Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Feedback request on the initial MikroE Clicks List @Parallax — Parallax Forums

Feedback request on the initial MikroE Clicks List @Parallax

Hello,

If you've been participating in the P2 Live Forum - Early Adopter Series, you'll know that we created an adapter for the P2 Evaluation Board <=> MikroE Click boards. The thought is that for the P2 to grow an audience it should be able to swim in a larger sea. Mouser and Digi-Key move thousands upon thousands of the MikroE Click boards. These provide us with a quick way of prototyping/testing a circuit.

Our intent is to stock a dozen or two of them, release community objects in their support (Spin2 and C libraries), and have them for sale as a convenience. In time, as our support grows for these, customers can also get them from Mouser.

This is the initial list of MikroE Click boards I'm looking at bringing in:

4-20 mA R click https://www.mikroe.com/4-20ma-r-click
4-20 mA T click https://www.mikroe.com/4-20ma-t-click
AIR QUALITY click https://www.mikroe.com/air-quality-click
Brushless 3 click https://www.mikroe.com/brushless-3-click
eINK click - bundle https://www.mikroe.com/e-paper-bundle-2
Environment click https://www.mikroe.com/environment-click
FTDI click https://www.mikroe.com/ftdi-click
LightRanger 4 Click https://www.mikroe.com/lightranger-4-click
LSM6DSL click https://www.mikroe.com/lsm6dsl-click
OLED C click https://www.mikroe.com/oled-c-click
Ozone 2 click https://www.mikroe.com/ozone-2-click
PROTO click https://www.mikroe.com/proto-click
Proximity 3 click https://www.mikroe.com/proximity-3-click
Relay2 click https://www.mikroe.com/relay-2-click
RS232 click https://www.mikroe.com/rs232-click
RS485 click 3.3V https://www.mikroe.com/rs485-33v-click
mikroBUS Shuttle Bundle https://www.mikroe.com/mikrobus-shuttle-bundle
Stepper 2 click https://www.mikroe.com/stepper-2-click
WiFi ESP click https://www.mikroe.com/wifi-esp-click

Appreciate your input here.

What Click boards do you think we are missing?

Which Click boards do you find not necessary?

Thanks,

Ken Gracey
«1

Comments

  • You might add a RTC module to that list. Very useful!
  • JRoark wrote: »
    You might add a RTC module to that list. Very useful!

    Sure! Can do. I initially looked towards one that JonnyMac has favored in the past (PFC8583) and found it was end of life. We need to identify the RTC with the most viable, non-obsolete, commonly used, low-cost processor at it's core. They've got a list here https://www.mikroe.com/rtc-click. What would be the favored RTC?

    Ken Gracey

  • I have a Mikroe easy pic7 with Mikroe basic, I think I like Bs2 Pbasic a little better. A CanBus Click board would be good.
  • WiFi/BLE click https://www.mikroe.com/wifi-ble-click <== ESP32-based
  • Like this @DigitalBob https://www.mikroe.com/can-spi-33v-click?

    Ken Gracey
  • dgately wrote: »
    WiFi/BLE click https://www.mikroe.com/wifi-ble-click <== ESP32-based

    OK, that's certainly helpful and shall be our candidate. Thanks for the extra set of eyes, Dennis.

    Ken Gracey
  • One of the Clicks that caught my attention was for brushless motor control. https://www.mikroe.com/brushless-3-click is the one currently on the list. This board uses an I2C/PWM interface. It seems it would be best to have a brushless motor board that doesn't have a co-processor since the P2 can handle all the signaling directly, right? The P1 found it's home in many motor control applications for CNC, drones, and robotics applications so we need to cover the motor driver bases as well as we can.

    If somebody can pick out a more appropriate brushless controller board for the P2 that would be nice, unless the one we've identified is the right fit. I'd also get a few low-cost brushless motors in stock to make it quick to get crackin' on some results.

    Ken Gracey
  • This is great news. I use these modules and they are rock solid.

    However, my latest development is a motherboard that accommodates the

    Tibbit Blocks

    and fits their standard enclosure. The end result is a finished saleable product.
  • Taking shape...

    2968 x 2320 - 2M
  • JonnyMacJonnyMac Posts: 8,912
    edited 2020-08-17 16:05
    Ken Gracey wrote: »
    JRoark wrote: »
    You might add a RTC module to that list. Very useful!

