4.7 uh inductor

Design News is part of Informa PLC's Informa marketing department

This site is operated by one or more companies owned by Informa PLC, and all copyrights belong to them. The registered office of Informa PLC is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

| November 21, 2016

In science museums and physics classrooms, there is a very common demonstration called "jumping loop" or "electromagnetic loop transmitter". The experiment involved inserting a cylindrical iron core a few centimeters long into a large solenoid while a copper ring passed through the extended iron core. . When the solenoid is powered by AC power, the magnetic ring jumps out of the magnetic core.

There are many reasons why this experiment is so popular and important in science and engineering. First, it is interesting to observe the metal ring jumping out or hovering. Secondly, it uses Faraday's law of induction, Lenz's law, mutual inductance and electromagnetic induction force to make the ring hover or jump. The main problem with this conventional ring transmitter is its bulkiness and weight, because it requires a large number of thick copper wires for the solenoid and the heavier core inside. In addition, since it works with mains voltage (115 V or 230 V, alternating current), it is not safe to operate. Calculations show that the efficiency of ringing transmission is several times higher than that of AC mains (50/60Hz).

In this project, I used a square wave generator with a 555 timer IC whose frequency is adjustable from 700 Hz to 18 kHz. Its output drives the power MOSFET. The MOSFET drives a small coil of about 50 to 60 turns, which is wound on a 10 cm long ferrite cylinder instead of an iron core. The copper ring passes through the extension of the ferrite cylinder. Place a 16 micro Farad film capacitor in parallel with the coil to achieve parallel resonance. At resonance, the current flowing through the coil can reach several times the current provided by the power supply. When thick copper wire (AWG#14) is used to make the coil, the resistance of the coil will be reduced, resulting in a high quality factor (Q) of the coil. The current maintained by the high Q of the coil is nearly 8 times higher than the current that the power supply can provide. High primary currents are essential for inducing high currents in the copper ring, and the interacting magnetic field will float the ring. The circuit only needs 24V DC for floating, hovering and launching loops. A 10 ohm resistor is used in series with a 24V power supply. As the oscillator frequency increases slowly, the power supply current gradually decreases. At the resonant frequency, the power supply current reaches a minimum (~1.2 A), and at this point, the copper ring is suspended and hovering in the middle of the extended ferrite rod. The other switch is used to short-circuit the 10 ohm resistor. When short-circuited, the ring will jump out of the rod a few centimeters. Now, keep the 10 ohm resistor shorted, if you turn on the power, the loop jumps to a few tens of centimeters above the rod. This one

Show these effects.

This circuit consists of a square wave oscillator implemented by a 555 timer IC, a power MOSFET and a MOSFET driver circuit (Figure 1). This circuit requires two power supplies, a 15V, 0.8A power supply for the oscillator and MOSFET driver, and a 24V, 4A power supply for the coil.

In order to achieve a duty cycle close to 50%, the resistor R1 is chosen to be 180 Ohm, which is much smaller than R2 + R7 (minimum ~4.7k). By changing R2 from 100K to 0 Ohm, a square wave output from 700 Hz to 18 kHz can be obtained. The square wave output on pin 3 of the 555 timer IC should not be used directly to drive the MOSFET (Q3), for the gate capacitance. The MOSFET driver is implemented using two transistors Q1 and Q2. To limit the initial high gate current, R5 is used. High power and high current MOSFET (Q3) is used to drive the coil capacitor combination. The fast recovery diode D1 is used to enable the LC circuit to run freely during the off time of the MOSFET. When the MOSFET is on, an inductor of 5 microhenries (L1) is used to limit the initial large current. L1 can be easily made by winding about 40 turns on a plastic tube with a diameter of 1 cm. When the MOSFET is turned on, the energy is transferred to the LC circuit. When the MOSFET is turned off, the energy stored in the capacitor C and the coil L begins to flow between L and C.

When the switching frequency of the MOSFET matches the resonance frequency of the LC circuit, the LC circuit will use the least energy to maintain oscillation. In this case, although the current drawn from the power supply is small, the current flowing in the LC circuit is much larger. This high current generates a strong magnetic field in the ferrite core. The copper ring passing through the core serves as a low-resistance single-turn coil. The alternating magnetic field in the ferrite core induces a voltage in the copper ring, so high current also flows through the ring. These two interacting fields force the ring to jump out of the core. After working for a period of time, especially during tuning, MOSFET Q3 and diode D1 become hot. These two devices require two small heat sinks. The PCB layout of the circuit is shown in Figure 2. The 10 ohm power resistor (R8) is not shown on the PCB because it is a panel mount type. R8 should be screwed onto the aluminum housing as shown in Figure 3.

figure 2. PCB layout

image 3. Circuit board in the housing

Figure 4. Front panel

In order to make a suitable bobbin and ferrite cylinder base, an unclad FR4 board was used. As shown in Figure 5, cut and tighten several pieces. At the top, a hole was punched for the ferrite cylinder. Nowadays, since long ferrite rods are no longer common, two ferrite cylinders with holes are used. Each cylinder is 5 cm long, and these cylinders are connected by long nylon brackets and nylon screws. After making the coil, use an LCR meter to measure its inductance and resistance. Connect two ~8 micro Farad capacitors in parallel to make ~16 micro Farad, and connect this combination in parallel with the coil. Now you can use the well-known formula to calculate the resonance frequency:

The resonant frequency can also be measured using an oscilloscope and function generator. This process can be found in many places on the Internet.

The detailed specifications are as follows.

Diameter (coil former): ~27 mm, length: 16 mm, number of turns, N: 50~60, wire size: #14 AWG. Insert a ferrite cylinder with a diameter of about 16 mm into the coil (use nylon screws and supports to connect two cylindrical ferrite rods). The measured inductance is approximately 110 mH (approximately 235 mH with a ferrite core inside). The measured resistance is about 0.1W, C = 16 mF, the measured resonant frequency,

About 2.6 kHz

 Figure 5. A coil of 16 microfarad capacitors is connected in parallel. Shown is a copper ring passing through an extending ferrite cylinder.

The entire system consists of boxed circuit boards, power supplies and coils; as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Photo of the complete system

In order to set the best operating conditions, the coil capacitor circuit should be set to resonance. Without using any expensive equipment, we can easily determine this situation according to the schematic block diagram shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Set resonance

Before connecting the 24V power supply, we must ensure that the 10 Ohm resistor parallel switch (S2) is turned on. Now, connect the 24V power supply to the ammeter in series with the circuit, and the potentiometer R2 slowly changes from high to low, which causes the frequency to change from low to high. As the frequency increases and the current decreases, we can see that the ring begins to float. At resonance, the current reaches its minimum value at ~1.2 A. At resonance, the copper ring is suspended about 2 cm above the coil. Now, if the 10 Ohm resistor is short-circuited by closing S2, the loop will jump out of the ferrite rod. Keep the switch S2 closed, if you turn the power switch S1 from OFF to ON, the ring will jump to several tens of centimeters above the rod. All these tests are shown in the video. The circuit can even operate at a voltage higher than 24V. If driven by 48V, higher jumps can be seen.

When the coil is in resonance, the oscilloscope waveform is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. When the coil is driven in resonance, the waveforms of the MOSFET gate, drain, coil high side and both ends of the coil.

C1

0.01u

ceramic capacitor

70079249

C2

0.1 microfarad

70095155

C3

C4

0.1uF

C5

C6

100uF

Polarized capacitor

70187892

C8

70079479

D1

FFPF30UA60S

Fast recovery diode

70078639 

VS-15ETH06FPPBF

D2

18 volts

Zener diode

70061620 

IC1

NE555N

Timer IC

70550780 

L1

5 hours

Inductor

~40 open 1cm diameter. plastic pipe

Q1

2N2222

NPN transistor

70725575 

Q2

2N2906

PNP transistor

70348161 

Q3

TK32E12N1

Power MOSFET

70017262 (equivalent  

)

R1

180 ohm

resistance

70024696

R2

100K

Potentiometer

70153741

R3

1k

Resistor

70648011 

R4

4.7 ohm

70023927

R5

10 ohm

70183308 

R6

20k

 70183654

R7

4.7 thousand

70650980

R8

10 ohm, 25W

Power resistance

70201458 

2-pin terminal, 4

70086275 

Radiator-2

70115166 

PS1

15V, 800 mA

Power supply 1

70231086 

PS2

24V, 4.5A

Power supply 2

70177388 

S1

switch

switch

70192043

S2

large

About 238 uH

Ferrite core coil

C

8.2 uF + 8.2 uF

2 parallel capacitors

70260082

2 terminals (red)

70210915

2 terminals (black)

70198054

frame

70148724

Ferrite cylinder-2

Etiquette #2643625202

Other items needed for this project include screws, nylon screws, and connecting wires.

follow us:

We are fools for small projects. Put anything into a small enough package, and you may get our attention. Make these things small and useful, for example

, This excites me. It is a switch-mode power supply that takes up the same space as a traditional linear regulator.

It is true that the heavy work of [Kevin Hubbard]'s small step-down converter is done by the PAM2305 DC-DC step-down converter chip, which requires only a few supporting components. But the engineering staff [Kevin] put in it and squeezed everything onto the 9mm PCB waste board on the side, which is impressive. The largest passive component on the board is the inductor in 0805. Everything else is in 0603, so if you decide to use SMD welding technology, you can test it. Check the video after the break to understand the speed of the manual welding process.

The total bill of materials includes

With only one or two bucks running, the end result is that the power supply has a stable 750mA output that can handle a 1-A surge in 5 seconds. We want to know if there is a small radiator tab that might not help? With some black epoxy potting agent, at least TO-220 can look more perfect.

[Kevin]’s Black Mesa Labs has a history of developing interesting projects,

to

. We look forward to everything that follows-assuming we can see it.

Do you need a small DC/DC 3W switch to reduce 5V to 3V in the 7805 TO-220 pin? Or maybe just want to learn surface mount solder 0603 components. Check out this $3 OSH project from Black Mesa Labs. $ 0.60 PCBs from

, BOM from $2

.

-Kevin Hubbard (@bml_khubbard)

Man, I still feel weird when people say 0603 parts are difficult to weld... Then, I remember I manually installed some smaller components to make a living! Great little project to love these things: D

Well, if you have hand-eye coordination, they are actually not difficult. I occasionally solder (despite EE), but when I solder, 0603 is not that difficult. 0402s is the real tongue.

Most of our recent board of directors are 0201.

But hope you don’t have to solder by hand. I think 0603 is quite easy, 0402 is feasible, but it is best to observe under a good microscope, and 0201 is almost invisible on the finished PCB. I can solder them under the microscope with good tools.

The real question is whether there is a solder mask. Of course, hands must be firm, eyesight must be good, and optical gain must be appropriate.

If there is no solder mask, 0603 will be close to the trace width of most homemade PCBs, and the solder will flow around and the joint will become ugly.

I don't like 0402, but mainly because many are not even marked.

Sharp tweezers help a lot.

With this information, the IC can be changed to an IC with different input and output restrictions. Looking at Digikey, the TSOT-23-5 package suitable for this product has a maximum input voltage of 5.5v and a maximum output voltage of 5v.

Without changing the small board, there is no 9v battery to 5v Arduino battery, but it is still very useful.

If there is enough interest, I will study the changes in a wide voltage range. I am watching this part

. My requirement is that there is no external diode and no small 0805 chip inductors (2.2uH-4.7uH). This Rohm BD9C301FJ meets these two requirements and has a wide input range from 5V to 18V and an output range from 1V to 12V. The surface looks good. The price of the SOIC8 package is $1.70.

+1

almost finished. I want to add another resistor and possibly a ground ring at the top. View pictures here:

This is a 3A link with a wide input and output voltage range. It has not been established, but those who are interested can use it as soon as possible.

Why is it so cheap to get a CUI V7803W up to 72V? Or can the cheaper Murata OKI withstand voltages up to 35V? This is a good project worth learning, but for the actual circuit structure, there are already excellent dcdc converters that can replace 220-size linear devices...

Price and size are two outstanding advantages. CUI is a very bulky thing-if you are lucky, it can be installed at 780x (plus it only works with 500mA, which will cost you $10 in the first quarter). Murata OKI-78SR-3.3/1.5-W36-C is more compact and cheaper than CUI at only $4.30, but both components suffer a significant voltage drop – CUI is 9-72V in, and Murata is 7-36 . The CUI part is very useful for using a 9V battery as an input (or it will definitely be useful after the battery is exhausted), if you want to step down the 5V power supply to 3V3, then flattening *neither applies* (for example, because you There is already a 5V rail, but it needs a little 3V3 love).

If you are designing a product for production, the switch mode circuit will definitely become part of the PCB design, rather than being implemented as a replacement for TO220. However, when prototyping the design, it is very convenient to experiment with the power supply as a plug-in module, so if these are the parts you want to use in PCB integrated switch mode, why not use it for the prototype power supply?

