Loving circuit ikan

Loving well planned Altium Rooms #halfABoardIn16Hours

hey guys, thanks to the lovely guidance of an EE stacker I found this article electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/171716/…

Basically the answer with "video squeezer" mentioned sounds exactly like what I'd like to do, but I am wondering if this might be achievable on a Cyclone II or do I need to go for a higher grade FPGA

Also, is his method basically just appending bits from video two onto a stream that has the pixels of video one preceding it until a full image is generated?

I would also be very happy to learn how to responsibly figure out if my Cyclone II would work myself and what to check on the matching spec sheets

I sort of feel this should be closed, but don't want to be the person really deciding...

@Asmyldof thats why we have votes and decide that together ;)

electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/265478 how can some people have teh brain capacity to breathe?

oh a 9V battery wont power a 220V lamp, what a surprise...

so back to that vacuum decay project...

when was the last time anyone here used a dedicated flipflop chip and whatfor?

@PlasmaHH do transparent latches count?

@Shalvenay probably, they are almost the same

well, I have a '573 in my current project, serving as an output register for a LED bar because those pins on the micro are used both as outputs to the LED bar and inputs from the keypad

@PlasmaHH Used a 7473 JK flip flop to build a "diode tester for dummies" a LONG time ago. Most perverted design you ever saw. It used an LM3909 LED flasher powered from the clock input to the 7473 to generate the clock pulses. The 3909 ran off the leakage from the input. Over 25 years since I built the last one.

o_O

Is this a room where I can talk about the ARM Cortex-M3?

you can talk everywhere about it all day long, question is if someone listens and talks back in the way expected ^^

@MarkYisri Just go ahead and ask. Nobody will get bent out of shape over it, and you might get an answer.

Hello

@Rizier123 Hi.

@JRE Can I ask you, if you have time for it, a basic question about transistors?

Ask away. I might not be able to answer, but somebody else probably can. The main site might be a good place to ask your question, though.

I have a BC548A NPN transistor and I was wondering if a 10k resistor is correct for the base of the transistor?

What are you doing with it? If you are just using it as switch to drive another digital input, then it ought to be OK. If you are doing something analog (building an amplifier) then probably not.

My end goal is to build a full adder with transistors.

I think you ought to formulate that into a full question (with your proposed circuit) and post it as a question on the EE stackexchange.

Maybe I should, but I really try to solve it myself(meta.stackoverflow.com/q/261592).

Well, it looks to me like you have a solution. There's nothing wrong with stating your goal, giving your solution, and asking if you've missed something or if it could be improved.

and if its simple, to simulate it to see whats going on

hm, I guess within the next year or two I need to figure out what to do with my yucca :/

@JRE Okay I will give it a try. First question might take a while reading the help-center; all the tags which one are the correct ones; ...

@PlasmaHH 4 months ago 74/74, workshop, 1500pcs

1500 on one pcb? ;)

Can I do something when my schematic is blurry in my question?

redraw it in a non blurry way?

How? :P That is the image it created when I draw my schematic: i.stack.imgur.com/IK6yC.png

ah, with the internal circuit tool? well, it has some resolution limit, try packing it more, I see alot of wasted space.

or maybe use an external tool and screenshot something readable from it

@PlasmaHH 500

yikes

well, actually, closer to 1545 / 515 (out of 700 bare boards produced)

@PlasmaHH Okay I try my best. Really difficult to make a schematic readable.

@Rizier123 indeed. there is also one or two questions around about how to draw proper schematics. I recommend reading them

On meta, obvs

nah, the olin one is on the main site afaik

@Rizier123 Check out these suggestions for neat and clean diagrams.

@JRE Thanks for the link.

Might be a dumb question, but I just played around with the circuit a bit more and it kind works, but the thing is that my LED that I use to see the output really various from almost not glowing up at all and glowing up "correct/fully". Does that mean it works, but my resistor values are wrong?

well, you set the specifications, so if it behaves as specified, it works

I'm so confused if it counts as working or not working or what is going on at all...

Probably not strictly working. If the LED sometimes lights fully and other times doesn't, then I'd say that the output doesn't quite switch cleanly. Also, looking at your schematic, I'd say it is a good thing you simulated first. The way you are driving the LEDs could cause them to be destroyed in real life.

Take Q17. Collector to 5V, Emitter to LED. If the transistor switches fully, then it can provide more current than the LED is rated for. Cue release of magic smoke...

Ah!, that is missing in the schematic :) But the LED have a built in resistor.

w'ah?

Would it be a good idea to split up the schematic into different parts? Like every gate and then I just label the outputs?

To post it here, just clean it up and shrink it some. I think you could get some good suggestions on improving it. But make sure to include the series resistors for the LEDs.

@JRE You mean that I have to mention that the LED has a built-in resistor?

@JRE Except that they are voltage followers with a 10k base resistor

What do you think of this: i.stack.imgur.com/oelS7.png ?

Any improvements to my current question draft: gist.github.com/Rizier123/d7f5f5d91c60f93b5505d360c3b4a906 ?

I'm glad he said it and not me.

@ThePhoton Strictly speaking it'd be "Getordeerde Paren" or "Getordeerd Paar", depending on plurality (prior) or singular (latter)

@Asmyldof So much for Wikepedia.nl

?

Where I got my translations.

If you guys didn't all speak English so well, maybe you'd get a better Wikipedia in Dutch.

