 | | Re: Custom Firmware, IR Problems, and Dead RCXs —Matthias Jetleb
| | | | (...) Actually, it's the computer itself that determines the duty cycle. This does mean that you could change the duty cycle, but you should be aware that it would be at the expense of noise immunity and would require a higher sampling rate from the (...) (24 years ago, 29-May-01, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | | | | | RE: Custom Firmware, IR Problems, and Dead RCXs —Jim Lee
| | | | | | (...) Ummm, that doesn't make sense. You know where the midpoint is by knowing the baud rate, and hence the bit width. The only time you need to sample at the beginning of the bit time is to look for a start bit. This is all very basic asynchronous (...) (24 years ago, 29-May-01, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Custom Firmware, IR Problems, and Dead RCXs —Ralph Hempel
| | | | | (...) <snip> (...) <snipped more> Well, no. The RCX receiver is a standard IR unit tuned to the carrier frequency. when I look a the signal on my scope, I get a nice square-shaped wave that is the same as the data byte (with start and stop bits) (...) (23 years ago, 29-May-01, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Custom Firmware, IR Problems, and Dead RCXs —Matthias Jetleb
| | | | | (...) Gee, could you tell I don't have a block diagram of the innards of the RCX? 95% of the work I've done with microcontrollers has been based on the MC68HC705J1A, J2A and K1 series (mainly because that's what I have the development tools for). (...) (23 years ago, 30-May-01, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | |
