RN-42 Bluetooth device

Comments

• Chris Savage Parallax Engineering Posts: 14,406

  2015-01-15 13:53 edited 2015-01-15 13:53

  Mike,
  
  We'll most likely have to replace this device to get that compliance since the updated firmware for the RN-42 removes functionality that was supported when we designed the board, but is no longer available.
• JonnyMac Posts: 9,282

  2015-01-27 00:29 edited 2015-01-27 00:29

  Can you elaborate, Chris? I have an older RN-42 and just got it working with my cell phone. I created an app using MIT App Inventor -- will post details in separate thread.
• Chris Savage Parallax Engineering Posts: 14,406

  2015-01-27 10:04 edited 2015-01-27 10:04

  The OP was referring to Bluetooth 4.0, but the RN-42 is Bluetooth 2.1/2.0/1.2/1.1 compliant. When we were sent the first transceiver for evaluation we designed our own module around it. At some later time the firmware was updated making it incompatible with our board as some features were removed. So the transceivers we order have the original version of the firmware the module was designed around. To get Bluetooth 4.0 / BLE we will more than likely have to switch to a new design altogether.
  
  I remember evaluating a Bluetooth transceiver from Adafruit that I was actually able to use to reprogram a Propeller chip over the Bluetooth connection directly from the PC Bluetooth COM Port. But as I recall it was not 4.0 / BLE either.
  
  As a note, I have connected my Android phone to the RN-42 for many applications before. Including robot control, for example: http://www.savagecircuits.com/content.php?187-Bluetooth-BoE-Bot-Demo
• JonnyMac Posts: 9,282

  2015-01-27 11:46 edited 2015-01-27 11:46

  To get Bluetooth 4.0 / BLE we will more than likely have to switch to a new design altogether.

  
  If you do that, please consider an XBee module format version -- that would be great for the Activity Board. In fact, maybe you make a carrier for that which would allow XBees or the new BT module to be plugged into a standard breadboard (using the on-end connections like the present BT module). Just and idea.....
• GordonMcComb Posts: 3,366

  2015-01-27 15:30 edited 2015-01-27 15:30

  JonnyMac wrote: »

  If you do that, please consider an XBee module format version -- that would be great for the Activity Board.

  
  +1
• Chris Savage Parallax Engineering Posts: 14,406

  2015-01-29 08:24 edited 2015-01-29 08:24

  Thanks for the suggestion. It has both merit and logic. I like logic. It seems like I have evaluated a Bluetooth Module from Roving Networks that was in that form factor. I will have to go back and look. It would be nice to bring the product up to current technology and remove the voltage selection.
• JonnyMac Posts: 9,282

  2015-01-29 08:57 edited 2015-01-29 08:57

  The Roving Neworks XBee-socket-compatible version is about half the cost of the Parallax RN-42 module, and it's really convenient for things like the Activity Board. I've been putting XBee sockets on a lot of projects, and now that I'm getting a handle on programming my Android to use BT coms, I anticipate doing more of it.
  
  Rick Galinson invited me to dinner the other evening -- it's always good food, talk about women, and talk about Propeller programming. I took my PAB with a battery an showed Rick the Android/BT connection. Funny how two grown men can get so excited seeing an LED come on after putting "HIGH 26" into a text box and pressing a Send button. For the things we do, though, the implications are big. Honestly, the BT side of that was the easiest; the bigger thing for me was creating a parser and token identifier code that allows me to handle natural language statements.
• Chris Savage Parallax Engineering Posts: 14,406

  2015-01-29 09:09 edited 2015-01-29 09:09

  Jon,
  
  Is the Roving Networks XBee-socket-compatible version BT 4.0 / LE compliant?
• JonnyMac Posts: 9,282

  2015-01-29 09:58 edited 2015-01-29 09:58

  It looks like the answer is no.
  
  -- http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/268/Datasheet-RN41XV-RN42XV-ds-v1%200r1-493475.pdf
• Chris Savage Parallax Engineering Posts: 14,406

  2015-01-29 11:20 edited 2015-01-29 11:20

  Oh yeah...running the same transceiver (RN-42). There's got to be one like this somewhere...or we make one. I'll try to make sure our next effort meets both needs.