1st Post: Newbie Advice on Solenoid Sequencing.

Archiver

Greetings,
I am new to STAMPs, having stumbled upon them in the course of pursuing
a circuit design. I should preface this post by declaring that I am a
virtual novice with regard to electronics, with no programming
experience to speak of. However, I do have a project goal I'd like
to attain and towards that end I've been experimenting with circuits
and components and studying whatever I can about STAMPs,
microcontrollers, Bolean logic, PBASIC,etc…enough to temp me, fill my
head with dreams(and frustration) , and ultimately, lead me to this
mailing list.
Essentially, I'm looking for some guidance and the benefit of
experience and knowledge to evaluate my design needs, and perhaps
recommend a point of entry.

I'm in the process of designing a circuit that will power anywhere
from 3-6 (quantity) Solenoids rated @120VAC, 12amp (at full stroke)
continuous. The 120VAC main has only a 15 amp capacity, and I'd like to
power , if at all possible, a maximum of 6 solenoids on this single
line.

These are the desired parameters for the solenoid's firing sequence:

-Pulse Time: 100ms per solenoid (max pulse solenoid needs for a fully
charged stroke)
-Pause Time: RANDOM, between approx. 0.5s – 6.0s

The reason the Stamp interests me [noparse][[/noparse]besides the wonder in making
acquaintance with its mind boggling possibilities] is I believe it
possible to program all 6 solenoids to fire in rapid succession, so
that within the space of a second (more or less, allowing for lags in
execution, relay function[noparse][[/noparse]?], etc.) all 6 solenoids can fire, but with
never more than one solenoid receiving current at any one time. Unless
I am mistaken, I believe a microcontroller can accommodate this.
A likely sequence would involve a randomly (or pseudo randomly)
generated number "X" between 05s-6.0s that is automatically selected
and used as the Pause Time for the approaching cycle….

oSolenoid#1 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the
contact on outboard relay#1 ), immediately after relay #1 is re-
opened, then…
oSolenoid#2 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the contact
on an outboard relay #2)
o Solenoid#3 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the
contact on an outboard relay #3…
oand so on through Solenoid#6

which would conclude one `six-solenoid firing cycle'.
oA new randomly generated number "Y" is then selected and the system
pauses "Y" seconds, then repeats the Solenoid firing order of #1-#6
(each receive a constant Pulse Time of 100ms.).

oSolenoid#1 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the
contact on outboard relay#1) {ad infinitum}

In this way theoretically at least, the main never needs to supply more
than 12amp for a single solenoid, + the additional 5VDC/12VDC to power
the STAMP and a series of small inboard intermediary relays.

I am not very experienced planning circuits, but I imagine a STAMP
connected to a series of 6 intermediary inboard relays which control
the contacts of 6 corresponding heavy duty relays which carry the
120VAC to the Solenoids , would work. An option to disconnect any or
all solenoids from the sequence by manual switch(s) would also be
important. I would very much appreciate opinions on the viability of
constructing this circuit with a STAMP assuming I can muster the PBASIC
(I recognize my lack of programming/electrical design experience). If
such a circuit is feasible and the STAMP can handle it, what would be
the recommended components? I was considering the STAMP2 with either a
carrier board or connected to a breadboard for initial experimentation/
tinkering, but I am fuzzy on the options with which to control the
High-Powered outboard relays. An array of 6 smaller relays? Some other
means by programming and components I do not yet know of?

Penultimately, an issue concerning remote control.
Before I considered integrating all the solenoids into a single
microcontrolled circuit, my original plan had each solenoid on
separate circuits and switched on/off via an x10 remote control
module. Assuming the STAMP can handle all the Solenoids on a single
circuit, is there a way also to incorporate remote X10 on/off
switching of each individual solenoid?

Finally, is there a reasonable way to write BASIC code and program the
STAMP using a Mac? I have a Powerbook 3400 (non USB) and an older PPC
7100 and would prefer not to have to beg, borrow, buy another PC.
Thrift is definitely a virtue.

Thanks for ANY and all opinions, recommendations, admonitions,
insights…., more efficient, cheaper, elegant?

Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

[font=arial,helvetica]In a message dated 4/24/01 10:00:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
lovegasoline@yahoo.com writes:

Greetings,
I am new to STAMPs, having stumbled upon them in the course of pursuing
a circuit ·design. I should ·preface this post by declaring that I am a
virtual novice with regard to electronics, with no programming
experience to speak of. However, I do have ·a project ·goal ·I'd like
to attain and towards that end I've been experimenting with circuits
and components ·and ·studying whatever I can about STAMPs,
microcontrollers, ·Bolean logic, ·PBASIC,etc…enough to temp me, fill my
head with dreams(and frustration) , and ultimately, lead me to this
mailing list.
Essentially, I'm looking for some guidance and the benefit of
experience ·and knowledge to ·evaluate my ·design needs, and perhaps
recommend ·a point of entry.

I'm in the process of designing a circuit that will power ·anywhere
from ·3-6 (quantity) ·Solenoids rated @120VAC, 12amp ·(at full stroke)
continuous. The 120VAC main has only a 15 amp capacity, and I'd like to
power , if at all possible, a maximum of 6 solenoids ·on this single
line.

These are the desired ·parameters for the solenoid's firing sequence:

-Pulse Time: 100ms per solenoid (max pulse solenoid ·needs for a fully
charged stroke)
-Pause Time: RANDOM, between ·approx. 0.5s – 6.0s

The reason the Stamp interests me [noparse][[/noparse]besides the wonder ·in making
acquaintance ·with ·its mind boggling possibilities] ·is I believe ·it
possible ·to ·program all 6 solenoids ·to fire in rapid succession, so
that within the space of a second (more or less, allowing for lags in
execution, relay function[noparse][[/noparse]?], etc.) all 6 solenoids ·can fire, but with
never more than one solenoid receiving current ·at any one time. Unless
I am mistaken, I believe ·a microcontroller can accommodate this.
A likely sequence would involve a randomly (or pseudo ·randomly)
generated number ·"X" between ·05s-6.0s that is automatically selected
and used as the ·Pause Time for the approaching ··cycle….

oSolenoid#1 is loaded ·for pulse of 100ms ( current ·closing the
contact ·on outboard ·relay#1 ), immediately ·after relay #1 is re-
opened, then…
oSolenoid#2 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current ·closing the contact
on an outboard ·relay #2)
o Solenoid#3 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current ·closing the
contact ·on an outboard ·relay #3…
oand so on through Solenoid#6

which ·would conclude one ·`six-solenoid firing cycle'.
oA new ·randomly generated number "Y" ·is then selected and the system
pauses ·"Y" seconds, ·then repeats the Solenoid firing order of #1-#6
(each receive ·a constant Pulse Time of 100ms.).

oSolenoid#1 is loaded ·for pulse of 100ms ( current ·closing the
contact ·on outboard ·relay#1) {ad infinitum}

In this way theoretically at least, the main never needs to supply more
than 12amp for a single solenoid, + the additional 5VDC/12VDC to power
the STAMP and a series of small inboard intermediary ·relays.

