Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #39801 > unrolled thread

Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-06-17 04:35 -0700
    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 05:21 -0700
    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 08:57 -0700
    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-17 10:58 -0700
    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-06-17 22:39 +0100
      Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 23:10 -0700
        Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 16:24 -0400
    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 16:17 -0400
      Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-06-20 07:49 -0700
        Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 09:36 -0700
          Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-06-20 13:40 -0700
        Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 13:00 -0400
          Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-06-20 11:13 -0700
            Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 15:04 -0400
          Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-20 20:25 -0700
            Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-20 20:34 -0700
            Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 09:40 -0400
              Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 08:29 -0700
                Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 13:40 -0400
                  Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-23 13:42 -0700
                    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 07:11 -0700
                    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 11:15 -0400
                      Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 10:16 -0700
                        Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 17:54 -0400
                      Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-24 15:01 -0700
                        Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 18:38 -0400
                          Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-24 16:37 -0700
                            Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 21:01 -0400
                              Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-26 12:58 -0700
        Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-20 12:24 -0700
          Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-06-20 14:03 -0700
            Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-20 15:03 -0700
            Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-21 01:33 -0700
              Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 09:47 -0400
    Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? darek.maksimiuk@gmail.com - 2015-06-30 13:52 -0700
      Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-07-01 10:45 -0700
        Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-01 15:01 -0700
          Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-07-01 18:14 -0700
            Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 00:49 -0700
              Re: Industrial Single Board Forth Computer - recommendations? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-02 03:02 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#40022

marți, 23 iunie 2015, 23:42:53 UTC+3, Paul Rubin a scris:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> > The Beagle Bone Black.  I searched the support group and found a
> > couple of times when an industrial temp range was asked ..
> > Heck, I'm just glad he is talking to me.
> 
> That sounds like the Bluesteel board:
> 
> http://linuxgizmos.com/beaglebone-sbc-goes-oem-com-version-coming/

Not having soldered flash may be a big step backward for such a system.
The links for the product page and the wiki are dead however... 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40027

On 6/23/2015 4:42 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> The Beagle Bone Black.  I searched the support group and found a
>> couple of times when an industrial temp range was asked ..
>> Heck, I'm just glad he is talking to me.
>
> That sounds like the Bluesteel board:
>
> http://linuxgizmos.com/beaglebone-sbc-goes-oem-com-version-coming/

This is interesting, but no, this is a different board.  The board I 
heard about will *not* have the rounded corners and will be designed 
with *all* the BBB circuitry, with customization by leaving parts off 
the board.

Probably the most useful part of this board is that the maker is giving 
assurance of the board being produced for 8 years.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40032

miercuri, 24 iunie 2015, 18:15:39 UTC+3, rickman a scris:
> On 6/23/2015 4:42 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> >> The Beagle Bone Black.  I searched the support group and found a
> >> couple of times when an industrial temp range was asked ..
> >> Heck, I'm just glad he is talking to me.
> >
> > That sounds like the Bluesteel board:
> >
> > http://linuxgizmos.com/beaglebone-sbc-goes-oem-com-version-coming/
> 
> This is interesting, but no, this is a different board.  The board I 
> heard about will *not* have the rounded corners and will be designed 
> with *all* the BBB circuitry, with customization by leaving parts off 
> the board.
> 
> Probably the most useful part of this board is that the maker is giving 
> assurance of the board being produced for 8 years.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick

That's helping on the board cost. 
What I always need is not some component missing or not but different
connector styles or at least different positioning on the sides...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40036

On 6/24/2015 1:16 PM, Raimond Dragomir wrote:
> miercuri, 24 iunie 2015, 18:15:39 UTC+3, rickman a scris:
>> On 6/23/2015 4:42 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> The Beagle Bone Black.  I searched the support group and found a
>>>> couple of times when an industrial temp range was asked ..
>>>> Heck, I'm just glad he is talking to me.
>>>
>>> That sounds like the Bluesteel board:
>>>
>>> http://linuxgizmos.com/beaglebone-sbc-goes-oem-com-version-coming/
>>
>> This is interesting, but no, this is a different board.  The board I
>> heard about will *not* have the rounded corners and will be designed
>> with *all* the BBB circuitry, with customization by leaving parts off
>> the board.
>>
>> Probably the most useful part of this board is that the maker is giving
>> assurance of the board being produced for 8 years.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick
>
> That's helping on the board cost.
> What I always need is not some component missing or not but different
> connector styles or at least different positioning on the sides...

