Hi,

The BLE112 contains a TI chipset which seems to be sensitive to ESD. We have not been able to replicate this ourselves but here is a reference from TI forum:

https://e2e.ti.com/support/wireless-connectivity/bluetooth/f/538/t/600846?CC2541-Flash-data-is-changed#

Some conditions we have observed on customer boards that result in flash corruption / unintentional page erase:

1. Errant software, such as an application code stack overflow causing the erase sequence to be executed
2. Exceeding the specified Absolute Maximum Ratings from the data sheet (e.g., ESD)
3. Not adhering to reference design guidelines for power / clock / ground layout 

Is it possible that your failed units have been exposed to excessive ESD?

Regards,

Tiago

Hi,

That list seems to have everything that studio supports. If you scroll up to the top of the list you will also see EFM32 which as a bare MCU without any radio.

The part support for Bluetooth Mesh is the one I communicated above, EFR32xG13 or EFR32xG12 (and modules based on them).

Regards,

Tiago

Hi,

We haven't finalized reviewing it but I can share the draft version here.

To test it's pretty simple:

- Create soc-empty from the SDK 2.11 for the WSTK radio boad that you are using

- Drag and drop app.c and app.h into the soc-empty project, either drop on the Simplicity IDE or just replace the files in the project directory.

I tested now that it builds fine but haven't verified the functionality yet.

Regards,

Tiago

Hi,

Why did you purchase BLED112? Was it recommended to use for these products?

If you are looking for a generic Bluetooth LE dongle then you didn't get the right part because the BLED112 is a full-stack module which exposes on windows as COMPort, not a Bluetooth device.

Regards,

Tiago

Hi,

You won't get 4x range with LE Coded PHY, why did you expect such increase in range?

I see also another weird result, you're saying that legacy advertisement had smaller range that extended advertisement with 1M as the primary and 2M on secondary. That shouldn't be the case because legacy advertisement uses 1M so the range should be the same.

In fact, the extended advertisement with 2M on secondary should probably be shorter because that PHY has less range and I assume the smartphone will need to catch the advertisement on the secondary channels to report it to the application.

Regards,

Tiago

Ok, I'm still confused, can you please describe exactly what is the range that you are comparing? And if you are testing between EFR32 and a smartphone, we don't know what the smartphone can do in terms of range, could be that the benefit from LE Coded PHY against a smartphone is not as pronounced as between 2 EFR32 devices.

Hi,

This forum is really directed at technical discussions, not commercial ones, and especially not related with pricing. You might get this information from other forum members but from our part (Applications Engineers) we recommend you contacting our sales team or authorized distributors in your region for pricing and related matters.

https://www.silabs.com/about-us/contact-sales

Regards,

Tiago

Hi,

but is ti normal that we had the same  adv range on phy coded adv and ext adv

I'm not sure what you mean here, aren't you using LE Coded PHY for both primary and secondary advertisement channels? Or are you using 1M PHY for the primary and LE Coded PHY for the secondary? Please clarify, of even better if you paste here the piece of code where you setup the advertisements.

Regards,

Tiago