CC Code Challenge (Week 8) Stumps Engineering Community

We stumped the engineering community with last week’s CC Weekly Code Challenge! We posted a code snippet with an error and challenged you to find the mistake!

Since nobody had the correct answer, we’ve drawn one lucky winner at random from all those who participated.

Congratulations to Marcelo Jimenez of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil for being selected in the CC Weekly Code Challenge – Week 7 drawing! He’ll receive a CC Tag Cloud t-shirt.

The language is Burroughs Corporation “Enhanced” Algol, a rather obscure language these days, though Algol variants were important in their time and are still discussed today in terms of their influence on the structure of subsequent programming languages. The correct answer was: Line 4: incorrect exponent character – it should be “2.99792458@8″

You can see the complete list of weekly winners and code challenges here.

What is the CC Weekly Code Challenge?
Each week, Circuit Cellar’s technical editors purposely insert an error in a snippet of code. It could be a semantic error, a syntax error, a design error, a spelling error, or another bug the editors slip in. You are challenged to find the error.Once the submission deadline passes, Circuit Cellar will randomly select one winner from the group of respondents who submit the correct answer.

Inspired? Want to try this week’s challenge? Get started!

Submission Deadline: The deadline for each week’s challenge is Sunday, 12 PM ESTRefer to the Rules, Terms & Conditions for information about eligibility and prizes.

Great Plains Super Launch 2013

 

Pella, IA — Spectators, visitors and participants alike all erupted into cheerful applause and exclamation after watching the weather balloons launch successfully from the launch site at Vermeer on Saturday. The onlookers observed these hydrogen/helium filled balloons rising into the air until they faded from sight, approaching extremely high altitudes.  The launch was the start of an hour and a half that the balloon spent ascending, all the way into the Earth’s ozone layer.  Another thirty five or forty minutes later the balloon popped and parachutes back to Earth.

The balloons enable us to explore the region of the atmosphere called “near space”, which is above 60,000 ft., but below the accepted altitude of space- 328,000 ft. Cosmic radiation of near space is 100 times greater than it is at sea level. The large balloons are attached to a payload, which contains GPS tracking and various sensors. The payloads contain beacons which emit radio signals. Many of the payloads in this year’s super launch were made by students dedicated to exploring near space.

This sort of active involvement is what PENS strives for. PENS is Pella’s Exploring Near Space program. Mike Morgan, the president of PENS, enjoys and commits to getting kids involved and interested in science and technologies.

“The only thing that goes higher than our balloons are astronauts and satellites. The launch of a radio balloon isn’t something you see or do every day,” Morgan said.
The payload of the balloon also includes a camera so that you can get the view from the edge of space, along with other valuable information that the payload and sensors give. They are used to test things such as barometer, pressure, temperature, UV radiation and humidity. All of these are important factors in the study of aero science.

Bill Brown, founding father of Amateur Radio, participated in the Great Plains Super Launch on Saturday. From Alabama, Brown flew the first high altitude balloon with an amateur radio and video camera in 1987. Brown has flown 400 balloons in 20 states, but each launch presents new information and stimulating challenges. Brown explains that from the edge of space, “You can see the black sky and the curve of the Earth”.

For Nick Stich, the balloon that he launched was his 188th balloon. Balloons from all over the country were launched last Saturday, including radio balloons from Nebraska Stratospheric Amateur Radio, Edge of Space Sciences, DePauw University, and Iowa High Altitude Balloon. PENS, coordinated by Jim Emmert, hosted the conference for near space explorers and enthusiasts.

By Renee Van Roekel
The Chronicle

For more information on the super launch or radio ballooning, visit www.superlaunch.org .

This article was originally published by The Pella Chronicle on June 22, 2013, and is posted here with the permission of its publisher.

Elektor’s Electronics Lab

Want to share electronics projects? Looking for a design community that will help you reach your project goals? Need feedback on your electronic system-related ideas, applications, and design plans?

ELektor.LABS is for you!

Current projects in Elektor.LABS:

  • PLµX: Programmable Logic Microcontroller on Linux
  • Wireless Batter Charger
  • LPC810 as NE555 or as Capacitance Meter
  • FPGA Development Board
  • USB-IO24 Cable
  • Wi-Fi RGB LED Strip
  • And many more!

Want to know more? Check out this video.

CircuitCellar.com is an Elektor International Media publication.

CC 277: Simulate and Design a Switched Capacitor Filter

Here is Lacoste’s experimental mockup. It’s not pretty, but it’s functional. The clock is at the top. The filter is below.

Circuit Cellar columnist Robert Lacoste doesn’t like to throw away his old magazines—at least the ones that have electronics projects.

And often it’s the lack of microcontrollers in such projects that he finds intriguing. The designs required “clever solutions to implement even simple features, which is always a good source of inspiration,” he says.

Lacoste was recently inspired by a 1981 Elektor magazine article on switched-capacitor filters (part of the old magazine collection in his basement). So, he decided to revisit the topic in his column appearing in Circuit Cellar’s August issue.

“I figured, why not refresh it for a Circuit Cellar Darker Side article, as mastering switched-capacitor filters is now mandatory for plenty of mixed-signal designs?”

Lacoste’s column shows you how to modify a basic low-pass filter into a switched-capacitor filter.

He explains why such a modification can be a good one:

“The most basic form of a low-pass filter is the simple one-pole RC filter… Why can’t we be happy with such simple RC filters? There are two reasons. First, it is often convenient to have a filter with an adjustable cutoff frequency. With a RC filter, you would need to change either the resistor’s or the capacitor’s value. This it is not easy to do if you want to design an inexpensive electronic system. The other reason is more linked to IC technology and CMOS in particular.

“Assume you want to design a filtering chip with a cutoff frequency of about 10 kHz. If you want to use a small and inexpensive capacitor—perhaps no more than 1 nF—you will need a high-value resistor… The problem is that designing a high-value resistor on a silicon chip is complicated (i.e., expensive). Moreover, unlike capacitors, on-chip resistors are difficult to manufacture with tight specifications.”

Lacoste found the solution by looking through few back issues of his magazine collection and a few past decades.

“In the late 1970s, IC designers looked for a way to replace high-value resistors with inexpensive and easy-to-integrate parts (e.g., small capacitor),” he says.

The idea of replacing a resistor with a switched capacitor produced the switched-capacitor architecture Lacoste presents in his August column. As a bonus, his design offers an easy way to adjust switching frequencies.

“Of course, no one is actually designing a switched-capacitor circuit from scratch, as I did for this article,” Lacoste says. “It was only for demonstration purposes. There are plenty of ready-made switched-capacitor chips on the market. Just read their datasheets and use them in your design, more or less as a black box.”

Still, Lacoste says, “the best way to learn is to never be afraid of any technology. Knowing the internals helps you avoid usage mistakes.”

Intrigued? Check out Lacoste’s column in the August issue for more details.

Alex Ivopol Wins the CC Code Challenge (Week 7)

We have a winner of last week’s CC Weekly Code Challenge, sponsored by IAR Systems! We posted a code snippet with an error and challenged the engineering community to find the mistake!

Congratulations to Alex Ivopol of Wellington, New Zealand for winning the CC Weekly Code Challenge for Week 7! He’ll receive an IAR Kickstart KSK-TMPM061-JL kit.

Alex’s correct answer was randomly selected from the pool of responses that correctly identified an error in the code. Alex answered:

2013_code_challenge_07_answerYou can see the complete list of weekly winners and code challenges here.

What is the CC Weekly Code Challenge?
Each week, Circuit Cellar’s technical editors purposely insert an error in a snippet of code. It could be a semantic error, a syntax error, a design error, a spelling error, or another bug the editors slip in. You are challenged to find the error.Once the submission deadline passes, Circuit Cellar will randomly select one winner from the group of respondents who submit the correct answer.

Inspired? Want to try this week’s challenge? Get started!

Submission Deadline: The deadline for each week’s challenge is Sunday, 12 PM ESTRefer to the Rules, Terms & Conditions for information about eligibility and prizes.

Member Profile: Joe Pfeiffer

Joe Pfeiffer

Location: Las Cruces, NM

Education: BS with a double major in Computer Science and Physics, 1979, and a PhD in Computer Science, 1986, both from the University of Washington in Seattle

Occupation: Joe was a professor in the Department of Computer Science at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces until he retired in 2010. Joe’s research interests focused on visual programming languages and geometric reasoning for mobile robots. Most of his teaching involved computer architecture, Assembly language programming, and OSes.