Yeah, I think to get that would be a fully customized design.  He is 
keeping the mechanical design the same as the BBB so it is compatible 
with all current "capes" (daughtercards).  He will do a custom design, 
but I'm sure there will be NRE as well as a higher board cost.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40037

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> http://linuxgizmos.com/beaglebone-sbc-goes-oem-com-version-coming/
> This is interesting, but no, this is a different board.  The board I
> heard about will *not* have the rounded corners and will be designed
> with *all* the BBB circuitry, with customization by leaving parts off
> the board.

Hmm, interesting that more than one vendor is making an industrial BBB
then.  FWIW, I've heard that the BBB's rounded corners were to make it
fit in an Altoids tin, which people complained that the rpi couldn't do.

> Probably the most useful part of this board is that the maker is
> giving assurance of the board being produced for 8 years.

That's kind of an interesting claim: who knows if the parts on it,
particularly the Sitara SOC, will still be around in 8 years.  

I'm not a hardware guy and so this is just an uninformed impression, but
it's seemed to me that these RPI/BBB/Cubieboard style boards are a bit
complicated for the manufacturer to get completely working, partly
because the SOC's are intended for use in mobile phones and tend to be
complicated by functions that an SBC doesn't really need.  Their
documentation may not be so great either, since they're usually sold to
quite large customers (phone manufacturers) who can work closely with
the chip vendor.  Finally because phones are trendy and highly cost
sensitive consumer electronics, product longevity may not be so great
either (so the 8 year claim raises an eyebrow).

By comparison, the simpler arm7 cpus used on the lower end boards seem
more intended for low-moderate volume industrial use, so they're
possibly more conservative in various ways, and maybe better documented.
We used the Glomation board with a 300(?) mhz ARM and 64MB of ram, and
then we later made a custom board with a comparable cpu without too much
fuss, using the Freestyle reference Linux kernel and the Angstrom
distribution, which is more embedded-oriented than desktop distros like
Debian.  So I think life is easier if the hardware isn't trying to push
the envelope.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40038

On 6/24/2015 6:01 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>>> http://linuxgizmos.com/beaglebone-sbc-goes-oem-com-version-coming/
>> This is interesting, but no, this is a different board.  The board I
>> heard about will *not* have the rounded corners and will be designed
>> with *all* the BBB circuitry, with customization by leaving parts off
>> the board.
>
> Hmm, interesting that more than one vendor is making an industrial BBB
> then.  FWIW, I've heard that the BBB's rounded corners were to make it
> fit in an Altoids tin, which people complained that the rpi couldn't do.
>
>> Probably the most useful part of this board is that the maker is
>> giving assurance of the board being produced for 8 years.
>
> That's kind of an interesting claim: who knows if the parts on it,
> particularly the Sitara SOC, will still be around in 8 years.

The guy building the BBB has a tight connection with TI, so I'm sure he 
has an assurance from TI that this chip will be around.


> I'm not a hardware guy and so this is just an uninformed impression, but
> it's seemed to me that these RPI/BBB/Cubieboard style boards are a bit
> complicated for the manufacturer to get completely working, partly
> because the SOC's are intended for use in mobile phones and tend to be
> complicated by functions that an SBC doesn't really need.

Like what?  I can't think of anything the BBB CPU uses externally that 
isn't pretty fully exercised by now.


> Their
> documentation may not be so great either, since they're usually sold to
> quite large customers (phone manufacturers) who can work closely with
> the chip vendor.  Finally because phones are trendy and highly cost
> sensitive consumer electronics, product longevity may not be so great
> either (so the 8 year claim raises an eyebrow).

My last conversation with people about what CPUs *are* used in cell 
phones indicated that *none* of these CPUs are actually used in cell 
phones.  Cell phones mostly use fully custom SoCs which incorporate many 
phone functions on chip... which seems to be what you are referring to 
earlier.  Think about it a bit, do cell phones need an HDMI output?

