The previous project, my Calcnet2 hub, is now wrapping up. (Part discussion, ordering, assembling) So I've decided to start a new one: wireless calculator linking. Sparked from a random thought about it, I think it's definitely possible (and more probable than OTCalc)... Wink

RF radio modules, with another chip for packet recv/send/calc communication is the likely method. I/O port and USB will be used for communication.

Note that is is NOT Wifi. Wifi is insane, and even BrandonW (the super geek god) didn't exactly think it's possible either after playing around with it. (Anyone can prove me wrong one day though! Smile ) This is just linking, but wireless. Wink

So any ideas, opinions, or thoughts on it? Wink
alberthrocks wrote:
The previous project, my Calcnet2 hub, is now wrapping up. (Part discussion, ordering, assembling) So I've decided to start a new one: wireless calculator linking. Sparked from a random thought about it, I think it's definitely possible (and more probable than OTCalc)... Wink

RF radio modules, with another chip for packet recv/send/calc communication is the likely method. I/O port and USB will be used for communication.

Note that is is NOT Wifi. Wifi is insane, and even BrandonW (the super geek god) didn't exactly think it's possible either after playing around with it. (Anyone can prove me wrong one day though! Smile ) This is just linking, but wireless. Wink

So any ideas, opinions, or thoughts on it? Wink
I think perhaps until this idea gets more full-fledged I should merge this into the other wireless internet topic?
KermMartian wrote:
alberthrocks wrote:
The previous project, my Calcnet2 hub, is now wrapping up. (Part discussion, ordering, assembling) So I've decided to start a new one: wireless calculator linking. Sparked from a random thought about it, I think it's definitely possible (and more probable than OTCalc)... Wink

RF radio modules, with another chip for packet recv/send/calc communication is the likely method. I/O port and USB will be used for communication.

Note that is is NOT Wifi. Wifi is insane, and even BrandonW (the super geek god) didn't exactly think it's possible either after playing around with it. (Anyone can prove me wrong one day though! Smile ) This is just linking, but wireless. Wink

So any ideas, opinions, or thoughts on it? Wink
I think perhaps until this idea gets more full-fledged I should merge this into the other wireless internet topic?


Depends. I was more or less expecting a more technical discussion here. Assuming the "other" topic is the one started by rcplanegy, it was more of a general discussion topic basically convincing him that there's no such thing... yet. This topic is aimed at the technical and design aspects to make it come true. Wink (And as in wireless linking, NOT wifi.)

It's up to you though. Thoughts on merging?
I guess leaving it separate for now makes sense. I'll have to try out those wireless transceivers that I got at some point, although they have a weakness of only transmitting one of the two link lines (which of course will unfortunately be true of any such RF modules), so you can't use either the TI-OS linking protocols or CALCnet2 out-of-the-box with them.
Do you mean like the IR link thing? I agree that Wifi takes too much power and processor to run on a calc, plus its too big of a program to have anything on it. I'm amazed Kerm's CalcNet worked so well because of the SLOWNESS of the link port! It is SUPER slow, but Kerm can do anything!
KermMartian wrote:
I guess leaving it separate for now makes sense. I'll have to try out those wireless transceivers that I got at some point, although they have a weakness of only transmitting one of the two link lines (which of course will unfortunately be true of any such RF modules), so you can't use either the TI-OS linking protocols or CALCnet2 out-of-the-box with them.


Not sure about that though. What if you used another chip (as I said before), and combine the 2 lines together? Not physically, but with the chip, perhaps "encode" them together? And of course, the box will have both a sender and a receiver RF module.

adept wrote:
Do you mean like the IR link thing? I agree that Wifi takes too much power and processor to run on a calc, plus its too big of a program to have anything on it. I'm amazed Kerm's CalcNet worked so well because of the SLOWNESS of the link port! It is SUPER slow, but Kerm can do anything!


No, not IR Smile Actual RF wireless. Now that's fun. Wink
RF is too demanding for poor calculators. If you have it, you can never run anything else in the background. Just a file send recieve, not like CalcNet, realtime linking in assembly!
adept wrote:
RF is too demanding for poor calculators. If you have it, you can never run anything else in the background. Just a file send recieve, not like CalcNet, realtime linking in assembly!


Ahh, and you'd be wrong here. Wink The entire wireless attachment is separate from anything else on the calc. No software needed at all, nor power (from the calc - you still need some batteries).