Member Status: Joe says he’s been a Circuit Cellar subscriber for at least 10 years.

Technical Interests: He enjoys programming Microchip Technology PIC processors. More recently, he has become interested in Android programming and development under Linux.

Most Recent Embedded Tech-Related Acquisition: Joe bought a model rocket altimeter (and a bunch of related connectors and things) for a rocket he’s building for his National Association of Rocketry Level 2 high-power certification.

Current Projects: Joe is currently developing a shop oven. “I want it to be useful for solder reflow work—so I’ll want it to be able to follow the reflow temperature profile—and also accurately maintain a temperature for applications like powder coating. I’m planning a USB interface so I can log its activity for later analysis,” he explained.

Thoughts on the Future of Embedded Technology: Joe feels that computing is becoming more pervasive and connected. “From a digital caliper that cost me under $10, to a Bluetooth-connected OBD-II scanner for a car—it’s just amazing,” he said. “One thing I worry about is that, along with so much in computing and technology, the bar is getting too high for entry. As through-hole, hand-solderable components slowly disappear, it seems like it’ll be harder and harder for someone to create a first simple project and get started,” he added.

Using Socially Assistive Robots to Address the Caregiver Gap

David Feil-Seifer

Editor’s Note: David Feil-Seifer, a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Computer Science Department at Yale University, wrote this  essay for Circuit Cellar. Feil-Seifer focuses his research on socially assistive robotics (SAR), particularly the study of human-robot interaction for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). His dissertation work addressed autonomous robot behavior so that socially assistive robots can recognize and respond to a child’s behavior in unstructured play. He recently was hired as Assistant Professor of Computer Science at the University of Nevada, Reno.

There are looming health care and education crises on the horizon. Baby boomers are getting older and requiring more care, which puts pressure on caregivers. The US nursing shortage is projected to worsen. Similarly, the rapid growth of diagnoses of developmental disorders suggests a greater need for educators, one that the education system is struggling to meet. These great and growing shortfalls in the number of caregivers and educators may be addressed (in part) through the use of socially assistive robotics.

In health care, non-contact repetitive tasks make up a large part of a caregiver’s day. Tasks such as monitoring instruments only require a check to verify that readings are within norms. By offloading these tasks to an automated system, a nurse or doctor could spend more time doing work that better leverages their medical training. A robot can effectively perform simple repetitive tasks (e.g., monitoring breath spirometry exercises or post-stroke rehabilitation compliance).

I coined the term “socially assistive robotics” (SAR) to describe robots that provide such assistance through social rather than physical interaction. My research is the development of SAR algorithms and complete systems relevant to domains such as post-stroke rehabilitation, elder care, and therapeutic interaction for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). A key challenge for such autonomous SAR systems is the ability to sense, interpret, and properly respond to human social behavior.

One of my research priorities is developing a socially assistive robotic system for children with ASD. Children with ASD are characterized by social impairments, communication difficulties, and repetitive and stereotyped behaviors. Significant anecdotal evidence indicates that some children with ASD respond socially to robots, which could have therapeutic ramifications. We envision a robot that could act as a catalyst for social interaction, both human-robot and human-human, thus aiding ASD users’ human-human socialization. In such a scenario, the robot is not specifically generating social behavior or participating in social interaction, but instead behaves in a way known to provoke human-human interaction.

David Feil-Seifer developed an autonomous robot that recognizes and appropriately responds to a child’s free-form behavior in play contexts, similar to those seen in some more traditional autism spectrum disorder (ASD) therapies.

Enabling a robot to exhibit and understand social behavior with a child is challenging. Children are highly individual and thus technology used for social interaction needs to be robust to be effective. I developed an autonomous robot that recognizes and appropriately responds to a child’s free-form behavior in play contexts, similar to those seen in some more traditional ASD therapies.

To detect and mitigate child distress, I developed a methodology for learning and then applying a data-driven spatiotemporal model of social behavior based on distance-based features to automatically differentiate between typical vs. aversive child-robot interactions. Using a Gaussian mixture model learned over distance-based feature data, the developed system was able to detect and interpret social behavior with sufficient accuracy to recognize child distress. The robot can use this to change its own behavior to encourage positive social interaction.