So, what is the white paper used for welding?

"It happened too fast, officer, I'm not sure what happened!"

The white paper is actually the tape that holds the SMD components.

Thank you!

In order to get more power, you need a larger inductor, a larger heat sink will not help.

correct. But please also note that the inductor must have a very low DCR to get good efficiency. Otherwise, for this voltage range and taking into account the noise problem, it is impossible to discern the advantage over a decent LDO linear regulator.

What is the point of this interesting little project? If you need to be small, I will choose one of the complete modules that can provide the same output power in a miniature package. For example, using the TPS82150 in a 3.0x 2.8×1.5mm package, 3V to 17V input range and 1A continuous output current.

As for other DCDC converters in the TO220 package, there are already a large number of manufacturers to choose from, and a large number of manufacturers have poured into the market. Therefore, if you do not have very special requirements, you can perform some tests on the ready-made products. (If you only need one item, or only a few items, please remember to request samples;)

I have been using these, ages from 7 to 36 volts input 3.3 out.

This is a $0.50 test board to evaluate the switcher solution for my Spartan7 FPGA design (

). The final design is a 4-layer $60 fab, so I want to make sure that the switcher design is reasonable and not a risky project for FPGA design. Afterwards, I just thought that this is an interesting OSH gadget kit project for people who want to solder their own power supply for $2 (compared to $5 for off-the-shelf equipment).

Okay, that makes sense. But why would you pay $5 for a ready-made product? Take CUI VXO7803-500 as an example. 2.4 $ If you order individually from Mouser, you only need some input and output caps on the target board (which should be placed here anyway), plus a few cents.

The price of VXO7803-500 is really great. For my FPGA design, I stepped down 5V to 1V, and I cannot use this through-hole design. My TO-220 design is just a test board for making interesting DIY kits. The only advantage over off-the-shelf products is that the output voltage can be hard selected. 3V is just a common example.

I use TI TPS62160 switch mode IC for my design. It is suitable for voltages up to 17Vin, and can be programmed for various output voltages, 1A power, high switching frequency (using feedback resistors), and run to Vin = Vout. It has other functions such as EN and power good, which are very useful in sequential power configuration. Changing the value of one of the resistors in the BOM, I have 3V3 or 5V switching mode (or any of the many other voltages I don't use frequently).

At the beginning of this year, I laid out and manufactured many such devices in a TO220 PCB with a size of 8.24 x 12.53mm. The cost of each set of 3 PCBs is only $0.75 (in the PCB-other components are more). It is just for the tickets for the breadboard, or inserting the tickets in the slots that require linreg in other designs.

TI parts are certainly not the cheapest option, but I have them and all other support components (including wirewound SMD inductors) on hand. You stick to what you know and trust.

I neglected to mention that TI has some fixed output changes on this IC (3V3 and 5V), which slightly reduces the number of external parts. However, considering the cost of the IC, I prefer to use a pair of resistors to adjust a bunch of things (and I chose the resistor value so that one of them is 3V3 and 3V swamp standard 100K). 5V implementation).

TPS62150 and TP62160 are very similar parts, not typos.

I understand that something is designed and built for entertainment or education, but these versions have been available for many years and cost a lot of money.

Yes – Digikey’s fixed 3.3V drive is particularly good, only $4

. However, I cannot use the through-hole solution in the FPGA board design, so I designed my own single-sided surface mount only layout. The BML DC/DC "tool kit" is suitable for the DIY crowd and used as an education platform. After choosing the interesting 0603 welding, choose the resistance values ​​of R1 and R2 and get any voltage between 1.0V and 5.0V.

The speed-up capacitor in the feedback network should bypass the high resistance in the voltage divider-not the bottom resistance. In the reference circuit, a capacitor is placed here to increase the gain above a certain frequency. In the current configuration, the feedback circuit attenuates high frequency components.

You are right. The 100pF capacitor cover is incorrectly placed on the PCB layout. When it should be connected to GND, connect it to Vout. Gerbers will update within 24 hours and upload new shared projects to OSH-Park. Thank you.

A 100pF capacitor is fixed. New shared items are available here

I am a little wary of the EMI compliance of this kind of thing, and did not even say that off-the-shelf parts can do the same thing for less money and have been EMI certified.

Then there is the demand of people, who keep inventing some axles, they named the wheels as hubs, which may be a good thing for many people, but in this case, the only "performance" is to compress the parts into a small On the parts. board.

For most of us, this low fruit and the taste that might be poisoned by EMI seems tasteless, but it looks juicy enough that [Dan] picked it here and refluxed it. ...That's great!

I have been using China's small pressure reduction board for some time. They can be adjusted by a small but easily adjustable adjustment tank. They have a very wide input and output range. They have an efficiency in the range of 90% at 5v to 3.3v and have a rated current of at least 1 ampere. Oh, they removed 10 of them for $10,

Before I got them, I thought about replacing these potentiometers with fixed resistors, but now after using them for some things, they are actually very good. If I were to talk about a car project or other items that were subject to strong vibrations, I might consider changing the pot, but I have not felt the need to do so.

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (

)

The site uses Akismet to reduce spam.

.

By using our website and services, you expressly agree to our placement of performance, functionality and advertising cookies.

I have a good background in high voltage. For me, this means more than 10,000 volts, but I still have a lot of blanks in the low voltage area where the RC control board and H bridge are located. When I was working on the first real robot BB-8 robot, I stumbled upon a design board that was used to convert the different polarity of the RC receiver board to a positive voltage for Arduino only.

The question today is how to convert a negative voltage to a positive voltage?

In the end, I came up with a viable method, but I'm sure there is a more elegant solution, which may be an obvious solution for those who understand the low-voltage field. Next is my journey to present the committee. My work has worked well, but it still keeps me entertained. I would love to see the skills and experience of the Hackaday community applied to this simple but confusing design challenge.

I have an RC receiver taken from a toy truck. When it is on a truck, it controls two DC motors: one for front and rear driving, and the other for left and right steering. This means that the motor needs to be told to rotate clockwise or counterclockwise. To make the DC motor rotate in one direction, you need to connect the two wires in two ways, and to make it rotate in the other direction, you need to reverse the two wires or reverse the polarity. It is common that there is no output line inside the RC receiver. This is the method I found difficult, as shown below.

I did not use the RC receiver on the toy truck. I extracted it from the truck and used it to control my BB-8 robot. My BB-8 robot has two configurations

, But more widely known are fuel tank drives or differential drives (see illustration). The two wheels rotate in the same direction relative to the robot, and the robot moves in that direction. Reverse both wheels and drive in opposite directions. Rotate the wheel in the opposite direction, and then turn it on.

The motor in BB-8 is a drilling motor, controlled by two H bridge boards. Arduino performs pulse width modulation on the H bridge board for speed control and controls which direction the motor should rotate in. Finally, the RC receiver tells the Arduino what to do. However, a conversion board (the subject of this article) is required between the RC receiver and the Arduino. Please note that Arduino is also necessary to counteract when the BB-8 robot swings and synchronize the sound with the movement, but it is not resolved here.

Since there are two motors and each motor has two directions, the RC receiver needs to control the four pins on the Arduino to make the two drilling motors behave as follows: motor 1 / clockwise, motor 1 / counterclockwise , Motor 2 / clockwise, motor 2 / counterclockwise rotation. Any voltage that the receiver applies to these pins must be relative to Ardunio's ground.

That's the problem. The Arduino expects a positive voltage relative to ground on all these pins. Therefore, I need a way to map the two sets of motor control lines of the RC receiver to the Arduino pins that only require positive voltages, which may have positive or negative voltages at both ends. Remember that these RC receiver wires are not common inside the receiver.

Now, please remember that electronics is my general interest, except for the courses we teach in high school physics, I am self-taught. This means I have "understood", but a lot of my knowledge depends on the projects I have completed. So I have gaps in knowledge. I have never changed a negative voltage to a positive voltage. It sounds simple. However, searching online did not help. The closest I got was in the two old posts on the forum, the answer was "It's easy to do. I can do this with a resistor." But there is no further explanation, at that time I didn't ask myself anywhere problem.

Instead, I came up with my own method, first using only one set of wires from the RC receiver. The wires from the receiver are blue and brown, and can be positive or negative or counterclockwise depending on how the receiver is told to spin the motor. This means I need two diodes to create two possible paths for the different polarities the brown wire may have: positive or negative. Then, I added a battery to a negative path to make it positive.

Next, I placed a PNP transistor between the positive terminal of the battery and the receiver. In the absence of a signal from the RC transmitter, the base of the transistor is extremely negative with respect to the emitter, but not enough to turn on the transistor. This is because the negative terminal of the battery is connected to the blue wire of the receiver, and since there is no signal from the transmitter, the brown wire is also at the same potential as the blue wire, and the battery is negative.

The idea is that when the transmitter sends a signal to make the brown wire negative with respect to the blue wire, it will become more negative and turn on the PNP transistor. Then, a positive signal will be transmitted from the battery to the Arduino through the transistor.

The most obvious problem is that the Arduino wants to see 3 volts to register as a HIGH input, which means that the battery must be at least 3 volts, so even if there is no signal from the transmitter, the voltage to the transistor is -3 volts and should not be turned on Turn it on in case of

Therefore, I immediately thought of using relay instead. I will use the current flowing through the negative path to power up the relay, thus closing a switch completely independent of the RC receiver. Arduino has a 5V output pin, so I made the switch to close the circuit between the 5V pin and Arduino pin 7 to provide the required positive voltage to pin 7.

The 1 in the circle in the schematic shows where I want to place a resistor to limit the current flowing through the relay coil. However, I have been trying to use resistors as low as 4.7 ohms, but the coil does not have enough current to close the switch. Without resistance, it can work with a current of 70mA. The rated voltage of the coil of the relay is 3V/120mA, so I left it.

Using a relay may seem laborious, but this is the only solution I can think of, and I already have a relay.

The next step is to add a second relay and do the same for the second set of wires from the RC receiver of the second motor.

But this behavior seems to be sporadic. Remember that there is a complete double H-bridge circuit also connected to the Arduino ground. I have worked with relays many times before, and the RC receiver comes from a commercially produced functional toy, so I have no reason to doubt. On the other hand, I have made the H-bridge circuit from scratch because I have mastered most of the parts and I am still new to H-bridge and MOSFET. Therefore, at first I spent two weeks of free time thinking that my problem was with the H-bridge and drilling motor. I’m pretty sure that all of us have experienced the same blindness, and believe that the most likely culprit is the part you are involved in.

But at some point, I disconnected the H bridge, only tested the RC receiver circuit, and observed the voltage on the Arduino pin. At the same time, I turned on the two "motors" in all combinations in both directions (although there was no connection at the time Any motor). The only strange behavior I saw was when I turned on the motor in the opposite direction.

Note that in the diagram, I connected the two blue wires from the RC receiver together. Until then, I have assumed that the blue wire is common inside the receiver, and only the brown wire changes from positive to negative relative to the blue wire. From my behavior, it seems that both wires are switching polarity, possibly around other internal common references.

Therefore, I added a third relay on one of the positive paths of one of the set of wires. This means that it is no longer necessary to ground the corresponding blue wire, so that the two blue wires of the receiver remain separated. Please note that I did not put in the fourth relay for the remaining positive path, which proved unnecessary. At that time, the circuit played a big role, and it continues to do so.

So I asked, is there a better way to convert the RC receiver output into something that Arduino can use? Relays require power, so it would be great if there is a solution that does not require any additional power. My relay solution seems to be in the early 1900s. Maybe this is a good solution after all, but it is only one of many solutions. Let us know in the comments below.

I was asked in the comments to provide high-resolution photos of the RC receiver circuit board. The embedding is too big (don’t want to slow down the phone users), so

(Warning: 5MB).

Your chart is more advanced than the one I used before, but I am curious why you don't just choose a simple motor speed controller? Those of us who have developed R2-D2, and some who have built BB-8, just use size engineering ESC, and most of what you are talking about can be processed.

Usually, when I start all this, I am not familiar with ESC. Moreover, I also have to synchronize the movement with the sound through the Arduino (for example, when rotating in the field, the children who usually sway around translate, so I want it to make a sound when the rotation starts). When the droid stops, the Arduino also performs speed control to handle the swing. I am new to ESC, but based on my reading, I did not see how they can be used with Arduino.

For BB-8, this thing has been more or less solved and open sourced by people who 3D print more than 90% of his figure. James Bruton / XRobots. Search for it on youtube and you will find links to all his codes.

To get a simpler/universal "fuel tank"-like control (ie -R2, no need for inertial monitoring in complicated places), please check the SHADOW and Padawan systems under the electronic sub-forum on asromech.net.

