 | | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
Before starting the hacking,I did some tests whit this 'for-lus-delay', and I found the results better than expected. I found that this: for(long i=0;i<100000;i++); takes about 120ms, so one for lus takes 0.0012ms. I made a test program which first (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
(...) Nope, I didn't. Mixed up the packages/sec and bits/sec. It should be 6360Hz. Sounds even more faster (-: (22 years ago, 13-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
ARGH!!!...!!! i'm getting nuts of all these numbers! Now it appears that my stopwatch didn't give the time in steps from 1 ms, but in steps from 10 ms so then the program takes 3750ms, which means 70,6 packages per second. the RCX has send 1 adress (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
"Bastiaan v.kesteren" <b.van.kesteren53@zonnet.nl> wrote in message news:H8o02v.Gpz@lugnet.com... (...) 375ms, which is (...) at the sensor (...) 6360Hz. (...) I don't understand your references to clock pulses. The I2C protocol is edge triggered (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
"Bastiaan v.Kesteren" <b.van.kesteren53@zonnet.nl> wrote in message news:H8nvnF.2rz@lugnet.com... (...) takes (...) package, (...) A 3% error rates (7 out of 250 messages) is far too high. I would have expected error rates under 1 in 10 million (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
Dick Swan wrote: >I don't understand your references to clock pulses. The I2C protocol >is edge triggered with a data bit transferred as the clock signal >transitions from a LOW to HIGH value. Where do clock pulses come into >play? OK, as a (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
(...) Lepomux works with a serial protocol (5 bit preamble, 8 bit data, parity) based on a halfbit-clockspeed of 1 kHz. So compared to your I2C-driver it is dead slow (about 33ms/byte = 30 bytes/s). This slow speed has two reasons: - it's possible (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
(...) Well, one reason for this is that I2C doesn't need a precise clocksignal (thanks to Dick Swan for telling me, I totally forgot about it). All the timer stuff shouldn't matter for the I2C device, so there should be even higher speeds possible, (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
(...) We'll first check it out before boasting about it ;) The whole thing won't work without some hardware modifications on the lepomux - so I'll tell you about it in two or three weeks. Gunther (22 years ago, 15-Jan-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
(...) ... took slightly longer than 2 weeks, but now it works as expected. Using BrickOS you'll get up to 100 byte/s without any patch. I've put a protocol description on www.lepomux.org. Gunther (22 years ago, 1-Mar-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: I2C device for the RCX
|
|
** For some reason my e-mail didn't work anymore, so i couldn't post any messages to Lugnet. that's why i'm responding so late. So , hoping this time it will work, I send my post, again(for about the 10th time...) ** It looks very good! You say(on (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