I am not very experienced planning circuits, but I imagine ·a STAMP
connected to a series of 6 intermediary inboard relays ·which control
the contacts ·of ·6 corresponding heavy ·duty ·relays which carry the
120VAC to the Solenoids , would work. An option to disconnect any or
all solenoids from the sequence by ·manual switch(s) would also be
important. I would very much appreciate opinions on the viability of
constructing this circuit with a STAMP assuming I can muster the PBASIC
(I recognize ·my lack of ·programming/electrical design experience). If
such a circuit is feasible and the STAMP can handle it, what would be
the recommended components? I was considering the STAMP2 with either a
carrier board or connected to a breadboard for initial experimentation/
tinkering, but I am fuzzy on the options with which to control the
High-Powered outboard relays. An array of 6 smaller relays? Some other
means by programming and components I do not yet know of?

Penultimately, an issue concerning ·remote control.
Before I considered integrating all the solenoids into a single
microcontrolled circuit, my original ·plan had each solenoid on
separate circuits ·and switched on/off via an x10 remote control
module. Assuming the STAMP can handle all the Solenoids on a single
circuit, is there a way also to incorporate ·remote X10 on/off
switching of each individual solenoid?

Finally, is there a reasonable way to write BASIC code and program the
STAMP using a Mac? I have a Powerbook 3400 (non USB) and an older PPC
7100 and would prefer not to have to beg, borrow, buy ·another PC.
Thrift is definitely ·a virtue.

Thanks for ANY ·and all opinions, recommendations, admonitions,
insights…., more efficient, cheaper, elegant?

Cheers,
-Neal

Neal:

I am assuming that the 12 amps you refer to is the coil current requirement
for the solenoids. ·If that is the case then you will need some honker solid
state relays or some electro-mechanical relays with 15 amp rated contacts.

Since the coil voltage appears to be 120 VAC then some type of interface
relay or solid state switching device will be required anyway.

This being said, ·it will be very close if you can in fact fire all six
within a one second time frame. ·If you pulse each at 100ms then that alone
would be 600ms of the 1000ms, add in the approximate 15ms response time for
the coils of the solenoids ( and that is assuming they can respond that fast)
then the 15ms (again assumed) response time for the interface devices it will
be close. ·A total of around 960ms would be required IF the solenoids and
interface devices can actually respond within 15ms on and off. ·The more
powerful the solenoid is, the slower they usually respond.

However, on an upbeat note, ·the Basic Stamp should have no problem firing
the solenoids in whatever order you want by simply turning on and off the
selected outputs from the Basic Stamp with pauses of at least 100ms for on
and then, if needed, a short pause in between. ·For faster operating times
the SX version would be the choice however the BS2 would probably work as
well.

Hope this helps some.



Regards,

Randy Abernathy
Woodworking Machine Specialist
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone/Fax: 770-974-5295
E-mail: cnc002@aol.com[/font]

Archiver

Welcome Neal -- you'll have lots of fun with the Stamp.

> I'm in the process of designing a circuit that will power anywhere
> from 3-6 (quantity) Solenoids rated @120VAC, 12amp (at full stroke)
> continuous. The 120VAC main has only a 15 amp capacity, and I'd like to
> power , if at all possible, a maximum of 6 solenoids on this single
> line.
Of course, you need a relay or some solid state arrangement to switch AC
with the Stamp.


>
> These are the desired parameters for the solenoid's firing sequence:
>
> -Pulse Time: 100ms per solenoid (max pulse solenoid needs for a fully
> charged stroke)
> -Pause Time: RANDOM, between approx. 0.5s – 6.0s

As the previous response mentioned, you may have trouble producing 6 100mS
pulses plus do more processing in the space of a second. The problem is the
Stamp does one thing at a time, so you are consuming 600mS right of the bat
using something like PULSOUT. A few things to think about:

1) You could turn the solenoids on in a loop and estimate the time for
100mS. So something like this (in psuedo code for 3 solenoids):

Loop:
gosub decide
if S1_ON>0 then HIGH 1
if S2_ON>0 then HIGH 2
if S3_ON>0 then HIGH 3
if S1_ON>0 then S1_ON=S1_ON-1
if S2_ON>0 then S2_ON=S2_ON-1
if S3_ON>0 then S3_ON=S3_ON-1
if S1_ON=0 then LOW 1
if S2_ON=0 then LOW 2
if S3_ON=0 then LOW 3
goto Loop


So the decide routine would plug a number into S1_ON, S2_ON, or S3_ON to
turn the solenoid on. The number you plug in would need to be tuned
experimentally to result in 100mS. It probably would not be too exact, but
it could get close enough for what you need. The advantage is that the Stamp
never stops for 100mS. The more paths through the "decide" subroutine there
are the less accurate your 100mS time will be (unless you get really fancy
and adjust the times depending on the path through the routine). In other
words decide could look like this:

decide:
tick=1
' do short thing
if some_condition then
' do long thing
tick=3
end if
return

Then the main code would read:
if S1_ON>0 then S1_ON=S1_ON-tick (and repeat for S2, S3...)

And you'd need to check for S1_ON (and others) going <0 instead of =0.

But that may be overkill for what you need.

Another choice is to use a PAK-VIII
(http://www.al-williams.com/awce/pak8.htm) which would let you set exact
pulse outputs on 8 channels that work without intervention of the Stamp. You
can set a "count" so you can get just 1 pulse (or any number you want) or
you can get a stream of pulses.

So, for example, if you wanted a 100mS on and a random off time, you could
set those, and then they would repeat essentially forever with no more Stamp
code (until you want to change the output). Or, if you just wanted 1 pulse,
you could do that too. Then you'd reprogram the channel to change it.


Some of your questions may be answered at
http://www.al-williams.com/wd5gnr/stampfaq.htm -- driving relays, mac, etc.
is all discussed there.


Good Luck!