Yes, James did a great job. There are also some good shaft drives. One of the open source is Ed Zarick

. But making BB-8 is not what I really want to do. I am more driven by engineering challenges, so following other people’s verbatim records is not of interest to me (plus James and I started at about the same time. It took me longer.)

In my opinion, the RC receiver already has two H bridges to control the electric motor of the toy truck. Therefore, I am not sure why I need to make things so complicated.

^^^This

Because the goal is to convert a "normal" drive to a differential drive.

In an article on Hackaday: "I'm not sure why I need to make things so complicated."

Made me laugh

If it were me, I would not use the analog output of the receiver. All you really need is the RF deck in the Rx. You don't need a decoder or powertrain, so I will look for the original pulse sequence from the RF card socket to the decoder, then send it to the Arduino and decode it there. This also allows you to perform any mixing, fault protection, etc. you think is suitable for the application.

A few years ago, I did something similar in a cheap fixed-wing remote control toy. It uses Elan uC, I found a pin compatible AVR, you can plug it into the circuit, and then write your own decoder.

It all depends on the comfort level of using low-level firmware. I don't know what the Arduino environment has, as I wrote for the AVR series in C and Assy.

I am working on a broad assumption that the original receiver lacks any balancing or anti-sway logic, and you may be using an upgraded motor (the original receiver unit may not be able to drive reliably). Basically, you only need its input, so you don't have to build your own remote circuit. First of all, please check whether the battery is grounded and any output has the required voltage when driving this output-one of the two wires means "left" and "right", the other means "positive" and "when either pair Relative to the battery ground when it is positive, "reverse". Don't read both pins together-just connect one pin to ground. If that's fine, then you only need to connect the receiver ground wire to the Arduino ground wire You can use it.

The next simplest method is to turn on the RF receiver, isolate the two half H-bridges inside (tracing back from the output wiring), and then connect IN to INPUTS. Drive the Arduino common receiver power ground, no matter which H bridge input is high, it will define the motor direction. The premise is that the receiver unit can be opened, and no ASIC (h-bridge integrated inside the receiver IC chip) is packaged or used, but this is not the standard for cheap toys.

Also, in the answer below, it is mentioned that the receiver runs 5V, while Ardunino runs 9V (minimum 7V), if you bypass the voltage regulator on the Arduino (ie, don’t use the input power plug, but set the regulated 5V Insert the GND and +V headers), you can provide the receiver and Arduino at the same time from the same power supply. Another benefit is that your device will have a power switch.

In addition, as long as the receiver does not consume too much power, you can power the Arduino through its current input, and power the receiver through the +5V and GND of the Arduino connector (to achieve most of the juice in the receiver battery) The configuration was originally intended to be used For the drive motor). Speaking of which, how do you power the motor? I hope it is not directly disconnected from the Arduino I/O pins?

The motor is powered by the second H-bridge through which Arduino sends PWM. This is powered by drill batteries, one for each drill motor.

Your assumption is correct. I need to use Arduino to implement anti-swing logic, because the BB-8 robot will swing a lot when it stops, and the start of the motor is also a signal for the Arduino to make a sound.

I assume you use the same power supply for the receiver and arduino? If so, use common ground as a reference and use a diode/pull-down resistor on each "motor" wire. When powered by a battery, the H-bridge does not generate negative voltage, it only reverses the direction of current through the motor.

+1

This is very. If the receiver and Arduino can run on the same power supply, it should be possible to read the H-bridge output using a pull-down resistor. If the receiver has its own H-bridge, it may not output "negative voltage", but just swap which motor output pin is VDD and GND.

Therefore, parallel bridge rectifiers can solve the problem.

Unless the receiver implements some PWM by itself, the solution should really be that simple. The H-bridge connects the output to GND or VDD. It is not creating a "negative voltage", but to change which end of the motor is connected to the same "positive voltage". As long as both chips use the same power supply, you need a pull-down resistor and a digital reader.

A small capacitor in parallel with the resistor will be responsible for the PWM signal. Even better, you can use the 4 analog inputs of Arduino to read the PWM equivalent analog value!

Sadly, their consumables are different. The receiver uses 5 volts, while the Arduino uses 9 volts (7 volts minimum).

You can still connect them to the ground.

As long as the two power systems are not connected, the H-bridge output will float and display as an AC signal, and you can connect it to any voltage required on the Arduino circuit. If you connect one H-bridge output to the ground of the Arduino, then you will get negative and positive voltages from the other output-however, all other output channels depend on the state of that channel.

Conversely, if you connect the power ground of the receiver to the power ground of the Arduino, all H-bridge outputs are switched between 0...+5V relative to the Arduino.

In addition, since you only use the Arduino to control another H-bridge, what you actually need is to add a push-pull amplifier stage to the output channel of each receiver. You can add other H-bridge chips, but you can skip the process and just add some powerful FETs with appropriate current handling capabilities.

GND is the receiver's ground, and V+ is the ground you want. If V+ is greater than the receiver output voltage, you need to use a simple level shifter between the receiver and the push-pull buffer, because the input signal must swing from GND to V+ to drive the FET correctly.

Possible warnings are that the receiver’s H-bridge does not have enough dead time between switching, and/or your level shifter has reduced the speed of the FETs, so they all stay on and start to heat up during the crossover period . In that case, you do need another H-bridge chip, but you still don't need an Arduino because you can treat the receiver output as a logic level signal relative to the receiver power ground.

Moreover, you also need to add freewheeling diodes at both ends of the FET so that the induction kickback of the motor does not put too much pressure on them.

This simple buffer is suitable for voltages up to about 24 volts. In addition, you cannot drive the FET gate from the common input because the voltage difference between the gate and the source exceeds the FET's specifications and may damage them. For higher voltages, you need separate high-side and low-side drivers.

This is a circuit simulation of a CMOS inverter, which is basically a buffer

Please note that when you implement a level shifter with a pull-up resistor to V + and a level shifter with an NPN transistor for pulling down to GND, it is also an inverter, when the signal is inverted by CMOS again When the inverter is inverted, it will output the correct path.

This ^^^^ is more or less the correct answer, but it can be simplified a bit. In fact, many "dumb" H-bridge chips are just dual half-bridges (basically introduced here), which is exactly what you want because it has built-in dead time/bootstrap circuitry. The built-in H-bridge of your RC driver will produce an output voltage of 0-5V (because you are talking about its power supply), so these voltages can be fed directly into the half-bridge control input. Again, as others have pointed out, this is all out of common ground. Unity.

Dual half bridges usually don't have cross protection or current limiting options because they are dual half bridges rather than full bridges-they are assumed to operate independently as independent push-pull buffers, so the state of one should not affect the state of the other.

It looks like it might be the solution. I did some further tests with an oscilloscope last night, and it seemed that grounding the negative of the battery on the circuit board (it turns out that the negative of the battery on the circuit board was marked as negative) actually caused the output to be positive relative to that ground. So it looks like connecting it to the ground of the Arduino and adding some current limiting resistors and pull-down resistors are all necessary, unless I still lack anything or encounter another problem.

The BTW receiver does not implement PWM. The TX/RX has no speed control. The transmitter appears to be capable of speed control, but it is actually an on/off switch.

I do need Arduino. It also uses the motor to counteract the robot's swing when it is stopped, and in some cases plays a sound when the motor is turned on (for example, when the robot is spinning on the spot, like I do when I stare at the robot when I have children) it).

The only reason the Arduino needs 7+ V is that you power it through the built-in voltage regulator, which provides 5 V that is actually depleted. You can directly power it by connecting a 5 V power supply to the 5 V pin instead of the Vin pin. Even if you warn on the Arduino page, it is absolutely safe, as long as your power supply is actually 5 V and you disconnected the power when you plug it into your computer via USB (if not, it will connect two different voltage sources , Not a good idea).

I think the light release agent can solve two problems well. One problem is the positive and negative problem, and the other is voltage level conversion.

^^Yes. I am thinking of an AC optocoupler like pc814. Just use a 500/2 = 250E resistor to connect bkue and brown power to the LED, and the optocoupler can work bidirectionally without worrying about absolute ground and -v voltage difference.

Indeed, unless the motor uses PWM, you will have the following combinations

0001

0010

0011

and many more….

0 is grounded or "-" or "battery negative", this may be the place to cause confusion-except for the positive battery, it is not a true negative.

The "positive" of Figure 1 is again similar to an RC car for a battery-powered "floating" circuit, and it is meaningless unless compared with the negative of a battery.

I work at HV and have read some of your articles, uh... Yes

Although you said that there is no common pin on the receiver, is it probably the power ground wire or the battery negative? You can connect it to the Arduino ground, and then you only need to have a diode and a series + pull-down resistor on each side of the motor driver to convert to a logic level (positive = high, negative = low).

Or, you can connect two optocouplers (with current limiting resistors, of course) on each motor output in a similar way to the above relays, and simply connect the outputs through pull-up or pull-down resistors as needed To arduino. Much smaller and lower power than relays

If you just want to read the on/off signal instead of the analog signal, my first thought is to also use an optical isolator. Low current consumption and maintain complete isolation between the two circuit boards.

If Rx's H-bridge output is PWM (most likely), then this is the case. However, if you want to enter the analog input, or if there is a capture/compare peripheral on the microcontroller, you need to convert it back through a suitable size resistor and capacitor. You can sample the rising/falling edge and measure between them. Tick ​​between to get the value. Using capture/comparison is probably the least number of parts, power consumption and CPU load.

By testing the last light with an oscilloscope, it looks as if grounding the negative of the battery on the circuit board (it turns out that it is marked with such a mark on the circuit board) actually causes the output to be positive relative to that ground. So, as many of you have suggested, it looks like connecting it to the ground of the Arduino, and adding some current limiting resistors and pull-down resistors is enough.

By the way, this receiver does not have PWM. The transmitter's paddle looks like it needs to be speed controlled, but it's actually an internal on/off switch.

You can use an operational amplifier to change the voltage level. But in fact, the problem here is not that you want negative numbers to be positive, but that there is no commonality between the outputs. (Then and you really want three-state inputs; HIGH, LOW, NULL)

I will give up the reading method of 1 pin per channel. I think you are full of complaints towards the end, so this is the third relay. I strongly recommend using MIT OpenCourse on op amps:

What you might want is to bias the op amp and reduce the signal gain. The idea is that the op amp is biased to a neutral but halfway voltage, such as 2.5v. When the input is negative, the output is 0v; when the input is positive, the output is 5v. Indeed, you may end up turning around because the circuit requires less passive to output 5v at high input and 0v at low input.

If you do try to bias the signal, then I suggest you create a voltage divider (with a very small resistance value) between the two wires, which is sufficient for your situation.

As N1JPL said, it sounds like the signal you are trying to convert already comes from the H bridge. Of course, they may not be enough to drive drilling motors. Depending on the structure of the receiver, you may be able to find the PWM signals between the actual radio receiver and the H-bridge on the receiver unit, and then plug them directly into the Arduino. Even go directly to the larger H bridge. Is there a close-up photo of the receiver circuit?

I opened it for the first time and uploaded a high resolution photo here

. There is also an editor at the bottom of the article with the link. It is too large to be embedded.

I admit that I don't know anything about it. Through searching, it appears that the chip is the actual receiver. It seems that Y2 may be a FET, and D2 may be a diode or an NPN transistor (BCW32), both from

, But HY1D has no content.

You can still find the location of its gate (if it is a FET) or base (if it is a bipolar transistor), without even knowing its exact part. This is the only pin that is not connected to the motor or power/ground.

HY1D looks like an NPN transistor MMBT8050 rated at 1.5A.

Y2 looks like a PNP transistor SS8550 with a rated current of 1.5A.

They are located on the L/RH bridge, I had expected the F/R bridge to have higher specifications, so it is strange to see more Y2.

I will give up trying to get good mcu power from the motor to PWM signal, which is bound to be unstable and error-prone. Just use a 7805 or similar linear regulator connected to the battery, or a buck/boost converter that directly removes the 5V power from the battery. You don’t need to turn positive numbers into negative numbers:)

If it is on the kanban, all components are labeled, DP+, Y2 and L7 components are transistors with a "Q" label. This number is just an increasing counter, and each component has a unique number in each component type. R stands for resistor, D stands for diode, Q stands for transistor, C stands for capacitor, L stands for inductor, Y or X stands for crystal/oscillator, etc.

You can see that each output has 4 transistors or mosfets, so there is a complete H bridge. These bridges are controlled by the smaller transistor L7, because the R288-2 chip cannot output a signal strong enough to overcome the gate capacitance (for MOSFET) or current (for bipolar transistors) of the MOSFET. If you want to copy it yourself (with higher current capability of course), please make sure you have studied how to properly control the MOSFET from the arduino. Especially for PWM signals above 1kHz, capacitance will become critical.

