SparkFun Forums 

Where electronics enthusiasts find answers.

All things pertaining to wireless and RF links
By wd40
#68587
[My goal is to have one Xbee module send the state of D0 to another as it changes.]

I have two XBee Pro 2.5 Modules, each in SparkFun USB Explorer adapters attached to PC's. I have both modules set with the same PAN. One module is a Coordinator the other is a Router/End Node. I have the Router DL/DH configured with the SL/SH of the Coordinator. The Coordinator receives terminal data entered in X-CTU from the Router just fine.

I have configured D0 as Input (3) on the Router. I have IC set to 0x1 on the Router, which should enable Change Detection for D0. When I use the ATIS command, I can read the state of D0 just fine. However, no data is sent from the Router to the Coordinator. What am I missing? How can I configure the Router to send D0 state when it changes?

Thanks in advance for any assistance,
Andy
By wd40
#68699
This is the answer I got from Digi:
Andrew,

Thank you for contacting Digi. Unlike the XBee 802.15.45 modules, the XBee Znet 2.5/ZB modules do not perform the DIO line passing on their own. They require the use of an external processor to both issue an ATIS command to read the values and a ATDxx command to set the proper line to the proper state. Unless you require Routers to extend the range or you are going to be performing this function from a sleeping end node to another sleeping end node, I would strongly recommend using our XBee 802.15.4 modules instead.

If there is anything else I can do for you, please let me know.
The modules I got from SparkFun are ZNet and I can't see where I can order the 802.15.4 modules from here...
User avatar
By FartingMonkey92
#68745
I believe "802.15.4" modules are "series 1" XBees.
They were renamed as people expected "series 2" + to be better than "series 1" modules when they are actually for different applications.
Sadly, stores haven't caught on to the new naming scheme and even Sparkfun have their listings wrong.
Our resident XBee guru will tell you more if need be...
User avatar
By AZRobbo
#68760
FartingMonkey92 wrote:I believe "802.15.4" modules are "series 1" XBees.
Agreed - you want the "series 1" modules.

It's amazing that digi seems to be consistently referring developers to "802.15.4" modules, even on their developer webcasts.

I'm starting to wonder who they designed Series 2 for; perhaps it was merely to have a ZigBee compliant device?

azrobbo
twitter.com/azrobbo
Embedded Systems Designer
AVR, Arduino, and Wireless Specialist
By wd40
#68831
Thanks for the confirmation, guys. It is a bit disappointing that SparkFun has all but the identical description for all the Xbees and there clearly is a difference.

To me, the Series 2 Xbees I picked up are good for remote serial communications between devices. However, the XBees have so much potential with the digital and analog direct IO (DIO) that can only really be exploited in the Series 1 Xbees.

Kudos to SparkFun for the great forum that is full of information and searchable on Google, though :)
#73224
At least for the 2.5 chip set (which i thought was the same hardware just different firmware from the v2 chip set) the documentation clearly talks about how to make digital line passing work using XBee.

Here's a link to the doc:
http://ftp1.digi.com/support/documentat ... 0866_C.pdf

Section 4.5 (page 41) tells a story about how to make this work.

I did my best job of following the directions (router as a digital input reading a line hooked to a grounded button PLUS coordinator as a digital output back to an LED) but have not yet figured it out. I've configured everything i think is needed, but still can't get the signal to show up on the coordinator.

Has anyone else gotten this to work? I know Limor/LadyAda got this going just fine, but that was Series 1 chips.

...and yes I agree: hooray for Sparkfun and googled text!

:D
By stevech
#73226
XBee Series 1 use FreeScale 802.15.4 chip and an 8051 like microprocessor. Has wireless serial port extension firmware and also code to do A/D and digital I/O locally and remotely.

XBee Series 2 use Ember's 802.15.4 chip and a different microprocessor. Has same wireless firmware as above, plus an option for ZigBee protocol stack if you are among the few hobbyists that need such.

