Search results

Thanks!! This is the information I needed. (y) I had already browsed thru the Rev-ed website, but apparently my search skills are subpar as I couldn’t find the information.

I found another Microchip 18 pin SMT device, the PIC16F1847. Same situation, would this be a legitimate 18M PICAXE? Since these are SMT devices, there is no simple way to breadboard something to run the editor for identification.

Organizing my parts drawer, I found in the Picaxe bin a 14 pin Microchip SMT device, a 16F1825 Looking at the Picaxe Manual 1, I cannot see any device that matches. I know that the 14M2 chip is labeled as such. But somewhere else I read that some 14M2 could be labeled with the original...

The difference between a plain vainilla digipot and ones dedicated to audio volume control is that the actual tap changeover occurs at the audio waveform’s zero-crossing, precisely to avoid the clicking. I also had previously attempted to build an audio attenuator myself, but had also ran in...

Indeed, straightforward and simple to use. Direct values, no need to address registers. Do you think that the HSPI instruction would be suitable, or is it better to bit-bang the values?

For some reason, it doesn't allow me to upload the PDF file. Thus the link instead...

From time to time, I like to browse IC datasheets to view new (to me) devices which would pique my interest. Double bonus if they are Picaxe-able. As such I would like to share a particular Texas Instruments PGA2311, which should be a bonus for anyone thinking of building a high performance...

The problem lies if one applies a slightly higher over voltage condition, which would not instantly kill the device but cause it to behave incorrectly. This is specifically important in linear circuits like opamps, whereas a performance parameter like offset voltage could be degraded. Ask me...

Of course for the utmost precision a shunt is recommended. However, for non-invasive and isolated sensing, perhaps a clamp-on current transformer is better. The following example already has an included burden resistor, which at its rated current, will output 1 volt which can be divided down to...

Based on my limited exposure to them, Chinese companies are building many low-cost, exciting and very clever chips. But their datasheets are, to put it quaintly, full of "Easter eggs" for one to stumble and discover. Part of the fun which helps maintain one's brain active.(y) They definitively...

The solution is actually quite simple and it doesn't require any computing. The resistor ratios shown in the datasheet should be recalculated such that at nominal voltage it provides a slightly higher voltage at the device's inputs. Then the calibration requirements will always be downwards.

At least some of the Analog Devices work correctly. Way back, I built a fuel gage for a robot which used an AD7755. Working with DC makes finding the proper accurate sources far easier. My concerns about the calibration may be unfounded.

Buzby, thanks for your comments. The 0.2% quoted in the datasheet I believe is linearity, not actual accuracy. The accuracy error I quote arises from the Vref tolerance 2.43V +/-5% and the Masterclock tolerance of 3.579 Mhz +/- 15% Since both appear on the frequency equations shown in page 7...

That is interesting. From the speed of execution, which of the two approaches would be faster? I remember reading a long time ago that the CASE statements were the slowest.

As you can see from the datasheet, the devices provide an output frequency which is proportional to the current and voltage values, as shown in the equations of paragraph 3.2, which I fully understand. The issue I face is how to calibrate it. Due to limitations of the internal voltage reference...

An unknown -at least for me- Chinese IC manufacturer (Hiliwi) produces a line of of highly integrated AC powerline measurement devices. Some background first; I've designed and built powerline meters for over 25 years now. Hiliwi's most advanced IC, the HLW8112 performs a myriad of measurements...

I have become a little wiser today :)

Oooooooooooook. I get it. Well, let's say that I believe I get it. But the next question begs: Why one has to do this in the first place? Is DAC100 on its own an invalid statement?

Beautiful and well executed project. (y) I really like the fact that you have included the component's value in the silkscreen. I quickly browsed your code. Will ask questions later if I have any doubts. PD: it is amazing the capabilities of those SMT Mosfets.

I am sorry to derail this discussion, but I don't understand what is the purpose of: #Define DAC10 DAC2 DAC2 DAC2 DAC2 DAC2 #Define DAC50 DAC10 DAC10 DAC10 DAC10 DAC10 #Define DAC100 DAC50 DAC50 And how this operates to generate 100 iterations of the do:loop Before anyone...