Don't be fooled by the small size components, if the design is correct, they can control large current without heating!

My guess is that the gate or base of these transistors are directly connected to the Bright R288-2 chip. You can use the multimeter continuity check mode to see which pin. If not, there may be a resistance between them. The resistors R12...R15 seem to be connected to the R288-2 chip, and the other end of the resistor is connected to the L7 transistor. These are the signals you are looking for.

If you have an oscilloscope, you can easily identify the signal and voltage level and connect the ground terminal of the oscilloscope to the battery ground terminal (labeled GND). Put the probe on the smaller transistor pin, check the reading, and then probe the pin of IC1 (R288-2) to see if you can find the same signal.

The voltage of the signal cannot be higher than the battery, so please pay attention to whether it needs to be level converted for arduino. Connect the GND of the arduino to the GND of the battery, the solder lead of the L7 transistor, use a voltage divider to reduce the voltage if necessary, and use an online calculator to obtain a good value. If it is between 0V-0.6V (logic low level) and 3-5.5V (logic high level), the arduino should be able to handle them.

That being said, you are making it difficult for yourself to use toy electronics. There are already ready-made modules for RC, which you can plug in and connect to arduino, motor and other wires. Although I am not an RC expert, I cannot suggest any modules, but I am sure that there are many people here to join.

Thank you for your help, helping you read the board, guys, and the detailed tracking tips, i.e. imqqmi. Interestingly, I have been trying to find the part number, except for the capacitor, I don't even have the text on the board. I did read that book in some way.

Re-using toy remote control toys instead of off-the-shelf toy remote control toys, I did not realize that the prices were comparable at the time. But for motors, etc., there are still cost issues, at least when they are all added up. The way I went was that one drilling rig cost $10 and the other was $0. My double H-bridge cost me the price of a MOSFET because I have everything else. I also learned a lot of things, which is much more than I buy ready-made things. This is my first time using MOSFETs, and it is worth it. Coupled with the experience of designing the board, even if this is excessive, debug the whole thing.

I understand your reasoning, and this is my method of learning:) I commend your thinking and learning methods out of the box.

I also set myself a challenge to use only what I own and try to keep costs low, but sometimes, if you want to accomplish something, it's better to invest in some ready-made modules that are known to be available. You can take them apart at any time and understand how they work.

I have been trying to figure out how to use a graphics display salvaged from a Lexmark color laser printer (128×64 pixel dot matrix). I learned about jtag to try to dump a custom lexmark controller by building a custom buspirate. I have to learn to use Linux to use openocd. Finally, it still cannot connect. It also has an i2c port, and I made an i2c address scanner to find out which address it uses. Unfortunately I can't figure out the protocol, but I can reset the display using i2c.

The last thing to try is to make the logic analyzer capture the reset signal sent through the 14 data signals, and try to find out the protocol and registers that must be written to the LCD using my own controller. Fingers crossed, I hope the LCD module will survive my poking :)

The receiver SMD pin is arranged in the following brief description

If you want to skip the operation of converting negative numbers to positive numbers.

However, if you want to divide the positive and negative parts of the signal into two positive pins, there seems to be a trivial way, but it looks incredible, and tomorrow I will have to do some experiments to verify that it actually works.

I will return:)

You can use two optocouplers and 3 resistors to achieve this.

Anti-parallel LEDs. This will be sent to your H-bridge through a suitable current limiting resistor.

Then, connect the transistor in the form of a totem pole, and connect the other two 1K resistors in parallel with each collector and emitter pair. Connect the top of the totem pole to the power supply of the microcomputer and the other end to the ground of the microcomputer.

The resistor divider sets the output voltage to the midpoint of the micro power supply.

Then, the PWM signal from the H-bridge will drive one or the other transistor according to the direction.

Therefore, the full forward direction will be your micro's VCC, and the full reverse direction will be GND.

Oh, thank God, I found this comment. I'm going crazy. The 2 optocouplers are what I thought about after reading the question about 2 seconds.

However, after seeing all the crazy designs and complex solutions, I began to wonder if I was crazy about it, and I am glad that others mentioned it.

Or, buy a suitable multi-channel TX/RX pair from eBay for just $40. very easy. You will also get better information.

Why has no one suggested these obvious choices?

I would have used 4 optocouplers and 2 current limiting resistors.

For each motor (forward/reverse (F/R) and left/right (L/R)), connect two optocoupler LEDs in anti-parallel as described earlier. Connect the LED through a current limiting resistor instead of one of the motors.

At the optoelectronic output, you have a pair of outputs-refer them to the MCU ground and connect both outputs to the MCU. For each motor, only one of these outputs is valid, depending on the driving direction of the motor. From this, you can use the code to restore the motor direction and PWM.

The software polling of 4 optocoupler outputs will be very intense. You will find a way to capture pulse edge timing using MCU peripherals (input capture timing) would be great. This may require mixing the photoelectric output in a way that allows all four signals to send their pulses to a single pin for edge time capture.

Alternative method: You can probe the receiver board to try to find the output of the receiver and decode 1 receiver output instead of 4 motor outputs.

Alternatively, you can go back to the beginning of the R/C chain-back to the transmitter. Before transmitting the joystick signal, use the MCU to remix the joystick signal to obtain the desired operation from the unmodified receiver. The problem is that the F/R output of the receiver may be more powerful than the L/R output. L/R may not be able to drive a motor of the same size as F/R. You can replace both existing H bridges with your own (the same as you planned). You must reverse engineer the receiver motor output.

After some time, from the perspective of development work, the use of conventional R/C controls began to appear attractive. You can exchange $$$ for development time/energy. Especially if you plan to add more features in the future. But what's the fun?

Polling for four inputs is not "stressful" at all. Set up a timer, and then view the status of each pin when the timer is off. There is no easy way.

The way I did this in another project was to use two resistors and one of the two outputs to form a 2:1 voltage divider towards the positive rail of the receiver. I assume that the driver is isolated from the receiver power supply (this will increase the cost, but there is no practical reason), so assuming that the RC receiver is 5v, *should* be solved with only two resistors. If it is higher, you need to connect the third resistor to ground.

Therefore, one resistance goes from the wire (brown or blue) to the other equal resistance to the positive power supply of the RC receiver, and the third resistance is grounded from the connection point between the two.

Maybe an opto-isolator is set up so that the internal LEDs are back-to-back, so when the polarity changes, it will change the photoelectricity that is turned on. Then, the transistor side is connected to the arduino pin. It has the same basic idea as the relay, but it saves electricity.

The combination of modular synthesizer and Arduino knows the same challenges.

Check this design:

In my opinion, optical isolators can solve the problem. Use four of them with two LEDs on each RC receiver connected from the anode to the cathode of each RC receiver with a common series resistance. Neither one, the other nor both light up at any given time. The forward conduction of one will protect the other from excessive reverse bias. The secondary side (phototransistor) can be connected as a simple open collector output. The arduino pins can be configured with internal pull-up resistors. It's done.

Can't you use a bridge rectifier to change a negative voltage to a positive voltage?

it will. (Minus the diode drop) However, it will change the positive voltage to (still) positive voltage, so you can no longer distinguish "forward" or "reverse" signals...just "the motor is running".

This is a bit rough, but I listened to the high and low of the analog signal, serialized it through a pipe to find out what happened [no scope], and then coded around it

If you want to use the H-bridge output, relative to the negative of the RXVR power supply, the signal on each pin will still be positive, one direction is +ve, the other direction is 0V, and the other direction is the opposite. This will use 2 pins on the Arduino to read + – forward – + backward ++ stop – stop.

A resistor divider may be needed to reduce the voltage to the input level required by the Arduino, but it is much simpler than a relay/optocoupler/transistor

Ebay has been providing ESCs with reverse ESCs for brush motors all day long. If you can use arduino to make beep and bloop sounds, you can easily control several RC ESCs. About 1000 to 2000 uS PWM, of which 1500uS is the dead point. Not only can you own drives, you can also have proportional drives. Ramp up, ramp down, less moving robot...

This is why I hate ardunio people, they always want super complicated circuits, robots and things, but they don't want to do any actual work. "Just give me the library!" They said...Uh.

I digress

I think this is back to the root of hackers! Use with OTS wall-mounted world remote control car. Reminds me of when I was ten years old...maybe more interesting than OTS parts.

Hey man, I am completely new to RC, but I stumbled upon this and started thinking about it. Sorry if I am completely wrong.

Is there no PWR/GND associated with the RC receiver? Did you tie the GND to the Arduino GND instead of one pole of the drive wire? Then, you will need to use two input pins on the Arduino, and connect a diode in series to the input pin on each drive line. If the drive line generates +5V / -5V in one way and -5V / +5V in the other way, then 3 diodes are connected in series to make the voltage drop to close to 3V (the cathode is facing the Arduino). The diode will block the negative voltage from the Arduino.

If this is indeed a floating voltage, which seems strange to me, then you can connect a larger resistor between each drive wire and Arduino GND. This will set the reference voltage of each drive line to 0V, and I will use the same diode method as above.

Now, I will be expecting a complete error and hope to learn something! :)

If the voltage is actually a negative voltage, not just swapping ground and power, can you not connect a voltage source greater than the maximum negative voltage in series to make the voltage positive, and then use several resistors to divide the voltage to the level where you need Arduino?

On similar chips, I directly used the output of the chip pins and ignored the H bridge on the board. Found the data sheet of the chip, but you may only need to check the trace of the test circuit board through the H-bridge.

(Written in "recipe style", I don't mean to sound "clumsy")

Connect the signal from the remote control car control chip to its H bridge. (For the H bridge, they are Q5, 6, 7, 8 and 11, 12, 13, 14.) Feed these signals to your arduino, if they are higher than 5V, use a series resistor (if you don’t want to abuse the input For protection diodes, use Zener resistors), such as 10k to 100k, or a voltage divider. If they are PWM wired, connect them to the analog input and use an RC filter (try to ground the 10k + 100n series, please check with an oscilloscope and increase any value until you get a smooth DC voltage).

Actually, connect the GND of the receiver to the arduino GND.

To me, it sounds easier than using some kind of relay.

Why does it appear on hackaday? In my opinion, this is more like a question you want to post on an electronic forum.

Not a hacker!

I thought I would never be one of those "not a hacker" guy, but sadly, I must agree with you...

That big article is just a common question belonging to the electronic forum. There is nothing new or interesting to learn.

Make the remote control car "ground" = 3V. Then 8v represents the 5v track. And connect a high resistance 100k to 1m ohm between the output and ardueno.

The AVR has a solid diode clamp on the pin to withstand high voltage. Oops, there are even application notes about feeding 120v AC with the same settings.

then

3.3v = off

5v = forward

0v = reverse

If you really want to use an existing receiver, use two optocouplers per output (4 in total). If you have a forward bias and a backward bias, they will provide you with a discrete digital output, which you can send to the arduino, or you can even filter it to provide an analog level.

That said, I think a better option is to get the ready-made RC receiver standard (no h-bridge) and use its servo/esc channel PWM output. Then arduino can measure the pulse length-above a certain threshold (such as 1.5ms) is forward, below a certain threshold is reverse. Standard receivers and transmitters are cheap, less than $30-for example

Generally, you can modify the exerciser's addition/removal of springs or pawls.

You cannot just connect the -5V wire to the input pin. Enable the internal pull-up resistor, and then execute a digital read to detect LOW?

I think it's easy without making all the comments first.

Because: you have no negative voltage. At least if you lead them to the correct potential, the negative terminal of the battery. Then, you can view the voltage of each half bridge of the two full bridges independently.

Therefore, as a general formula:

I connected a voltage divider to each half-bridge output, which gave me a convenient midpoint voltage.

From here on, it depends on the battery voltage supplying the motor output. For each half bridge, you must distinguish 3 states: low, off (medium voltage) and high. You can use a comparator or voltage divider to connect the input

For very low voltages, you can also use transistors (with base resistors) or small MOSFETs:

Connect E (or S) to one output, and connect the base resistor (or G) to the corresponding output of the other half bridge. Connect a pull-up resistor from C (or D) to the microcontroller power supply (5V/3V3). And connect the second one in another way on the same motor channel, so E is at the junction of the base resistance of the first transistor, and the base resistance of the second is at the junction of E of the first transistor .

The second transistor has a similar pull-up. Now you have two direction signals.

Do the same for other motor channels.

It is essentially positive = A *! B, backward=! A * B instead of = Az * Bz

Where z = high impedance.

For speed control (if supported by the RC board), I will use an op amp to bias it half forward into an analog pin and the other part towards the servo controller.

The deviation on the drive should be programmed to a value less than zero to produce a negative integer, and vice versa.

When the two wheels are programmed to deviate halfway between the zero offset and negative/positive, the steering system should zero any motor. In this way, one side may be completely tilted, but the other side may be required to slow down or move backward, depending on how hard you push the rod to both sides.