To encourage human-human interaction once human-robot interaction was achieved, I developed a navigation planner that used the above spatiotemporal model. This was used to maintain the robot’s spatial relationship with a child to sustain interaction while also guiding the child to a particular location in a room. This could be used to encourage a child to move toward another interaction partner (e.g., a parent). The desired spatial interaction behavior is achieved by modifying an established trajectory planner to weigh candidate trajectories based on conformity to a trained model of the desired behavior.

I also developed a methodology for robot behavior that provides autonomous feedback for a robot-child imitation and turn-taking game. This was accomplished by incorporating an established therapeutic model of feedback along with a trained model of imitation behavior. This is used as part of an autonomous system that can play Simon Says, recognize when the rules have been violated, and provide appropriate feedback.

A growing body of data supports the hypothesis that robots have the potential to aid in addressing the needs of people through non-contact assistance. My research, along with that of many others, has resulted in technical advances for robots providing assistance to people. However, there is a long way to go before these systems can be deployed as a therapeutic platform. Given that the beneficiary populations are growing, and the required therapeutic needs are increasing far more rapidly than the existing resources to address it, SAR could provide lasting benefits to people in need.

David Feil-Seifer, a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Computer Science Department at Yale University, focuses his research on socially assistive robotics (SAR), particularly the study of human-robot interaction for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). His dissertation work addressed autonomous robot behavior so that socially assistive robots can recognize and respond to a child’s behavior in unstructured play. David received his MS and PhD in Computer Science from the University of Southern California and a BS in Computer Science from the University of Rochester, NY. He recently was hired as Assistant Professor of Computer Science at the University of Nevada, Reno.

Colm Baston Wins the CC Code Challenge (Week 6)

We have a winner of last week’s CC Weekly Code Challenge, sponsored by IAR Systems! We posted a code snippet with an error and challenged the engineering community to find the mistake!

Congratulations to Colm Baston of Flintshire, UK, for winning the CC Weekly Code Challenge for Week 6! He’ll receive the Elektor 2012 & 2011 Archive DVD.

Colm’s correct answer was randomly selected from the pool of responses that correctly identified an error in the code. Colm answered:

Line 7: (c == *s++) is comparing the values of c and *s rather than assigning: It should be (c = *s++)

You can see the complete list of weekly winners and code challenges here.

What is the CC Weekly Code Challenge?
Each week, Circuit Cellar’s technical editors purposely insert an error in a snippet of code. It could be a semantic error, a syntax error, a design error, a spelling error, or another bug the editors slip in. You are challenged to find the error.Once the submission deadline passes, Circuit Cellar will randomly select one winner from the group of respondents who submit the correct answer.

Inspired? Want to try this week’s challenge? Get started!

Submission Deadline: The deadline for each week’s challenge is Sunday, 12 PM ESTRefer to the Rules, Terms & Conditions for information about eligibility and prizes.

Client Profile: Custom Computer Services (CCS), Inc.

Custom Computer Services (CCS), Inc.
Spring City Drive
Waukesha, WI 53186

www.ccsinfo.com

Contact: Sales, sales@ccsinfo.com

Embedded Products/Services: CCS specializes in embedded software and hardware development tools. Available to the development community is a range of solutions for Microchip Technology microcontrollers, and digital signal controllers (DSCs), that include: C compilers, prototyping boards, development kits, and programmers/debuggers. CCS also offers custom engineering services and a line of embedded Ethernet devices (e.g., EZ Web Lynx). For more information visit www.ccsinfo.com.

Product Information: The CCSC Version 5 compiler with all of its new features and enhancements has just been released! Version 5 is the first release to include an aggressive code optimizer, plus a dynamic C Profiler tool. Other enhancements include:

  • New libraries—generate relevant and tight code for a specific application. Included are: RS-232, RS-485, PWM, timers, a capacitive touchpad, and more.
  • C++ stream operator support—C++ streams provide a unified interface for I/O and data formatting.
  • Serial port monitor—a graphing capability enables real-time graphing at a PC from a Microchip Technology PIC microcontroller program. For more information on Version 5, visit www.ccsinfo.com/version5

Exclusive Offer: For Circuit Cellar readers, CCS is offering $60 off the purchase price of any development kit. Development kits include: the IDE C Compiler, prototyping board, an ICD-U64 debugger/programmer, a breadboard with auxiliary parts, a power supply, and cables. Call the sales department at 262-522-6500 ext. 35 and mention the promo code CC60, or visit www.ccsinfo.com and use the promo code CC60 in your cart. This offer is valid until August 31, 2013.

