Chip with simple program for Toy

"lerameur" <lerameur@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1164589146.605543.305610@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
Hi,

I received this TWS-434A/RWS-434 8-Bit RF Combo Package and been
playing with it. I am sending and receiving using pics.
My sending signal somewhat differs with my receiving signal. I hook up
both signals on the oscilloscope and I get this clear but different
signal, Here is a picture I posted of the signal:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/lerameur/
It seems that the receiving signal cannot stay on more then 125ms,
anyone can tell me why and how to fix it ?
the baud rate on the pic chip is at 2400 and the frequency if the
signal is at 433mhz as mentionned above

thank you

ken
Click to expand...
Have you got the baud rate wrong? 125ms is a long time. A start bit plus 8
data bits only lasts 9/2400=3.75ms at 2400 baud.
 
lerameur wrote:

Baron a ĂŠcrit :

lerameur wrote:

HI,

I just started to play with wireless transmision. I used this kit
that I ordered:
http://www.rentron.com/remote_control/TWS-8-bit-combo.htm

I do get a signal at the receiver but I do not know how to
interpret
it or how to fix it. The signal is clear but not the same as the
one I sent. I posted a picture of both signal
http://www3.sympatico.ca/lerameur/

can somebody tell me why the receiving signal is not identical?
it seems the receiving signal cannot stay on more then 125ms

I am using a pic chip transfering at 2400bps, signal propagation
at 433Mhz

thanks

Ken

It looks like its synchronising on the leading edge and the data is
the next pulse/s in the time frame before the next sync.

well I am just using a simple command at the receiver using picbasic
pro:
B0 var byte
start:
serin2 PORTB.3,n2400,[B0]

same speed the transmitter.

Ken
Click to expand...
Just passing an observation based on the picture you posted. Does it
look the same if you pass several cycles of data ?

--
Baron:
 
Ross Herbert wrote:

Using the 555 tool at
https://wwws.ee.ucl.ac.uk/facilities/teachlab/inter
Click to expand...
Uh, that page seems to give erroneous results. According to the Texas
Instruments' 555 datasheet,

T1 (or T_high) = 0.693 * (Ra+Rb) * C

The ucl.ac.uk website has dropped the "Rb" term in their equation.

Mark
 
Rich Grise wrote:
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 07:22:12 -0800, Liz wrote:

I did decorations on our balcony (new at this apartment) only to find
out the balcony light is not working, thus no electrical connection. I
need to know how to hook up battery power to a string of mini christmas
lights. Know very little about electrical terms...so I guess I need
"how to make battery operated christmas lights for dummies".

The "right" way to do this, of course, is get your apartment electrical
wiring repaired before it burns the place down.

Or, you could shop for "battery powered xmas lights" and use what you
can find - whoever sells them will tell you how to hook up the battery.

Good Luck!
Rich
Crossposted to s.e.basics, with followups to there.
Click to expand...
You could use a 12V to 120AC converter, lot of hardware and other
consumer electronics stores sell them.Then just plug in your standard
christmas lights to the converter. The only caution is the wattage, you
don't want exceed the power(watts) of the converter. Most christmas
light manufactures provide this information, so you can hookup one or
two strings at the most. I would use the new LED type lights over old
Incandescent type. Average wattage per string for the Noma Outdoor
lights is 75 watts, not a good choice. Next you will need a battery,
there are many types on the market. Lead Acid is probalby the best,
Your still going have a problem with charging it up all the time. It
may keep the lights lit for 6 to 8 hours.

OK
Neil
 
Baron a écrit :

lerameur wrote:


Baron a écrit :

lerameur wrote:

HI,

I just started to play with wireless transmision. I used this kit
that I ordered:
http://www.rentron.com/remote_control/TWS-8-bit-combo.htm

I do get a signal at the receiver but I do not know how to
interpret
it or how to fix it. The signal is clear but not the same as the
one I sent. I posted a picture of both signal
http://www3.sympatico.ca/lerameur/

can somebody tell me why the receiving signal is not identical?
it seems the receiving signal cannot stay on more then 125ms

I am using a pic chip transfering at 2400bps, signal propagation
at 433Mhz

thanks

Ken

It looks like its synchronising on the leading edge and the data is
the next pulse/s in the time frame before the next sync.

well I am just using a simple command at the receiver using picbasic
pro:
B0 var byte
start:
serin2 PORTB.3,n2400,[B0]

same speed the transmitter.