Series 1 has the "Pro" product option for higher transmitter power if you live in a country that permits such. I think Series 2 has the same. Of course, with a (large) antenna with equivalent dB gain, use the non-Pro, you get the same effect.
By krowney
#73231
@stevech:

Sounds like you know what you are talking about.

Is it true what I said though about the difference between 2.5 and 2?

Firmware only?

What I struggle with right now is:
(*) In the thread above, someone quotes Digi support saying that Series 2 does not support digital I/O line passing
(*) In the documentation for 2.5, there's clear indications for support of digital I/O line passing
(*) I have Xbee chips that say "Series 2" all over them
(*) I loaded them up with 2.5 firmware. Serial I/O seems to be working fine. Digital I/O line passing doesn't.
(*) Am trying to figure out if it could or couldn't work

I seem to remember reading somewhere online that the only difference between Xbee 2 and Xbee 2.5 is firmware.

What do you think? Is that true?
By JO
#80471
In regards to:
I seem to remember reading somewhere online that the only difference between Xbee 2 and Xbee 2.5 is firmware.

What do you think? Is that true?
so does any one have an answer to this?
By H.S.Srinivas
#80774
Yes. The difference is the firmware. I recently updated my series 2 firmware 1x2x to ZNET 2.5 firmware 1x4x.
By stevech
#80779
FartingMonkey92 wrote:I believe "802.15.4" modules are "series 1" XBees.
They were renamed as people expected "series 2" + to be better than "series 1" modules when they are actually for different applications.
Sadly, stores haven't caught on to the new naming scheme and even Sparkfun have their listings wrong.
Our resident XBee guru will tell you more if need be...
guru? Yes, Series 2 use Ember's chips and it's ZigBee only as I undertand- but I've used only series 1 as my project cannot use ZigBee as it's not an open standard as in IEEE 802.15.5 and 802.15.4.
By waltr
#80825
Yes, the XBee modules names make lots of confusion. This, I believe, starts on Digi Int's web site. I try to go by the modules Digi Part Number to differentiate the hardware and the Firmware version number to differentiate features.
The XB24 & XBP24 modules do support ZigBee, Digi Mesh and ZNET2.5 firmware. There are instructions in Digi's Knowledge base explaining how to change firmware.

Here is Digi document on the differences between the series 1 and 2 modules:
http://www.digi.com/support/kbase/kbase ... sp?id=2213
By cat
#82707
I realize I'm a little late to the party, but if anyone is listening, I use the XBEE change on input command (IC) successfully. I noticed that the original questioner was using a Router, which I haven't tried, but as stated, should work. I'm not sure what mode the Coordinator is in, but the latest Digi doc (90000976_C) says on the bottom of page 79 that the Coordinator must be in API mode to send remote samples out its UART. I'm using an XBEE ZB configured as an end device and and XBEE ZB configured as Coordinator in API mode and am getting samples on input changes from the Coordinator without problems.
By rappa
#84983
stevech wrote:XBee Series 1 use FreeScale 802.15.4 chip and an 8051 like microprocessor. Has wireless serial port extension firmware and also code to do A/D and digital I/O locally and remotely.

XBee Series 2 use Ember's 802.15.4 chip and a different microprocessor. Has same wireless firmware as above, plus an option for ZigBee protocol stack if you are among the few hobbyists that need such.

Series 1 has the "Pro" product option for higher transmitter power if you live in a country that permits such. I think Series 2 has the same. Of course, with a (large) antenna with equivalent dB gain, use the non-Pro, you get the same effect.
It's possible to use series 2 radios for point-to-point. I use series 2 (non-pro) radios because they have a slightly better range, which I need in my house. I don't use the mesh features.

I put together a wiki, comparing series 1 and 2. Any feedback would be appreciated. http://code.google.com/p/xbee-api/wiki/ChoosingAnXBee
By stevech
#85021
I've never used Ember/Series 2. It's intended for use in ZigBee mesh applications.

Simple star or peer-to-peer (no coordinator needed) use cases are best done with series 1.