FreeEMS hardware feature wishlist (your suggestions here!)

GrowlingandBiffo · Post by **GrowlingandBiffo** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:56 pm

Link works fine but there is a three month lead time.

Wonder if this is due to the availability of the CPU...

Post by **Fred** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:56 pm

GrowlingandBiffo wrote:Wonder if this is due to the availability of the CPU...

That wouldn't surprise me at all. Besides, it's the wrong CPU Jean! :-p ;-)

GrowlingandBiffo · Post by **GrowlingandBiffo** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 8:05 pm

Lot of refs to XEP though, so which one is the one you are going to use..

Forum: FreeEMS Hardware Topic: FreeEMS hardware feature wishlist (your suggestions here!)
Fred
Post subject: Re: FreeEMS hardware feature wishlist (your suggestions here!)
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:50 am

Replies: 91
Views: 554

... a module in a finished product. This is it's biggest value. For a single chip design, none of the other stuff I've found comes close to the XDP/XEP parts. Any how, hope I didn't kick to hard

No problem. I'm not sure where this post came from. It seemed out of left field and not related to ...

Forum: FreeEMS Hardware Topic: Why Freescale S12X?
Fred
Post subject: Re: Why Freescale S12X?
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:42 pm

Replies: 8
Views: 123

That is not their choice!!!

I'll definitely be porting whatever I have to XEP when MS3 comes out IF it uses that type of CPU... If it doesn't then... who knows what will happen

Forum: FreeEMS Hardware Topic: Why Freescale S12X?
Fred
Post subject: Re: Why Freescale S12X?
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:10 pm

Replies: 8
Views: 123

... one too!

For me, the form factor is the main thing though. The Adapt board is perfect for integration into a custom project like this. The XEP board is half the price, but is not suitable for just plugging into a custom project... The keen among us later might desolder our xdp and solder ...

Forum: FreeEMS Hardware Topic: Why Freescale S12X?
Fred
Post subject: Re: Why Freescale S12X?
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:42 am

Replies: 8
Views: 123

... chip. These devices are available with additional inputs and outputs so you have plenty of I/O 100 pins max compared with 144 for xdp and 2XX for xep The new tools are free of charge As is GCC 68hc11... There is lots of support on the new http://www.avrfreaks.com http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hc12%20forum ...

jbelanger · Post by **jbelanger** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:27 pm

Fred wrote:Besides, it's the wrong CPU Jean! :-p

Unless I'm missing something, this is the 112-pin auto temp XEP (M:-40C to 125C, AL:112-pin LQFP). And the 10 weeks lead time is if you order more parts than the 1825 they currently have in stock (at least that's my assumption based on what I've seen from other vendors).

Jean

jbelanger · Post by **jbelanger** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:32 pm

Unless you meant it's not the same as the techart board. I was just thinking about people who can't wait for more and are already thinking about having more options that what is currently planned. Besides, if you go to the trouble of making a CPU board, might as well have something more than the already available techart board.

Jean

Post by **Fred** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:32 pm

jbelanger wrote:Besides, if you go to the trouble of making a CPU board, might as well have something more than the already available techart board.

Agreed, but making a CPU board is way way way down the list too. The tech art board and XDP were chosen because they are accessible to people in a ready to use format. The XEP is not currently, and further more the code will require porting to it regardless of the pin count (yes, it should be a fairly minor task, but still...) As for the MS3 compatibility, I doubt it will be. I believe they want to do things differently to me (because they like a challenge and have a fetish for squeezing out every last drop of feature at any cost) and so, probably their pin layout won't be compatible with mine. Lastly, I really can't see what advantage a 112 pin XEP can have over a 112 pin XDP. All the extra good stuff is not exposed in that pin count <shrug>. More timers doesn't really count much, though it would make various thing easier you couldn't use them to the same effect you could on a 144 or 204 pin pack. If I went XEP I would DEFINITELY go with a larger pin count. There would be little point if you didn't. Anyway, like discussing multiple processors (in this thread) discussing XEP is somewhat counter productive at the moment. Once we have something that works and runs engines AND is fairly popular, then you can fragment the community. Fragmenting it early on pre any real tangible success is just shooting ourselves in the foot really.

XEP > XDP = true

TA board >>> bare chip = true (for 99.999% of people)

Let's discuss XEP's and FreeEMS 2.0 after 1.0 is a success :-) (I DO want to go there, and support 12 cyl sequential, but not yet, one thing at a time.)

Fred.

PS, Biffo, can you please clean up that post and leave only the relevant quotes in place? (I can clean it for you if you prefer? up to you.)

jbelanger · Post by **jbelanger** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:25 am

Fred,

I agree with you about pin count and that there nothing to gain in discussing the use of the XEP now. Like I said in my first post on the subject, it was just a tease. And the fact that there is at least one version of the chip available now in small quantity means that there is hope that at some point the more interesting version will be also available.

And I don't see any need to even consider MS3 here because that would be even more counter productive.

Jean

jharvey · Post by **jharvey** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:11 am

Here is an article about Switch Mode Pump's in the PSoC. Looks like the psocdeveloper.com's app note server is back on-line.

http://www.psocdeveloper.com/uploads/tx ... an2097.pdf

I know it's not going in V1.0, and likely not in V2.0, but SMP is still a handy thing to keep in mind.

Post by **Fred** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:32 am

jbelanger wrote:I agree with you about pin count and that there nothing to gain in discussing the use of the XEP now. Like I said in my first post on the subject, it was just a tease. And the fact that there is at least one version of the chip available now in small quantity means that there is hope that at some point the more interesting version will be also available.

And I don't see any need to even consider MS3 here because that would be even more counter productive.

Cool, glad you agree, sorry if I was a bit umm verbose(?). My girlfriend is a primary school teacher, and I'm an "engineer", I can't say I've enjoyed doing her job recently... perhaps a little too touchy when I wrote that...

Jared, thank you for the info on the current pumps, I'll try to have a read a little later.

Fred.

jharvey · Post by **jharvey** » Sat Jul 05, 2008 1:42 pm

Another feature to toss int the bag would be for on-board low end scope capabilities. Looks like the there will be extra ANolog input(s) so how about muxing one with a chip like Mouser part number 595-TS3DV520RHUR and using one of those inputs as scope. I haven't looked very close to know if this chip is any good, I saw it had a large bandwidth several muxible inputs. That's about all.