Ken

Just passing an observation based on the picture you posted. Does it
look the same if you pass several cycles of data ?
Click to expand...
HI I change to 4800 B to 9600, putting several data in the cycle, I
still get the same result

k
 
On 27 Nov 2006 17:52:17 -0800, "redbelly" <redbelly98@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Ross Herbert wrote:

Using the 555 tool at
https://wwws.ee.ucl.ac.uk/facilities/teachlab/inter

Uh, that page seems to give erroneous results. According to the Texas
Instruments' 555 datasheet,

T1 (or T_high) = 0.693 * (Ra+Rb) * C

The ucl.ac.uk website has dropped the "Rb" term in their equation.

Mark
Click to expand...

You're right, I didn't pay much attention to the text alongside the
circuit. I know it has been like that for years so I thought it would
have all the bugs out of it by now.

Tony Van Roon's 555 tutorial
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/555/555.html looks to be a
pretty comprehensive teaching aid so maybe the OP can get more info
from it.
 
Impmon wrote:
I tried Googling but all the formula for finding 555 timer frequency
is based on known capacitor and resistor values to find frequency.

I need to build a monostable timer to get 140Hz. I could throw in a
random capacitor and one resistor but my algebra skill is rusty (no
complex math formula in over 10 years!!)

The system will be running on 5v DC as it contains a few TTL chips.
Click to expand...
Your can use this program to calculate both monostable and astable
circuits for the 555 timer:
http://www.miscel.dk/MiscEl/miscelChargeTime.html
 
Ross Herbert wrote:
On 27 Nov 2006 17:52:17 -0800, "redbelly" <redbelly98@yahoo.com
wrote:


Ross Herbert wrote:

Using the 555 tool at
https://wwws.ee.ucl.ac.uk/facilities/teachlab/inter

Uh, that page seems to give erroneous results. According to the Texas
Instruments' 555 datasheet,

T1 (or T_high) = 0.693 * (Ra+Rb) * C

The ucl.ac.uk website has dropped the "Rb" term in their equation.

Mark


You're right, I didn't pay much attention to the text alongside the
circuit. I know it has been like that for years so I thought it would
have all the bugs out of it by now.

Tony Van Roon's 555 tutorial
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/555/555.html looks to be a
pretty comprehensive teaching aid so maybe the OP can get more info
from it.
Click to expand...
Funny how tough it is sometimes to be 100% error-free, whether it's
program code or just writing some text. It's mostly luck that I
bothered to check at all, but somehow the reference to a "50:50 duty
cycle" in your earlier post rang a warning bell in my head, because I
vaguely remembered that this was impossible with nonzero resistor
values.

Regards,

Mark
 
Music to my ears - the circuit I need to switch just shuts off with 3K.
Thanks for the explanation Don.


"Don Klipstein" <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in message
news:slrnemkmoe.n99.don@manx.misty.com...
In article <978b8$456a4c71$d1d89b1c$32444@PRIMUS.CA>, tempus fugit wrote:
Hey all;

I'm driving a 2222 transistor with the 5v output high from a 4049
inverter.
I'm not sure which figure to refer to on the data sheet regarding how
much
current I can safely draw from it though. I was hoping to use a 1-3k
resistor on the base of the transistor (it's being used as a simple
switch).

One of the figures says "Output Drive Current (for 5v supply) -1.6mA
(typ.)
Another says: "Output Sink Current (for 5v) 6.4mA (typ.)

It is common for ICs to have two different figures for "source current"
and "sink current". It is common for "sink current" to be the higher of
these two when they differ.

"Sink Current" is what the output can drain/suck/sink when it is "low".
"Source Current" is what the output can push out/source when it is "high".