"Hope it makes sense for Dad to smoke"

I mean (referring to) the H bridge under "+1"

Sorry.

Look: you are not trying to change a negative voltage to a positive voltage. You are trying to ground the correct wire. You have two H-bridges driving four wires. This means that zero, one or two wires can be connected to the positive pole of the receiver, and zero, one or two wires can be connected to the negative pole. Assuming that the receiver uses a negative ground topology, the negative rail is the "ground" of the receiver.

Connecting all four wires via diodes (connecting the cathode to each drive wire) will create a "virtual negative rail" that is one diode voltage drop higher than the most negative of the four driven wires, you can Connect it to the Arduino ground. These diodes essentially ground the correct wire.

Then, relative to this virtual negative rail, all four wires will be zero or positive. Then connect the drive line (if the voltage output by the receiver is too high, through a voltage divider) to the four digital pins of Arduino. For each motor, when the motor is not driven, you will get two logic low levels, and when the motor is driven, you will get a logic high level, and only one logic high level indicates the direction.

Oh: To deal with the situation where neither of them are driven, which will leave your "virtual negative rail" floating, just connect the weak pull-down resistors (~1K to 10k) on the four driving wires to the Arduino ground.

Steven: After looking back, and carefully reading some of the other suggestions and your answers, I realized that this is much simpler than this-no diodes are needed. The article gave me the impression that you do not have access to the circuit board, but only the motor. Just connect the negative terminal of the battery to the Arduino ground. The H bridge does not generate negative voltage. Like I said above, it just connects one of the outputs to ground and the other output to the + rail. Therefore, measuring each motor wire relative to the negative (ground) of the battery, you should only see the positive voltage.

However, there is another thing: You said that you think the receiver is good because it came out of a work toy. However, once you said that you connected the blue wires of two motors together. This is a very bad thing, because as soon as the receiver tries to turn the motor in the opposite direction, the receiver connects one of the wires (through the MOSFET) to ground and the other wire to the positive pole. So by now, your receiver may have toasted.

Through the test I conducted with an oscilloscope last night, it seemed that grounding the negative of the battery on the circuit board (it turns out that it was marked with such a mark on the circuit board) actually caused the output to be positive relative to that ground. So, it looks like it is enough to connect it to the ground of the Arduino and add some current limiting resistors and pull-down resistors. Implementation will take longer.

But fortunately, the receiver is not toast. It is actually part of a fully functional BB-8 robot, using my oversized conversion board (because of all these notes, it will be replaced by a simpler soon).

My first idea was also an optocoupler, but you only need two. There is no need to optically couple the forward signal. You can follow the forward path you first tried to route).

For the negative path, the optocoupler LED input can switch the transistor output to connect directly to your input.

Think further: When the receiver switches the motor in one direction, what voltage will you get between the blue wire and the negative pole of the RC receiver battery? I guess that in one direction, the blue wire will be positive compared to the negative of the receiver battery, and in the other direction, the brown wire will be positive.

If so, please connect the arduino GND to the receiver's battery negative terminal and connect the 2 inputs (via appropriate diodes/resistors) to the corresponding arduino inputs...

I would be happy to follow up on this to understand the solution you implemented.

I am surprised that no one mentioned MAX232/ST3232/etc. They are natural positive/negative/logic level converters. Or did I misunderstand this question?

As an RC guy, I want to say that your problem starts with the RC gear of the toy car, instead of just using some standard, documented RC gears. Conventional RC gears have many flavors, but the standard output is one of the following:

1) Multiple PWM channels (old style)

2) Combined PPM signal (intermediate ground)

3) Series (New Era)

Of course, there are various other possibilities.

Assuming you want to use relatively cheap products, you can get the FlySky Gt3b tx/rx kit for more than $30. It provides multiple PWM outputs. I learned that $30 is much higher than the price of a free toy truck, but sometimes the time saved is worth the time. Of course, if you like to hang out, what do you say?

When your grounding method is not ideal, opto-isolators can usually solve the problem, and usually provide the necessary electrical isolation in this application. You can do many tricks on the motor output. For example, you can use two opto-isolators and one of the LEDs is reversed to provide three possible signals-one of the opto-electronic outputs is on (high or low, depending on how you connect the pull-up or pull-down) to indicate that it is reversed . The other side means forward; while both are off, it means the motor is completely shut down.

If you don't have any optical isolators hanging around and insist on operating in a wired manner, then you are thinking about the problem in a useless way. The RC circuit may be a single-ended design. In other words, there is only one positive power supply, and the ground voltage is the lowest. If you can touch the ground, then these two wires will become simple "digital" outputs, always 0 or positive power.

Or, if grounding is not possible, there should be two diodes on each motor output wire (one from the ground wire to the motor wire-the negative side points to the motor wire, the other from the motor wire to the appropriate voltage digital I diode with pull-down resistor /O to complete the work.

But, in fact, if you understand all of these, you can also pull the original I/O line from the wireless controller IC. The h bridge has two outputs, and each half of the bridge has an I/O output. This should give you more or less all possible states (forward, reverse and motor off). There may be some level transitions, nothing more.

Will such a simple rectifier not work? One side is the "polarity" blue and brown, the other side is the DC output of the same polarity...

This is the circuit that should perform what you want.

The output of the RC driver is fed to the input LED of the optocoupler. Two optocouplers are connected in parallel with the input diode, but with opposite polarities. If there is any motor drive voltage, one or the other LED will light up, as will the associated output transistor.

If there is no motor power supply, the Arduino will see that both of the pair of inputs are high, and if there is a motor signal, one of them is low. Which one is low will depend on the direction of the motor.

Since optocouplers have no electrical connection between input and output, there is no need for a common ground reference between them.

Thank you! I don't know which route I will take, and may even try multiple routes, but it will definitely make it easier.

I'm not sure if I understood what you mean correctly, but won't this simple circuit?

This is a simulation of the circuit:

No, this simple circuit is called a bridge rectifier. Used to convert alternating current to direct current. Yes, you can use it as a direct current, but unless the input and output grounds are isolated from each other, it will not work properly. Try to simulate, you will quickly find that you have connected the input power to ground through a diode.

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (

)

The site uses Akismet to reduce spam.

.

By using our website and services, you expressly agree to our placement of performance, functionality and advertising cookies.

The original Raspberry Pi, released three years ago, looked a bit long when it was first released. For a computer priced at $35, this can be expected. In the electronic world, three years is a long time, and Pi is about to be updated. Now here, the biggest changes are faster quad-core chips, better processor architecture and 1GB RAM.

The Raspberry Pi 2 Model B has a quad-core ARM Cortex A7 running at 1GHz with 1GB RAM. The chip uses ARMv7 architecture instead of the original Raspi ARMv6. When using it, it is significantly more zipper than my months-old Raspi Model B in web browsing tasks. Very, very cool, this opens a few doors for CPU-intensive applications.

Although the CPU has been updated, there are no other changes on the Pi. The LAN9514 USB/Ethernet controller can still handle USB and Ethernet. If you are looking for Gigabit Ethernet, that will not happen. With this hardware update, we won't get eMMC flash memory, SATA ports or anything groundbreaking except for the CPU. This is almost an upgrade of CPU and RAM.

All the original ports found on the Raspberry Pi Model B+ can be found on the Raspi 2; HDMI, audio, analog video, Ethernet, USB, CSI, currently unused DSI and GPIO ports have not been changed. Similarly, we are considering using this hardware version to upgrade the CPU and RAM.

Now, RAM has moved to the rear of Raspi 2, instead of the peculiar Package On Package CPU and RAM stack on the previous Raspberry Pi.

RAM chip is

, This is an 8 gigabit DDR2 RAM with the same clock rate as the RAM in the original Raspi. Don't seek to increase memory performance or speed. Instead, I'm glad that there is now a full RAM on Raspi.

Some of you may remember the "upgrades" that early adopters of the "Raspberry Pi" missed. After the first shipment of hundreds of thousands of Raspberry Pi Model B, someone 

. It is not clear whether Raspberry Pi 2 will be easily upgraded like this. There are indeed 16 gigabit RAMs, but because the CPU and RAM are not in the same package, it is not just about expanding new RAM chips.

As far as software is concerned, almost everything that ran on the original Raspberry Pi will run on the Raspberry Pi 2. The functions of RaspberryPi 2 are a superset of the original Raspberry Pi. This is a brand new processor architecture; Pi 1 uses a chip with ARMv6 architecture, while Cortex A7 uses an ARMv7 architecture. This is huge. Raspberry Pi 2 can now run modern Android systems. is having a 

Pi 2 may not be able to achieve functions, and Pi 1 is hard to imagine.

There is a caveat regarding the software on the Pi. The foundation sent me a Pi 2 and an SD card with a Raspbian distribution. Until I became an idiot a few times and cut off the power to the Pi 2 without performing a proper shutdown, this has been fine. The card is damaged. I downloaded the Raspbian image from the current week ago. Pi 2 will not start the image. If you are dealing with the kernel, then there 

The difference between Pi 1 and Pi 2, Pi 1 and Pi 2 will have specific disk images.

Interestingly, Raspberry Pi 1 Model B+ will boot the Raspbian image of Pi 2. This is a bit interesting because the CPU on Pi 2 is actually a superset of the CPU on Pi 1. I have talked with people who have more than a century of ARM and Linux experience, but no one knows what's going on.

For the hardware, all the information you want from the GPIO pins of the Raspberry Pi is provided on the Raspberry Pi 2. This is the usual 40-pin expansion connector that we all expect, and as far as I know, there is no change between Raspi and Raspi 2.

Regarding the form factor, almost every situation compatible with Raspberry Pi Model B+ should be compatible with the new Raspi 2 Model B+. I have tested the new Pi with the following conditions

, 

with

 Pibow Coupe. Only Pimoroni is not compatible with the new Raspi 2, but this is only due to a piece of acrylic interfering with the new larger CPU. A pair of dikes

Shattered acrylic shots were fired throughout the room. Use a fine saw or file. In terms of external dimensions, it should be considered the same as Model B+.

There are multiple Pis in the Raspberry Pi ecosystem, but for now, Model A+ and Raspberry Pi computing modules will retain the old BCM2835 chipset. This is not to say that they will not be upgraded in the future. The circuit board layout between Pi 1 Model B+, A+ and the computing module is very similar around the CPU and RAM. The update to the "little" Pis may just be a problem for any EDA software used by the Foundation.

Historically, the Raspberry Pi Foundation has always used Model B as its flagship product, and first saw new innovations. when. . . when

And more GPIO pins,

Upgrade model A to the new design standard. If you are waiting for an ARM Cortex A7 board with A+ or computing module specifications, you may have to wait until June or July.

Since the introduction of the Raspberry Pi a few years ago, small, inexpensive ARM Linux boards have exploded. compared to

,

, Or

In the past few years, the 700MHz ARM11 CPU found in the original Raspberry Pi seemed a bit negative. This is not the fault of the Raspberry Pi. Raspberry Pi's idea is to produce small single-board Linux computers 

 "Clone" boards like Banana Banana and Odroid later appeared, which could use better and cheaper silicon and were not restricted by the $35 price point. There will always be better options at higher prices.

Raspberry Pi, "clone" boards and larger, more powerful, and more expensive boards (e.g.

 with

 The price of the board must be considered. Currently, there are few boards that match the features and price of Raspberry Pi 2. Odroid C1 matches Raspberry Pi 2 in terms of performance and functionality. However, I do not have Odroid C1, so I am not going to compare between the two.

However, I do have a Raspberry Pi Model B+. Tomorrow, I will publish some benchmark tests between Raspberry Pi 2 and Raspberry Pi Model B+.

I just happen to have one

 Sit around. When monitoring the power consumption of Raspi 2, its power consumption is slightly higher than that of Raspberry Pi 1.

When booting to the Raspbian desktop, Raspberry Pi 1 consumes about 290mA of current. Once the desktop is loaded, it drops to about 250mA. Raspberry Pi 2 consumes about 340mA of current when it starts, and drops to 270mA once the desktop is loaded. The current from Raspi 1 to Raspi 2 increases slightly.

Through some experiments, I did determine that the Raspberry Pi 2 will absorb 500mA under heavy load. This is the maximum specification of USB. If your current USB power adapter is not good, you may want to buy a better adapter for Raspi 2.

I will post tomorrow about the speed and benchmarks of Raspberry Pi 2. Before that, the time to boot to the desktop can fully characterize the speed of the Raspberry Pi 2.

Using the same SD card in both tests, Raspberry Pi 2 will boot to

. In order to perform the same test, the Raspberry Pi 1 Model B+ from a few months ago will be guided to

. The test condition is "from where the Tux should appear on the Raspberry Pi on the console" to "when the CPU monitor in the corner of the screen hits the bottom". In any case, Raspberry Pi 2 is significantly faster.

