|
|
 | | Re: New Version of pbForth with DCC Support Released
|
| (...) Enough interest? How about this: I think there'd be a HUGE interest! What would it take to convince you? We have no DCC session on tap as of right now, (1) and this would go well in robotics AND trains!!! Please do come! 1 - we were angling (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.trains, lugnet.events.brickfest, FTX)
| | | | | New Version of pbForth with DCC Support Released
|
| All, I've just finished updating the pbForth webiste with information on the latest version of pbForth that supports DCC. Yay! Yes, you can use Mark Riley's excellent train control firmware, but if you want to write code that starts and stops trains (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.trains)
| | | | | Re: BricxCC release 3.3.7.6
|
| (...) Thanks! It does work well! My files had a .txt extension. But since I've renamed them, it works beautiful. (...) Very impressive and useful features. (...) Now I get it! (...) You're right (...) I renamed the help files back and it's great (...) (21 years ago, 12-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, FTX)
| | | | | Re: BricxCC release 3.3.7.6
|
| (...) Unfortunately I haven't documented my pbForth support very well. Perhaps the following explanation will be useful to all BricxCC users who want to try pbForth. BricxCC figures out some things based on the extension of the file open in the (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Trains, DCC, and pbForth
|
| In lugnet.trains, David Koudys wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> This weekend was exceptionally busy, but I had time to play with the layout. Took my laptop downstairs, set it up with the IR tower, and loaded up Full Throttle. Wow! Pretty nifty piece of (...) (21 years ago, 24-Nov-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, FTX)
| | | | | RE: Trains, DCC, and pbForth
|
| (...) DOH! Of course. In the fire alarm business, we have a three state voltage out to the sensors. Usually the Vout is 24V and the device can respond when the voltage falls to 5 V. The devices have a power supply that is basically a big cap and a (...) (21 years ago, 21-Nov-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | Re: Trains, DCC, and pbForth
|
| (...) From what I've read, most DCC layouts have a separate small programming track anyways. This way a loco can be safely programmed without having to remove all the other locos from the layout[1]. So, you could hook output A of the RCX to the (...) (21 years ago, 21-Nov-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | Re: Trains, DCC, and pbForth
|
| (...) Yes, sounds like fun! And, that DZ123 I recently posted about would be ideal for the job. I think I'll have to order one or two more to test this out. One change to LDCC that would help facilitate this would be the ability to configure LDCC to (...) (21 years ago, 21-Nov-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Trains, DCC, and pbForth
|
| (...) So if I understand this correctly, my idea of inserting some kind of optoisolator or other power driver between the RCX and the track would interfere with LDCC receiving the ACK signal. Or could the sensor 1 input still be (safely) connected (...) (21 years ago, 21-Nov-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | Re: Trains, DCC, and pbForth
|
| (...) The basic DCC ack is defined as an increase of load on the track of at least 60ma for 6ms +/- 1ms. Normally this happens on a quiet track where all you have powered is the decoder being programmed at the time. However, if you have a bunch or (...) (21 years ago, 21-Nov-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
|