I suspect that the "Output Drive Current" of 1.6 mA is what you need to
consider for use with driving an NPN transistor.
Given the B-E junction of the transistor having a voltage drop likely to
exceed .5 volt at 1.6 mA and the IC likely being allowed to have output up
to at least .5V below +5V at full sink current and +5V likely to be
allowed to be as high as +5.25 volts, I would say "fairly worst case" the
voltage across the resistor between IC output and transistor base is is
4.25 volts. Divide that by 1.6 mA, and the current is 2.656 mA. A 3K
resistor - which is typically +/- 5% so should not be less than 2.7K -
should be just fine!

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
Click to expand...
 
redbelly wrote:
Ross Herbert wrote:
On 27 Nov 2006 17:52:17 -0800, "redbelly" <redbelly98@yahoo.com
wrote:


Ross Herbert wrote:

Using the 555 tool at
https://wwws.ee.ucl.ac.uk/facilities/teachlab/inter

Uh, that page seems to give erroneous results. According to the Texas
Instruments' 555 datasheet,

T1 (or T_high) = 0.693 * (Ra+Rb) * C

The ucl.ac.uk website has dropped the "Rb" term in their equation.

Mark


You're right, I didn't pay much attention to the text alongside the
circuit. I know it has been like that for years so I thought it would
have all the bugs out of it by now.

Tony Van Roon's 555 tutorial
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/555/555.html looks to be a
pretty comprehensive teaching aid so maybe the OP can get more info
from it.

Funny how tough it is sometimes to be 100% error-free, whether it's
program code or just writing some text. It's mostly luck that I
bothered to check at all, but somehow the reference to a "50:50 duty
cycle" in your earlier post rang a warning bell in my head, because I
vaguely remembered that this was impossible with nonzero resistor
values.

Regards,

Mark
Click to expand...
Yes, you can't get 50% duty with that configuration, but it can be
close. Ra needs to be a small fraction of Rb for near 50% DC which
means most of the resistance is in Rb. The values can be closely
approximated from Rb=0.693 / FC or C=0.693 / FRb and then just use 5 or
10% of Rb for Ra. But the error is big enough that .693 can be rounded
to 0.7. Also, Ra should be 1K or larger.

-Bill
 
lerameur wrote:

Baron a ĂŠcrit :

lerameur wrote:


Baron a ĂŠcrit :

lerameur wrote:

HI,

I just started to play with wireless transmision. I used this
kit that I ordered:
http://www.rentron.com/remote_control/TWS-8-bit-combo.htm

I do get a signal at the receiver but I do not know how to
interpret
it or how to fix it. The signal is clear but not the same as the
one I sent. I posted a picture of both signal
http://www3.sympatico.ca/lerameur/

can somebody tell me why the receiving signal is not identical?
it seems the receiving signal cannot stay on more then 125ms

I am using a pic chip transfering at 2400bps, signal propagation
at 433Mhz

thanks

Ken

It looks like its synchronising on the leading edge and the data
is the next pulse/s in the time frame before the next sync.

well I am just using a simple command at the receiver using
picbasic pro:
B0 var byte
start:
serin2 PORTB.3,n2400,[B0]

same speed the transmitter.

Ken

Just passing an observation based on the picture you posted. Does it
look the same if you pass several cycles of data ?


HI I change to 4800 B to 9600, putting several data in the cycle, I
still get the same result

k
Click to expand...
Sorry Ken! Nothing useful to offer!

--
Baron:
 
Baron wrote:
lerameur wrote:


Baron a écrit :

lerameur wrote:


Baron a écrit :

lerameur wrote:

HI,

I just started to play with wireless transmision. I used this
kit that I ordered:
http://www.rentron.com/remote_control/TWS-8-bit-combo.htm

I do get a signal at the receiver but I do not know how to
interpret
it or how to fix it. The signal is clear but not the same as the
one I sent. I posted a picture of both signal
http://www3.sympatico.ca/lerameur/

can somebody tell me why the receiving signal is not identical?
it seems the receiving signal cannot stay on more then 125ms

I am using a pic chip transfering at 2400bps, signal propagation
at 433Mhz

thanks

Ken

It looks like its synchronising on the leading edge and the data
is the next pulse/s in the time frame before the next sync.

well I am just using a simple command at the receiver using
picbasic pro:
B0 var byte
start:
serin2 PORTB.3,n2400,[B0]

same speed the transmitter.

