Home/Support/Support Forum/What changed with xBee S2C that causes failure on Beaglebone black with CBB-XBEE cape?

What changed with xBee S2C that causes failure on Beaglebone black with CBB-XBEE cape?

0 votes
We can no longer get S2 chips. We tested the S2C chip with Beaglebone black with CBB-XBEE cape. This works fine with S2 chips. With the replacement S2C the java open call fails. When using XCTU to connect to the S2C the parameters loading extremely slow and fails with TX error. On usb port the S2C has no issues - open call works and parameter loading is as fast as the S2 chips. I suspect there is a power issue that may cause us to redesign all PCB boards. Has anyone had this issue or know why the S2C fails?
asked Dec 31, 2015 in ZigBee PRO Featureset (and legacy ZNet 2.5) by albe New to the Community (4 points)
recategorized Dec 31, 2015 by michaelt

Please log in or register to answer this question.

3 Answers

0 votes
No, I have not see that at all. The main difference between the two is that the S2C has a larger processor and as such, no longer has multiple firmware targets. Have you changed your code to account for the additional commands?
answered Jan 4, 2016 by mvut Veteran of the Digi Community (13,036 points)
Thanks for your response. Not sure what you mean about a code change. I spoke with Digi support and was told there are no changes to their lib to support S2C. That said when the S2C chip is installed on the BBB cape it responds very slow and fails when connecting via XCTU. The S2 chips response on same cape is quick and works as expected. There are no issues with S2C on USB. Our code runs as it should when the S2C is on USB. This slow response to XCTU has nothing to do with our code. Thanks again for your response
0 votes
I have been struggling with this for over week now too. I initially bought S2B modules for my senior project, to use over UART with a Raspberry Pi.

Somewhere between design and construction, the S2B modules became obsolete, wish DigiKey would have told me, and the rest of my team bought S2C modules. I can confirm that the S2B modules work perfectly with my UART Pi hat, but the S2C modules will only work with a USB adapter, so it sounds like we are in the same boat.

Even though Digi claims these modules OTA compatible, the system does not like the UART and I do not want to redesign my Pi hat for SPI, which the new modules also have.

So, I ordered a new set of modules from Digikey and started playing around. I played with all the configuration settings. I even downgraded the firmware from 4059 to 4055.

I did eventually get the modules reliably communicating using the UART, but I spent hours (a lot of hours). I exported my configuration, so that I could give it to my classmates, but it does not work for them. It seems that while I was experimenting with the modules, I had recovered them to "XB24C reg" hardware instead of "XB24C reg TH" hardware.

So, I ordered yet another set of modules from DigiKey and still cannot get them to work. I am using the settings from my now "XB24C reg" modules, but no success. The modules will link, I get an RSSI led, but I cannot get UART data across my Pi, so I think there is something wrong with the firmware that is preventing us from using the modules.

I hope someone will look into this further.....
answered Mar 28, 2016 by MarkHunsberger New to the Community (1 point)
Could it be that you are driving some of the lines that would enable the SPI interface?
I am not driving any of the SPI lines, unless there is a firmware flaw, or a problem with XCTU.  I am only using pin 1, 2, 3, 10, 19 on the modules.  All the other pins float.  I think the answer may lie in the bitmasks, but Why do the modules that are flashed XB24C reg work and XB24C reg TH modules do not, with the same settings?
That does not make scene. I am not sure I can answer that one as they are effectively the same product with just a few less pins and functionality than the Surface mount version.
0 votes
The S2C actually uses 100mA less than the S2 PRO did so power should not be an issue.

Have you checked the Commands that are being issued by the Java call? Could it be that some of the commands are no longer valid or simply need to be modified to fit the One firmware file interface over the six firmware file interface needed for the S2 and S2B hardware?
answered Mar 28, 2016 by mvut Veteran of the Digi Community (13,036 points)
...