Seven-Controller EtherCAT Orchestra

When I first saw the Intel Industrial Control in Concert demonstration at Design West 2012 in San Jose, CA, I immediately thought of Kurt Vonnegut ‘s 1952 novel Player Piano. The connection, of course, is that the player piano in the novel and Intel’s Atom-based robotic orchestra both play preprogrammed music without human involvement. But the similarities end there. Vonnegut used the self-playing autopiano as a metaphor for a mechanized society in which wealthy industrialists replaced human workers with automated machines. In contrast, Intel’s innovative system demonstrated engineering excellence and created a buzz in the in the already positive atmosphere at the conference.

In “EtherCAT Orchestra” (Circuit Cellar 264, July 2012), Richard Wotiz carefully details the awe-inspiring music machine that’s built around seven embedded systems, each of which is based on Intel’s Atom D525 dual-core microprocessor. He provides information about the system you can’t find on YouTube or hobby tech blogs. Here is the article in its entirety.

EtherCAT Orchestra

I have long been interested in automatically controlled musical instruments. When I was little, I remember being fascinated whenever I ran across a coin-operated electromechanical calliope or a carnival hurdy-gurdy. I could spend all day watching the many levers, wheels, shafts, and other moving parts as it played its tunes over and over. Unfortunately, the mechanical complexity and expertise needed to maintain these machines makes them increasingly rare. But, in our modern world of pocket-sized MP3 players, there’s still nothing like seeing music created in front of you.

I recently attended the Design West conference (formerly the Embedded Systems Conference) in San Jose, CA, and ran across an amazing contraption that reminded me of old carnival music machines. The system was created for Intel as a demonstration of its Atom processor family, and was quite successful at capturing the attention of anyone walking by Intel’s booth (see Photo 1).

Photo 1—This is Intel’s computer-controlled orchestra. It may not look like any musical instrument you’ve ever seen, but it’s quite a thing to watch. The inspiration came from Animusic’s “Pipe Dream,” which appears on the video screen at the top. (Source: R. Wotiz)

The concept is based on Animusic’s music video “Pipe Dream,” which is a captivating computer graphics representation of a futuristic orchestra. The instruments in the video play when virtual balls strike against them. Each ball is launched at a precise time so it will land on an instrument the moment each note is played.

The demonstration, officially known as Intel’s Industrial Control in Concert, uses high-speed pneumatic valves to fire practice paintballs at plastic targets of various shapes and sizes. The balls are made of 0.68”-diameter soft rubber. They put on quite a show bouncing around while a song played. Photo 2 shows one of the pneumatic firing arrays.

Photo 2—This is one of several sets of pneumatic valves. Air is supplied by the many tees below the valves and is sent to the ball-firing nozzles near the top of the photo. The corrugated hoses at the top supply balls to the nozzles. (Source: R. Wotiz)

The valves are the gray boxes lined up along the center. When each one opens, a burst of air is sent up one of the clear hoses to a nozzle to fire a ball. The corrugated black hoses at the top supply the balls to the nozzles. They’re fed by paintball hoppers that are refilled after each performance. Each nozzle fires at a particular target (see Photo 3).

Photo 3—These are the targets at which the nozzles from Photo 2 are aimed. If you look closely, you can see a ball just after it bounced off the illuminated target at the top right. (Source: R. Wotiz)

Each target has an array of LEDs that shows when it’s activated and a piezoelectric sensor that detects a ball’s impact. Unfortunately, slight variations in the pneumatics and the balls themselves mean that not every ball makes it to its intended target. To avoid sounding choppy and incomplete, the musical notes are triggered by a fixed timing sequence rather than the ball impact sensors. Think of it as a form of mechanical lip syncing. There’s a noticeable pop when a ball is fired, so the system sounds something like a cross between a pinball machine and a popcorn popper. You may expect that to detract from the music, but I felt it added to the novelty of the experience.

The control system consists of seven separate embedded systems, all based on Intel’s Atom D525 dual-core microprocessor, on an Ethernet network (see Figure 1).

Figure 1—Each block across the top is an embedded system providing some aspect of the user interface. The real-time interface is handled by the modules at the bottom. They’re controlled by the EtherCAT master at the center. (Source. R. Wotiz)

One of the systems is responsible for the real-time control of the mechanism. It communicates over an Ethernet control automation technology (EtherCAT) bus to several slave units, which provide the I/O interface to the sensors and actuators.


EtherCAT is a fieldbus providing high-speed, real-time control over a conventional 100 Mb/s Ethernet hardware infrastructure. It’s a relatively recent technology, originally developed by Beckhoff Automation GmbH, and currently managed by the EtherCAT Technology Group (ETG), which was formed in 2003. You need to be an ETG member to access most of their specification documents, but information is publicly available. According to information on the ETG website, membership is currently free to qualified companies. EtherCAT was also made a part of international standard IEC 61158 “Industrial Communication Networks—Fieldbus Specifications” in 2007.

EtherCAT uses standard Ethernet data frames, but instead of each device decoding and processing an individual frame, the devices are arranged in a daisy chain, where a single frame is circulated through all devices in sequence. Any device with an Ethernet port can function as the master, which initiates the frame transmission. The slaves need specialized EtherCAT ports. A two-port slave device receives and starts processing a frame while simultaneously sending it out to the next device (see Figure 2).

Figure 2—Each EtherCAT slave processes incoming data as it sends it out the downstream port. (Source: R. Wotiz))

The last slave in the chain detects that there isn’t a downstream device and sends its frame back to the previous device, where it eventually returns to the originating master. This forms a logical ring by taking advantage of both the outgoing and return paths in the full-duplex network. The last slave can also be directly connected to a second Ethernet port on the master, if one is available, creating a physical ring. This creates redundancy in case there is a break in the network. A slave with three or more ports can be used to form more complex topologies than a simple daisy chain. However, this wouldn’t speed up network operation, since a frame still has to travel through each slave, one at a time, in both directions.

The EtherCAT frame, known as a telegram, can be transmitted in one of two different ways depending on the network configuration. When all devices are on the same subnet, the data is sent as the entire payload of an Ethernet frame, using an EtherType value of 0x88A4 (see Figure 3a).

Figure 3a—An EtherCAT frame uses the standard Ethernet framing format with very little overhead. The payload size shown includes both the EtherCAT telegram and any padding bytes needed to bring the total frame size up to 64 bytes, the minimum size for an Ethernet frame. b—The payload can be encapsulated inside a UDP frame if it needs to pass through a router or switch. (Source: R. Wotiz)

If the telegrams must pass through a router or switch onto a different physical network, they may be encapsulated within a UDP datagram using a destination port number of 0x88A4 (see Figure 3b), though this will affect network performance. Slaves do not have their own Ethernet or IP addresses, so all telegrams will be processed by all slaves on a subnet regardless of which transmission method was used. Each telegram contains one or more EtherCAT datagrams (see Figure 4).

Each datagram includes a block of data and a command indicating what to do with the data. The commands fall into three categories. Write commands copy the data into a slave’s memory, while read commands copy slave data into the datagram as it passes through. Read/write commands do both operations in sequence, first copying data from memory into the outgoing datagram, then moving data that was originally in the datagram into memory. Depending on the addressing mode, the read and write operations of a read/write command can both access the same or different devices. This enables fast propagation of data between slaves.

Each datagram contains addressing information that specifies which slave device should be accessed and the memory address offset within the slave to be read or written. A 16-bit value for each enables up to 65,535 slaves to be addressed, with a 65,536-byte address space for each one. The command code specifies which of four different addressing modes to use. Position addressing specifies a slave by its physical location on the network. A slave is selected only if the address value is zero. It increments the address as it passes the datagram on to the next device. This enables the master to select a device by setting the address value to the negative of the number of devices in the network preceding the desired device. This addressing mode is useful during system startup before the slaves are configured with unique addresses. Node addressing specifies a slave by its configured address, which the master will set during the startup process. This mode enables direct access to a particular device’s memory or control registers. Logical addressing takes advantage of one or more fieldbus memory management units (FMMUs) on a slave device. Once configured, a FMMU will translate a logical address to any desired physical memory address. This may include the ability to specify individual bits in a data byte, which provides an efficient way to control specific I/O ports or register bits without having to send any more data than needed. Finally, broadcast addressing selects all slaves on the network. For broadcast reads, slaves send out the logical OR of their data with the data from the incoming datagram.

Each time a slave successfully reads or writes data contained in a datagram, it increments the working counter value (see Figure 4).