Ken

Just passing an observation based on the picture you posted. Does it
look the same if you pass several cycles of data ?


HI I change to 4800 B to 9600, putting several data in the cycle, I
still get the same result

k

Sorry Ken! Nothing useful to offer!
Click to expand...
Thats ok , I found an already make circuit and software on the net, I
will test it ans see whT it gives, then move on from that

ken
 
lerameur wrote:

Baron wrote:
lerameur wrote:


Baron a ĂŠcrit :

lerameur wrote:


Baron a ĂŠcrit :

lerameur wrote:

HI,

I just started to play with wireless transmision. I used this
kit that I ordered:
http://www.rentron.com/remote_control/TWS-8-bit-combo.htm

I do get a signal at the receiver but I do not know how to
interpret
it or how to fix it. The signal is clear but not the same as
the one I sent. I posted a picture of both signal
http://www3.sympatico.ca/lerameur/

can somebody tell me why the receiving signal is not
identical? it seems the receiving signal cannot stay on more
then 125ms

I am using a pic chip transfering at 2400bps, signal
propagation at 433Mhz

thanks

Ken

It looks like its synchronising on the leading edge and the
data is the next pulse/s in the time frame before the next
sync.

well I am just using a simple command at the receiver using
picbasic pro:
B0 var byte
start:
serin2 PORTB.3,n2400,[B0]

same speed the transmitter.

Ken

Just passing an observation based on the picture you posted. Does
it look the same if you pass several cycles of data ?


HI I change to 4800 B to 9600, putting several data in the
cycle, I still get the same result

k

Sorry Ken! Nothing useful to offer!


Thats ok , I found an already make circuit and software on the net, I
will test it ans see whT it gives, then move on from that

ken
Click to expand...
OK ! Good Luck!
--
Baron:
 
Thats ok , I found an already make circuit and software on the net, I
will test it ans see whT it gives, then move on from that

ken

OK ! Good Luck!
Click to expand...

actually I changed the cystal from a 4 to a 20Mhz, changed everything,
I get weird result, but I will work on it and try many things.
Also if you have a link on a tutorial that explains the different
possibilities of sending signlas , that would be appreciated, here is
what I have to deal with and I am not sure 100% on why I should choose
on over another.

http://www.melabs.com/resources/ser2modes.htm

k
 
"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.11.29.00.02.23.344217@example.net...

I have the generator at home now and want to measure frequency with my
multimeter....it is a Radio Shack 22-812.
Click to expand...
Is that meter rated to measure frequency at 120 VAC or above?
 
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 14:18:47 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:
redbelly wrote:
Ross Herbert wrote:
On 27 Nov 2006 17:52:17 -0800, "redbelly" <redbelly98@yahoo.com
Ross Herbert wrote:

Using the 555 tool at
https://wwws.ee.ucl.ac.uk/facilities/teachlab/inter

Uh, that page seems to give erroneous results. According to the Texas
Instruments' 555 datasheet,

T1 (or T_high) = 0.693 * (Ra+Rb) * C

The ucl.ac.uk website has dropped the "Rb" term in their equation.

You're right, I didn't pay much attention to the text alongside the
circuit. I know it has been like that for years so I thought it would
have all the bugs out of it by now.

Tony Van Roon's 555 tutorial
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/555/555.html looks to be a
pretty comprehensive teaching aid so maybe the OP can get more info
from it.

Funny how tough it is sometimes to be 100% error-free, whether it's
program code or just writing some text. It's mostly luck that I
bothered to check at all, but somehow the reference to a "50:50 duty
cycle" in your earlier post rang a warning bell in my head, because I
vaguely remembered that this was impossible with nonzero resistor
values.

