There is a Microchip product that can interface to a BasicStamp via SPI and since it has two channels, it offers a lot of opportunity to create your own set up. It is the MCP2515 with MCP2555. [noparse][[/noparse]the two work together].
When you say automotive, do you really mean that you want to use it for such?
After getting the hardware operational, a lot of automotive software configuration is proprietary and requires trying to reverse engineer. Seems that they have kept changing formats just to keep people frustrated.
Personally, while I really like the CAN bus for what it brings to microcontroller communication for robotics, I find the automotive applications can tangle you up in a lot of hidden technicalities.
In sum, for learning try to keep it simple in the beginning. A must easier alternative is just plain old RS-485 drivers and a BasicStamp.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"When all think alike, no one is thinking very much.' - Walter Lippmann (1889-1974)
······································································ Warm regards,····· G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse]·黃鶴 ]·in Taiwan
Yes.· We need to interface to Automotive computers at work (We do it now with more expensive equipment).· If I could handle a few smaller tasks with use of the BS2 things would be good.· Is the BS2 even fast enough to handle HS CAN?
I will look into the MCP2555.· Any info you could supply me with from your own experience with this chip would be greatly appreciated.
The MCP 2515 is the main chip -- the PDF is 115pages or more long. It has its own clock and buffer to handle all the CANbus speed issues.· The BasicStamp just serves as a conduit to bring your data to a PC or to modify it as you see fit.
I like the setup because the division of task between the two is very obvious.· Other manufactures include CANbus within a processor and bugs from one might migrate over to the other with more confusion.
Do you handle big trucks, like 18-wheelers?
That code is far more generic. I suspect it has to do with transparency with government regulations. Passenger cars and small trucks are crazy, but you might get some information on a model by model basis.· You may have to pick out what every bit on an 8 byte message means as each on can control something different.
This isn't a BasicStamp issue. As you can see CANbus is just part of a bigger industry shift to microcontrollers and they want to hang on to as much as they can by 'in-house' software details.· They happily sell you new equipment and up-dates as often as they can.· Such is software.
I get a CANbus developers email on-line, but that too is muddled down in everyone trying to figure out how to plug into various proprietary codings.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"When all think alike, no one is thinking very much.' - Walter Lippmann (1889-1974)
······································································ Warm regards,····· G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse]·黃鶴 ]·in Taiwan
JimAvanti
Posts: 15
Comments
When you say automotive, do you really mean that you want to use it for such?
After getting the hardware operational, a lot of automotive software configuration is proprietary and requires trying to reverse engineer. Seems that they have kept changing formats just to keep people frustrated.
Personally, while I really like the CAN bus for what it brings to microcontroller communication for robotics, I find the automotive applications can tangle you up in a lot of hidden technicalities.
In sum, for learning try to keep it simple in the beginning. A must easier alternative is just plain old RS-485 drivers and a BasicStamp.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"When all think alike, no one is thinking very much.' - Walter Lippmann (1889-1974)
······································································ Warm regards,····· G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse]·黃鶴 ]·in Taiwan
I will look into the MCP2555.· Any info you could supply me with from your own experience with this chip would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Jim
I like the setup because the division of task between the two is very obvious.· Other manufactures include CANbus within a processor and bugs from one might migrate over to the other with more confusion.
Do you handle big trucks, like 18-wheelers?
That code is far more generic. I suspect it has to do with transparency with government regulations. Passenger cars and small trucks are crazy, but you might get some information on a model by model basis.· You may have to pick out what every bit on an 8 byte message means as each on can control something different.
This isn't a BasicStamp issue. As you can see CANbus is just part of a bigger industry shift to microcontrollers and they want to hang on to as much as they can by 'in-house' software details.· They happily sell you new equipment and up-dates as often as they can.· Such is software.
I get a CANbus developers email on-line, but that too is muddled down in everyone trying to figure out how to plug into various proprietary codings.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"When all think alike, no one is thinking very much.' - Walter Lippmann (1889-1974)
······································································ Warm regards,····· G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse]·黃鶴 ]·in Taiwan
Post Edited (Kramer) : 3/22/2006 6:55:05 AM GMT