| ??? 12/20/04 13:29 Read: times |
#83516 - where, where not IIC Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Since you already have I2C implemented, a pair of PCF8576 will make reading the thumbwheels easier
Raghu, The above should be a no brainer, If the "reaction time" to a changed thumbwheel setting (haven't seen this for a while) is delayed a few (hundered) milliseconds, so what. Another possibility would be to "farm out" some processiong to a LPC93x chip, that way you could e.g. convert the thumbwheels to two bytes to be read through IIC, rather than the entire processing done in your current (fully loaded) processor. If you look around you probably will find (in Philips or SILabs) a small cheap processor with a 10 or more bit D/A AND hardware IIC, with what I know about your app by now, that would probably be my solution. If you decide to coprocess, always let only ONE processor process the encoder to position and let that one transfer the data to the other. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| +/- 10V for +/- 2000 deg angle | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Only an idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Another idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Midpoint zero | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why Waste the Chips?? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Pins and more pins | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why change the MCU? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I2C already implemented. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Overlooked IIC interface | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| where, where not IIC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| DAC not thumbwheels | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why not... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Endurance rating | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| final stability/precision, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yet Another Idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Drop in replacement??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I2C DAC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
MAX1104 | 01/01/70 00:00 |