J
John Fields
Guest
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 12:12:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
Larkin?
What is this "Larkin" to which you refer?
What it's all about is that Bill Bowden and I have been having a
civilized discussion about a remote control decoder, he asked about
how the start bit got everything going and I thought, after having
posted the explanation, that I'd made a mistake.
When I see something that looks like I've made an error I like to post
about it immediately in case anyone has plans for realizing the
circuit in hardware, and if I find later that I was wrong about being
wrong, (as in this case) then no harm done when I post a retraction.
--
JF
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
---On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:06:59 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 06:50:57 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 06:20:45 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
---
The HC191 (U7) down-counts the 12 serial data clocks output from U3-4,
and when it gets to 0, latches the data accumulated by U8 and U9 into
their outputs, disables itself as well as U4 and U5, and drives U1-2
high.
If the data LSB is 1 at the time, then 445ľs later it'll go low, the
RS latch U1a/U1b will be reset, and the circuit will wait until for
the next start bit to begin a new data acquisition cycle.
If the data LSB is 0 at the time, however, U1a/U1b will be reset as
soon as U7 counts down to zero, and the circuit will wait for the next
start bit to start a new cycle.
---
Oops!
I think I found an error.
I'll work on it and post what I find.
---
My error; no error
What was that all about? Bait to entice Larkin to claim a digital
hazard, so you could whack him ?>:-}
...Jim Thompson
Larkin?
What is this "Larkin" to which you refer?
What it's all about is that Bill Bowden and I have been having a
civilized discussion about a remote control decoder, he asked about
how the start bit got everything going and I thought, after having
posted the explanation, that I'd made a mistake.
When I see something that looks like I've made an error I like to post
about it immediately in case anyone has plans for realizing the
circuit in hardware, and if I find later that I was wrong about being
wrong, (as in this case) then no harm done when I post a retraction.
--
JF