Figure 4—An EtherCAT telegram consists of a header and one or more datagrams. Each datagram can be addressed to one slave, a particular block of data within a slave, or multiple slaves. A slave can modify the datagram’s Address, C, IRQ, Process data, and WKC fields as it passes the data on to the next device. (Source: R. Wotiz)

This enables the master to confirm that all the slaves it was expecting to communicate with actually handled the data sent to them. If a slave is disconnected, or its configuration changes so it is no longer being addressed as expected, then it will no longer increment the counter. This alerts the master to rescan the network to confirm the presence of all devices and reconfigure them, if necessary. If a slave wants to alert the master of a high-priority event, it can set one or more bits in the IRQ field to request the master to take some predetermined action.


Frames are processed in each slave by a specialized EtherCAT slave controller (ESC), which extracts incoming data and inserts outgoing data into the frame as it passes through. The ESC operates at a high speed, resulting in a typical data delay from the incoming to the outgoing network port of less than 1 μs. The operating speed is often dominated by how fast the master can process the data, rather than the speed of the network itself. For a system that runs a process feedback loop, the master has to receive data from the previous cycle and process it before sending out data for the next cycle. The minimum cycle time TCYC is given by: TCYC = TMP + TFR + N × TDLY  + 2 × TCBL + TJ. TMP = master’s processing time, TFR = frame transmission time on the network (80 ns per data byte + 5 μs frame overhead), N = total number of slaves, TDLY  = sum of the forward and return delay times through each slave (typically 600 ns), TCBL = cable propagation delay (5 ns per meter for Category 5 Ethernet cable), and TJ = network jitter (determined by master).[1]

A slave’s internal processing time may overlap some or all of these time windows, depending on how its I/O is synchronized. The network may be slowed if the slave needs more time than the total cycle time computed above. A maximum-length telegram containing 1,486 bytes of process data can be communicated to a network of 1,000 slaves in less than 1 ms, not including processing time.

Synchronization is an important aspect of any fieldbus. EtherCAT uses a distributed clock (DC) with a resolution of 1 ns located in the ESC on each slave. The master can configure the slaves to take a snapshot of their individual DC values when a particular frame is sent. Each slave captures the value when the frame is received by the ESC in both the outbound and returning directions. The master then reads these values and computes the propagation delays between each device. It also computes the clock offsets between the slaves and its reference clock, then uses these values to update each slave’s DC to match the reference. The process can be repeated at regular intervals to compensate for clock drift. This results in an absolute clock error of less than 1 μs between devices.


The orchestra’s EtherCAT network is built around a set of modules from National Instruments. The virtual conductor is an application running under LabVIEW Real-Time on a CompactRIO controller, which functions as the master device. It communicates with four slaves containing a mix of digital and analog I/O and three slaves consisting of servo motor drives. Both the master and the I/O slaves contain a FPGA to implement any custom local processing that’s necessary to keep the data flowing. The system runs at a cycle time of 1 ms, which provides enough timing resolution to keep the balls properly flying.

I hope you’ve enjoyed learning about EtherCAT—as well as the fascinating musical device it’s used in—as much as I have.

Author’s note: I would like to thank Marc Christenson of SISU Devices, creator of this amazing device, for his help in providing information on the design.


[1] National Instruments Corp., “Benchmarks for the NI 9144 EtherCAT Slave Chassis,”


Animusic, LLC,

Beckhoff Automation GmbH, “ET1100 EtherCAT Slave Controller Hardware Data Sheet, Version 1.8”, 2010,

EtherCAT Technology Group, “The Ethernet Fieldbus”, 2009,

Intel, Atom microprocessor, www/us/en/processors/atom/atom-processor.html.


Atom D525 dual-core microprocessor

Intel Corp.

LabVIEW Real-Time modules, CompactRIO controller, and EtherCAT devices

National Instruments Corp.

Circuit Cellar 264 is now on newsstands, and it’s available at the CC-Webshop.

Simple Circuits: Turn a Tube Radio Into an MP3 Amp

Want to give your MP3 player vintage tube sound? You can with the proper circuits, an antique radio, and a little know-how. In addition to generating amazing sound, the design will be an eye catcher in your home or office.

Here I present excerpts from Bill Reeve’s article, “Repurposing Antique Radios as Tube Amplifiers,” in which he provides vintage radio resources, simple circuit diagrams, and essential part info. He also covers the topics of external audio mixing and audio switching. The article appeared in the May 2012 edition of audioXpress magazine.

Manufactured from the 1930s through the 1960s, vacuum tube radios often contain high-quality audio amplifiers at the end of their RF signal chain. You can repurpose these radios into vintage, low-power tube amplifiers—without marring them in any way or detracting from their original charm and functionality as working analog radios.