My understanding is that the rPi CPU was intended for settop boxes, 
hence the HDMI output.


> By comparison, the simpler arm7 cpus used on the lower end boards seem
> more intended for low-moderate volume industrial use, so they're
> possibly more conservative in various ways, and maybe better documented.

Apples and oranges.  I don't get your point.  My understanding is the 
only part of the BCM2835 that is not fully documented is the GPU which 
is very common on such chips.  The "ARM7" chips you talk about are 
really CM3 and CM4 devices and don't typically have GPUs.  They also run 
some 10 times slower than the larger chips and are targeted to very 
different apps.  If these aren't the chips you mean you need to be a bit 
more  specific.


> We used the Glomation board with a 300(?) mhz ARM and 64MB of ram, and
> then we later made a custom board with a comparable cpu without too much
> fuss, using the Freestyle reference Linux kernel and the Angstrom
> distribution, which is more embedded-oriented than desktop distros like
> Debian.  So I think life is easier if the hardware isn't trying to push
> the envelope.

What envelope?  I don't think anyone considers the BBB or rPi to be 
bleeding edge.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40039

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> The guy building the BBB has a tight connection with TI, so I'm sure
> he has an assurance from TI that this chip will be around.

That's good to hear.

> Think about it a bit, do cell phones need an HDMI output?
> My understanding is that the rPi CPU was intended for settop boxes,
> hence the HDMI output.

Some cell phones and many tablets do have HDMI.  I don't know what


> Apples and oranges.  I don't get your point.  My understanding is the
> only part of the BCM2835 that is not fully documented is the GPU which
> is very common on such chips.

The BCM GPU is not just non-fully documented, it's actually secret :(.
By badly documented though, I meant there is documentation but it has
gaps and errors, edge cases and bugs not described, etc.  For
commodity-ish parts where there's a larger number of smaller customers
making support calls when the docs don't suffice, there's greater effort
to document thoroughly.

> The "ARM7" chips you talk about are really CM3 and CM4 devices and
> don't typically have GPUs.  They also run some 10 times slower than
> the larger chips and are targeted to very different apps.

The ones we used (I don't know the part numbers) had MMU's and needed
external memory and flash and we ran Linux on them.  Actually it may
have been an ARM6.  This is not the board we used but it was along these
lines:

  http://www.glomationinc.com/products/index.php?n=SBC.GESBC-9G20w

Those M3/M4's are generally MCU's with flash and ram on the chip and are
very different.  I never ran serious computational benchmarks on the 300
mhz ARM but 10x slower than the BBB is conceivable (if I had to guess
I'd say 5x based on mhz and architecture).  It was much more than 10x
slower than the x86 laptop that I cross-developed from, though the
kernel thread switching time was maybe only maybe 2x slower (I measured
that but don't remember the numbers).  300 mhz is still stupendously
fast compared to old PC's/industrial boards and current 8-bitters.  Can
I ask what your application is?

> What envelope?  I don't think anyone considers the BBB or rPi to be
> bleeding edge.

They may have been closer to it when they were first introduced.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40043

On 6/24/2015 7:37 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> The guy building the BBB has a tight connection with TI, so I'm sure
>> he has an assurance from TI that this chip will be around.
>
> That's good to hear.
>
>> Think about it a bit, do cell phones need an HDMI output?
>> My understanding is that the rPi CPU was intended for settop boxes,
>> hence the HDMI output.
>
> Some cell phones and many tablets do have HDMI.  I don't know what
>
>
>> Apples and oranges.  I don't get your point.  My understanding is the
>> only part of the BCM2835 that is not fully documented is the GPU which
>> is very common on such chips.
>
> The BCM GPU is not just non-fully documented, it's actually secret :(.
> By badly documented though, I meant there is documentation but it has
> gaps and errors, edge cases and bugs not described, etc.  For
> commodity-ish parts where there's a larger number of smaller customers
> making support calls when the docs don't suffice, there's greater effort
> to document thoroughly.
>
>> The "ARM7" chips you talk about are really CM3 and CM4 devices and
>> don't typically have GPUs.  They also run some 10 times slower than
>> the larger chips and are targeted to very different apps.
>
> The ones we used (I don't know the part numbers) had MMU's and needed
> external memory and flash and we ran Linux on them.  Actually it may
> have been an ARM6.  This is not the board we used but it was along these
> lines:
>
>    http://www.glomationinc.com/products/index.php?n=SBC.GESBC-9G20w

That is an ARM9 which is still far short of the ARM11 and such used in 
the products we are talking about.


