| ??? 08/29/05 16:57 Read: times |
#100234 - Why not use a microcontroller instead? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Hi Damien,
What you're trying to do is a perfect example of a project that is ideal for a microcontroller. Instead of a timer chip with all its required discrete parts (which must be changed if timing is adjusted) try using a uC with a built-in clock oscillator. You can implement in code a simple state machine that looks at a switch connected to it, and if held for your 3-5 seconds then activate an output. There is a lot of flexibility, and you can make changes without having to change the board. Furthermore, a small uC can be cheaper than the timer, especially when you don't need to buy the resistors and capacitors all around it. Board space costs too. Dennis |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| 556 timer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why not use a microcontroller instead? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 556 timer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why, you do not need one, haven't you he | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| cheap micro eval board | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| even better | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 556 timer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| have a look at | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| have a look at | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| $0.39 4013 flip flop solution. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| $0.39 4013 flip flop solution. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| $0.59 solution | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not an 8051... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| didn't know | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Tiny11 has 32 Byte RAM | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Application | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| if a VERY small uC is the right tool, wh | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Because Philips ignorance | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
stuck in a rut | 01/01/70 00:00 |