DSP parts with free dev software/cheap dev tools?

Data wrote:
> On Dec 20, 9:15 pm, "steve" <bungalow_st...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > if you are using the gyro/accelerometers I think you are using they
> > have about 10% accuracy specs out of the box, so that is less then 4
> > bits of meaningful data, floating point math would be overkill, 16 bit
> > math would even be overkill, the ARM would be overkill, you don't need
> > a floating point DSP, use what you know, the ARM
>
> 10% total inaccuracy doesn't necessarily mean 4 bits of meaningful
> data. It will only mean that if the sensor can't be calibrated,

hence my comment "out of the box"

> Even if they were, floating-point could still be useful -- it accounts
> for roundoff error and overflow. It's not best for everything, but the
> choice has much more to do with the computation problem than the
> sensor.

floating point would be great for development, experimenting with
various equations, but not needed in the end product

> 
> --mpa

steve wrote:

> Data wrote:
> > On Dec 20, 9:15 pm, "steve" <bungalow_st...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > if you are using the gyro/accelerometers I think you are using they
> > > have about 10% accuracy specs out of the box, so that is less then 4
> > > bits of meaningful data, floating point math would be overkill, 16 bit
> > > math would even be overkill, the ARM would be overkill, you don't need
> > > a floating point DSP, use what you know, the ARM
> >
> > 10% total inaccuracy doesn't necessarily mean 4 bits of meaningful
> > data. It will only mean that if the sensor can't be calibrated,
>
> hence my comment "out of the box"

Then your comment was very silly. Surely he will calibrate the sensor,
etc.

> > Even if they were, floating-point could still be useful -- it accounts
> > for roundoff error and overflow. It's not best for everything, but the
> > choice has much more to do with the computation problem than the
> > sensor.
>
> floating point would be great for development, experimenting with
> various equations, but not needed in the end product

And how do you know that? Perhaps the designer himself is the best
judge of that.

--mpa

Data wrote:
> steve wrote:
>
> > Data wrote:
> > > On Dec 20, 9:15 pm, "steve" <bungalow_st...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > if you are using the gyro/accelerometers I think you are using they
> > > > have about 10% accuracy specs out of the box, so that is less then 4
> > > > bits of meaningful data, floating point math would be overkill, 16 bit
> > > > math would even be overkill, the ARM would be overkill, you don't need
> > > > a floating point DSP, use what you know, the ARM
> > >
> > > 10% total inaccuracy doesn't necessarily mean 4 bits of meaningful
> > > data. It will only mean that if the sensor can't be calibrated,
> >
> > hence my comment "out of the box"
>
> Then your comment was very silly. Surely he will calibrate the sensor,
> etc.

ok, maybe I am silly for assuming a student looking for a free DSP
toolset doesn't have access to a $100K+ temperature controlled multi
axis rate/vib table

>
> > > Even if they were, floating-point could still be useful -- it accounts
> > > for roundoff error and overflow. It's not best for everything, but the
> > > choice has much more to do with the computation problem than the
> > > sensor.
> >
> > floating point would be great for development, experimenting with
> > various equations, but not needed in the end product
>
> And how do you know that?

cause there is nothing a floating point processor can do that a fixed
point can't.

 Perhaps the designer himself is the best
> judge of that.
>
yes I agree, he can use either a fixed point for floating point
processor, I didn't say he had to use either, just that floating point
was not needed, that he didn't need to restrict himself, it's up to him
weight the various tradeoffs of each (learning a new toolset/processor
vs dealing with the headaches of fixed point math)

"dspwhiz" <soumit.mukherjee@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1166651081.231957.294590@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Is there any TI or ADSP simulator  available for free?


With adsp  there is a gcc port for the blackfin family
see blackfin.org

There is a cheap robotics board on the way - blackfin handy board 
http://www.cs.uml.edu/blackfin/
as well as the blackfin stamp boards.
http://blackfin.uclinux.org/gf/project/stamp
http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT9272421886.html
http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS7154844947.html

BF533 stamp is no longer made but the BF537 can be purchased from 
digikey.com
http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0,2877,BF537%252DSTAMP,00.html
search for BF537 stamp at digikey - US$226


For TI if you are at a uni, you may be able to get the tools for free via 
the university program
or buy some hardware and get the free matching tools offer
(probably have to spend at least US$400 min).

http://focus.ti.com/general/docs/university/univhome.tsp?templateId=5807&navigationId=10538&path=templatedata/cm/univgen/data/univ_ovw


Alex Gibson