> Those M3/M4's are generally MCU's with flash and ram on the chip and are
> very different.  I never ran serious computational benchmarks on the 300
> mhz ARM but 10x slower than the BBB is conceivable (if I had to guess
> I'd say 5x based on mhz and architecture).  It was much more than 10x
> slower than the x86 laptop that I cross-developed from, though the
> kernel thread switching time was maybe only maybe 2x slower (I measured
> that but don't remember the numbers).  300 mhz is still stupendously
> fast compared to old PC's/industrial boards and current 8-bitters.  Can
> I ask what your application is?

My immediate use is from a potential customer who wants an rPi (mostly 
for the Ethernet interface) along with a push button or two in a box 
shielded from the elements.  I am thinking of making this a standard 
product, but to meet the environmental requirements I would need an 
extended temperature range which the rPi won't support.  Running Linux 
the customer shouldn't really care much which CPU is inside but I 
haven't asked yet.


>> What envelope?  I don't think anyone considers the BBB or rPi to be
>> bleeding edge.
>
> They may have been closer to it when they were first introduced.

I think the only thing cutting edge about either is the price point.  No 
one had anything with that much power for under $50.  I didn't give the 
rPi much interest until someone gave me one and I played with it.  Even 
then I didn't do much with it until I worked with a TI Stellaris eval 
board and found the unsigned drivers were hard to load on my PC, so I 
used it with the rPi as a "server".  I learned about working remotely 
and liked it a lot.  The only thing I can't do is to reset the Stellaris 
board remotely.  I was working on getting a powered hub that would 
support cutting power, but I'm not convinced it will work.  Still, the 
next time I see a DLINK DHUB-H7 USB hub for cheap I'll get it and give 
it a try.  Then I learn to access the rPi from over the Internet and I 
can work with the Stellaris board remotely from anywhere in the world.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40075

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>>    http://www.glomationinc.com/products/index.php?n=SBC.GESBC-9G20w
> That is an ARM9 which is still far short of the ARM11 and such used in
> the products we are talking about.

Yes, ok, it's maybe 3-5x slower than a Rpi, but still plenty fast for
what we were doing with it.  I don't know how it compares in power
consumption.  The hardware itself is potentially cheaper too (we did
build some comparable boards ourselves).  The Rpi wasn't available at
the time of that project but maybe we'd have used it if it had been.

> My immediate use is from a potential customer who wants an rPi (mostly
> for the Ethernet interface) along with a push button or two in a box
> shielded from the elements.  I am thinking of making this a standard
> product, but to meet the environmental requirements I would need an
> extended temperature range which the rPi won't support.

Ah cool.  If it's a general purpose box and you're not too
size/cost/power constrained, then you might as well use the more
powerful board.  The BBB has some nice features like the PRU realtime
coprocessors that could be useful for some control applications too.
The Seeed version (Beaglebone Green) has a realtime clock and it would
be nice if the industrial version had one too.  That's missing from both
the regular BBB and the Rpi.

> I think the only thing cutting edge about either is the price point.
> No one had anything with that much power for under $50.

Yeah but there were lots of less powerful Linux boards in that price
range (ARM9/64MB feels about like a small modern VPS) that could still
be programmed with the usual Linux languages and tools.  The Rpi was/is
stupendously powerful compared to what we were used to thinking of as
control boards.  It crushes the workstations and servers from the
early-2000's dotcom era, and software and apps haven't changed *that*
much since then.

IMHO people got excited by the Rpi mostly because they could run desktop
bloatware and media players on it, and it's also nice if you want a
small Linux server with a web interface, database, etc.  For controlling
stuff, it's almost like a GA144: one is first amazed by the amount of
cpu cycles available, but then figuring out what to do with it (outside
of some niches) turns out to be a head scratcher.  It's not like a fast
DSP that you can do SDR or whatever with, since it's general purpose
computing under a multitasking OS.

