Sending/Receiving Data (CFX-9850G)
#1
Posted 18 June 2004 - 08:09 PM
Thanks,
Vwarto
#2
Posted 18 June 2004 - 08:25 PM
#3
Posted 18 June 2004 - 08:51 PM
#4
Posted 18 June 2004 - 08:56 PM
#5
Posted 18 June 2004 - 09:01 PM
#6
Posted 18 June 2004 - 11:59 PM
#7
Posted 19 June 2004 - 05:13 AM
#8
Posted 19 June 2004 - 07:33 AM
#9
Posted 19 June 2004 - 08:38 AM
btw: sorry for my short answer but I was busy and I answered very quickly
#10
Posted 19 June 2004 - 08:51 AM
I was thinking of just two players so the data will be rather short.
#11
Posted 19 June 2004 - 09:23 AM
#12
Posted 19 June 2004 - 11:43 PM
Note; i think i've read this somewhere, but i'm not 100% certain
#13
Posted 20 June 2004 - 06:36 AM
#14
Posted 20 June 2004 - 09:49 AM
GP Productions
just click on the CasIO link on the left menu
#15
Posted 20 June 2004 - 07:53 PM
It's a lot better to have two players on the PC.
#16
Posted 24 June 2004 - 01:23 PM
I think it IS POSSIBLE. I am currently working at a baudrate converter to allow overclocked calculators to communicate with other devices. There will be a small microcontroller. It will be no problem to implement a multiplayer function.
Only difficulty: The pattern will have 2 layers (front & back side with circuit paths). I am building it with ics i have here from old motherboards. It consists of: 2x um61256 32kbyte cache, 2x latch 74hc573 and the microcontroller Atmel ATmega8 (2 latches because i didn't have enough i/o pins).
Finish time: perhaps august this year. It'll be free to everyone.
But what i originally wanted to say:
I think the communication WILL BE TOO SLOW!
9600 bps = bits per second
8 databits 1 startbit 2 stopbits=11 bits per byte
=>870 bytes per second
data to transmit:
communication start: 2 bytes
header: 50 bytes
1 byte
min. 30 bytes for data
50 bytes for endheader
AND: the calc that calls "recv" has 2 headers: request header and response header...
lets calculate with 200 bytes per transfer (for 1 variable):
a transfer will take about 0,2 seconds.
If you send more data (5x5 matrix for example) you need to send 25 datablocks each about 30 bytes. So we need about 1 second.
This is really too long. A snake game is impossible. Chess would be nice...
cu
Matze
#17
Posted 25 June 2004 - 07:05 AM
does it plug straight from one calc into another calc
or do u have to go through a computer??
#18
Posted 27 June 2004 - 12:50 PM
#19
Posted 27 June 2004 - 12:55 PM
will it be possible for "mortals" to create such a cable aswell?
#20
Posted 27 June 2004 - 01:04 PM
#21
Posted 28 June 2004 - 12:11 AM
it's straight ( sounds funny) but there is a small micro-controller in it.
good call lol
how much approximatly would it cost to make one of these cables??
eg equiptment etc
Mr Sparkle
#22
Posted 28 June 2004 - 10:24 AM
could you post the schematic, please.
I would like to have a look at it, i think it can be done with less hardware if you select the parts (the micro controler) correctly and if you program it the right way.
#23
Posted 28 June 2004 - 02:07 PM
will you have to manipulate the calculator itself, or are you just tampering with the transfer cable?
#24
Posted 28 June 2004 - 06:53 PM
#25
Posted 28 June 2004 - 07:46 PM
#26
Posted 28 June 2004 - 07:56 PM
On second thoughts, I think that they intend to mod the actuall calculator. As I dont think Casio sell overclocked calculatorsI am currently working at a baudrate converter to allow overclocked calculators to communicate with other devices.
#27
Posted 30 June 2004 - 02:17 PM
Since the ATMEGA8 has only 1 UART, how are you going to communicate to two devices? Multiplexing? Is that the reason for the latches?
I'am very interested since I've got two ATMEGA8 here waiting for a usefull function!
Are there no smal microcontrollers with two UART's? (I only know "big" microcontrollers with two UART's)
Maybe there are external UART's on I2C or SPI?
#28
Posted 30 June 2004 - 02:34 PM
#29
Posted 30 June 2004 - 02:40 PM
#30
Posted 30 June 2004 - 05:14 PM
You could always try making an interface/baudrate converter using a PIC chip or an ATMEL Controller
#31
Posted 30 June 2004 - 10:10 PM
#32
Posted 01 July 2004 - 12:04 PM
#33
Posted 01 July 2004 - 04:53 PM
physics describes what happens, in micro and macro levels. Clearly, describing, by utilizing laws of physics, what really happens wouldn't be off-topic
Anyway, communication between two calcs via programs sounds lovely. I'm looking forward to it!
#34
Posted 03 July 2004 - 07:20 PM
on the other hand, perhaps that reply was not written for you
I will try to explain a few things: the "device" the casio uses to communicate is a UART (Universal Asynchronous Receive Transmit or.... something a like)
The good news is that most microcrontrollers (e.g. ATmega) have an onboard UART. Which means you don't need to care about timing, shifting bits, start stop conditions etc...
The bad news is most of the microcontrollers only have one... And you really want two UART's. Since you need to listen to both calc's.
You could always try making an interface/baudrate converter using a PIC chip or an ATMEL Controller
You can make an "soft" UART of course... but that's not the most easy thing to do.., come to think of it, maybe someone already made one... I remember thinking why the *** would someone write a soft UART if you got it in hardware. I'll check it...
#35
Posted 03 July 2004 - 08:39 PM
#36
Posted 03 July 2004 - 09:28 PM
So basicly if you get the smallest avr with a UART (probably the AT90S2313 or the ATTiny2313) one is capable of making two calc's communicate. Or one coulde try to a smaller one and making two soft UART's
It would be a nice project.... if one has two calc's
I could probably put hands on a second casio, and I have a mega8 (which would do the trick as well)... but then again it would cost a lot of time... it would be nice if there are others willing to participate, anyone with atmel's on the shelf?
It would still be at a terrible rate due to the protocol casio build.... they are sending more than 200 bytes just to get one (1) variable over!
#37
Posted 29 July 2004 - 04:18 AM
Let us know on your progress
#38
Posted 02 August 2004 - 08:10 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users