OT w/ Disclaimer: Hobby Microcontrollers
This post is not intended to discuss cats, Miatas, cats driving Miatas, Miatas killing cats, chili con carne, the existance of a greater being, or anything relating to the good and evil qualities of Sarah Palin. This is intended to say that I will not start, nor encourage the posting of what I shall call "stupid" off topic messages, such as those mentioned above (If they are not above, you are either using too high a screen resolution or do not have "word wrap" enabled). I simply wish to discuss a topic which I believe to be at least somewhat known by the community here.
Hobby Microcontroller Setups:
I will soon hopefully be starting a robotics team with some friends. The goal is to make some entries for a competition in Ohio in late April.
We can pretty much use anything for control, from relay logic to a microcontroller. Unless I were building something for either novelty or to show the possibility to use an old technology, I would obviously choose some type of microcontroller. As I do not yet know what tasks we will be competing in, it is hard to make a decision. The devices I am considering are:
Anyone use any of these three? As I understand it, programming Arduino and BASIC will be simpler than the Propeller. The Propeller though, is significantly more powerful than the other two. So, it will ultimately depend on what we decide upon, but basically, what has the most bang for the buck? What is the most versitle? You get the idea.
- -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Joe Giliberti" <Starbase89@...>
> Hobby Microcontroller Setups:
> Which one?
> I will soon hopefully be starting a robotics team with some friends. The
> goal is to make some entries for a competition in Ohio in late April.
> We can pretty much use anything for control, from relay logic to a
> microcontroller. Unless I were building something for either novelty or to
> show the possibility to use an old technology, I would obviously choose some
> type of microcontroller. As I do not yet know what tasks we will be
> competing in, it is hard to make a decision. The devices I am considering
> --BASIC Stamp
> --Parallax Propeller
> Anyone use any of these three? As I understand it, programming Arduino and
> BASIC will be simpler than the Propeller. The Propeller though, is
> significantly more powerful than the other two. So, it will ultimately
> depend on what we decide upon, but basically, what has the most bang for the
> buck? What is the most versitle? You get the idea.
I'll try to keep it short here... :)
You're question will always open a can of worms amongst many hobbyists . I've been in robotics as a hobby and some work since 70's. This type of question is best suited for their newsgroups. BUT, I personally recommend you to refrain from posting this over there because it won't get you any clear and concise answers. A choice of hardware is at best an individual preference. There's always the "mine's better than yours crowd". To develop your preference of choice it's better to actually experiment with a few types or view someones design to get some hands on experience. Just reading about the stories is never enough--reading about what information to look for in hardware is most important. That's why they make evaluation boards to let you experiment with the hardware. A lot of times people just take this and put it inside their robot if it fits.
The Arduino is best suited for beginners. As it has many support features built-in to let you get started right away. It'll go a long way, and it's capable of running many different robotic projects. But if your already a programmer you will find the urge to upgrade later on, such as a C compiler--which as far as I know this isn't supported on here - but check anyway. The Propeller is something I would recommend once after you gain some experience with ordinary microcontrollers--this one is much more involved.
I suppose you're familiar with the robotics newgroups out there in Chicago ? There is a robot contest held by the ChiBots robot club. There's another club in that area too, CIRC. Both have their own yahoo newsgroup, its open to anyone --not just the local members. It's close to us but we haven't made it there yet.
As for my preference, over the years, I found the AVR from Atmel to be quite effective and user friendly--for 8bitters. Mainly because the AVR technology has always been modern, the parts are cheap, and there's a large open source community (ie.free) of software(including compilers) Check out this website, it's about the biggest forum, http://www.avrfreaks.net/
You should find a lot of info on the Arduino there --since it has an AVR processor too
Your welcome to checkout the webpage for our robot club in Pittsburgh.
We're building a new robot contest here, it's called RoboSwarm (see link below)
The details about the robots and contest are in the different links there
The webpage needs some attention as we're always busy with building than writing :)
We only have 4 robots for this contest so far that our members are building.
Hopefully we'll get more people once it's up and running.
hope this helps,
- --- In email@example.com, ragooman@... wrote:
>features built-in to let you get started right away.
> The Arduino is best suited for beginners. As it has many support
I recently saw an alternative, which is Freeduino
But, I don't know enough yet about microcontrollers to really ascertain
whether this is a viable replacement for Arduino. However, they are
advertsing in MAKE magazine, so I assume it's for real.
> > The Arduino is best suited for beginners. As it has many supportThat is a very useful resource. I found a useful article there
> features built-in to let you get started right away.
> I recently saw an alternative, which is Freeduino
instantly. I admit that the Atmel AVR series of microcontrollers
seems to be a great choice for learning: great user communities, open
source tools and low cost kits (such as the AVR Butterfly) that don't
require a JTAG or proprietory programmer.
The Basic Stamp MIGHT be nice but it's rather expensive and there's
the recurring cost per unit for the ROM.
I learned the Microchip PIC-18 during a course for interfacing
sensors, so I started with a kit with a boot-load pre-programmed into
the flash (programmed via rs232). I bought it from Al Williams
http://www.awce.com/ and used Microchip's free "C" compiler. I will
eventually "graduate" to using the In Circuit Emulator for debugging
and to program the (cheaper) totally blank chips without any boot loader.
I can't find an active PIC community. All the Yahoo groups are dead.
But the PIC is found in many devices, such as the PicAXE (apparently
popular in the UK).
To bring this back to the RETROComputing topic, you could re-discover
the joys of the Z80 or the eZ80 (50 MHz embedded version). The
software is sure "mature enough" but the enthusiasm is lacking. I'm
yet to find more than a few posts about the eZ80 anywhere despite
Circuit Cellar's contest and articles.
- I use AVR's. The attiny2313, in particular, as it includes a UART,
enough flash and I/O to handle most of what I need to do. I did have
one project where I needed more I/O pins, but I simply split the
project into two logical parts and connected the UARTs together in
order to link the two parts. I could have easily gone to an AVR with
more pins, but will be able to reuse one half of this project in the
future. A serial interface is also handy to have available, if you
need to send or receive data from a PC.
The AVR instruction set, is easier to use, in my opinion, than the
PICs and 8051s. Compiled C code will often not fit in a micro-
controller's limited flash space, depending upon your application, so
this is an important consideration. Atmel provides both in-circuit
debugger capabilities and a simulator. Atmel's in-circuit debugger
costs around $300. The simulator has allowed for me to debug most
everything I've done, so I never purchased the interface for in-
circuit debugging. The AVR software tools are free, so the cost of
startup has been a flash programmer for around $29.00 and some AVR
chips. The interface from the chip to the flash programmer is simple
enough to slap together on a breadboard in a few minutes. There are
plans on the web for building your own flash programmer, but I think
that it is hardly worth the trouble.
>>> Regards, Mike WillegalHi Mike. Are you new here? If so, please send a "hello world" message to our list to introduce yourself ... Background, location, how you found us, etc.