Al Williams
AWC
* NEW: Floating point A/D (5 channels/10 bit):
http://www.al-williams.com/awce/pak9.htm

Archiver

Hi,


X10.com had a special and probably still do where they
give you a lamp module, a transceiver/ampliance module,
a palm controller and a 'firecracker' that plugs onto
a db9 com port on the back of your computer.

It would be pretty easy to get the stamp to control then
pins of the firecracker and then your stamp would control
all remotely. the x10 data (communications) packet is a
40 bit packet. If you send this to the firecracker, it
makes the appropriate transmission to the transceiver.

Bandit


<some snippage>

>Penultimately, an issue concerning remote control.
>Before I considered integrating all the solenoids into a single
>microcontrolled circuit, my original plan had each solenoid on
>separate circuits and switched on/off via an x10 remote control
>module. Assuming the STAMP can handle all the Solenoids on a single
>circuit, is there a way also to incorporate remote X10 on/off
>switching of each individual solenoid?

Archiver

LED displays can be multiplexed because the eye is tricked into
believing the segments are all lit at the same time.

Imagine that your load was light bulbs instead of solenoids. You have
a bunch (say 6) light bulbs, you're going to turn them on and off in
sequence, really, really fast. If you measured the light output of
these 6 lamps you would not see more than the output of single lamp.
Only one lamp is turned on at a time. If you needed the light from
all six bulbs, they would all have to be powered at the same time.

To get a certain amount of work out of a solenoid (or any load) you
need to input a certain amount of energy into it.

In the most obvious form, if only 1/6 of the energy is applied to the
solenoid, the solenoid will only do 1/6 the work.

The solenoid requires way more current when you first apply power to
it (inrush current). The solenoid settles down once it's core is
pulled in. It takes way more energy to pull the core into the
solenoid than it does keeping it there. I imagine that if you
constructed what you suggest the solenoids would never turn on, not
enough energy available..


The circuitry required to interface this inductive, high current
load would be fairly component intensive. We're talking big triacs
(or solid state relays)

I'm hardly an expert, but I don't thing you can get a bunch of
solenoids to work by applying the energy required to operate one.
I have never tried what you suggest, my grey matter said it could not
be done. I am stubborn. If anybody has had any success doing this I
would be curious to see what's involved.

Regards
Rich
iceninevt@y...

--- In basicstamps@y..., lovegasoline@y... wrote:
> Greetings,
> I am new to STAMPs, having stumbled upon them in the course of
pursuing
> a circuit design. I should preface this post by declaring that I
am a
> virtual novice with regard to electronics, with no programming
> experience to speak of. However, I do have a project goal I'd
like
> to attain and towards that end I've been experimenting with
circuits
> and components and studying whatever I can about STAMPs,
> microcontrollers, Bolean logic, PBASIC,etc…enough to temp me,
fill my
> head with dreams(and frustration) , and ultimately, lead me to this
> mailing list.
> Essentially, I'm looking for some guidance and the benefit of
> experience and knowledge to evaluate my design needs, and
perhaps
> recommend a point of entry.
>
> I'm in the process of designing a circuit that will power
anywhere
> from 3-6 (quantity) Solenoids rated @120VAC, 12amp (at full
stroke)
> continuous. The 120VAC main has only a 15 amp capacity, and I'd
like to
> power , if at all possible, a maximum of 6 solenoids on this
single
> line.
>
> These are the desired parameters for the solenoid's firing
sequence:
>
> -Pulse Time: 100ms per solenoid (max pulse solenoid needs for a
fully
> charged stroke)
> -Pause Time: RANDOM, between approx. 0.5s – 6.0s
>
> The reason the Stamp interests me [noparse][[/noparse]besides the wonder in making
> acquaintance with its mind boggling possibilities] is I believe
it
> possible to program all 6 solenoids to fire in rapid succession,
so
> that within the space of a second (more or less, allowing for lags
in
> execution, relay function[noparse][[/noparse]?], etc.) all 6 solenoids can fire, but
with
> never more than one solenoid receiving current at any one time.
Unless
> I am mistaken, I believe a microcontroller can accommodate this.
> A likely sequence would involve a randomly (or pseudo randomly)
> generated number "X" between 05s-6.0s that is automatically
selected
> and used as the Pause Time for the approaching cycle….
>
> oSolenoid#1 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the
> contact on outboard relay#1 ), immediately after relay #1 is re-
> opened, then…
> oSolenoid#2 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the
contact
> on an outboard relay #2)
> o Solenoid#3 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the
> contact on an outboard relay #3…
> oand so on through Solenoid#6
>
> which would conclude one `six-solenoid firing cycle'.
> oA new randomly generated number "Y" is then selected and the
system
> pauses "Y" seconds, then repeats the Solenoid firing order of #1-
#6
> (each receive a constant Pulse Time of 100ms.).
>
> oSolenoid#1 is loaded for pulse of 100ms ( current closing the
> contact on outboard relay#1) {ad infinitum}
>
> In this way theoretically at least, the main never needs to supply
more
> than 12amp for a single solenoid, + the additional 5VDC/12VDC to
power
> the STAMP and a series of small inboard intermediary relays.
>
> I am not very experienced planning circuits, but I imagine a STAMP
> connected to a series of 6 intermediary inboard relays which
control
> the contacts of 6 corresponding heavy duty relays which carry
the
> 120VAC to the Solenoids , would work. An option to disconnect any
or
> all solenoids from the sequence by manual switch(s) would also be
> important. I would very much appreciate opinions on the viability
of
> constructing this circuit with a STAMP assuming I can muster the
PBASIC
> (I recognize my lack of programming/electrical design
experience). If
> such a circuit is feasible and the STAMP can handle it, what would
be
> the recommended components? I was considering the STAMP2 with
either a
> carrier board or connected to a breadboard for initial
experimentation/
> tinkering, but I am fuzzy on the options with which to control the
> High-Powered outboard relays. An array of 6 smaller relays? Some
other
> means by programming and components I do not yet know of?
>
> Penultimately, an issue concerning remote control.
> Before I considered integrating all the solenoids into a single
> microcontrolled circuit, my original plan had each solenoid on
> separate circuits and switched on/off via an x10 remote control
> module. Assuming the STAMP can handle all the Solenoids on a single
> circuit, is there a way also to incorporate remote X10 on/off
> switching of each individual solenoid?
>
> Finally, is there a reasonable way to write BASIC code and program
the
> STAMP using a Mac? I have a Powerbook 3400 (non USB) and an older
PPC
> 7100 and would prefer not to have to beg, borrow, buy another PC.
> Thrift is definitely a virtue.
>
> Thanks for ANY and all opinions, recommendations, admonitions,
> insights…., more efficient, cheaper, elegant?
>
> Cheers,
> -Neal

Archiver

Connecting a firecracker to a Stamp was a Stamp Project of the Month a while
back. If there were enough demand, I might be persuaded to repost it.