Anyone who is about to release the Raspberry Pi 1 will remember the months of waiting for Newark, Farnell, Allied and RS components. Part of the reason is due to huge demand, but most of the responsibility for defaulting orders should be attributed to the Raspberry Pi foundation. This is understandable. At the time, they were looking for the success they had dreamed of.

This time, they are ready. [Eben] told us that there are currently 100,000 Raspberry Pi 2 ModelB in the warehouse. It will take time for the new Pis to enter Fry's and Microcenter, but we are waiting for a few weeks instead of the months of initial release.

In most cases, this is just an upgrade to the Raspberry Pi Model B's CPU and RAM. Currently, there is no release or software compilation specifically for Raspberry Pi 2, and the software will take full advantage of Raspberry Pi 2. The faster Raspi 2 multi-core CPU will take a while.

Raspi 2 is faster, and the larger CPU opens several doors for interesting applications. The poor CPU of the original Raspberry Pi limited the interesting applications of a small Linux board. Applications such as computer vision and any application where a large amount of I/O occurs at the same time are impossible. This hardware revision will resolve this issue.

Future updates of Raspberry Pi will include Model A + and computing modules. These may appear in a few months. You will not hear anything about the improved Raspberry Pi 2 or Raspberry Pi 3.

The detailed classification and benchmarks of Raspberry Pi 2 will be released tomorrow.

If you were to search for the word "disclosure," then it exists. At my request, the Raspberry Pi Foundation sent me Raspberry Pi 2 Model B and SD card.

Do we have any information about the price of this new version?

Oops, didn't see TL; DR... ashamed of me.

Mano invented new Meme, SOM, DR-TL, DR and DR. Looking forward to TL; DR reply to this post...

TL; DR- Dun Goofed!

Finally, I finally bought a Raspberry Pi yesterday. At least so stable.

I have the same regret. I feel this situation and I should wait a few more weeks to upgrade from Pi B to Pi B+.

No regrets at all! You cannot have too many pis. I have four and I desire more.

I just bought B+ a week ago. Should stick to it, it's a bit difficult

I did the same thing. Thankfully, Amazon has a great return policy...

Alas, I bought a few B+s at the Studio Bazar store I have seen on the weekend before the launch. They conveniently—it looks like—a good promotion, just before the release, for $30 instead of $35...Is the inside information abused?

Is this not true for all technologies? There will always be shiny new things around the corner.

This may be correct, but only a few weeks after buying your technology at the same price, buying old and newer technology is not a good move.

Adam Osborne nodded sadly.

Yes, this is cheap technology, not something like a retina iMac.

It runs Windows:

Hell has officially frozen.

You won the internet today!

It smells like raspberries...

Don't worry this is not consumer Windows 10. This is Windows IoT..., this is just another name for WinCE.

And we think M $ can be changed, and finally get one (1) Windows to rule all these windows...tsssk tsssk tsssk. Still a mess. Windows RT (will be buried shortly), Windows 10 x86/x64, Windows Phone (aka Other Windows on ARM), then Windows IoT (or WinCE...) Remember what they used to sell as Windows Phone 7 was After shooting down about a year and a half, because it uses WinCE? ).

This is just hot air. For the hype, people stopped using all these Linux variants (and RISC OS) on the Pi.

No, I can confirm that the Windows IoT version uses the NT kernel.

WinCE works on Raspberry Pi 1 (ceonpi.codeplex.com)

This is the first time in my life installing Windows.

did not expect...

Microsoft must be dissatisfied with them being locked in the future. It is powerful to influence the thinking of young people. In many ways, Windows 10 on RPi is a bad thing-there are more consumers than creators.

Yes, for sure... Android on the Pi is also bad?

This is a very good step that Microsoft has taken. If they do something to influence someone, then I will not profit from others because they do it...

I just hope they provide an easy-to-use GPIO interface... If you do, Windows might become a big deal on the Pi

If not all Google spyware is free, then yes.

Because millions of people who use Windows have never created anything? grow up.

Windows does not encourage people to write bare metal. I am not saying that RPi can solve the problem, but I would say that without the support of Micro$oft, it will encourage people to enter more embedded system programming.

In the early days of the computer age, programs were like mathematics and were free for everyone to use. There was no such thing as closed source code, because without access to the source code, your program would never run on any other system, so the architecture There are huge differences. Today, there is very little diversity structure left, like Darwinism through marketing. I think this is an indoctrination problem. If your life is filtered to see only one thing, then you will never see anything.

Windows does not encourage people to write bare metal. "

LINUX discourages people from writing bare-metal programs

BSD discourages people from writing bare metal programs

SOLARIS discourages people from writing bare metal programs

The reason is that we have the kernel module

I did not choose the option to reply to your "F", so I am replying to myself, which is a bit strange, but I guess you will not choose to reply to me either. Decades ago, I had written a bare-metal program. If Window (or iCrap) were the only OS I encountered in my life, I thought it would be impossible. It is not Linux vs Window vs BSD vs blah blah. It has nothing to do with bare metal. It allows young people to have unlimited access to new things. And I see windows as intuition.

"In the early days of the computer age, programs were like mathematics and were free for everyone to use, so there was nothing like closed source, because if your program would never run on any other system without access to the source code, Then the architecture is different. Many."

Yes, indeed, guys, this guy is purely Quentin Tardintino’s fantasy land

"This is the kid, this is the Raspberry Pi. I have installed all the latest development tools."

"Thank you, sir, but all I need is a web browser to complete my school assignments."

"Of course, but after doing this, you can start Emacs and start hacking. Or maybe you prefer VIM?"

"Thank you, sir, but I have no interest in this. I might play some games."

"Yes, after you shoot down the aliens, you can write by yourself!"

"Thank you, sir, but I would rather just use the computer."

"This is unacceptable! You need to be taken seriously!"

"Thank you, sir, but after I finish my homework and play some games, can I get authorization?"

"I think I see the problem here. You just haven't realized that you can use bare metal programming, which means freedom!"

"Thank you, sir, it sounds interesting. My sister may be interested in it-she is good at programming. But I really only need a computer to find things and play games."

"Of course, if you want to live a life on your knees, please always beg for software scrap."

"I think I'm going to the library now. They have some computers there."

That's it, "Micro $ oft" is a true sign of utopian believers who don't understand and want to be realistic. This is where I stopped reading. Enjoy your fun in the real deformation field.

Also in education, it is useful to be able to deconstruct things to see how they are made. In this regard, M$ product placement is not very useful in this regard.

Tell us more about how to carefully record all functions of the linux kernel

Then explain to us the existence of many programming manuals, which explain in detail the internal working principles of Windows.

Once again, I did not choose the right to reply to your "F", so I am replying to myself, which is a bit strange, but I guess you did not choose the option to reply to me.

Deconstructing things, I never mentioned Linux or Windows. The biggest gain in my life is that when something breaks, I can peel off the lid to find out why.

This is the product placement.

Tell us more about how the availability of Windows on the platform makes it impossible to deconstruct

I began to suspect that you are a Microsoft spam bot, and the thinking time for all your negative comments is less than 2 seconds.

It is useful to be able to deconstruct things. It is also useful to be able to load tools (pictures, videos, new computer programs, new thingamabob) that allow you to build something quickly and easily. Sometimes the two are mutually exclusive. It is always a good thing to have choices. You can load Windows on the pi to perform easier operations in Windows, and you can load linux on the pi to perform operations more suitable for linux. what happened

Do you think we should give each child some original processors and components, and then say: "Sorry, if you want to edit this picture, you need to assemble these bits and pieces into a working computer"? If someone wants to learn something, they will. If they don't, they won't. I was forced to take piano lessons when I was young. I hate it, so I'm not good at it. Later in life, I decided to play music, so I taught myself and was very good at music.

Do you want to compare the percentage of debates/producers between people who grew up on the classic C64/apple2/Amiga/ST/Linux and typed on PC magazines and those who grew up on the Windows download appz? Puh-leeze.

According to Microsoft, this is not a complete Windows 10, but "Windows 10 for IoT." According to what they have said so far, this may be a streamlined version of Windows that is friendly to manufacturers and development boards. Maybe we should wait until we actually see it before we judge it?

In other words, Redmond may have built a *nix core, which contains a visual clone of the Win10 UI and some proprietary bits, with the purpose of preventing the target audience from gaining any real control. Ironically, this is the nature of these things.

In other words, Rob is just exuding random incoherent concepts

I doubt it. I hope it is based on Windows RT code.

Waiting for judgment? Are you crazy? This is Microsoft, so let's start twitching!

Sadly, you are right. Some people can't see their noses, so they look down on anything they don't yet understand. I still don't know what Windows 10 on RPi means because I haven't seen it yet. Therefore, I chose to be optimistic about this, rather than automatically assuming the worst.

Does Windows 10 require a license or can it be installed for free? It's a shame to have to pay for a license key that is more expensive than the hardware used, isn't it?

According to Microsoft and the Raspberry Pi Foundation, anyone willing to register as a developer will be completely free, which is also free.

Thanks for your clarification. May pick up some check out android/windows.

So, in other words, you can’t actually use it for anything useful, because your clients must be registered developers

You seem to be saying that the only useful thing to do is to do things for customers.

I agree that making things for sale is useful, but I believe making things for your own use, enjoyment or learning, or sharing with other developers is also useful.

I also doubt whether Windows will be well supported on non-x86 hardware, otherwise this version will actually be 6 times faster. But it does look very useful on Linux, and it only costs $35, which is amazing.

At this year's Build conference, Microsoft has provided free Windows for mobile phones, small-screen tablets and so-called "Internet of Things" devices under 8 inches.

They can extend their "free" Windows 10 license to an RPi basis, just like an OEM. Interestingly, RPi may not have the entire secure UEFI boot. :)

I did not target the development board, so the answer to me is "yes, it may be very useful". If after getting RPi 2 I find that Microsoft's IoT Windows 10 is better than GNU/Linux in a given pet project, I will use it. If not, then not. To be honest, I don't care, I will use the platform that suits me best.

I know why you are asking this question, but to be honest, only Microsoft knows the real answer, and they have not disclosed any information about commercial licensing. Of course, this does not stop trolls and omniscient people from scolding them for what they have not done yet. Once again, how do we wait and observe what they will do before automatically assuming the worst-case scenario? Recently, the company has become more open source friendly; perhaps this is their permanent direction, not just word of mouth. Maybe not, but we don’t know yet.

I want to know how much "basic information only used to improve the experience" collected by the RPI version of Windows 10 and can turn off spyware.

Therefore, do you want RPi version 10 to be equivalent to the current developer preview version? Because this is the only mandatory information collection place I have seen on Windows 10. Given that the final release (for PC and RPi) is more than 8 months old, how can we determine what will be included? The short answer: We don't have it, but the wild guesses and conclusions are the name of the game in this forum.

Speaking of spyware, have you seen any Android phones recently? Even if you turn off all the checkboxes that even imply privacy, every button, every link visited, every photo taken, every GPS waypoint will be sent back to Google’s native language. But it’s okay because it’s not M$FT, right?

They must do this; because "the superiority of American information on every platform" is the only thing that can prevent our vital fluids from being stolen by terrorists or any terrible incident that happened last week. Think about the children!

Can't I see the analog video port on the image?

It has been moved to the 3.5mm jack in RPi B+. Take part in the show.

On B+, analog video is carried out through the headphone jack (TRRS connector).

The composite connector is combined with the 3.5mm jack socket in the B+ version. It’s still there, you just need a different cable (something like this

)

Oops, this will teach me to type a reply and have a cup of tea before posting...

Just in case no one told you that it is now part of the 3.5mm jack

It's hard to complain about getting more power at the same price, but I personally think that keeping the USB/HUB/Ethernet messy is a wrong decision.

But hey, there are other boards that got it right.

Yes, because software developers are free and don’t need to spend time writing new drivers or debugging them

I am just assuming here. I guess that unlike most SoC devices in the past ten years, those Broadcom chips may not have a built-in Ethernet mac, and therefore no usb Ethernet mac/phy. They may also not have many USB host ports, so a hub is required to use them.

Someone might read the data sheet and prove me wrong, but this is what happens when you speculate.

AFAIR, that special hub + Ethernet combination series, RPi USB has some initial timing problems. [cyk] may refer to this. Using a different chip for this can save some problems. Linux probably covers most of the drivers, so there is no difference.

It is really interesting that Broadcom has MAC and PHY in its IP. They make router chips, Ethernet switches, PHYs, etc. They can implement Ethernet MAC in SoC like SoC used on other boards.

Have you been told to review negative reviews, etc., in exchange for review units that other sites seem to have?

Even if the hardware is great (Broadcom NDA is the worst! = great), I think I will choose Odroid-C1 to lay the "foundation" for its naive behavior.