Basically, it's as simple as putting in batteries, connecting the cable to the calc and the wireless box, and you're done! Wink
That would work, but would be more bulky than you want it.
adept wrote:
That would work, but would be more bulky than you want it.


Meh, the device is really small anyway. Think of it as the new iPod nano, but not as thin (probably 1-2 cm?), and a little bigger, and a LOT more awesomer! Wink
Yeah, except the antenna for 434MHz needs to be decently large. There's no way to "encode" the two lines together other than some kind of odd TDM (time-division multiplexing, for those of you with fewer EE degrees than me Wink) that would have to perform self-synchronization.
KermMartian wrote:
Yeah, except the antenna for 434MHz needs to be decently large. There's no way to "encode" the two lines together other than some kind of odd TDM (time-division multiplexing, for those of you with fewer EE degrees than me Wink) that would have to perform self-synchronization.
Gloating about your number of degrees a little there Kerm. Razz

On a related note IR linking has been done and personally IMO IR blasters are the way to go.
KermMartian wrote:
Yeah, except the antenna for 434MHz needs to be decently large. There's no way to "encode" the two lines together other than some kind of odd TDM (time-division multiplexing, for those of you with fewer EE degrees than me Wink) that would have to perform self-synchronization.


I don't know much anyway Razz I just thought you can maybe tag one stream with "DATA", another with "CLOCK", toss them into the DATA line of the RF module, and send/recv along...

TheStorm wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
Yeah, except the antenna for 434MHz needs to be decently large. There's no way to "encode" the two lines together other than some kind of odd TDM (time-division multiplexing, for those of you with fewer EE degrees than me Wink) that would have to perform self-synchronization.
Gloating about your number of degrees a little there Kerm. Razz

On a related note IR linking has been done and personally IMO IR blasters are the way to go.


IR linking? Not a good idea, IMO. It only works if it's close to each other, and it has to face each other too. Wireless doesn't have those problems. Smile
TheStorm wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
Yeah, except the antenna for 434MHz needs to be decently large. There's no way to "encode" the two lines together other than some kind of odd TDM (time-division multiplexing, for those of you with fewer EE degrees than me Wink) that would have to perform self-synchronization.
Gloating about your number of degrees a little there Kerm. Razz

On a related note IR linking has been done and personally IMO IR blasters are the way to go.
Oh, I didn't notice that no one had actually posted the IR Link link:
http://sami.ticalc.org/irlink/
alberthrocks wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
Yeah, except the antenna for 434MHz needs to be decently large. There's no way to "encode" the two lines together other than some kind of odd TDM (time-division multiplexing, for those of you with fewer EE degrees than me Wink) that would have to perform self-synchronization.


I don't know much anyway Razz I just thought you can maybe tag one stream with "DATA", another with "CLOCK", toss them into the DATA line of the RF module, and send/recv along...

TheStorm wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
Yeah, except the antenna for 434MHz needs to be decently large. There's no way to "encode" the two lines together other than some kind of odd TDM (time-division multiplexing, for those of you with fewer EE degrees than me Wink) that would have to perform self-synchronization.
Gloating about your number of degrees a little there Kerm. Razz

On a related note IR linking has been done and personally IMO IR blasters are the way to go.


IR linking? Not a good idea, IMO. It only works if it's close to each other, and it has to face each other too. Wireless doesn't have those problems. Smile


not to mention the fact that IR signals are messed up in even small ammounts of sunlight and some lighting situations...
Actually, it's not as bad as you might think with sunlight, but you're not going to sit on a lawn at noon and get reliable data transfers.
Well, I'd still go with wireless linking then. Smile

For the device itself, maybe 2 RF pairs? (pair = recv/send?)
alberthrocks wrote:
Well, I'd still go with wireless linking then. Smile

For the device itself, maybe 2 RF pairs? (pair = recv/send?)
That would be the easiest method, but that's four different pieces of hardware per calc, a substantial draw in power, square inches of PCB, and money. Of course, you could miniaturize all four onto one PCB, but it would still be a fair outlay in hardware for the one-off types of prototypes we tend to make around here.
Hmm... any other ideas for wireless implementation? Smile
Maybe there are smaller chips for RF?
Or maybe we can use something else?
alberthrocks wrote:
Hmm... any other ideas for wireless implementation? Smile
Maybe there are smaller chips for RF?
Or maybe we can use something else?
There are some smaller chips for RF, and I'm also trying to consider some modulation schemes to cram the two signals into one channel
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 1 of 2
» All times are GMT - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement