Power Consumption - Scanning and Advertising at same time - S140

Hi,

I'm working on a project using BLE via s140, everything works fine until I look more seriously at the current draw of the device.

Simply, my project starts a Scan which lasts X milliseconds and which repeats every 20seconds. In parallel, the device advertises at interval Y milliseconds.

I use Power Profiler in order to obtain average consumption values and here are the results for different configurations.

(Note : Scan_Interval = 100ms and Scan_window = 50ms)

Scan duration  = 1s / Adv Interval = 100ms

So we have:

  • Average = 273,31uA
  • Scan + Adv = 2,44mA
  • Adv = 134,93uA

Scan duration  = 1s / Adv Interval = 3s

So we have:

  • Average = 293,99uA
  • Scan + Adv = 5,74mA
  • Adv = 11,78uA

My question is therefore: why when I increase the advertising interval, during Scan + Advertising, I get a significantly higher consumption ?

thanks for your support

Parents
  • Okay, so when you set the scan duration to 100 by using the define in sdk_config.h the power consumption looks normal ~6mA. The only difference between the two configs (custom and default) I see now is the NRF_BLE_SCAN_BUFFER size (31 vs. 255) but I don't think that's what is hindering the scanning device from going to sleep between scans... Correct me if I'm wrong.

    DEFAULT:

    CUSTOM: 

    Best regards,

    Simon

  • Hi,

    I don't have my setup at hand but during my tests, I seem to remember that when I configured .scan_phy = BLE_GAP_PHY_1MBPS and not .scan_phy = (BLE_GAP_PHY_1MBPS | BLE_GAP_PHY_CODED), the consumption profile was correct.

    Unfortunately, this configuration change greatly impacts the SoftDevice environment and I cannot, from my point of view, explain this behavior.

    Best regards,

Reply
  • Hi,

    I don't have my setup at hand but during my tests, I seem to remember that when I configured .scan_phy = BLE_GAP_PHY_1MBPS and not .scan_phy = (BLE_GAP_PHY_1MBPS | BLE_GAP_PHY_CODED), the consumption profile was correct.

    Unfortunately, this configuration change greatly impacts the SoftDevice environment and I cannot, from my point of view, explain this behavior.

    Best regards,

Children
Related