    Sure! Can do. I initially looked towards one that JonnyMac has favored in the past (PFC8583) and found it was end of life. We need to identify the RTC with the most viable, non-obsolete, commonly used, low-cost processor at it's core. They've got a list here https://www.mikroe.com/rtc-click. What would be the favored RTC?

    Ken Gracey
    Thankfully, many I2C RTC modules are code compatible -- or very close -- so it won't be a lot of effort to update to a new RTC.

    This one
    -- https://www.mikroe.com/rtc-10-click
    ...uses the DS3231 which I've written P1 code for and friends have used in several projects.

  • Yep that's it CAN SPI.
  • The DS3231 RTC is what I use. Very accurate timekeeping and lots of code is available. This would be my choice. Most of the DS13xx code in the Obex can be easily updated to run with it. It also has an embedded temp sensor you can read directly which ticks yet another box on my wish list.
  • Okay, refreshing this thread for a moment.

    Are there other Click boards for which you would like drivers?

    Ken Gracey
  • A compass/accel/gyro board might be quite useful for robotics use. Eg. A MPU 9DOF type of thing. How good that particular board is I don't know. They do seem to have quite a large range to select from.
  • For years I have looked at these boards and wished that there was Prop1 support for them.
    I would like to suggest a Click GSM board, for example Click GSM 3G.
    This will be very useful for remote monitoring projects.
  • Ken Gracey wrote: »
    One of the Clicks that caught my attention was for brushless motor control. https://www.mikroe.com/brushless-3-click is the one currently on the list. This board uses an I2C/PWM interface. It seems it would be best to have a brushless motor board that doesn't have a co-processor since the P2 can handle all the signaling directly, right?

    The DRV10983 can handle up to 28V and 2A which is probably good for first experiments with a brushless motor without the risk to burn something. But it is far too little power to drive something useful. Even a small model servo draws more current.

    And yes, the P2 could handle a brushless motor power stage (mainly 3 PWM outputs and 3 ADC inputs) directly. But then you don't need the mikroBUS but on the other hand much more complicated software than you'd need for the DRV10983. Not a big problem but somebody has to write or port it. I've written a lot of code for industrial servo control and I'm "almost finished". But there you usually have an encoder on the motor. For simple brushless drives you don't. The algorithms for sensorless drives are quite different.

  • It's a pity the P2-EVAL might only allow 3-4 of these Click modules to be connected by consuming all sides of the P2-EVAL yet most of these modules only typically need a subset of their 12 pins. Sometime further into the future I wonder if two Click modules could try to share the 16 P2 pins somehow, maybe jumper selectable for mapping connected P2 pins, or sharing a common i2c bus, reset pin etc, that may be good for increasing the number of these modules that could be connected to the P2 board.

    Another option is to have a smaller single wide jumperable Click adapter board that lets you choose up to 8 of the 12 connected pins yourself. The Click module spacing will possibly just fit the P2-EVAL dual connector pitch, but it's tight. Perhaps this could also then let the Click breakout connector also work alongside the existing Parallax breakout boards on each side of the P2-EVAL. Spacing these out is not ideal I know.

    click.png
  • MicksterMickster Posts: 2,588
    edited 2020-08-18 08:51
    @rogloh

    Isn't that what the "shuttle bundle" is for, listed in Ken's OP?
  • yes.. shuttle allows multi clicks per adapter. needs some code and click combo thought, but pretty capable solution.
  • Mickster wrote: »
    @rogloh

    Isn't that what the "shuttle bundle" is for, listed in Ken's OP?

    Aha, yeah Mickster that could help us too, hadn't looked at that one. It seems like it is just paralleled which is okay for 1-wire and i2c based boards.
  • Mickster wrote: »
    This is great news. I use these modules and they are rock solid.

    However, my latest development is a motherboard that accommodates the

    Tibbit Blocks

    and fits their standard enclosure. The end result is a finished saleable product.

    @Mickster Since you've touched them - are these modules any good for semi industrial applications, I mean robust enough and somehow environmentally sealed ? They look good for sure, like funny LEGO bricks.

    On the main subject of the MicroE click modules and drivers for these - I'd start with the minimal set of them, based on the most popular functionalities people use or would like to use and I'd select these functionalities first.
    Then the modules, picking the ones that are based on relatively new, mid range priced, good quality components.
  • @Maciek

    Yes, all I do is industrial control systems; mainly retrofitting CNC Tube Benders where I remove the old Siemens/Allen Bradley/Beckhoff/Cybelec controls and replace them with my own creations. Therefore I need a flexible solution that is robust and doesn't scream "hobby box".