Can you be more specific than "it looks"?

If "intentional" is the driving force for his actions, don't expect reason or logic

Odroid-C1 has better hardware specifications at the same price. 1.5GHz and 1GHz, Gigabit Ethernet with internal MAC instead of USB, optional faster eMMC module.

I think this is a better choice.

Not to mention that C1 has better graphics and video core.

But it's not just the hardware that matters. Raspberry Pi can start things, supports the most operating systems, has the best support, etc.

So my opinion is:

you want:

Hardware repair, learning: Raspberry Pi

Home automation: Raspberry Pi

Run Android games: Odroid

Change my computer. Odro

Build NAS: Banana Pi / Cubieboard

It was not started by raspberry, but olimex launched the arm pc;)

Wow, were you born yesterday? The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) introduced the ARM PC in 1985. Decades ago, Apple delivered many Newton devices with ARM chips.

What is the better choice?

Raspberry Pi is an educational tool that is designed as a cost-effective and stable platform that can be used for long-term development platforms and fewer and fewer underlying applications. It is designed to tell kids that if you want to do more processing, you can upgrade, or you can improvise to write more efficient code.

They waited a long time to perform well, then succumbed to pressure and released an upgraded version of pi. But the speed depends on the hardware and the ability that the programmer can find in it. Therefore, compared with PC games of the same hardware, console games can achieve higher performance. Advanced engineering technology is looking for techniques to maximize the performance of the target system. This is something that a generation has forgotten, and it is also something that many of us need to learn anew.

When the costs of the two platforms are the same, the arguments of "cost-effective" and "less = more" are invalid. A better architecture means you can get the same attention in optimization work. We are not children either, so don't limit yourself to the "education" part.

See that RPi is messy at the engineer level, such as the placement of connectors, power supply (linear and switching modes), mounting holes, etc. Compared with professionally designed products of companies with experience in this field. Designing a better platform can help me make money.

Oh, you mean how people like odroid falsify the availability of parts

Oh, do you believe they won't do it again?

Odroid avoided Broadcom, so they are unlikely to be bothered by Broadcom and its interesting relationship with the RPI Foundation again.

From the odroid website:

"Can I get PCB layout files and Gerber files?

no. The ODROID project is not a complete open source hardware.

We only publish schematics. "

But the odroid developers are ashamed of their design and can’t share with us

Mrs. Todd, what's wrong with you? You seem to totally disagree with...everything.

Just because ODROID does not want to release its PCB layout resources, it does not mean that any company is satisfied with its design. I think you are very lucky to ask Intel for the latest CPU design files. If a company is willing to somehow reveal its internal workings as a magical "we are not ashamed of our product" symbol, then why did Broadcom take so long to let us finally get the video core document.

In retrospect, if something happened, the trial relationship between ODROID and Broadcom gave us ODROID-W, which in turn led us to ODROID-C1 and established a cooperative relationship with Amlogic so far. Finally, even if ODROID-W is about to be discontinued due to limited operation, I am happy that at least two products exist, and hope that RPI Foundation, ODROID and various other companies will continue to produce these types of products. Development boards, because having more project options is never a bad thing.

"Providing more options for projects has never been a bad thing."

Yes, indeed, we want our scarce software developers to spend all their time porting code to another board instead of doing new and more interesting things.

You seem to have the wrong impression that the only important cost is hardware cost, and the only important value is hardware performance. This is strange because you don’t need keen observation skills to recognize this throughout history. Technological progress, despite higher prices and worse capabilities, still has some "victory".

What’s even more confusing is that those who find their favorites become unappreciated and continue to persevere, unable to fully take the next step, and consider whether there is something they lack, something they don’t understand, maybe Will uncover the paradox that conceals its existence. Sometimes they may feel a little harsh, but then they or a friend quickly labeled it as "marketing" and scrambled to burn it lest it poisoned their mortal souls in some unknown but certainly terrifying way.

Not sure if RPi is more suitable for learning. I don't care if the platform is popular. In fact, if I force myself to write my own code from the chip documentation, I will learn more. In my book, documenting the SoC more publicly (ie no NDA) would be a better option.

If I want to use NAS, I would choose Mini-ITX with multiple SATA, more memory, CPU horsepower, and run FreeNAS and the like.

If you really want the ultimate learning experience, maybe you can get some sand from the beach, extract silicon and build a computer

Are you a paid professional troll? I did not see any positive comments from you. The most difficult part is to purify the silicon to between 99.9% and 99.9999999% required for fab work. Yes, many people want to be able to deposit, dope, mask and etch their own silicon.

"You" learn more.

What about the fourth grade children?

I kind of agree with the learning part. IMHO, it doesn't matter whether the device is "designed" for learning. It really depends on how you use the device, or determine whether you are actually "learning" or the operation on the device that can learn something.

Personally, I have been buying Raspberry pi because it is a form factor and can be easily obtained from where I live (so, I mean don’t have to worry about international shipping.) If there are other motherboards that can be easily obtained and With better performance specifications, I will buy those.

Except for the GPU.

(Show me odroid/bananaPi/orangePi that can run XBMC/Kodi and play 50fps Full HD video.)

Any other development board has the same gpu-wise nonsense as any random android device.

It is agreed that cortex-A5 is similar in structure to A7. Due to the clock speed, the 1.5GHz A5 of ODROID-C1 will show a significant performance improvement over the 900MHz A7. RAM is also faster (DDR3 on C1 vs. DDR2 on RPI2). C1 also has Gigabit Ethernet, and the Ubuntu Snappy kernel will be added to C1 soon.

All in all, unless being part of the RPi ecosystem is important to you, I think C1 will bring you more benefits.

Frankly speaking, the sudden release of RPI2 (didn't Eben say that it will be released in 2016/2017?) may be due to two reasons: the emergence of multiple RPi clones that are more affordable and more powerful; especially 35 The dollar C1, and the Ubuntu Snappy version... In the official press release, Ubuntu announced that Ubuntu Snappy OS will support C1 and Beaglebone Black without mentioning RPi (probably due to its ancient ARM v6 architecture).

I am very happy to see that both boards are released (although the release of Windows 10 RPi2 does not care...although it is a joke). But I am not only satisfied with my C1.

+1

Does c1 have audio or analog output?

I can see that this is important.

Is there any such board with VGA output?

> Does it support sound via HDMI? Yes.

>Is there an analog audio output or input? no. But you can use our USB audio adapter.

There are "HDMI to VGA" dongle from China (price of 20 dollars) or from Walmart and "USB sound card" (price of 5 dollars)

What about the GPU?

Q: Are you still using VideoCore?

Answer: Yes. VideoCore IV 3d is the only publicly documented 3d graphics core of an ARM-based SoC. We hope that over time, the Raspberry Pi will be more open, not less.

from here:

Many people did buy Raspberry Pi because of XBMC/Kodi.

No clone is executed near it.

+1 (get my odroid c1 now!)

Of course the advantage of Odroid C1 that I intend to take advantage of is the two ADC pins. I like my RPi, but it does not have an ADC and clearly becomes an educational tool. This is an oversight that I hope version 2 can overcome.

Of course, you can connect I2C and SPI-ADC and determine a good NI USB ADC, but this should be an experiment out of the box. Hook the CD and measure the light, "You know, for the kids" –

).

After switching to the Odroid world due to the huge performance shortage of the Raspberry Pi, I agree that Odroid will undoubtedly bring more benefits. The pi was great when it was first released, but early on I started to feel that the performance was very low. Even a few years ago, it was easy to provide students with an old single-core laptop for free or almost free. The ability to access eMMC storage at a speed of 100MB/s alone has a great impact on Odroid. Using Odroid, I can open a chrome tab to browse the entire website for solutions and make corrections to the program instantly. This is something that I feel very painful on pi. Even this new pi lacks the storage, Ethernet, and usb throughput that most students need to eliminate unnecessary troubles, and it requires a second regular PC solution to the encoding problem.

Lack of CEC support provided by files.

By the way, I don't have any, but when I switch, CEC will be a big ++++ for me for media devices.

What childish? The cost of manufacturing and selling equipment is high, so children have the opportunity to learn how computers and electronic products work, and at the same time greatly support the entire developer community. They took over Pi and did things that the foundation did not expect?

The only naive thing seems to be your open mind.

What is the underside of HDMI?

RAM

I think onebiozz refers to the unoccupied space directly below the HDMI port. Marked as J5. The RAM chip is far away from the HDMI port.

This is a JTAG port.

The same J5 can be used under the HDMI of Pi 1 B+, and the test point is marked as TRST_N: TDI / TDO / TWS / TCK / GND

Sounds like JTAG

JTAG

Hmm... 8-pin... maybe a lightning connector...? But it may not be. Maybe some proprietary MHL connector?

Even from the layout (no need to point out, it is JTAG), you can see that it is not a modern I/O because there are no differential tracks that take up space.

It is "dikes", not "dikes". Quite different :)

Short for diagonal milling cutter, a good choice.

Remember when the "Foundation" said that they would not release "Raspberry Pi 2" before 2017?

Correct. Eben said in the podcast

, He now changes the line to "I do not comment on unpublished products",

. It might be wise to consider everything... :)

It is wiser that they did not release Raspberry Pi Vista... What will they do when they use Raspberry Pi 8?

I can see why, if the voyeur wants to install the latest version of Android or Windows 10 on the device. Due to the old arm architecture, the CPU was an issue from the beginning (even for Linux distributions). A7 is OK (a little bit worse than Nokia 735), and we may see a 64-bit version by 2017.

The foundation also stated that they will be shipped with the box after the first production. *Shrug*, with the best will in the world, things have changed.

Still believe that prices still have a certain amount of leeway, especially now that their sales are rising.

"The foundation also stated that they will ship the boxes together after the first production run."

Tell us more about the difficulty of finding a case for the Raspberry Pi

*Shrug* Maybe it's just the R-Pi with a shell that I couldn't find at the title price.

In my opinion, the comments as early as July 2014 were considering a new development work and a complete circuit board redesign. What we get is not a redesign, but a development board (which is not a bad thing). From my point of view, it could have been called ModelC. But what prevents them from naming it RPi 2? No.

At least it is not as bad as Firefox's numbering system, which currently has reached 35.0.x, so one can say that it is nearly 3.5 times better than IE11.

The Pibow chassis has a new layer 3 to support B+ and Pi2. If you want to use Pi 2 in a case before January 2015, please contact

So we can pull your pieces.

If you want to cut, please score the cut line first :)

"[…] We have no plans to launch Raspberry Pi 2 ModelA before the end of 2015."

(by

I like that TLDR.

Bryan

Do you want to use Odroid C1 for benchmarking? I have an extra feature that I have never used before.

Ok i'm fine

Some clarifications can be made about this. My opinion is different because you don't have to rely on or wait for Broadcom to sell you its CPU + RAM.

> There are indeed 16 gigabit RAMs, but because the CPU and RAM are not in the same package, there are more issues to consider besides putting down the new RAM chips.

As long as the memory controller supports higher density and the design is predictable, it can be routed correctly according to the JEDEC pins. All that remains is to let the boot loader (u-boot?) initialize the RAM.

There is no gigabit connection. I also look forward to SATA connectors. I don't think that I will upgrade.

Banana PI has both. I bought a BPI just for use as a NAS, but I haven't tested it yet. Today, PI and its clones provide hardware support in the mainline kernel, which is good, so there is no need to extract code from untrusted sources. Of course, you still need to believe that the boot firmware of the device itself is reliable.

Yes, it is always disappointing when you cannot use your computer for unexpected purposes

Are you talking about cutting them?

I also wish to have a SATA port. In a way, this is a good thing because it prevented me from immediately taking out my credit card and purchasing the 4th Rpi.

If you need a cheap SATA, check out PogoPlug. eBay sells them cheaply, and you can flash Arch on them and shake them.

It is just a quad-core ARMv7 at 900 MHz, no USB3, no 1Gbit/s LAN, and no eMMC.

But it has I2S, analog audio/video and low power consumption, which my odroid C1 does not have.

On the other hand, RPI2 seems to be more open source than C1 (it is stuck on linux kernel 3.10 due to bin blip).

I don't know much about my C1, at least it runs at 4 times 1.5 GHz.

No audio input? Shame...

Is it suitable for Bitcoin mining now?

(joke).

At last! ! ! !

Have been waiting for this to be damned.

Does this new CPU still have an internal hardware random number generator?

If you need random sound, please hook it to the hackaday comment section

nice one

Linear regulator or switch?

It seems to be the same design as the last one (Diode Inc. PAM2306?). The two 4.7uH inductors completely fail.

Switching power supply

Okay, thank you for your quick response.

I just ordered some element 14 from Farnell, but it seems to be out of stock at the moment.

I will reply to this post as soon as I receive it.

You can try RS, they seem to have some stock...

