Timeline for NRF24L01+ false detection
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 12, 2016 at 17:44 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| May 27, 2014 at 19:51 | history | edited | klaus verner | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 115 characters in body
|
| May 27, 2014 at 19:46 | history | edited | klaus verner | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 115 characters in body
|
| May 27, 2014 at 19:39 | comment | added | klaus verner | Do you have a scanner or spectrum Analyser ? Or scope on RSSI and data? | |
| May 27, 2014 at 17:26 | comment | added | Wouter van Ooijen | That's not what I meant: for instance, if your SPI communication has excessive noise, you might occasionally think a frame was received when in fact nothing was received. | |
| May 27, 2014 at 16:52 | comment | added | user54579 | @WoutervanOoijen: No, the transmitter is off. | |
| May 27, 2014 at 16:32 | history | edited | klaus verner | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 168 characters in body
|
| May 27, 2014 at 16:08 | comment | added | Wouter van Ooijen | Are you sure all false detection is due to the receiver part of the NRF? Maybe there is some (extra) source, for instance in the communication between your uC and the NRF. | |
| May 27, 2014 at 15:54 | review | First posts | |||
| May 27, 2014 at 15:58 | |||||
| May 27, 2014 at 15:49 | comment | added | user54579 | OK, if noise isn't uniformly distributed, my calculations for 152 hours may be fail. But CRC is remainder from polynomial division, so it has uniform distribution, i.e. value of CRC is uniformrly random depending on packet's data. Therefore, adding 1 byte of CRC should multiplicate average false detection time by 256, not matter how packet's data is distributed. But in my experiment the multiplicater actually is too smaller... I can't explain this. | |
| May 27, 2014 at 15:39 | history | answered | klaus verner | CC BY-SA 3.0 |