Custom Computer Services, Inc.

CC276: Not a Hockey Fan?

Hockey can be fun, unless you’re building a surface-mount device (SMD) prototype and the “puck” is one of the tiny components getting away from your soldering iron. In an article appearing last month in Circuit Cellar, “DIY?Surface-Mount Circuit Boards: Tips and Tricks for Building SMD Prototypes,” engineer James Lyman inadvertently sparked a bit of debate on the magazine’s website. Readers posted various alternatives to Lyman’s approach to the “SMD hockey” challenge. Here’s how Lyman’s article describes the problem and his solution:

“When I built my first few surface-mount boards, I did what so many amateurs and technicians do. I carefully placed each minute component on the circuit board in its correct position, and then spent several minutes playing ‘SMD hockey.’ With nothing holding the component in place, I’d take my soldering iron and heat the pad component while touching the solder to the junction. Just as the solder was about to melt, that little component would turn into a ‘puck’ and scoot away. Using the soldering iron’s tip as a ‘hockey stick,’ I’d chase the little puck back to its pads and try again, which was maddening…

“It slowly occurred to me that I needed something to hold each part in place while soldering—something that would glue them in place. Commercial houses glue the components down on the boards and then use a wave soldering machine, which does all the soldering at once. That’s exactly what I started doing. I use J-B Weld, a common off-the-shelf epoxy.”

Here is a sampling of alternative solutions readers posted to circuitcellar.com.

  • From Bill: “If you must use epoxy, then the cheapest fast-setting epoxy from Poundland will do the trick.
    “Personally, I’ve always used a tiny spot of cheapo CA superglue, which gives you 20-60 s to position the component. If there are a lot of SMDs on the board, you might want to use an accelerant spray to reduce the CA cure to 5 or 10 s. If you can’t afford proper CA accelerant, then isoprop or a gentle waft above the board with a cloth soaked in a little household ammonia will do the trick.”
  • From Trevor: ”I did a lot of hand soldering of SM parts years ago and agree that it is best to fix the parts before soldering.
    “I used an adhesive made for SM parts from RS Components, which comes in a syringe and is really easy to use. ” (Trevor’s post provides a link to his preferred Electrolube brand.)
  • From Kevin: ”Crikey, epoxying all the components first is a bit brutal. What if you want to change one? Melt the solder and twist, all at the same time?
    “Much easier to tin one pad, then place the part on it with tweezers and touch it with the iron, one end soldered fine, now solder the other end.”

Feel free to visit circuitcellar.com to weigh in or take some of the advice offered there.

Antonios Chorevas Wins the CC Code Challenge (Week 5)

We have a winner of last week’s CC Weekly Code Challenge, sponsored by IAR Systems! We posted a code snippet with an error and challenged the engineering community to find the mistake!

Congratulations to Antonios Chorevas of Attiki, Greece, for winning the CC Weekly Code Challenge for Week 5! He’ll receive a CC “Tag Cloud” T-shirt and a hardcopy of the CC25 Anniversary Issue.

Antonios’ correct answer was randomly selected from the pool of responses that correctly identified an error in the code. Antonios answered:

Line 04: (x*x) must be replaced by ((x)*(x)) because there is problem with the priority of the operations

 

You can see the complete list of weekly winners and code challenges here.

What is the CC Weekly Code Challenge?
Each week, Circuit Cellar’s technical editors purposely insert an error in a snippet of code. It could be a semantic error, a syntax error, a design error, a spelling error, or another bug the editors slip in. You are challenged to find the error.Once the submission deadline passes, Circuit Cellar will randomly select one winner from the group of respondents who submit the correct answer.

Inspired? Want to try this week’s challenge? Get started!

Submission Deadline: The deadline for each week’s challenge is Sunday, 12 PM ESTRefer to the Rules, Terms & Conditions for information about eligibility and prizes.

Electrical Engineering Crossword (Issue 276)

The answers to Circuit Cellar’s July electronics engineering crossword puzzle are now available.

