You have a computer? If so, then you should know that you can never have too many USB ports, mine currently has 12, and all but the front 2 are in constant use, and one of the rear 10 has a 4 port hub on it. I figure Hey, if I can add a 4 port hub on, then by using my device you would actually gain 2 ports instead of losing 1.DirtyLude said:You really can't give up a USB port for this?
Karaethon said:Ok I think I understand how all this works now. correct me if I'm wrong. First I write Basic Operating Instructions that will run on the Z8 and control the ADT Chip then I flash it (or however I write to the chip) to the Z8, Then I write Windows Software that will connect to the Z8 throught the USB Interface to set user values for Min/Max temps, alarm temps, etc.
ok, and if i understand this right then even if this circut isnt connected to USB as long as I set defaults into the BOI this device will boot and run all by itself, without user intevention?
Karaethon said:Ok, in your opinion, what would be a good Chip to use? (good for a beginner at the electronics stage, but well versed in programming languages) and could someone please explain all the options, I know what the words mean but not sure what the different Memory amounts are(obviously the largest is storage) I look at all these specs and i dont know how to compare a chip from manufacturer A to one from manufacturer B.
Yes I guess since I'm using the FT232 Then serial Communication would be needed.Nigel Goodwin said:Serial port? (to connect to FT232), although this can easily be done in software.
No, not needed as the ADT7460 Chip will be used for reading the fan speeds and controling them.Nigel Goodwin said:PWM? - if needed to drive the fan, but as already suggested some fans won't like PWM!.
Optional, the ADT chip has 3 on board temp inputs, but could use more to monitor other parts (like water pre and post cooling temps to calculate latent heat transfer)Nigel Goodwin said:Analogue inputs? - used to read the temperature.
Well I have no Idea how much space I'd need here, if figure the more funtionality implimented then of course the more space I'll need, so I figure something in the mid-range would be good.Nigel Goodwin said:Program wise, a few hundreds bytes should be all that's required?.
DirtyLude said:You can see some of my arguments for the Encore here:
https://electro-tech-online.com/viewtopic.php?t=11980
Being, apparently the only one who has used both PIC and the Z8Encore in this thread, I can say, the Encore is much easier to deal with, especially if you want to program the chip in C.
The only advantage the PIC has is it's wide userbase, which is definitely a big bonus for it. Like Nigel said, though, it doesn't matter which one you go for as long as it does the job, and either of these will do the job.
I don't believe that all the control lines on the FT232 are needed for the connection to the uC. TX, RX should be enough, and maybe CTS/RTS could be used if you want. Otherwise, it looks like it has lines for all the rs-232 controls that nobody ever uses anymore.
As for what chip you would want, I think one of the 28 pin 8k chips would be fine. You don't need alot of memory on the controller for this. If you want to go overboard and use the 64k PLCC chip, that would be fine as well. The XP line is a specialized chip line and is considered seperate from the base Encores, though the programming cable and development environment still work with them.
Well, that's your opinion, but I've done quite well, and completed alot of nice projects using just C here when I see alot of people bogging down here trying to learn PIC assembler and working with crappy slow PIC programmers.Nigel Goodwin said:Personally I consider that one of the minus points - I don't consider you can program a micro-controller effectively in C without at least a working knowledge of assembler - due to the low levels you're working with on a micro-controller.
Usually you are quite logical, but how can you claim ease of use, low cost, availability of tools and programmers on a uC you have never used, or apparently never even looked into?Like anything else, it's really down to personal preference, but wide userbase, ease of use, low cost of devices, availability of tools and programmers and all advantages of PIC's. But, as you say, the BIG! advantage is the huge numbers of PIC's out there, and the vast experience you can draw on.
Perhaps this stems from the functionality that could be put into this project based on what the original poster is now feature creeping, but also it's from the Z8 packages itself. Actually, they have a 20 pin PDIP that I would recommend, now.Perhaps this stems from using a Z8?, or perhaps from using C?, but I was thinking more of an 8 pin PIC, with 1K or 2K of memory, or perhaps an 18 pin one?.
If it's a question of moving up to 28 pin devices, you may as well do it 'properly' and use an 18F series PIC with in-built USB.
DirtyLude said:Well, that's your opinion, but I've done quite well, and completed alot of nice projects using just C here when I see alot of people bogging down here trying to learn PIC assembler and working with crappy slow PIC programmers.Nigel Goodwin said:Personally I consider that one of the minus points - I don't consider you can program a micro-controller effectively in C without at least a working knowledge of assembler - due to the low levels you're working with on a micro-controller.
When we are talking about a uC that costs $2.00 I don't see the point in trying to be minimilastic.
One question, does the 8 pin version have more mulit/use lines than the 28 pin? i find that extremely confusing when im reading the datasheets, and they list a pin as having 2/3/4 different functions. If I can get a chip with 1 pin per function i dont mind the excess in size. i know these multi function pins are understood by you, but for me as a beginner they worry me about am I hooking them up right.More a question of size?, why use a 28 pin when an 8 pin would do the job?
Well, then you're talking about optimal programming and not 'effective' programming which is your first quote. Whatever gets the job done is effective programming. I've learned the basics of z8e assembler, and I can say it helps in optimizing code, or even debugging, is it necessary to be an effective hobbyist, no, I don't think so.Nigel Goodwin said:Yes, it's my opinion, and that of a fair few other people - it becomes obvious when you look at how some things are badly programmed using C (or BASIC, or anything else high level). I've seen numerous examples where multiple lines of C are used to do what one instruction in assembler could do, simply because the writer didn't have any assembler knowledge at all - not that I'm saying that he should use the single assembler instruction, but knowing about it enables you to find a far more elegant solution in C.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?