Twist and getwist aren't proper. Though they have been incorporated, while most people just use twisted pair

Even most installers do

If not just "Gimme the spool o them CAT6"

getorst is an actual proper word

@Asmyldof I imagined the different Flemish term came from years ago when the Belgian national telecom chose a different word for its technical manuals compared to the Dutch telecom.

Belgians are stricter with using proper words over inclusion of Anglicisms

@Asmyldof Probably anxious about French words slipping in.

and making the Wallonians feel all superior.

Flemmish are linguistics purists in many ways, not just the words

Like the Francophones in Canada

Not so much all of Vlaanderen, but the Flemmish that concern themselves with such

We had a linguistic quiz "Tien voor Taal", Dutch vs Flemmish, and the win rate was 1:2

(quizshow, pologies)

@Rizier123 I mean show the resistors in the diagram. Sure as god made little green boogers, somebody will miss your written mention of the LEDs having built in resistors, and you will get asked about them.

@JRE What kind of a ridiculous expression is that?!

@Asmyldof Sorry, what is the difference between Vlaanderen and "the place where Flemish people live"?

@JRE Ah okay. Any other things I can improve or do you think the question is otherwise good: gist.github.com/Rizier123/d7f5f5d91c60f93b5505d360c3b4a906 ?

@ThePhoton Technically Vlaanderen is in both Belgium and the Netherlands, though mostly Belgium, but I did mean the Flemmish region of Belgium

Vlaams = Flemmish

@Rizier123 That looks good.

@Asmyldof The expression "as sure as god made little green boogers" is am american phrase that is generally used to mean that something is certain. Little green boogers exist ( check inside your nose sometime) so it is a given that someone will ask where the redistors are for the LEDs.

@Rizier123 Oops. Looks good except for the missing resistors.

@JRE I've added them in the asked question: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/265567/127819 :)

@JRE No, in Europe, your expression means there will be no questions

Has anyone seen this website: circuits.io

It looks nice

@Asmyldof Its an expression, and not contingent upon the existance of any god. Note the lower case. I don't believe in one, either.

@JRE "sure as a none existant entity did something it didn't" NOR "Sure as an entity which exists and may be believed in, but has no hands in biologic evolution, did something it thus didn't" = 1

I don't know about circuits.io @MarkYisri. Might be "fun" for a novice, but seasoned vets would steer far clear of it. They are obviously trying to get their fingers into the "maker" movement.

(100% - (statement1 OR statement2)[given most of Europe]) <= 20%

Has anyone else ever seen a 104 ceramic dip cap shorted to 0.04 ohms? Wow.

I have seen ceramics do lots of things when "properly" pressured through piezoelectric stresses

deneonline.nl/programma-2016

Design Automation & Embedded Systems Event op 2 november 2016

last time i saw that event it was expensive, this year it's free

Because the people with the budget to pay for it recognise it as not worth it

Maybe now they'll start coming again

@Asmyldof I got an invitation from Altium

/me shrugs

don't know why they invited me

last time I designed a PCB as with a vector drawing program and the time before that with a felt stift ..

Last time I designed a PCB will be tomorrow evening

@Asmyldof, gotta second for an Atmel question?

I want to poll SysTick to see if I should do some low-priority housekeeping.

If I call an inline function to check the SysTick Ctrl register, it never sees the bit set.

If I write directly into my code if(SysTick->CTRL & SysTick_CTRL_COUNTFLAG_Msk), then it will see the bit set.

("the bit" means SysTick_CTRL_COUNTFLAG)

@ThePhoton Because SysTick calls a system interrupt by default, which resets it?

Any idea what's the difference?

@Asmyldof No ASF being used.

No SysTick interrupt handler installed.

Did you try to make the inline volatile?

And SysTick_CTRL_INTFLAG (whatever it's called) is not set

@Asmyldof Didn't try that. Didn't know a function could be volatile.

And/or check the generated ASM

Let me try...

If your inline doesn't do anything else yet, linkers and/or precompiler may decide to discard it before/after breakpoints are considered, maybe

for the majority of compilers, the inline keyword does not influence inlining at all

__ force_inline __ does if it is supported

though its not an official keyword

Most ARM compiler types have something of the sort

@PlasmaHH So far, Atmel Studio has seemed to do inlining when I specify inline every time I've checked.

But I am aware that it's only a hint, not a demand.

@ThePhoton usually the decision is made based on a) the definition being available and 2) a heuristic determining the cost

@PlasmaHH I would guess embedded compilers take it as a stronger hint than compilers targeting desktop apps...on the premise that embedded developers are more likely to be carefully considering the actual cost of a function call & return.

@ThePhoton probably depends on the mindset of the author(s), usually gcc trusts its cost heuristics more than the programmers (usually I would do too)

Hmm. AFAIK this is actually gcc under the hood.

But it's probably tunable based on processor type etc

yeah, the amount of knobs to turn is astronomic

Figured it out...I had defined my inline function to return uint8_t, but the flag I was looking for is in bit 16.

So that's me being dumb.

@PlasmaHH @ThePhoton So far, in my experience the inline keyword is adhered to by atmel compilers in its original forced implementation. But, I do check every time it's important to me, especially with the ARM compiler

In areas where bare metal is likely compilers are usually geared more towards developers using certain keywords knowing something the compiler doesn't, such as instruction timing (for privilege duration, for example)

And in fact, all GCC I know of can be made to interpret the inline keyword as a rule rather than a hint and I would not be surprised if Atmel implements the flag per standard, as this was the normal behaviour for AVR-GCC for a decent amount of time in the early days

However, that may be an addition/fluke to certain flavours of GCC