Across
3.    CRAY—Seattle, WA-based supercomputer company founded in the 1970s
5.    SUPERSTATE—A subprogram common to several states [two words]
7.    ONESCOMPLIANT—Inverted bits’ value [two words]
11.    BACKPLANE—Lacks processing and storage
13.    FALSECLOCK—Locks on an incorrect frequency [two words]
15.    TERNARY—This signal is capable of taking on one of three conditions
16.    BLUMLEIN—Known for advancements in telecommunications and radar
17.    JABBER—XML messaging protocol (hint: prior to 2000)
18.    DIRECTCURRENT—Zero frequency [two words]
20.    SERIALTRANSFER—Moves data bit by bit [two words]

Down
1.    LYAPUNOV—Theory applies input-to-state (ISS) to systems with inputs
2.    LOWFREQUENCYOSCILLATOR—Produces a frequency below approximately 20 Hz [three words]
4.    HASHING—Security method
6.    SIGNIFICAND—aka, mantissa
8.    THYRISTOR—They have a four-layer N- and P-type construction
9.    HALFADDER—Combines two single binary digits [two words]
10.    DARKTRACE—A type of direct-view bistable storage tube [two words]
12.    FARADAYCAGE—Electric field-buffer [two words]
14.    SYMMETRIC—Uses the same key to code and decode
19.    KAHAN—Helped create the IEEE 754 floating-point computation specification

LED Characterization: An Arduino-Based Curve Tracer

Circuit Cellar columnist Ed Nisley doesn’t want to rely solely on datasheets to understand the values of LEDs in his collection. So he built a curve tracer to measure his LEDs’ specific characteristics.

Why was he so exacting?

“Most of the time, we take small light-emitting diodes for granted: connect one in series with a suitable resistor and voltage source, it lights up, then we expect it to work forever,” he says in his July column in Circuit Cellar. “A recent project prompted me to take a closer look at commodity 5-mm LEDs, because I intended to connect them in series for better efficiency from a fixed DC supply and in parallel to simplify the switching. Rather than depend on the values found in datasheets, I built a simple Arduino-based LED Curve Tracer to measure the actual characteristics of the LEDs I intended to use.”

The Arduino Pro Micro clone in this hand-wired LED Curve Tracer controls the LED current and measures the resulting voltage.

Ed decided to share the curve tracer with his Circuit Cellar readers.

“Even though this isn’t a research-grade instrument, it can provide useful data that helps demonstrate LED operation and shows why you must pay more attention to their needs,” he says.

Ed says that although he thinks of his circuit as an “LED Curve Tracer,” it doesn’t display its data.

“Instead, I create the graphs with data files captured from the Arduino serial port and processed through Gnuplot,” he says. “One advantage of that process is that I can tailor the graphs to suit the data, rather than depend on a single graphic format. One disadvantage is that I must run a program to visualize the measurements. Feel free to add a graphics display to your LED Curve Tracer and write the code to support it!”

He adds that “any circuit attached to an Arduino should provide its own power to avoid overloading the Arduino’s on-board regulator.”

“I used a regulated 7.5 VDC wall wart for both the Arduino Pro Mini board and the LED under test, because the relatively low voltage minimized the power dissipation in the Arduino regulator,” he says. “You could use a 9 VDC or 12 VDC supply.”

To read more about Ed’s curve tracer, check out Circuit Cellar’s July issue.

 

New Products: July 2013

CWAV, Inc. USBee QX

MIXED SIGNAL OSCILLOSCOPE WITH PROTOCOL ANALYZER

The USBee QX is a PC-based mixed-signal oscilloscope (MSO) integrated with a protocol analyzer utilizing USB 3.0 and Wi-Fi technology. The highly integrated, 600-MHz MSO features 24 digital channels and four analog channels.

With its large 896-Msample buffer memory and data compression capability, the USBeeQX can capture up to 32 days of traces. It displays serial or parallel protocols in a human-readable format, enabling developers to find and resolve obscure and difficult defects. The MOS includes popular serial protocols (e.g., RS-232/UARTs, SPI, I2C, CAN, SDIO, Async, 1-Wire, and I2S), which are typically costly add-ons for benchtop oscilloscopes. The MOS utilizes APIs and Tool Builders that are integrated into the USBee QX software to support any custom protocol.

The USBee QX’s Wi-Fi capability enables you set up testing in the lab while you are at your desk. The Wi-Fi capability also creates electrical isolation of the device under test to the host computer.

The USBee QX costs $2,495.

