I am troubled with the following operation of PN7150.
[ Execution environment ]
BOARDs :
1). OM5578/PN7150ARD
2). LPCxpresso824-MAX
IDE : MCUXpressoIDE 10.3.1
Project : NXP-NCI_LPC82X_example
NxpNci.c : '18/12/19 14:11
nfc_task.c : '18/12/19 14:11
PN7150 CORE_INIT_RSP :
NCI << 40 01 19 00 03 1e 03 00 08 00 01 02 03 80 81 82 83 02 d0 02 ff 02 00 04 88 10 01 a0
VICCs : ISO15693 NXP ICODE SLIX
1) UID = e0 04 01 50 65 6d 40 b5
2) UID = e0 04 01 50 65 6c 74 0f
3) UID = e0 04 01 50 65 6c e9 df
[ Operation verification ]
[1] 1 VICC : No.1
NCI << 61 05 15 01 01 06 06 ff 01 0a 00 00 b5 40 6d 65 50 01 04 e0 06 80 80 00
| RF_INTF_ACTIVATED_NTF <-- OK
[2] 1 VICC : No.2
NCI << 61 05 15 01 01 06 06 ff 01 0a 00 00 0f 74 6c 65 50 01 04 e0 06 80 80 00
| RF_INTF_ACTIVATED_NTF <-- OK
[3] 1 VICC : No.3
NCI << 61 05 15 01 01 06 06 ff 01 0a 00 00 df e9 6c 65 50 01 04 e0 06 80 80 00
| RF_INTF_ACTIVATED_NTF <-- OK
[4] 2 VICCs : No.1 & 2
NCI << 61 03 0f 01 06 06 0a 00 00 b5 40 6d 65 50 01 04 e0 02
NCI << 61 03 0f 02 06 06 0a 00 00 0f 74 6c 65 50 01 04 e0 01
| RF_DISCOVER_NTF <-- OK
[5] 2 VICCs : No.1 & 3
NCI << 61 03 0f 01 06 06 0a 00 00 b5 40 6d 65 50 01 04 e0 02
NCI << 61 03 0f 02 06 06 0a 00 00 df e9 6c 65 50 01 04 e0 01
| RF_DISCOVER_NTF <-- OK
[6] 2 VICCs : No.2 & 3
NCI << 60 07 01 a1
NCI << 60 07 01 a1
:
:
NCI << 60 07 01 a1
NCI << 60 07 01 a1
| CORE_GENERIC_ERROR_NTF <-- NG
| A1 : DISCOVERY_TARGET_ACTIVATION_FAILED
[1] - [5] Normal operation.
[6] Why can't the PN7150 identify tags?
PN7150B0HN/C11006 is installed
OM5578/PN7150ARD is
How can I get it?
The board I have now
I wish I could upgrade
Data Sheet
Modified Date : 25 Jun 2020
User Guide
Modified Date : 26 Jun 2020
Adder definition of PN7150B0HN/C11006
Hello
Thank you for your response
> We are planning to release a new version fixing
Waiting for good news
PN7150B0HN / C11006E
Status : Development
Discontinuation Notification 202001024DN
Why was PN7150B0HN / C11004E discontinued?
Hello,
Yes, I just received internal feedback about this. They let me know that we had to discontinue this version because of a major regression lately found.
We are planning to release a new version fixing this but are still waiting for R&D planning for which we will appreciate your comprehension on this.
Thank you very much.
BR,
Ivan.
Should have seen the latest datasheet sooner.
[ PN7150 Version ]
NCI >> 20 01 00
NCI << 40 01 19 00 03 1e 03 00 08 00 01 02 03 80 81 82 83 02 d0 02 ff 02 00 04 88 10 01 a0
answer[8] : 0x08
answer[17+answer[8]] : 0x10
answer[18+answer[8]] : 0x01
answer[19+answer[8]] : 0xA0
Version C11002
[ PN7150 Product data sheet ]
Rev. 3.9__28 August 2019
317439
6 Versions
6.1 Version C11004
A fix has been added that addresses a collision
resolution problem for ISO 15693 tags in case
there are multiple tags in the field.
6.2 Version C11002
initial released version.
Equipped with PN7150B0HN / C11004
Does OM5578 / PN7150ARD exist?
Performed additional testing
VICCs : ISO15693 NXP ICODE SLIX
1) UID = e0 04 01 50 d6 bb 63 76
2) UID = e0 04 01 50 d6 bb 63 09
[ Operation verification ]
[1] 1 VICC : No.1
NCI << 61 05 15 01 01 06 06 ff 01 0a 00 00 76 63 bb d6 50 01 04 e0 06 80 80 00
| RF_INTF_ACTIVATED_NTF <-- OK
[2] 1 VICC : No.2
NCI << 61 05 15 01 01 06 06 ff 01 0a 00 00 09 63 bb d6 50 01 04 e0 06 80 80 00
| RF_INTF_ACTIVATED_NTF <-- OK
[3] 2 VICCs : No.1 & 2
NCI << 61 03 0f 01 06 06 0a 00 00 76 63 bb d6 50 01 04 e0 02
NCI << 61 03 0f 02 06 06 0a 00 00 09 63 bb d6 50 01 04 e0 01
| RF_DISCOVER_NTF <-- OK
Hello,
Please let me know if I understood your requirement.
When you try to read ICODE SLIX 1 & 2 specifically it is not possible to activate them? If so, have you modified something in the SW to detect multiple devices?
Thank you for clarifying.
BR,
Ivan.
Hello
Thank you for your reply
Yet I have not changed the settings
The same execution environment
[Anti-collision failure]
UID = e0 04 01 50 65 6c 74 0f
UID = e0 04 01 50 65 6c e9 df
[Anti-collision success]
UID = e0 04 01 50 d6 bb 63 76
UID = e0 04 01 50 d6 bb 63 09
After this, I want to change the PF_BIT_RATE setting.
Are there any other measures?
> After this, I want to change the PF_BIT_RATE setting.
Changing PF_BIT_RATE did not change the result
Tried value :
0x00 : 106k
0x01 : 212k
0x02 : 424k
0x03 : 848k
0x80 : 26k
0x81 : 212k & 424k