Regards,

Al Williams
AWC
* Expand your Stamp I/O: http://www.al-williams.com/awce/pak3.htm


>

---

Original Message

---

> From: Sample Bandit [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=VVOT5WnjUk-F-UYBBqixYULLAOosFBmLC-wd4H-kFkEVw57Sc5ztrqzonyTalpZci6KZYEU]tesla@i...[/url
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 10:21 AM
> To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] 1st Post: Newbie Advice on Solenoid
> Sequencing.
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
> X10.com had a special and probably still do where they
> give you a lamp module, a transceiver/ampliance module,
> a palm controller and a 'firecracker' that plugs onto
> a db9 com port on the back of your computer.
>
> It would be pretty easy to get the stamp to control then
> pins of the firecracker and then your stamp would control
> all remotely. the x10 data (communications) packet is a
> 40 bit packet. If you send this to the firecracker, it
> makes the appropriate transmission to the transceiver.
>
> Bandit
>
>
> <some snippage>
>
> >Penultimately, an issue concerning remote control.
> >Before I considered integrating all the solenoids into a single
> >microcontrolled circuit, my original plan had each solenoid on
> >separate circuits and switched on/off via an x10 remote control
> >module. Assuming the STAMP can handle all the Solenoids on a single
> >circuit, is there a way also to incorporate remote X10 on/off
> >switching of each individual solenoid?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>

Archiver

I'd like to see it, I must have missed it

Robert Staph, W3RCS
The Center for Advanced Technologies

---

Original Message

---

From: Al Williams <alw@a...>
To: <basicstamps@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 12:36 PM
Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] 1st Post: Newbie Advice on Solenoid Sequencing.


> Connecting a firecracker to a Stamp was a Stamp Project of the Month a
while
> back. If there were enough demand, I might be persuaded to repost it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Al Williams
> AWC
> * Expand your Stamp I/O: http://www.al-williams.com/awce/pak3.htm
>
>
> >

---

Original Message

---

> > From: Sample Bandit [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=Cv_wjKm_bbFAiRAjOXykWAAmdiz7xGc7w7T3QT04bLd68yax1b82V5QLikfjCTK7Tjz4ZZhupw]tesla@i...[/url
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 10:21 AM
> > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] 1st Post: Newbie Advice on Solenoid
> > Sequencing.
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > X10.com had a special and probably still do where they
> > give you a lamp module, a transceiver/ampliance module,
> > a palm controller and a 'firecracker' that plugs onto
> > a db9 com port on the back of your computer.
> >
> > It would be pretty easy to get the stamp to control then
> > pins of the firecracker and then your stamp would control
> > all remotely. the x10 data (communications) packet is a
> > 40 bit packet. If you send this to the firecracker, it
> > makes the appropriate transmission to the transceiver.
> >
> > Bandit
> >
> >
> > <some snippage>
> >
> > >Penultimately, an issue concerning remote control.
> > >Before I considered integrating all the solenoids into a single
> > >microcontrolled circuit, my original plan had each solenoid on
> > >separate circuits and switched on/off via an x10 remote control
> > >module. Assuming the STAMP can handle all the Solenoids on a single
> > >circuit, is there a way also to incorporate remote X10 on/off
> > >switching of each individual solenoid?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Archiver

Hi ya Randy,

> I am assuming that the 12 amps you refer to is the coil current requirement
> for the solenoids. If that is the case then you will need some honker solid
> state relays or some electro-mechanical relays with 15 amp rated contacts

I've got a test setup with a subminiature highpower relay (with coil
voltage of 110V, contacts rated @ 15A, 115VAC; 10A, 240VAC; 30VDC.
(Relay is RadioShack #900-2377).
An aside: does someone produce a relay that will switch 6 different
loads, cheaper than 6 seperate relays?


> Since the coil voltage appears to be 120 VAC then some type of interface
> relay or solid state switching device will be required anyway.

Currently, my little test circuit has an adjustable timer kit made by
Velleman (#MK111)a 12VDC affair with to pots and a SPDT onboard relay.
The pots adjust pulse and pause times.

> This being said, it will be very close if you can in fact fire all six
> within a one second time frame.

I'd liketo be able o fire them as rapidly as possible, so that
occasionally the random pause times will be short and produce a back-
to-back stuccatto firing. I'm not beholden to a 1s time frame, but I'd
like to keep it as low as possible.

If you pulse each at 100ms then that alone
> would be 600ms of the 1000ms, add in the approximate 15ms response time for
> the coils of the solenoids ( and that is assuming they can respond that fast)
> then the 15ms (again assumed) response time for the interface devices it will
> be close. A total of around 960ms would be required IF the solenoids and
> interface devices can actually respond within 15ms on and off. The more
> powerful the solenoid is, the slower they usually respond.


Thanks for breaking the times down.

> However, on an upbeat note, the Basic Stamp should have no problem firing
> the solenoids in whatever order you want by simply turning on and off the
> selected outputs from the Basic Stamp with pauses of at least 100ms for on
> and then, if needed, a short pause in between.


I'm curious, would a pause be needed to be written into code, or would
back-to-back close-output/open-output commands suffice? Again, I'm a
baby with regard to programming.

For faster operating times
> the SX version would be the choice however the BS2 would probably work as
> well.

Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

[font=arial,helvetica]In a message dated 4/24/01 3:38:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
lovegasoline@yahoo.com writes:

Hi ya Randy,

> I am assuming that the 12 amps you refer to is the coil current
requirement
> for the solenoids. ·If that is the case then you will need some honker
solid
> state relays or some electro-mechanical relays with 15 amp rated contacts

I've got a test setup with a subminiature highpower relay (with coil
voltage of 110V, contacts rated @ 15A, 115VAC; 10A, 240VAC; 30VDC.
(Relay is RadioShack #900-2377).
An aside: does someone produce a relay that will switch 6 different
loads, cheaper than 6 seperate relays?


> Since the coil voltage appears to be 120 VAC then some type of interface
> relay or solid state switching device will be required anyway.

Currently, my little test circuit has an adjustable timer kit made by
Velleman (#MK111)a 12VDC affair with to pots and a SPDT onboard relay.
The pots adjust pulse and pause times.

> This being said, ·it will be very close if you can in fact fire all six
> within a one second time frame.