Yes, you can't get 50% duty with that configuration, but it can be
close. Ra needs to be a small fraction of Rb for near 50% DC which
means most of the resistance is in Rb. The values can be closely
approximated from Rb=0.693 / FC or C=0.693 / FRb and then just use 5 or
10% of Rb for Ra. But the error is big enough that .693 can be rounded
to 0.7. Also, Ra should be 1K or larger.
Click to expand...
None of you seems to have noticed the diode across Rb. That takes it out
of the circuit for the charge half-cycle. The cap charges through Ra and
D1, and discharges through Rb.

Oh, by the way: a link might be useful:
http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~amoss/java/555.htm

Were you guys looking at a different page? How did I get to that one? ?:-/

I felt so clever some decades ago when I came up with this on my own that
I almost dislocated my shoulder patting myself on the back. :)

Cheers!
Rich
 
Rich Grise wrote:
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 14:18:47 -0800, Bill Bowden wrote:
redbelly wrote:
Ross Herbert wrote:
On 27 Nov 2006 17:52:17 -0800, "redbelly" <redbelly98@yahoo.com
Ross Herbert wrote:

Using the 555 tool at
https://wwws.ee.ucl.ac.uk/facilities/teachlab/inter

Uh, that page seems to give erroneous results. According to the Texas
Instruments' 555 datasheet,

T1 (or T_high) = 0.693 * (Ra+Rb) * C

The ucl.ac.uk website has dropped the "Rb" term in their equation.

You're right, I didn't pay much attention to the text alongside the
circuit. I know it has been like that for years so I thought it would
have all the bugs out of it by now.

Tony Van Roon's 555 tutorial
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/555/555.html looks to be a
pretty comprehensive teaching aid so maybe the OP can get more info
from it.

Funny how tough it is sometimes to be 100% error-free, whether it's
program code or just writing some text. It's mostly luck that I
bothered to check at all, but somehow the reference to a "50:50 duty
cycle" in your earlier post rang a warning bell in my head, because I
vaguely remembered that this was impossible with nonzero resistor
values.

Yes, you can't get 50% duty with that configuration, but it can be
close. Ra needs to be a small fraction of Rb for near 50% DC which
means most of the resistance is in Rb. The values can be closely
approximated from Rb=0.693 / FC or C=0.693 / FRb and then just use 5 or
10% of Rb for Ra. But the error is big enough that .693 can be rounded
to 0.7. Also, Ra should be 1K or larger.


None of you seems to have noticed the diode across Rb. That takes it out
of the circuit for the charge half-cycle. The cap charges through Ra and
D1, and discharges through Rb.

Oh, by the way: a link might be useful:
http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~amoss/java/555.htm

Were you guys looking at a different page? How did I get to that one? ?:-/

I felt so clever some decades ago when I came up with this on my own that
I almost dislocated my shoulder patting myself on the back. :)

Cheers!
Rich
Click to expand...
Yes, you are right. I forgot to look at the drawing. But actually the
diode isn't needed for 50% DC if you put Rb in series with pin 7, and
tie the cap from junction of Ra and Rb to ground. It's on page 10 of
the data sheet, but the ratio of Ra:Rb has to be 51:22 which makes
selecting the parts a little difficult. The diode is the easy way.

-Bill
 
Thanks gents, I stopped at Radio Shack today and we tested the DMM following
the directions; it all worked as desired and tonight I was adjusting the
frequency on the generator.

I appreciate the constructive comments here. Whether right or wrong, in
fact I read in a number of places that the old analog style clocks can be
used for measuring.

Thanks again to the group for the help,

Tim


"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.11.29.00.02.23.344217@example.net...
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 06:43:50 +0000, news-server.mn.rr.com wrote:

I have a generator at an off-grid cabin hooked to a charger/inverter
system
with 4 golf cart batteries. Works great to get 110v 24x7 only running
the
generator ~2 hours daily.