Have you really thought of a Forth program that's going to use 512MB of
ram?  For most control purposes I'd probably rather have a smaller,
slower board that uses 1/10th as much power.

> The only thing I can't do is to reset the Stellaris board remotely.  I
> was working on getting a powered hub that would support cutting power,

There are various ready-made Rpi expansion boards with relays on them,
or I'm sure you could wire something up to a gpio pin for that purpose.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39902

Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> It seems that computer hardware, as well as software, is a division of
> the fashion industry, and has very little to do with either elegance
> or getting the job done.

There's certainly tons of automotive computer equipment in this world.
You might ask on comp.arch.embedded where there's probably more
knowledge on the topic.  I know that CAN bus stuff gets discussed there
from time to time.  Usually it's 12 volts though.  As Rickman says,
maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.  Searching
digikey.com for automotive dc-dc converters finds lots of parts that
might be suitable.  But, you probably need additional
filtering/transient suppression to deal with the nasty electrical
environment usually found in vehicles.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39904

On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 8:24:24 PM UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Howerd <yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> > It seems that computer hardware, as well as software, is a division of
> > the fashion industry, and has very little to do with either elegance
> > or getting the job done.
> 
> There's certainly tons of automotive computer equipment in this world.
> You might ask on comp.arch.embedded where there's probably more
> knowledge on the topic.  I know that CAN bus stuff gets discussed there
> from time to time.  Usually it's 12 volts though.  As Rickman says,
> maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.  Searching
> digikey.com for automotive dc-dc converters finds lots of parts that
> might be suitable.  But, you probably need additional
> filtering/transient suppression to deal with the nasty electrical
> environment usually found in vehicles.

Hi Paul,

I think this thread is a classic example of how hard it is to communicate on a newsgroup :-)

What I wanted to achieve was wiring together some really simple hardware, write some really simple software to do a really simple job.
When I looked for this really simple hardware I found that almost the only board that is nearly suitable is my own design.
That is, nobody is catering for the simple problems any more.

> As Rickman says, maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.
Life is too short. The other PCB of the two in a CBC-02 Conveyor Belt Computer takes up to 35V DC and drops it down to 12V, so I could use that And it connects to the IS5d with a ribbon cable. And I have 17 of them cluttering up my spare bedroom. Then I might as well use the whole CBC-02 in its enclosure.
The relentless rise of complexity strikes again...

I could just drop in a fanless Linux box - probably cheaper than my IS5d board, due to economics of volume manufacturing.
Then I could choose my high level language and invoke whatever incantation is required to direct /dev/tty0 to /dev/tty1 passing it though grep or lisp, or even Forth.
But how much of what goes on would I actually understand? Much less than 1%, I would say. 

Simplicity is expensive, it seems.

Thanks for your response - I hope my tone isn't too disgruntled.
I'm just nostalgic for the days when not all hardware was a mobile phone in disquise.

Best regards,
Howerd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39907

Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> I think this thread is a classic example of how hard it is to
> communicate on a newsgroup :-)
> What I wanted to achieve was wiring together some really simple
> hardware, write some really simple software to do a really simple job.

I guess I don't understand your expectations then.  There are a ton of 5
volt and 12 volt computer boards out there.  You want a computer that
runs on 28 volts.  So connecting a stepdown converter (little black
module) to an existing board sounds like "wiring together some really
simple hardware" to me.  The software doesn't need to know about it.

I think some aviation stuff also uses 28 volts, so maybe there are
boards intended for use on aircraft that fit your desires.  Anything
having to do with aviation sounds expensive though.

> That is, nobody is catering for the simple problems any more.

The simple problem meaning running a digital board on 28 noisy volts in
a vehicle?  Was that ever considered simple rather than specialized?

>> As Rickman says, maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.
> Life is too short. The other PCB of the two in a CBC-02 Conveyor Belt
> Computer takes up to 35V DC and drops it down to 12V, so I could use that

I guess I'm not sure if you're talking about the same application.  If
you've already got 12V available in your box, then using it sounds like
the obvious thing.  