I'd liketo be able o fire them as rapidly as possible, so that
occasionally the random pause times will be short and produce a back-
to-back stuccatto firing. I'm not beholden to a 1s time frame, but I'd
like to keep it as low as possible.

If you pulse each at 100ms then that alone
> would be 600ms of the 1000ms, add in the approximate 15ms response time
for
> the coils of the solenoids ( and that is assuming they can respond that
fast)
> then the 15ms (again assumed) response time for the interface devices it
will
> be close. ·A total of around 960ms would be required IF the solenoids and
> interface devices can actually respond within 15ms on and off. ·The more
> powerful the solenoid is, the slower they usually respond.


Thanks for breaking the times down.

> However, on an upbeat note, ·the Basic Stamp should have no problem
firing
> the solenoids in whatever order you want by simply turning on and off the
> selected outputs from the Basic Stamp with pauses of at least 100ms for
on
> and then, if needed, a short pause in between.


I'm curious, would a pause be needed to be written into code, or would
back-to-back close-output/open-output commands suffice? Again, I'm a
baby with regard to programming.

For faster operating times
> the SX version would be the choice however the BS2 would probably work as
> well.

Cheers,
-Neal

Neal:

The only reason I was thinking you might want a pause in between is due to
the limited amount of current you have available, that would just insure that
you didn't have 2 of them firing at the same time and therefore overloading
your source.

Otherwise, no you could fire them all at the same time as far as the Stamp is
concerned

Regards,

Randy Abernathy
Woodworking Machinery Specialist
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101
Ph/Fax: 770-974-5295
E-mail: cnc002@aol.com[/font]

Archiver

--- In basicstamps@y..., Sample Bandit <tesla@i...> wrote:

Hi ya Bandit,
'
> X10.com had a special and probably still do where they
> give you a lamp module, a transceiver/ampliance module,
> a palm controller and a 'firecracker' that plugs onto
> a db9 com port on the back of your computer.

I have a 3 peice set with remote controller, a lamp module, a
transceiver/ampliance module, (and free little credit card remote)which
I bought from X10 not long ago.
I do not think the firecracker will work on a Mac, although I may be
wrong. Anyone know?
I suppose an option is a cheap PC to run X10 and write code, but I want
to keep costs within a sensible budget at this stage. Although I have
been considering.

> It would be pretty easy to get the stamp to control then
> pins of the firecracker and then your stamp would control
> all remotely.

If I follow, the firecracker interface will allow computer to send X10
commands (and also initiate/manange other if/then, etc. x10
functions). Will this also permit a hand remote to turn on/off each of
the 6 solenoids once the BASIC Stamp is up,running, and firing the
solenoids?


the x10 data (communications) packet is a
> 40 bit packet. If you send this to the firecracker, it
> makes the appropriate transmission to the transceiver.

I'm new to bit packets [noparse]:)[/noparse]

Thanks a bunch.

Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

--- In basicstamps@y..., iceninevt@y... wrote:

H ya Rich,

> To get a certain amount of work out of a solenoid (or any load) you
> need to input a certain amount of energy into it.
>
> In the most obvious form, if only 1/6 of the energy is applied to the
> solenoid, the solenoid will only do 1/6 the work.
>
> The solenoid requires way more current when you first apply power to
> it (inrush current). The solenoid settles down once it's core is
> pulled in. It takes way more energy to pull the core into the
> solenoid than it does keeping it there. I imagine that if you
> constructed what you suggest the solenoids would never turn on, not
> enough energy available..

The circuit I had in mind would COMPLETELY load each solenoid before
curren to that solenoid would be disconnected. I spoke with a Dormeyer
Engineer and he said that the solenoid bottoms out and completes its
stroke with within 100ms. Any longer just will heat up the solenoid.
By the way, I am using pull type solenoids which I will modify to a
push type: drill out, insert stainless rod. I do not need any holding
power on the solenoid, just the impact force.
But the pulse would ALWAYS be a constant 100ms, only the pause time
varies, as it is random.
Perhaps you are refering to Al's 'pulse' post (which I am still
digesting...thanks Al, I'm turning it over to understand it [noparse]:)[/noparse]


> The circuitry required to interface this inductive, high current
> load would be fairly component intensive.

Yes.

We're talking big triacs
> (or solid state relays)

On board intermediary relays powering higher capacity outboard relays?
I am still unclear about solution options to the interface.

> I'm hardly an expert, but I don't thing you can get a bunch of
> solenoids to work by applying the energy required to operate one.


I'm not trying to fire 6 solenoids simultaineously: I am trying to fire
them in succesion. If each solenoid draws 12a for 100ms, I would like
to have one solenoid fire IMMEDIATELY AFTER the previous one, until all
6 fire.

> I have never tried what you suggest, my grey matter said it could not
> be done. I am stubborn.

Thanks for your stubborness as it is helping me think it through as
well.

Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

--- In basicstamps@y..., cnc002@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/24/01 3:38:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

Hi ya Randy,

> The only reason I was thinking you might want a pause in between is due to
> the limited amount of current you have available, that would just insure that
> you didn't have 2 of them firing at the same time and therefore overloading
> your source.

Yes, initially I was thinking along the lines of a small pause time.
But as I started looking at BASIC codes in tutorials, it seems that
they back-to-backed the opening/closing of pins. So, I assumed (I may
be wrong) that the same would hold true for higher power circuits. I
really have no experience with which to evaluate one way vs. the other.
I don't know if the digital Stamp makes decisive and absolute opening/
closing of circuits and if all of this can transpire within
milliseconds and open/close inductive loads reliably enough to program
it without a pause time.


Thanks.

Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

At 08:16 PM 4/24/01 +0000, you wrote:
>--- In basicstamps@y..., iceninevt@y... wrote:
>
>H ya Rich,
>
> > To get a certain amount of work out of a solenoid (or any load) you
> > need to input a certain amount of energy into it.
> >
> > In the most obvious form, if only 1/6 of the energy is applied to the
> > solenoid, the solenoid will only do 1/6 the work.
> >
> > The solenoid requires way more current when you first apply power to
> > it (inrush current). The solenoid settles down once it's core is
> > pulled in. It takes way more energy to pull the core into the
> > solenoid than it does keeping it there. I imagine that if you
> > constructed what you suggest the solenoids would never turn on, not
> > enough energy available..
>
>The circuit I had in mind would COMPLETELY load each solenoid before
>curren to that solenoid would be disconnected. I spoke with a Dormeyer
>Engineer and he said that the solenoid bottoms out and completes its
>stroke with within 100ms. Any longer just will heat up the solenoid.
>By the way, I am using pull type solenoids which I will modify to a
>push type: drill out, insert stainless rod. I do not need any holding
>power on the solenoid, just the impact force.
>But the pulse would ALWAYS be a constant 100ms, only the pause time
>varies, as it is random.
>Perhaps you are refering to Al's 'pulse' post (which I am still
>digesting...thanks Al, I'm turning it over to understand it [noparse]:)[/noparse]
>
>
> > The circuitry required to interface this inductive, high current
> > load would be fairly component intensive.
>
>Yes.
>
>We're talking big triacs
> > (or solid state relays)
>
>On board intermediary relays powering higher capacity outboard relays?
>I am still unclear about solution options to the interface.
>
> > I'm hardly an expert, but I don't thing you can get a bunch of
> > solenoids to work by applying the energy required to operate one.
>
>
>I'm not trying to fire 6 solenoids simultaineously: I am trying to fire
>them in succesion. If each solenoid draws 12a for 100ms, I would like
>to have one solenoid fire IMMEDIATELY AFTER the previous one, until all
>6 fire.
>
> > I have never tried what you suggest, my grey matter said it could not
> > be done. I am stubborn.
>
>Thanks for your stubborness as it is helping me think it through as
>well.
>
>Cheers,
>-Neal
Just curious Neal... This isn't a rail/coil gun by chance is it? (grin)


Anyway you might consider discharging/"dumping" a capacitor into the
solenoid coil for optimal current vs. time constraints.

Archiver

Hi Neal

Thank you for the clarifications. seems like you have a plan. I
imagine your BS2 would do a good job keeping track of things.

If it was me, I would use some big solid state relays. They are
pricey, but they could interface directly with the stamp, and are
easy to replace.

Let me know how you make out with this project, it is very
interesting. I did not know a solenoid could be held by being
intermittantly pulsed (after being completely energised, as you said)


Regards

Rich

--- In basicstamps@y..., lovegasoline@y... wrote:
> --- In basicstamps@y..., iceninevt@y... wrote:
>
> H ya Rich,
>
> > To get a certain amount of work out of a solenoid (or any load)
you
> > need to input a certain amount of energy into it.
> >
> > In the most obvious form, if only 1/6 of the energy is applied to
the
> > solenoid, the solenoid will only do 1/6 the work.
> >
> > The solenoid requires way more current when you first apply power
to
> > it (inrush current). The solenoid settles down once it's core is
> > pulled in. It takes way more energy to pull the core into the
> > solenoid than it does keeping it there. I imagine that if you
> > constructed what you suggest the solenoids would never turn on,
not
> > enough energy available..
>
> The circuit I had in mind would COMPLETELY load each solenoid
before
> curren to that solenoid would be disconnected. I spoke with a
Dormeyer
> Engineer and he said that the solenoid bottoms out and completes
its
> stroke with within 100ms. Any longer just will heat up the
solenoid.
> By the way, I am using pull type solenoids which I will modify to a
> push type: drill out, insert stainless rod. I do not need any
holding
> power on the solenoid, just the impact force.
> But the pulse would ALWAYS be a constant 100ms, only the pause
time
> varies, as it is random.
> Perhaps you are refering to Al's 'pulse' post (which I am still
> digesting...thanks Al, I'm turning it over to understand it [noparse]:)[/noparse]
>
>
> > The circuitry required to interface this inductive, high current
> > load would be fairly component intensive.
>
> Yes.
>
> We're talking big triacs
> > (or solid state relays)
>
> On board intermediary relays powering higher capacity outboard
relays?
> I am still unclear about solution options to the interface.
>
> > I'm hardly an expert, but I don't thing you can get a bunch of
> > solenoids to work by applying the energy required to operate one.
>
>
> I'm not trying to fire 6 solenoids simultaineously: I am trying to
fire
> them in succesion. If each solenoid draws 12a for 100ms, I would
like
> to have one solenoid fire IMMEDIATELY AFTER the previous one, until
all
> 6 fire.
>
> > I have never tried what you suggest, my grey matter said it could
not
> > be done. I am stubborn.
>
> Thanks for your stubborness as it is helping me think it through as
> well.
>
> Cheers,
> -Neal

Archiver

[font=arial,helvetica]Neal:

The stamp can respond far quicker than any electromechanical device such as a
solenoid and each input or output pin can be addressed separately. ·The
outputs on any digital device simply use logic levels less than about 2 volts
is usually low or off and greater than 4 volts is usually high or on. ·Of
course in some cases the low signal is less than .5 volts and the high is
over 4.5 volts, so it does vary somewhat from application to application.

In the case of the Stamp I believe that the outputs pretty well go to 0 volts
or very near to it when off and to +5V or very near to it when on. ·You would
normally drive the base of a transistor with the output and use the
transistor to drive a solid state relay or electromechanical rely to fire
your solenoids.

Regards,

Randy Abernathy
Woodworking Machine Specialist
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone/Fax: 770-974-5295
E-mail: cnc002@aol.com[/font]

Archiver

--- In basicstamps@y..., cnc002@a... wrote:

Hi ya Randy,

> The stamp can respond far quicker than any electromechanical device such as a
> solenoid and each input or output pin can be addressed separately. The
> outputs on any digital device simply use logic levels less than about 2 volts
> is usually low or off and greater than 4 volts is usually high or on. Of
> course in some cases the low signal is less than .5 volts and the high is
> over 4.5 volts, so it does vary somewhat from application to application.
>
> In the case of the Stamp I believe that the outputs pretty well go to 0 volts
> or very near to it when off and to +5V or very near to it when on. You would
> normally drive the base of a transistor with the output and use the
> transistor to drive a solid state relay or electromechanical rely to fire
> your solenoids.

This is the next area I need to tackle.
Again, I'm a newbie so I have little to no knowledge of alternative
stamp-relay interfaces. I've only done those "Mr. Blinky" (Mrs. Blinkey
for the ERA folks) type excersises with a 555IC and transistor.
So if I follow you correctly Randy, the current from the Stamp pin-out
goes to the base of a transistor, which acts as a switching device for
the relay. Does this eliminate the need for a low current DC
intermediate relay (initially I envisioned a small intermediate relay
powered by a seperate 5VDC-12VDC circuit, with the Stamp output closing
this relay's contacts)? Will a transistor whose base is fed from the +
4V of the Stamp's output generate enough umph to fully charge a high
powered relay coil?

Al's FAQ states,
"Another excellent way to switch a high-current load is using a power
MOSFET. RadioShack sells the IFR-510 which is ideal for use with the
Stamp and quite inexpensive (less than $2)."