CWAV, Inc.
www.usbee.com

 


DownStream Technologies FabStream

FREE PCB DESIGN SOFTWARE SUITE

FabStream is an integrated PCB design and manufacturing solution designed for the DIY electronics market, including small businesses, start-ups, engineers, inventors, hobbyists, and other electronic enthusiasts. FabStream consists of free SoloPCB Design software customized to each manufacturing partner in the FabStream network.

The FabStream service works in three easy steps. First, you log onto the FabStream website (www.fabstream.com), select a FabStream manufacturing partner, and download the free design software. Next, you create PCB libraries, schematics, and board layouts. Finally, the software leads you through the process of ordering PCBs online with the manufacturer. You only pay for the PCBs you purchase. Because the service is mostly Internet-based, FabStream can be accessed globally and is available 24/7/365.

FabStream’s free SoloPCB Design software includes a commercial-quality schematic capture, PCB layout, and autorouting in one, easy-to-use environment. The software is customized to each manufacturing partner. All of the manufacturer’s production capabilities are built into SoloPCB, enabling you to work within the manufacturers’ constraints. Design changes can be made and then verified through an integrated analyzer that uses a quick pass/fail check to compare the modification to the manufacturer’s rules.

SoloPCB does not contain any CAM outputs. Instead, a secure, industry-standard IPC-2581 manufacturing file is automatically extracted, encrypted, and electronically routed to the manufacturer during the ordering process. The IPC-2581 file contains all the design information needed for manufacturing, which eliminates the need to create Gerber and NC drill files.

FabStream is available as a free download. More information can be found at www.fabstream.com

DownStream Technologies, LLC
www.downstreamtech.com

 


Rohde Schwarz SMW200A

HIGH-PERFORMANCE VECTOR SIGNAL GENERATOR

The R&S SMW200A high-performance vector signal generator combines flexibility, performance, and intuitive operation to quickly and easily generate complex, high-quality signals for LTE Advanced and next-generation mobile standards. The generator is designed to simpify complex 4G device testing.

With its versatile configuration options, the R&S SMW200A’s range of applications extends from single-path vector signal generation to multichannel multiple-input and multiple-output (MIMO) receiver testing. The vector signal generator provides a baseband generator, a RF generator, and a real-time MIMO fading simulator in a single instrument.

The R&S SMW200A covers the100 kHz-to-3-GHz, or 6 GHz, frequency range, and features a 160-MHz I/Q modulation bandwidth with internal baseband. The generator is well suited for verification of 3G and 4G base stations and aerospace and defense applications.

The R&S SMW200A can be equipped with an optional second RF path for frequencies up to 6 GHz. It can have a a maximum of two baseband and four fading simulator modules, providing users with two full-featured vector signal generators in a single unit. Fading scenarios, such as 2 × 2 MIMO, 8 × 2 MIMO for TD-LTE, and 2 × 2 MIMO for LTE Advanced carrier aggregation, can be easily simulated.

Higher-order MIMO applications (e.g., 3 × 3 MIMO for WLAN or 4 × 4 MIMO for LTE-FDD) are easily supported by connecting a third and fourth source to the R&S SMW200A. The R&S SGS100A are highly compact RF sources that are controlled directly from the front panel of the R&S SMW200A.

The R&S SMW200A ensures high accuracy in spectral and modulation measurements. The SSB phase noise is –139 dBc (typical) at 1 GHz (20 kHz offset). Help functions are provided for additional ease-of-use, and presets are provided for all important digital standards and fading scenarios. LTE and UMTS test case wizards simplify complex base station conformance testing in line with the 3GPP specification.

Contact Rohde & Schwarz for pricing.

Rohde & Schwarz
www.corporate.rohde-schwarz.com

 


Texas Instruments CC2538

INTEGRATED ZIGBEE SINGLE-CHIP SOLUTION WITH AN ARM CORTEX-M3 MCU

The Texas Instruments (TI) CC2538 system-on-chip (SoC) is designed to simplify the development of ZigBee wireless connectivity-enabled smart energy infrastructure, home and building automation, and intelligent lighting gateways. The cost-efficient SoC features an ARM Cortex-M3 microcontroller, memory, and hardware accelerators on one piece of silicon. The CC2538 supports ZigBee PRO, ZigBee Smart Energy and ZigBee Home Automation and lighting standards to deliver interoperability with existing and future ZigBee products. The SoC also uses IEEE 802.15.4 and 6LoWPAN IPv6 networks to support IP standards-based development.

