"Torbj&#4294967295;rn Heltne" <torbjorn.heltne@amelektronikk.no> skrev i meddelandet
news:41a21a6b$1@news.broadpark.no...
> Meindert Sprang wrote:
>
> > Why not go for the ATmega162. It has two serial ports.
>
> I can do without the TWI but need a couple of A/D channels.
>
> -- 
> Torbj&#4294967295;rn Heltne

For a single UART, the ATmega48 is a better choice.

-- 
Best Regards,
Ulf Samuelsson   ulf@a-t-m-e-l.com
This is a personal view which may or may not be
share by my Employer Atmel Nordic AB

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 07:53:06 +0100, the renowned "Meindert Sprang"
<mhsprang@NOcustomSPAMware.nl> wrote:

>"Schwob" <schwobus@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:123e50e1.0411261615.6b4dfa5c@posting.google.com...
>> Hi,
>>
>> the LPC915 has UART, 4 ADC channels and 2K FLASH.  It is much cheaper
>> than ATmega of the PIC16 proposed and does not even need an oscillator
>> (internal RC)
>
>Mmmm... I am alway very sceptic about internal oscillators in combination
>with UARTS. What do others think? Good/bad experiences?
>
>Meindert

<shrug> It's rated at +/-2.5% over temperature (and +/-1% at room
temperature). That sounds good enough to me if the divider granularity
doesn't add too much additional error, especially if you're
communicating with something that uses a crystal. 


Best regards, 
Spehro Pefhany
-- 
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

"Schwob" <schwobus@aol.com> wrote in message
news:123e50e1.0411261615.6b4dfa5c@posting.google.com...
> Hi,
>
> the LPC915 has UART, 4 ADC channels and 2K FLASH.  It is much cheaper
> than ATmega of the PIC16 proposed and does not even need an oscillator
> (internal RC)

Mmmm... I am alway very sceptic about internal oscillators in combination
with UARTS. What do others think? Good/bad experiences?

Meindert

Hi,

the LPC915 has UART, 4 ADC channels and 2K FLASH.  It is much cheaper
than ATmega of the PIC16 proposed and does not even need an oscillator
(internal RC)

Schwob

Torbj&#4294967295;rn Heltne <torbjorn.heltne@amelektronikk.no> wrote in message news:<41a21a6b$1@news.broadpark.no>...
> Meindert Sprang wrote:
> 
> > Why not go for the ATmega162. It has two serial ports.
> 
> I can do without the TWI but need a couple of A/D channels.

Someone wrote:

>> Speed requirements are <= 38400, amount of data max 150cps in each 
>> direction. I have read some on a few bit-banged serial port 
>> implementations. Common for all of them were that they were half 
>> duplex only. I need full duplex. I guess it is absolutely possible to 
>> achieve that but I think I prefer a hardware solutiuon anyway.
> 

There are several simple UARTS available at opencores, and they should 
fit nicely into a couple of dollarsworth of PLD, say a Xilinx XCR3064 or 
a Lattice 1016.

Paul Burke

Torbj�rn Heltne wrote:
>> It would be useful if you could add a little more detail to your 
>> requirements such as speed.
>>
>> Depending on how busy your uC is, you could bit-bang the serial port 
>> if the data rate is not too high.  We have done this on projects where 
>> space and cost were at an absolute premium.
>>
>> It was not clear why you can't use SPI, but if what you mean is you 
>> can't use SPI for the serial port, you might use a separate small 
>> micro that has both SPI and serial.  You talk to the SPI port from 
>> your micro and it talks to the serial port.
> 
> 
> Speed requirements are <= 38400, amount of data max 150cps in each 
> direction. I have read some on a few bit-banged serial port 
> implementations. Common for all of them were that they were half duplex 
> only. I need full duplex. I guess it is absolutely possible to achieve 
> that but I think I prefer a hardware solutiuon anyway.

The smallest Std UART with a narrow parallel BUS is the 2691 from 
Philips. Comes in 24 DIP and SO packages.


> I'm not too sure why I don't want to use the SPI-interface for asynch 
> SCI communication. You're more than welcome to give me reasons to do it 
> that way.

You may find that a small uC with SPI+UART, is cheaper/smaller than a 
small UART. Philips have tiny LPC91x series uC devices as small as 14 
pins, with UART and SPI ports, so you can add as many Duplex UARTS as 
you want....

-jg

Meindert Sprang wrote:

> Why not go for the ATmega162. It has two serial ports.

I can do without the TWI but need a couple of A/D channels.

-- 
Torbj�rn Heltne

"Torbj&#4294967295;rn Heltne" <torbjorn.heltne@amelektronikk.no> wrote in message
news:419dce17$1@news.broadpark.no...
>
> I'm already aiming for a micro with built in serial, the ATmega16. I
> need a second serial port.

Why not go for the ATmega162. It has two serial ports.

Meindert

> It would be useful if you could add a little more detail to your 
> requirements such as speed.
> 
> Depending on how busy your uC is, you could bit-bang the serial port 
> if the data rate is not too high.  We have done this on projects 
> where space and cost were at an absolute premium.
> 
> It was not clear why you can't use SPI, but if what you mean is you 
> can't use SPI for the serial port, you might use a separate small 
> micro that has both SPI and serial.  You talk to the SPI port from 
> your micro and it talks to the serial port.

Speed requirements are <= 38400, amount of data max 150cps in each 
direction. I have read some on a few bit-banged serial port 
implementations. Common for all of them were that they were half duplex 
only. I need full duplex. I guess it is absolutely possible to achieve 
that but I think I prefer a hardware solutiuon anyway.
I'm not too sure why I don't want to use the SPI-interface for asynch 
SCI communication. You're more than welcome to give me reasons to do it 
that way.


> How about a micro with built-in serial. PIC16F628, or PIC16F870 both 
> have uarts.

I'm already aiming for a micro with built in serial, the ATmega16. I 
need a second serial port.

-- 
Torbj&#4294967295;rn Heltne

Torbj�rn Heltne wrote:
> Are there any uarts around with a "narrow" parallell interface which can 
> be utilized from a uC w/o a full-blown address/data bus system? I am 
> aware of the possibility of using SPI-type uarts - but for various 
> reasons those are not an alternative this time.
> 
> I was thinking about the possibility of using 8-9-10 general IO lines on 
> a uC and I guess I should use an interrupt line as well.
> 
> Small footprint, low pin count, smd (of course), low price?
> 
> Ideas, anyone?
> 
Hi,

How about a micro with built-in serial. PIC16F628, or PIC16F870 both 
have uarts.

-- 
Luhan Monat: luhanis(at)yahoo(dot)com
http://members.cox.net/berniekm
"The Future is not what it used to be..."