> I'm just nostalgic for the days when not all hardware was a mobile
> phone in disquise.

I guess I can understand that.  There are certainly tons of cheap,
simple 5 volt boards that are reasonably Forth-friendly though.

Going a bit fancier, where I worked we used some industrial Linux boards
from these guys:

  http://www.glomationinc.com/products/index.php

Several of them handle automotive temperature ranges and support CAN.
They tend to want 7.5-24 volt power so maybe you could use a zener diode
to drop your 28 volts appropriately.  

MPE also has a board that supports Forth directly and goes up to 24 volts:

   http://mpeforth.com/pb2468.htm

Actually maybe this is of interest:

  https://www.olimex.com/Products/Duino/AVR/OLIMEXINO-328/open-source-hardware

Atmega-328 cpu, industrial temp range, input power up to 30 volts,
anti-noise stuff, seems to have some RS485 code downloadable from the
page.  They have some comparable PIC32-based boards as well, if you need
a bigger cpu.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39923

duminică, 21 iunie 2015, 00:03:24 UTC+3, Howerd a scris:
> On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 8:24:24 PM UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote:
> > Howerd <yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> > > It seems that computer hardware, as well as software, is a division of
> > > the fashion industry, and has very little to do with either elegance
> > > or getting the job done.
> > 
> > There's certainly tons of automotive computer equipment in this world.
> > You might ask on comp.arch.embedded where there's probably more
> > knowledge on the topic.  I know that CAN bus stuff gets discussed there
> > from time to time.  Usually it's 12 volts though.  As Rickman says,
> > maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.  Searching
> > digikey.com for automotive dc-dc converters finds lots of parts that
> > might be suitable.  But, you probably need additional
> > filtering/transient suppression to deal with the nasty electrical
> > environment usually found in vehicles.
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I think this thread is a classic example of how hard it is to communicate on a newsgroup :-)
> 
> What I wanted to achieve was wiring together some really simple hardware, write some really simple software to do a really simple job.
> When I looked for this really simple hardware I found that almost the only board that is nearly suitable is my own design.
> That is, nobody is catering for the simple problems any more.
> 
> > As Rickman says, maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.
> Life is too short. The other PCB of the two in a CBC-02 Conveyor Belt Computer takes up to 35V DC and drops it down to 12V, so I could use that And it connects to the IS5d with a ribbon cable. And I have 17 of them cluttering up my spare bedroom. Then I might as well use the whole CBC-02 in its enclosure.
> The relentless rise of complexity strikes again...
> 
> I could just drop in a fanless Linux box - probably cheaper than my IS5d board, due to economics of volume manufacturing.
> Then I could choose my high level language and invoke whatever incantation is required to direct /dev/tty0 to /dev/tty1 passing it though grep or lisp, or even Forth.
> But how much of what goes on would I actually understand? Much less than 1%, I would say. 
> 
> Simplicity is expensive, it seems.
> 
> Thanks for your response - I hope my tone isn't too disgruntled.
> I'm just nostalgic for the days when not all hardware was a mobile phone in disquise.
> 
> Best regards,
> Howerd

Howerd,
It seems you cannot find what you need off the shelf. 
I can recommend my actual micro LPC175x. It has all the serial ports
you need and CAN. However, I cannot help you about the CAN interface. 
Never worked with CAN.
Or if you don't want a cold jump in the Cortex-M world, there are
AT90CAN chips, which are 8bit AVR with CAN. They have only two UARTS,
but a third one can be easily bit-banged on these chips.
I never used the AT90CAN, but I have lots of designs with the AVR chips.
A switching power supply from 9-36VDC is also quite simple these days,
at least if you don't want more than 1A. I have at least 3 schemes that
I use all the time.

