RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] possibly interesting
Posted by
John Dammeyer
on 2006-07-05 17:10:11 UTC
Hi Graham,
I saw the advertisement for it in the latest Circuit Cellar magazine. What
I found disappointing though was the amount of memory available for each
processor. Human Interface devices dealing with LCD displays etc. tend to
require lots of memory for either images or text. Using a processor with
256K flash and 12K RAM like a 9S12 series would be more than fast enough and
also have the large scale memory for dats structures, text messages and even
graphic applications. Don't really know if a 8 processor module gains one
anything.
John Dammeyer
Wireless CAN with the CANRF module now available.
http://www.autoartisans.com/products
Automation Artisans Inc.
Ph. 1 250 544 4950
I saw the advertisement for it in the latest Circuit Cellar magazine. What
I found disappointing though was the amount of memory available for each
processor. Human Interface devices dealing with LCD displays etc. tend to
require lots of memory for either images or text. Using a processor with
256K flash and 12K RAM like a 9S12 series would be more than fast enough and
also have the large scale memory for dats structures, text messages and even
graphic applications. Don't really know if a 8 processor module gains one
anything.
John Dammeyer
Wireless CAN with the CANRF module now available.
http://www.autoartisans.com/products
Automation Artisans Inc.
Ph. 1 250 544 4950
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Graham Stabler
> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 4:56 PM
> To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] possibly interesting
>
>
>
> Parallax the creators of the basic stamp now do a multiprocessor chip
> with 8 X 32bit processors running at 80Mhz. The nice thing is that
> lots of functionality comes as standard in the form of objects for the
> programming language called spin, these include video functions as
> well as functions necessary for input devices such as mice
> and keyboards.
>
> I'm just wondering if something like this might be combined with a
> g-100 to make compact and rather simple machine controllers. I'm
> definately considering it for my EDM machine as human-user interfacing
> was always going to be a pain.
>
> Have a look, its really interesting in any case:
>
> http://www.parallax.com/propeller/
>
> Graham
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Addresses:
> FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
> Post Messages: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
>
> Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@yahoogroups.com,
> wanliker@..., timg@...
> Moderator: pentam@... indigo_red@...
> davemucha@... [Moderators]
> URL to this group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>
> OFF Topic POSTS: General Machining
> If you wish to post on unlimited OT subjects goto:
> aol://5863:126/rec.crafts.metalworking or go thru Google.com
> to reach it if you have trouble.
> http://www.metalworking.com/news_servers.html
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jobshophomeshop I consider
> this to be a sister site to the CCED group, as many of the
> same members are there, for OT subjects, that are not allowed
> on the CCED list.
>
> NOTICE: ALL POSTINGS TO THIS GROUP BECOME PUBLIC DOMAIN BY
> POSTING THEM. DON'T POST IF YOU CAN NOT ACCEPT THIS.....NO
> EXCEPTIONS........
> bill
> List Mom
> List Owner
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Discussion Thread
Graham Stabler
2006-07-05 16:57:01 UTC
possibly interesting
John Dammeyer
2006-07-05 17:10:11 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] possibly interesting
Phil Mattison
2006-07-05 17:36:13 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] possibly interesting
Graham Stabler
2006-07-05 17:50:25 UTC
Re: possibly interesting
John Dammeyer
2006-07-05 19:21:29 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: possibly interesting
Graham Stabler
2006-07-06 02:04:29 UTC
Re: possibly interesting
Graham Stabler
2006-07-25 02:01:08 UTC
Re: possibly interesting