I have to do my homework here and study these components and their
respective circuits. Feel free to prod and poke me towards the most
succesful solutions. Forgive what may appear like obvious thickheaded
denseness...it is thickheaded denseness! I'm trying to learn the
digital/microcontroller + software/programming fields while also
learning simple meats and potatoes (-os? Quail?) electronics.
Have patience as I'll need to bug you all quite a bit yet.
My mind is being blown hourly.

Thanks again!
Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

--- In basicstamps@y..., "Beau Schwabe" <bschwabe@a...> wrote:

Hi ya Beau,

> Just curious Neal... This isn't a rail/coil gun by chance is it? (grin)

Yes!

No [noparse]:)[/noparse] I don't even know what that might be?

> Anyway you might consider discharging/"dumping" a capacitor into the
> solenoid coil for optimal current vs. time constraints.

You know, I (newbie) am still vague on the functioning of caps in such
an application, but before I came across the BASIC Stamp, I was
thinking along analogue lines, all 6 solenoids on ONE serial circuit
(clearing of throat), with some vague idea of big caps incorporated
somehow to hold the charge and delay the loading of each solenoid in
some hysterically progressive cap-value scale...enough to stagger the
loading of the solenoids. Again...too hysterical.

Beau, would you mind elaborating a bit on your idea? I don't yet have
the technical knowledge to fully appreciate the benefit of the cap.

Thanks.

Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

I suspected he is building a "whack-a-mole" !! ;-)

---

Original Message

---

From: lovegasoline@y... [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=UZ983VTI13CmAxgoxF7TKK1v99_PkMfZXc9riNEKBvtmnd5jrZyfy5rAEhjguf9H_eO2E_TZoL-rpU3zbQ]lovegasoline@y...[/url
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 6:47 PM
To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Re: 1st Post: Newbie Advice on Solenoid
Sequencing.


--- In basicstamps@y..., "Beau Schwabe" <bschwabe@a...> wrote:

Hi ya Beau,

> Just curious Neal... This isn't a rail/coil gun by chance is it? (grin)

Yes!

No [noparse]:)[/noparse] I don't even know what that might be?

Archiver

--- In basicstamps@y..., "Michael Clark" <mdc@i...> wrote:



> I suspected he is building a "whack-a-mole" !! ;-)

Hi ya Michael,

Elaborate please.

Cheers,
-Neal

Archiver

You can also use a TIP120 transisitor to control a small motor. I've got a
BS1 running a small RC car using a couple of relays for steering and forward
/ reverse, and TIP120's to turn the steering and motor on and off. All
crammed on a BS1 version D board.

A robot is a good place to start learning about Stamps. For some interesting
stuff, snag a copy of Robot Builders Bonanza. They have lots of neat stamp
stuff in there. If you want free stuff, download all of the educational
material from the Parallax web site.

---

Original Message

---

> Again, I'm a newbie so I have little to no knowledge of alternative
> stamp-relay interfaces. I've only done those "Mr. Blinky" (Mrs. Blinkey
> for the ERA folks) type excersises with a 555IC and transistor.
> So if I follow you correctly Randy, the current from the Stamp pin-out
> goes to the base of a transistor, which acts as a switching device for
> the relay. Does this eliminate the need for a low current DC
> intermediate relay (initially I envisioned a small intermediate relay
> powered by a seperate 5VDC-12VDC circuit, with the Stamp output closing
> this relay's contacts)? Will a transistor whose base is fed from the +
> 4V of the Stamp's output generate enough umph to fully charge a high
> powered relay coil?
>
> Al's FAQ states,
> "Another excellent way to switch a high-current load is using a power
> MOSFET. RadioShack sells the IFR-510 which is ideal for use with the
> Stamp and quite inexpensive (less than $2)."
>
> I have to do my homework here and study these components and their
> respective circuits. Feel free to prod and poke me towards the most
> succesful solutions. Forgive what may appear like obvious thickheaded
> denseness...it is thickheaded denseness! I'm trying to learn the
> digital/microcontroller + software/programming fields while also
> learning simple meats and potatoes (-os? Quail?) electronics.
> Have patience as I'll need to bug you all quite a bit yet.
> My mind is being blown hourly.

Archiver

At 08:00 PM 4/24/01 -0000, you wrote:
>--- In basicstamps@y..., Sample Bandit <tesla@i...> wrote:
>
>Hi ya Bandit,
>'
>> X10.com had a special and probably still do where they
>> give you a lamp module, a transceiver/ampliance module,
>> a palm controller and a 'firecracker' that plugs onto
>> a db9 com port on the back of your computer.
>
>I have a 3 peice set with remote controller, a lamp module, a
>transceiver/ampliance module, (and free little credit card remote)which
>I bought from X10 not long ago.
>I do not think the firecracker will work on a Mac, although I may be
>wrong. Anyone know?
>I suppose an option is a cheap PC to run X10 and write code, but I want
>to keep costs within a sensible budget at this stage. Although I have
>been considering.

I was not speaking of using the 'firecracker' on a mac though I am
sure there is software out there to run it as it plugs into a
standard (I hate using that word with serial) serial port.
I thought you wanted to use the stamp to control the firecracker.
x10.com used to give you kit (URL below) for only shipping costs
I guess they dont anymore. As a sample bandit I was right there
at the right time [noparse]:)[/noparse]

http://www.x10.com/firecracker/fc_offer_br1ab.htm

My good friend ripped a firecracker apart and stuck the guts in a
palmpilot. He named the project 'sparkler'. Here is the URL plus
some links to learn more about the firecracker. It really is not
that hard to understand.

http://rallypilot.sourceforge.net/

>If I follow, the firecracker interface will allow computer to send X10
>commands (and also initiate/manange other if/then, etc. x10
>functions). Will this also permit a hand remote to turn on/off each of
>the 6 solenoids once the BASIC Stamp is up,running, and firing the
>solenoids?

No. Your hand remote transmits a signal to the transceiver (the x10 module
with the antenna). The transceiver decodes this 'packet' sent to it via
the palm controller and then sends a signal to the appropriate x10
module via your house wiring. The firecracker is a small device that
itself can transmit a signal to the transceiver. You just have to know
how to control the pins of the db9 on it. The URL above has links to
learn more about the friecracker. I have taken a firecracker apart.
There is a small PIC that does the processing for you. It is really
ingeniously simple. If you have a stamp controlling the firecracker
then you have complete automation, there is no need to use your
palm controller (wouldn't using the palm controller defeat the whole
purpose anyway?)