The CC2538 is capable of supporting fast digital management and features scalable memory options from 128 to 512 KB flash to support smart energy infrastructure applications. The SoC sustains a mesh network with hundreds of end nodes using integrated 8-to-32-KB RAM options that are pin-for-pin compatible for maximum flexibility.

The CC2538’s additional benefits include temperature operation up to 125°C, optimization for battery-powered applications using only 1.3 uA in Sleep mode, and efficient processing for centralized networks and reduced bill of materials cost through integrated ARM Cortex-M3 core.

The CC2538 development kit (CC2538DK) provides a complete development platform for the CC2538, enabling users to see all functionality without additional layout. It comes with high-performance CC2538 evaluation modules (CC2538EMK) and motherboards with an integrated ARM Cortex-M3 debug probe for software development and peripherals including an LCD, buttons, LEDs, light sensor and accelerometer for creating demo software. The boards are also compatible with TI’s SmartRF Studio for running RF performance tests. The CC2538 supports current and future Z-Stack releases from TI and over-the-air software downloads for easier upgrades in the field.

The CC2538 is available in an 8-mm x 8-mm QFN56 package and costs $3 in high volumes. The CC2538 is also available through TI’s free sample program. The CC2538DK costs $299.

Texas Instruments, Inc.
www.ti.com

CC 276: MCU-Based Prosthetic Arm with Kinect

In its July issue, Circuit Cellar presents a project that combines the technology behind Microsoft’s Kinect gaming device with a prototype prosthetic arm.

The project team and  authors of the article include Jung Soo Kim, an undergraduate student in Biomedical Engineering at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada, Nika Zolfaghari, a master’s student at Ryerson, and Dr. James Andrew Smith, who specializes in Biomedical Engineering at Ryerson.

“We designed an inexpensive, adaptable platform for prototype prosthetics and their testing systems,” the team says. “These systems use Microsoft’s Kinect for Xbox, a motion sensing device, to track a healthy human arm’s instantaneous movement, replicate the exact movement, and test a prosthetic prototype’s response.”

“Kelvin James was one of the first to embed a microprocessor in a prosthetic limb in the mid-1980s…,” they add. “With the maker movement and advances in embedded electronics, mechanical T-slot systems, and consumer-grade sensor systems, these applications now have more intuitive designs. Integrating Xbox provides a platform to test prosthetic devices’ control algorithms. Xbox also enables prosthetic arm end users to naturally train their arms.”

They elaborate on their choices in building the four main hardware components of their design, which include actuators, electronics, sensors, and mechanical support:

“Robotis Dynamixel motors combine power-dense neodymium motors from Maxon Motors with local angle sensing and high gear ratio transmission, all in a compact case. Atmel’s on-board 8-bit ATmega8 microcontroller, which is similar to the standard Arduino, has high (17-to-50-ms) latency. Instead, we used a 16-bit Freescale Semiconductor MC9S12 microcontroller on an Arduino-form-factor board. It was bulkier, but it was ideal for prototyping. The Xbox system provided high-level sensing. Finally, we used Twintec’s MicroRAX 10-mm profile T-slot aluminum to speed the mechanical prototyping.”

The team’s goal was to design a  prosthetic arm that is markedly different from others currently available. “We began by building a working prototype of a smooth-moving prosthetic arm,” they say in their article.

“We developed four quadrant-capable H-bridge-driven motors and proportional-derivative (PD) controllers at the prosthetic’s joints to run on a MC9S12 microcontroller. Monitoring the prosthetic’s angular position provided us with an analytic comparison of the programmed and outputted results.”

A Technological Arts Esduino microcontroller board is at the heart of the prosthetic arm design.

The team concludes that its project illustrates how to combine off-the-shelf Arduino-compatible parts, aluminum T-slots, servomotors, and a Kinect into an adaptable prosthetic arm.

But more broadly, they say, it’s a project that supports the argument that  “more natural ways of training and tuning prostheses” can be achieved because the Kinect “enables potential end users to manipulate their prostheses without requiring complicated scripting or programming methods.”

For more on this interesting idea, check out the July issue of Circuit Cellar. And for a video from an earlier Circuit Cellar post about this project, click here.