    I looked at the Tibbo motherboard but decided against it due to configuration limitations. Furthermore, their programming languages don't even feature a millisecond timer which is something I use a lot.
    The Tibbit blocks use a mixture of SPI, I²C, Serial and DIO and so I have designed a more flexible motherboard that fits in their size #3 project box.
    In the "Parts" section of their site, you can find empty shells for custom blocks. The pins, on the underside of the blocks are standard headers and quite long. You need the provided extraction tool to remove a block.
  • @"Ken Gracey" - if anything, I'd delay WiFi ESP Click. It's based on ESP8266EX. I know I'm going to be stoned here, but should the module be based on the ESP32 I'd be delighted to see it supported. I'm not a big fan of the power hungry ESP8266. But that's just me.
    I'm sure many would welcome the support for the (most?) popular chip in the WiFi department but since you asked ...
  • @Mickster

    Now you got me interested. Thanks a lot. I've surfed their site very briefly but somehow missed that part.

    Did you design your own comm protocol or do you use one of the well established ones ? Are these tube benders managed somehow remotely or just stand alone beasts ?
  • The power of the P1 and P2 is that you can use a pin for anything. There are not dedicated pins that have some functions but not others. Most devices only need ground, power and a couple of pins to operate.

    So I built my own Plug and play system that lets me just plug in whatever device I want to use and then let the software do it's thing. The Propeller Plug and Play system. I can build it at home for pennies.

    He is a picture of some of the devices I can just plugin. The software decides if it's I2C, SPI, or Serial.

    Why buy a device with a dedicated bus interface.

    Mike
    2448 x 3264 - 2M
  • re: MikroE

    They make great products. I sill have aPic 4 developement system & a dspic developement system from then. I use thir mikroPascal Pro Compilers for Pic & dsPic. I've used some of their medi type boards before they became Click boards. Everything worked great.


    @ Ken
    What Click boards do you think we are missing?

    https://www.mikroe.com/nano-lora-click

    Nano LoRa Click is a LoRa® technology-based transceiver Click board™, which operates at a sub-gigahertz frequency of 815MHz and 928 MHz Bands, optimized for very long-range, low consumption applications, suitable for LPWA networks. Thanks to the spread spectrum modulation feature, as well as the low power consumption, it is capable of achieving a long-range communication, immune to interferences. Operated over the UART interface, it represents a very simple, yet powerful solution for the LoRa-based IoT communication network solution.
    ============================================================================
    Over view :
    LoRa is a wireless technology that offers long range, low power and secure data transmission for M2M and IoT applications. LoRa is based on chirp spread spectrum modulation, which has low power characteristics like FSK modulation but can be used for long range communications. LoRa can be used to connect sensors, gateways, machines, devices, animals, people etc. wirelessly to the cloud.

    LoRa Technologies operates in different frequency bands in different regions: In the United States it operates in the 915 MHz band, in Europe it operates in the 868 MHz band and in Asia it operates in the 865 to 867 MHz, 920 to 923 MHz band. Click here to learn more about LoRa frequency bands

    ==========================================================================
  • I use the Counter with P1. SPI quad module. It was easy to get going without mods to my boards. Soon I will just add the circuit to my boards. The P1/2 can do quad easily but this was for an external board to keep the count on power outs.
  • Ken Gracey wrote: »
    What would be the favored RTC?

    Having some SRAM with a battery backup is really useful for Propeller projects. You can continuously save a few variables to the SRAM and these variables will survive a power outage.

    I don't know if Mikroe sells one like this but I like using the MCP7940N-I/SN.
  • iseries wrote: »
    The power of the P1 and P2 is that you can use a pin for anything. .....

    Why buy a device with a dedicated bus interface.

    Mike

    @iseries Could you please elaborate a bit more ?

    I'd say Ken has already given an answer to your question in his opening post or at least that's how I see it. He just wants the forum members to add or remove a module and state the reason behind such a move.

    There are users who need these drivers badly to speed things up in development and certainly there are some, like myself, who simply lack the abilities or time to write their own drivers for a commonly available component, at least at the moment.

    Or maybe you are referring to some other post, mine possibly ? If that's the case, I'll explain.
  • Just an addition to my last post.
    I also prefer to do things on my own but as we all know, writing ones own drivers is often a tedious and challenging experience, depending on the device in question. The protocol isn't the only factor. Neither is the pinout. It's all of the conditions one must meet to deliver.
Sign In or Register to comment.