Anyway, speaking about microcontroller families is relevant here only
for the hardware part. If you want to program it in Forth, there are
forths available for almost any microcontroller.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39990

On 6/21/2015 4:33 AM, Raimond Dragomir wrote:
> duminică, 21 iunie 2015, 00:03:24 UTC+3, Howerd a scris:
>> On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 8:24:24 PM UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>> Howerd <yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>>> It seems that computer hardware, as well as software, is a division of
>>>> the fashion industry, and has very little to do with either elegance
>>>> or getting the job done.
>>>
>>> There's certainly tons of automotive computer equipment in this world.
>>> You might ask on comp.arch.embedded where there's probably more
>>> knowledge on the topic.  I know that CAN bus stuff gets discussed there
>>> from time to time.  Usually it's 12 volts though.  As Rickman says,
>>> maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.  Searching
>>> digikey.com for automotive dc-dc converters finds lots of parts that
>>> might be suitable.  But, you probably need additional
>>> filtering/transient suppression to deal with the nasty electrical
>>> environment usually found in vehicles.
>>
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> I think this thread is a classic example of how hard it is to communicate on a newsgroup :-)
>>
>> What I wanted to achieve was wiring together some really simple hardware, write some really simple software to do a really simple job.
>> When I looked for this really simple hardware I found that almost the only board that is nearly suitable is my own design.
>> That is, nobody is catering for the simple problems any more.
>>
>>> As Rickman says, maybe the answer is a dc/dc converter in your device.
>> Life is too short. The other PCB of the two in a CBC-02 Conveyor Belt Computer takes up to 35V DC and drops it down to 12V, so I could use that And it connects to the IS5d with a ribbon cable. And I have 17 of them cluttering up my spare bedroom. Then I might as well use the whole CBC-02 in its enclosure.
>> The relentless rise of complexity strikes again...
>>
>> I could just drop in a fanless Linux box - probably cheaper than my IS5d board, due to economics of volume manufacturing.
>> Then I could choose my high level language and invoke whatever incantation is required to direct /dev/tty0 to /dev/tty1 passing it though grep or lisp, or even Forth.
>> But how much of what goes on would I actually understand? Much less than 1%, I would say.
>>
>> Simplicity is expensive, it seems.
>>
>> Thanks for your response - I hope my tone isn't too disgruntled.
>> I'm just nostalgic for the days when not all hardware was a mobile phone in disquise.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Howerd
>
> Howerd,
> It seems you cannot find what you need off the shelf.
> I can recommend my actual micro LPC175x. It has all the serial ports
> you need and CAN. However, I cannot help you about the CAN interface.
> Never worked with CAN.
> Or if you don't want a cold jump in the Cortex-M world, there are
> AT90CAN chips, which are 8bit AVR with CAN. They have only two UARTS,
> but a third one can be easily bit-banged on these chips.
> I never used the AT90CAN, but I have lots of designs with the AVR chips.
> A switching power supply from 9-36VDC is also quite simple these days,
> at least if you don't want more than 1A. I have at least 3 schemes that
> I use all the time.
>
> Anyway, speaking about microcontroller families is relevant here only
> for the hardware part. If you want to program it in Forth, there are
> forths available for almost any microcontroller.

I've been working with Mecrisp on an ARM chip.  From what I've seen it 
shouldn't be hard to port to any ARM chip.  They currently support some 
TI ARMs, several ST Micro ARMs and a few other devices.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40170

Howerd,
  what about these two:
    https://www.toradex.com/products/carrier-boards/by-colibri-arm-family
    http://www.phytec.eu/europe/products.html 

Cheers,
  Darek 


On Wednesday, 17 June 2015 13:35:39 UTC+2, Howerd  wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Can anyone recommend an industrial SBC that I can program in Forth?
> 
> Rough Spec. :
> DIN Rail mounting
> PSU 9 to 35V DC
> 2 x RS232
> 1 x RS485
> 1 x CAN bus.
> 
> I need 10 of these to convert CAN and various serial protocols into a data format that can be sent to a GSM modem.
> 
> Best regards & TIA,
> Howerd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40206

On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 4:52:53 PM UTC-4, darek.m...@gmail.com wrote:
> Howerd,
>   what about these two:
>     https://www.toradex.com/products/carrier-boards/by-colibri-arm-family
>     http://www.phytec.eu/europe/products.html 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Darek 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, 17 June 2015 13:35:39 UTC+2, Howerd  wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > Can anyone recommend an industrial SBC that I can program in Forth?
> > 
> > Rough Spec. :
> > DIN Rail mounting
> > PSU 9 to 35V DC
> > 2 x RS232
> > 1 x RS485
> > 1 x CAN bus.
> > 
> > I need 10 of these to convert CAN and various serial protocols into a data format that can be sent to a GSM modem.
> > 
> > Best regards & TIA,
> > Howerd

Phytec would be a good choice. They are on the German market since several decades.