>the x10 data (communications) packet is a
>> 40 bit packet. If you send this to the firecracker, it
>> makes the appropriate transmission to the transceiver.
>
>I'm new to bit packets [noparse]:)[/noparse]

Follow the above URL and you will find a link that tells you all
about the x10 protocol and the 40 bit packets. It is not that
difficult to understand.


Hope this helps
Here to answer more questions if you have any [noparse]:)[/noparse]

Sample Bandit

Archiver

Sorry if second posting....first didnt seem to go.


At 08:00 PM 4/24/01 -0000, you wrote:
>--- In basicstamps@y..., Sample Bandit <tesla@i...> wrote:
>
>Hi ya Bandit,
>'
>> X10.com had a special and probably still do where they
>> give you a lamp module, a transceiver/ampliance module,
>> a palm controller and a 'firecracker' that plugs onto
>> a db9 com port on the back of your computer.
>
>I have a 3 peice set with remote controller, a lamp module, a
>transceiver/ampliance module, (and free little credit card remote)which
>I bought from X10 not long ago.
>I do not think the firecracker will work on a Mac, although I may be
>wrong. Anyone know?
>I suppose an option is a cheap PC to run X10 and write code, but I want
>to keep costs within a sensible budget at this stage. Although I have
>been considering.

I was not speaking of using the 'firecracker' on a mac though I am
sure there is software out there to run it as it plugs into a
standard (I hate using that word with serial) serial port.
I thought you wanted to use the stamp to control the firecracker.
x10.com used to give you kit (URL below) for only shipping costs
I guess they dont anymore. As a sample bandit I was right there
at the right time [noparse]:)[/noparse]

http://www.x10.com/firecracker/fc_offer_br1ab.htm

My good friend ripped a firecracker apart and stuck the guts in a
palmpilot. He named the project 'sparkler'. Here is the URL plus
some links to learn more about the firecracker. It really is not
that hard to understand.

http://rallypilot.sourceforge.net/

>If I follow, the firecracker interface will allow computer to send X10
>commands (and also initiate/manange other if/then, etc. x10
>functions). Will this also permit a hand remote to turn on/off each of
>the 6 solenoids once the BASIC Stamp is up,running, and firing the
>solenoids?

No. Your hand remote transmits a signal to the transceiver (the x10 module
with the antenna). The transceiver decodes this 'packet' sent to it via
the palm controller and then sends a signal to the appropriate x10
module via your house wiring. The firecracker is a small device that
itself can transmit a signal to the transceiver. You just have to know
how to control the pins of the db9 on it. The URL above has links to
learn more about the friecracker. I have taken a firecracker apart.
There is a small PIC that does the processing for you. It is really
ingeniously simple. If you have a stamp controlling the firecracker
then you have complete automation, there is no need to use your
palm controller (wouldn't using the palm controller defeat the whole
purpose anyway?)

>the x10 data (communications) packet is a
>> 40 bit packet. If you send this to the firecracker, it
>> makes the appropriate transmission to the transceiver.
>
>I'm new to bit packets [noparse]:)[/noparse]

Follow the above URL and you will find a link that tells you all
about the x10 protocol and the 40 bit packets. It is not that
difficult to understand.


Hope this helps
Here to answer more questions if you have any [noparse]:)[/noparse]

Sample Bandit

Archiver

At 10:47 PM 4/24/01 +0000, you wrote:
>--- In basicstamps@y..., "Beau Schwabe" <bschwabe@a...> wrote:
>
>Hi ya Beau,
>
> > Just curious Neal... This isn't a rail/coil gun by chance is it? (grin)
>
>Yes!
>
>No [noparse]:)[/noparse] I don't even know what that might be?

Since this doesn't seem to be the case you don't need to worry about
acceleration issues between coil firing. i.e. the "object" is not
propelled by successive coil firing, thus increasing speed with each
coil pass.

> > Anyway you might consider discharging/"dumping" a capacitor into the
> > solenoid coil for optimal current vs. time constraints.
>
>You know, I (newbie) am still vague on the functioning of caps in such
>an application, but before I came across the BASIC Stamp, I was
>thinking along analogue lines, all 6 solenoids on ONE serial circuit
>(clearing of throat), with some vague idea of big caps incorporated
>somehow to hold the charge and delay the loading of each solenoid in
>some hysterically progressive cap-value scale...enough to stagger the
>loading of the solenoids. Again...too hysterical.
>
>Beau, would you mind elaborating a bit on your idea? I don't yet have
>the technical knowledge to fully appreciate the benefit of the cap.

In this application, capacitors could be used to dump a large amount of
power in a very short amount of time. The basic circuit would be...

R1 Coil
+V120VDC >--/\/\--o

---

o---)))))--o
| | |
| C1 | D1 |
o--||--o o----|<----o
+ | |
| SCR1 |
GND>

---

o---K--|<--A---o
/G
R2 D2 |
Trigger>

---

/\/\---->|--o


Where:
- R1 trickle charges C1
- R2 controls the amount of current to an
SCR (Silicon Controlled Rectifier)
- D1 protects SCR1 from back EMF
- D2 trigger circuit protection


Assuming that C1 has charged, A Trigger pulse latches
the SCR1 until C1 has completely discharged into the Coil.


R1 should be at least 100x the Coil resistance and rated
appropriately.

Example: If the coil is 50 Ohms R1 should be at least 5K
rated for 2.88 Watts.

I = V / R
I = 120 / 5000
I = 24mA

P = I * V
P = 24mA * 120
P = 2.88 Watts

SCR1 should be rated properly as well....

Iscr = (Vcap - Vscr) / Rcoil
Iscr = 120 - 1.2 / 50
Iscr = 2.4 Amps

...As a good rule of thumb, double or
tripple this value...

Iscr = 4.8 to 7.2 Amps

D1 should have the same rating as SCR1

C1 should be rated for at LEAST twice the voltage...
A 250V or 330V "Z-photo-flash" capacitor might do
nicely. The uF rating will depend on the
desired "firing" rate you want.



















>Thanks.
>
>Cheers,
>-Neal
>
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Archiver

On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:47:17 -0000 lovegasoline@y... writes:
> --- In basicstamps@y..., "Beau Schwabe" <bschwabe@a...> wrote:
>
> Hi ya Beau,
>
> > Just curious Neal... This isn't a rail/coil gun by chance is it?
> (grin)
>
> Yes!
>
> No [noparse]:)[/noparse] I don't even know what that might be?


Sounds cool. What is it?