Recently I upgraded my charger to a unit that has tighter power quality
tolerances.....specifically, it requires input AC voltage to be within 5v
of
120v and frequency to be within 5Hz of 60Hz. The diagnostic on the
charger
is telling me my generator has "bad AC" and is putting out 67Hz.

I have the generator at home now and want to measure frequency with my
multimeter....it is a Radio Shack 22-812. Bear with me now please,
because
I don't understand electricity and electronics all that well. The user
instruction manual is very cryptic but I think that I set the main
control
on one of the V (voltage) settings, probe the 110v outlet with red on hot
and black on neutral (not on ground, right?), and then after I get the
voltage reading, I press the Hz/Duty/Width button to cycle thru the
various
settings, specifically here to get the frequency from the Hz option.

Does this seem right?

Yup. I also concur with Tom Bruhns - don't let the boneheads get you down.
Actually, this can be a pretty harsh NG, so I've gone ahead and
crossposted this to s.e.basics, with followups to there; that's really
where this question belongs, and the people who frequent there don't
denigrate newcomers - they're very welcome, and it's a very helpful group.
Some of the posters in s.e.design participate there as well, when they're
sober. ;-P

Anyway, I've left the rest of the post for the benefit of s.e.basics:

There is also another option on the main (round)
control that says Logic/Hz, but I am reading an ambiguous comment in
another
place in the manual that that setting should not be used for any circuit
with significant voltage (maybe that option is for getting frequencies
say
off of an audio signal, or ?).

I have searched all over the internet to try to understand how to make
this
measurement, but I ham having problems figuring it out. Can someone
help?

Also, on the main control, for the voltage options, there are two given.
One says 1) dBm~V, while the other says 2) C/F_V, where in the latter,
the _
is a flat bar with three dashes below. One place in the manual says
these
options mean 1) "selects AC voltage measurement in dBm or volts", and 2)
displays temperature and measures DC volts. It seems quite obvious that
if
I want to measure AC frequency I should select option 1), but in the part
of
the manual that advises the procedure for "measuring AC voltage
frequency",
the intro says "The meter can measure the frequency of an AC voltage,
with
or without a DC source bias", and then in the first subpoint it says "If
you
are measuring AC voltage with a DC source bias, set the function selector
to
dBm~V. Otherwise, set the function selector to C/F_V". (it then
proceeds
to advise to press the Hz/Duty/Width button, etc). This seems backwards
to
me, like a typo. I don't really know what "DC source bias" means, but I
think 110v power from my gene or from my outlets in my home should not be
"DC source bias". IE, I SHOULD use the dBm~V function, right?

I hope someone here can help me so I don't blow up my new $70 multimeter.

Thanks,

Tim

Cheers!
Rich
Click to expand...
 
Rich Grise wrote:

None of you seems to have noticed the diode across Rb. That takes it out
of the circuit for the charge half-cycle. The cap charges through Ra and
D1, and discharges through Rb.
Click to expand...
You're right. I had also emailed them to tell them about their
"error",
and they replied pointing out the diode just as you did.

Oh, by the way: a link might be useful:
http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~amoss/java/555.htm

Were you guys looking at a different page? How did I get to that one? ?:-/
Click to expand...
Yep, that's the page.

Cheers,

Mark
 
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 04:35:58 GMT, "news-server.mn.rr.com"
<TimBodin@mn.rr.com> wrote:

<snip>
I appreciate the constructive comments here. Whether right or wrong, in
fact I read in a number of places that the old analog style clocks can be
used for measuring.
Click to expand...
Those clocks with synchronous motors (they plug in, don't tick,
and usually have a sweep second hand) should work well.
The resolution of your measurement will depend upon
comparing it to another clock that you know is accurate.
The synchronous motor's speed is controlled by frequency,
not by voltage (within a reasonable range). So if your generator
is putting out 67 Hz, the clock it drives will advance 67 seconds
in one minute, or 67 minutes in one hour, etc. The resolution
depends on how long you want to wait...

Best regards,


Bob Masta
dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom

D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Home of DaqGen, the FREEWARE signal generator
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top