And then, after porting Forth to it, offer Forth for Phytec boards!

DB.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40220

On Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 6:45:44 PM UTC+1, visua...@rocketmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 4:52:53 PM UTC-4, darek.m...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Howerd,
> >   what about these two:
> >     https://www.toradex.com/products/carrier-boards/by-colibri-arm-family
> >     http://www.phytec.eu/europe/products.html 
> > 
> > Cheers,
> >   Darek 
> > 
> > 
> > On Wednesday, 17 June 2015 13:35:39 UTC+2, Howerd  wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > > 
> > > Can anyone recommend an industrial SBC that I can program in Forth?
> > > 
> > > Rough Spec. :
> > > DIN Rail mounting
> > > PSU 9 to 35V DC
> > > 2 x RS232
> > > 1 x RS485
> > > 1 x CAN bus.
> > > 
> > > I need 10 of these to convert CAN and various serial protocols into a data format that can be sent to a GSM modem.
> > > 
> > > Best regards & TIA,
> > > Howerd
> 
> Phytec would be a good choice. They are on the German market since several decades.
> 
> And then, after porting Forth to it, offer Forth for Phytec boards!
> 
> DB.

Hi Darek, Dirk and everyone,

Thank you for all of the suggestions :-)

We have decided not to so a quick kludge with an SBC, but to add the features that we need to the next issue of our own PCB, when time allows.

For me it was an interesting thread :-)

Best regards,
Howerd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40225

On Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 6:01:57 PM UTC-4, Howerd wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 6:45:44 PM UTC+1, visua...@rocketmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 4:52:53 PM UTC-4, darek.m...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Howerd,
> > >   what about these two:
> > >     https://www.toradex.com/products/carrier-boards/by-colibri-arm-family
> > >     http://www.phytec.eu/europe/products.html 
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > >   Darek 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wednesday, 17 June 2015 13:35:39 UTC+2, Howerd  wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > > 
> > > > Can anyone recommend an industrial SBC that I can program in Forth?
> > > > 
> > > > Rough Spec. :
> > > > DIN Rail mounting
> > > > PSU 9 to 35V DC
> > > > 2 x RS232
> > > > 1 x RS485
> > > > 1 x CAN bus.
> > > > 
> > > > I need 10 of these to convert CAN and various serial protocols into a data format that can be sent to a GSM modem.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards & TIA,
> > > > Howerd
> > 
> > Phytec would be a good choice. They are on the German market since several decades.
> > 
> > And then, after porting Forth to it, offer Forth for Phytec boards!
> > 
> > DB.
> 
> Hi Darek, Dirk and everyone,
> 
> Thank you for all of the suggestions :-)
> 
> We have decided not to so a quick kludge with an SBC, but to add the features that we need to the next issue of our own PCB, when time allows.
> 
> For me it was an interesting thread :-)
> 
> Best regards,
> Howerd

Looking at this interesting "market research", are you planning to offer your PCB then for sale, with Forth on it?

DB.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40233

On Thursday, 2 July 2015 02:14:34 UTC+1, visua...@rocketmail.com  wrote:
> 
> Looking at this interesting "market research", are you planning to offer your PCB then for sale, with Forth on it?
> 
> DB.

Yes! Enquiring minds want to know!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#40240

On Thursday, July 2, 2015 at 8:49:11 AM UTC+1, Mark Wills wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 July 2015 02:14:34 UTC+1, visua...@rocketmail.com  wrote:
> > 
> > Looking at this interesting "market research", are you planning to offer your PCB then for sale, with Forth on it?
> > 
> > DB.
> 
> Yes! Enquiring minds want to know!

Hi Mark & Dirk,

Here is the web page :
http://www.inventio.co.uk/IS5d.html
Orders welcome :-)

As for programming it - I have a lot of code for the IS5d - contact me for a quote...

Best regards,
Howerd

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web