It's too late, although the tip

It was delivered this morning.

Yes, indeed, we are all disappointed with the performance of the new $35 Raspberry Pi, which does not exceed the 12-core Xeon server.

Stop the madness!

I really like TL: DR

I don't understand that someone asked an extra question? Scanning the reviews, the only thing that surprised me was that someone asked about the price. The price is not in the article, only in TL; DR. If it was added later, it was the first time [Brian] ignored it.

In either case, why does [Brian] blame the HAD readers of *ENT** because they must provide the necessary details in a concise format-anyway, is this what he should do? Especially the following statement:

"Now here, the biggest changes are faster quad-core chips, better processor architecture and 1GB RAM."

If that is the biggest change, it means there are others, right? Then, at least the next few paragraphs (if not the whole article) are needed to be sure...Oh, [Brian] misled us, nothing else changed. If you want to separate your hair, the components and positions on the PCB will be slightly different, plus support for a better OS, but these little things can be easily inferred from the quoted sentences.

Hush. I have been trying to tolerate editing errors, but if [Brian] wants to publish an article with insults to hide his fault...

The performance of Odroid C1 is still higher than that of Raspberry Pi 2, and the price is $35

odroid C1 is a steam vessel from a company that has been certified to produce steam vessels

Obviously, it is an automobile, and I will tell my C1 to cease to exist immediately.

Raspberry PI 2 is getting Windows 10, which is great

Yes, we all remember how it worked when Microsoft ported Windows to new devices

Let us remember the port of MIPS

Alpha port

How are these structures doing today?

When Microsoft ported Windows to your chip, it was a sign of death

exactly! What is the result of Microsoft porting Windows NT to Intel architecture?

Wait for ti = o buy raspberry pi

I would like to know how the Pi Camera performance of this new camera is – do you have a chance to try it?

It should be the perfect shell for the new raspberry:

I would like to see a camera module that can provide 4k video @ 24fps for the new PI 2 for a price of about $50. If there is a PI-based 4k camera, that would be so cool...

IIRC, you can get 5MP JPEG frames at about 8fps from the sensor/GPU. Unless you compress it to hell, think that the bandwidth exceeds the USB bus...

Since the MIPI connector of the camera is the same, it may have similar limitations as the previous RPi.

> The two data channels on the CSI-2 bus provide a theoretical 2 Gbps bandwidth, which is approximately 5 MP resolution. So this is what I expect from the new camera. It is likely to have a maximum video recording resolution of 1920 pixels × 1080 pixels at about 30 frames per second.

I was about to exercise why it didn't work, but to my surprise, at least in theory, it might work, and there is some margin.

Full HD @ 30 fps encoding/compression is about 2.1MiB/sec, so 4K (@30fps) will be 4 times that of 8.5MiB/sec. You can install it on a 128GB SDXC microSD card at this rate for about 4 hours, or you can stream it from the RPi to a remote storage system through a 10/100 NIC. If the speed is 24fps, it should be reduced by about 25%, so play for 5 hours at 128GB microSD or 6.8MiB/sec.

I don't know if the RPi CSI bus can stream data to the ISP (Image Sensor Pipeline) in VideoCore IV for encoding at such a high rate, I did find a mention of 150-160Mpixels/second in Raspberry's Google cache. Pi Forum (

-Currently they are very frustrated, I want to know why). But 150 megapixels at 8.3 megapixels per second will be 18 fps. Therefore, it may not be possible, or this new BCM2836 chip has a CSI-2 bus, and the chip works in backward compatibility mode.

Sorry, I was wrong, the old RPI A/B/B+ already has a CSI-2/CCP-2 bus, but maybe the new BCM2836 CPU can provide the GPU with a transmission rate of more than 150-160Mpixel/sec for encoding.

The camera module is only RAW data from the sensor, so it is still limited by the speed of the CSI-2 bus as mentioned earlier. Even so, this is still the theoretical limit. The actual chip implementation will be lower than this, but we don't know if we don't sign the NDA.

Raspberry Pi 2, right? I am disappointed that they did not call it Raspberry Tau.

Regrettably, a non-profit foundation disappointed its supporters by releasing a new version, which they themselves said would not be released until some time. For those who have just purchased b+, this is disappointing. If 35 dollars is nothing to you, it is still too high for others.

You should probably warn others about the kill switch in the Raspberry Pi hardware. I can't believe they stopped your B+ from working when they released a new version. Maybe it's in the firmware, we can get the patch version without using the kill switch.

I know that many people will be eliminated and I know I will do it. I even considered choosing B+ when I heard the second B+, but it didn’t actually provide any major improvements. I realize it means a lot in the eyes of lovers, but I have dealt with the limited GPIO on the original PiB by learning the basics of i2c. This greatly reduces my dependence on pins. Also, B+ and apparently 2 still put Ethernet on the USB bus, which is a total spoiler for me.

:/Also just bought b +

Um...I want to buy this too

Windows fans are too easily injured.

At the price of $35.00, you must not complain about anything.

I thought that a lot of resources would be wasted when running a complete operating system, but the price of a quad-core ARM SBC is $35.00.

That is what I think. Forget Microsoft's criticism, people are criticizing this because, what is that? Affordable quad-core board? Is it better than B+ at the same price? Is it really usable now, instead of a long-term out-of-stock board of competitors?

I swear, some people just complain because they have nothing to do. Wouldn’t it take more effort to play with any non-RPi gadgets that they find so great?

When there are other options that can actually provide better hardware for the same $35, there is still some room for complaint: P

The official Raspbian image from the Raspberry Pi Foundation is suitable for both the original Raspberry Pi and Raspberry Pi2. It contains the kernel kernel.img (for ARMv6) and kernel7.img (for ARMv7) of two devices.

This explains why your new card can boot on the original Pi.

As for why the copy on the website cannot boot on Pi 2, I will try the official image with the latest firmware. But otherwise it should work.

There is no mystery here.

Yes! htttp: //emlid.com's major upgrade to Navio + Autopilot HAT hopes that the RT core of the new Raspberry Pi 2 will not take long.

I use Pi 1 Model B as a web server; I am also using SanDisk 32GB SDHC Extreme Pro card.

These sites mainly contain graphics (architects and photographers), and I want to use Raspberry Pi 2 to speed them up.

Can Raspberry Pi 2 boot with Pi 1’s Model B Raspbian image?

Thanks, louis

I am using the power switch

The job of safely shutting down the Pi is excellent

"You are not a child, you should learn to read"

Then you lost me. From time to time there are some suspicious choices, but do you directly insult your readers? What kind of guy is it?

I think this is interesting and a little weird. Perhaps it was because of complaints, which showed what he meant. O

TLDR is too big, I didn’t read this part until the first time, then skip to the article

Hello there

I’m no stranger to this, so please don’t mind if my question is naive to you.

I have been looking for a low-cost motherboard, hoping to port it to WEC7 (won the CE..new name). Now that I got this committee, my question is can I do it?

If yes, what should I do?

Usually, the SDK comes with a BSP for porting. You must find the part closest to your platform and adjust it. Not sure if the announced "free" win10 has an adaptable BSP.

BSP:

You can do it on Raspberry Pi 1.

Oh, and look, the rumors about the basic release of a new faster model are correct, because the source of the original chip has dried up.

Did they do any other work to resolve previous design flaws when making changes? No. Because it is not redesigned by selection, it is forced to purchase due to the increasingly difficult supply of original components

...Quote? Resources?

The BeagleBone Black is still $55 and has a single-core Cortex-A8 and only 512 MB RAM.

I just hope these guys can quickly move their next design to the production stage, because the Pi is quad-core and has 1 GB of RAM, so it will (psychologically) attract more users.

Hi, I am a newbie in your geek world. I want to immigrate there as soon as possible and hope to become a citizen of Odrpid or pi2. The main reason I did this is to decode the matrix, speak your native language, and build htpc for all relatives and friends to broadcast live TV, baby live! life! Goodbye Cable Bay!

Which ones are good for openelec live TV broadcast! Pi2 or Odriod?

Raspberry Pi 1 or 2 better (excellent GPU/video acceleration driver for XBMC/Kodi)

> There is no release compiled for rpi2 now

There are NetBSD builds of archlinuxarm and Raspberry Pi 2.

Hi, can I port RTEM on Rpi2 and develop new applications

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (

The site uses Akismet to reduce spam.

.

By using our website and services, you expressly agree to our placement of performance, functionality and advertising cookies.

How do you measure the value of unknown inductance? If you have an LCR bridge or electric meter, you may want to use it. If not, you can use many different techniques. All of this relies on the same thing my algebra teacher, Mr. Harder, said in the 1970s: You must use what you know to get what you don't know.

[Ronald Dekker] has to think in the same way. He took

. He set the signal output to about 20kHz and adjusted the 1V peak-to-peak value on the oscilloscope. Then, he put the unknown inductor on both ends of the signal and adjusted the frequency (and only the frequency) to achieve 1/2 volt peak-to-peak output.

The idea is that the size of the inductive reactance in the midway part must be 50 ohms (a 50/50 voltage divider is formed with the source impedance). [Ronald] did a detailed mathematical derivation, but the result is that the inductor (unit is uH) is 4570/f, where f is the frequency in kHz. In fact, it is not necessary to set the 1V reference completely, but if you read the complete article, it will simplify the way he makes measurements.

Of course, there may be some stray resistance in the circuit, but it is not enough to make a big difference in most inductors. If you have reason to doubt, [Karen Orton] contributed mathematical principles and got a slightly more complicated expression that allows you to consider the DC resistance of the coil in the calculation.

Of course, this is not the only game in town. We like to use

. On the other hand, if

Where you are interested, please talk to Elliot.

I like reading articles about alternative methods and techniques for identifying such unknowns... awesome!

that's nice

I used to use the 1khz reference output of a standard oscilloscope, pass it through a known capacitor, and then connect it to the inductor ground. Use the same oscilloscope to measure the inductance and check the ringing frequency. Calculate from there.

The only tools needed are standard oscilloscopes, capacitors and some mathematical operations.

Can any arduino-ey board with a good enough ADC build a black box fast enough?

STM32F103 has dual 12-bit 1Msps ADC and many functions. You can get a plank for $2 from China. Use external DAC + driver as signal generator via SPI.

You can make an LC oscillator and use *duino to measure the frequency of a known capacitance, and then calculate the inductance. There are few online level gauges based on microcontrollers. Some of them use external or internal comparators to form LC oscillators.

There are also AD9833/AD9834, which can be used to measure complex impedance, and then can be used to calculate the parameters of components or networks.

Instead of trying to build an AC meter through ADC sampling, use an active rectifier and measure the DC value. Compared to buying a faster op amp, you can reach the bandwidth and sampling limits at the ADC frequency.

Check out this simple circuit for use with a multimeter (PDF in Polish):

Inductance is an interesting thing.

If they are small (physically or just very low values), to obtain accurate measurement values, the test leads must be compensated, etc.

If you run at a high enough frequency, you get capacitance between the turns of the coil

Not to mention the stripline effect, PCB traces with open ends will become inductive.

Inductors outside of Prius can be large:

In addition, the video shows the same measurement technique. ;)

The strange part to me is having such a good signal generator, but not having a simple LCR meter. I guess a person can assemble something with DDS chips. You will need an adjustable amplifier to bring the output to a known level. Even so, you will change the output level as the frequency changes. I guess you can split it into the second trace of the dual-track oscilloscope and continue to adjust the output as it moves.

Here is the poor ham scalar network analyzer (PHSNA). Using Arduino, drive the DDS chip and get the amplitude from the log amplifier/detector.

DDS chip tends to change output with frequency, so it can be calibrated by scanning frequency without inductance. Repeat the inductor across the terminals.

You can also set the frequency to about 10 Hz to get an approximation to the DC resistance.

I played this game a while ago, using a square wave generator using PIC16 instead of the smitt trigger used in the video:

Except that my edge transition is not fast enough (probably) and divide the resulting inductance by 3, all other methods work well. I used an Excel worksheet to combine the errors and give the correct values. I checked the known inductor and it seems to work. I use a potentiometer from 1khz to about 20khz to adjust the frequency. I replaced the 10pF capacitor with a 560pF capacitor and it gave me a stronger signal. I used a breadboard, but it still works at 4.7uH.

I don't believe that my super cheap function generator outputs a constant voltage when the frequency changes, nor that my voltmeter can accurately measure voltage at high frequencies. Therefore, I have always used the ratio measurement method to measure the two voltages across the inductor and the series resistor at several frequencies, and then fit the model to the data. see

E.g. (This method can handle not only inductors, but also more complex devices. I usually use it to characterize speakers that may have multiple mechanical resonances.)

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (

)

The site uses Akismet to reduce spam.

.

By using our website and services, you expressly agree to our placement of performance, functionality and advertising cookies.