Wood-cased radios have especially good sound quality, and the battery compartments in antique “portable” radios (like the Philco 48-360 or the Zenith Transoceanics) provide perfect locations for additional circuitry. When restored properly, large furniture-style radios that were built for “high fidelity” (like the late 1930s and early 1940s Philco console radios) can fill a room with rich beautiful sound.

Simple Circuits

The simple circuits described in this article perform two functions. They mix an external line-level stereo signal (typically from an MP3 player or computer) and reference it to the radio’s circuit. They also use the radio’s on/off knob to switch this external signal to the radio’s audio amplifier.

There is not one circuit that will work for every antique radio. (Original schematics for antique tube radios are available on the web But the circuits described here can be adapted to any radio topology. All the parts can be ordered from an electronics supplier like Digi-Key, and the circuit can be soldered on a prototyping printed circuit board (such as RadioShack P/N 276-168B).

External audio mixing

Figure 1 and Figure 2 show some examples of circuit schematics that mix the line-level stereo audio signals together (almost all tube radios are monophonic), while providing galvanic isolation from high voltages within the radio. Figure 1 shows an inexpensive solution suitable for most table-top radios.

Figure 1: An inexpensive circuit for mixing an MP3 player’s stereo audio signals safely into an antique radio. None of the component values are critical. (Source: B. Reeve, AX 5/12)

These radios have relatively small speakers that are unable to reproduce deep bass, so an inexpensive audio transformer (available from on-line distributors) does the job. I picked up a bucket of Tamura TY-300PR transformers for $0.50 each at an electronics surplus store, and similar transformers are commercially available. Alternatively, the Hammond 560G shown in Figure 2 is an expensive, highquality audio transformer suitable to high-fidelity radios (like the furniture-sized Philco consoles). A less expensive (and fine-sounding) alternative is the Hammond 148A.

Figure 2: A high-fidelity circuit for mixing external stereo audio signals safely into an antique radio. (Source: B. Reeve, AX 5/12)

I use Belden 9154 twisted, shielded audio cable for wiring internal to the radio, but twisted, 24-gauge wire will work well. An 8′ long audio cable with a 3.5-mm stereo jack on each end can be cut in half to make input cables for two radios, or you can use the cord from trashed ear-buds. You can route the audio cable out the back of the chassis. Photo 1 is a photograph of a 1948 Philco portable tube radio restored and used as an MP3 player amplifier.

Photo 1: A 1948 Philco portable tube radio restored and repurposed as an MP3 amplifier. (Source: B. Reeve, AX 5/12)

Audio switching using the radio’s on/off knob

After creating the mixed, radio-referenced signal, the next step is to build a circuit that switches the voltage driving the radio’s audio amplifier between its own internal broadcast and the external audio signal.

Figure 3 illustrates this audio routing control using the radio’s existing front panel power knob. Turn the radio on, and it behaves like the old analog radio it was designed to be (after the tubes warm up). However, if you turn the radio off, then on again within a few of seconds, the external audio signal is routed to the radio’s tube amplifier and speaker.

The circuit shown in Figure 3 uses a transformer to create the low voltage used by the switching circuit. There are many alternative power transformers available, and many methods of creating a transformerless power supply. Use your favorite….

The next photos (see Photo 2a and Photo 2b) show our additional circuit mounted in the lower (battery) compartment of a Zenith Transoceanic AM/shortwave receiver. Note the new high-voltage (B+) capacitors (part of the radio’s restoration) attached to a transformer housing with blue tie wraps.

Photo 2a: The inside view of a Zenith Transoceanic AM/shortwave radio restored and augmented as an MP3 audio amplifier. b: This is an outside view of the repurposed Zenith Transoceanic AM/shortwave radio. (Source: B. Reeve, AX 5/12)

The added circuit board that performs the audio re-routing is mounting to a 0.125″ maple plywood base, using screws countersunk from underneath. The plywood is securely screwed to the inside base of the radio housing. Rubber grommets are added wherever cables pass through the radio’s steel frame.—Bill Reeve

Click here to view the entire article. The article is password protected. To access it, “ax” and the author’s last name (no spaces). and audioXpress are Elektor International Media publications.   

A Workspace for Radio & Metrology Projects

Ralph Berres, a television technician in Germany, created an exemplary design space in his house for working on projects relating to his two main technical interests: amateur radio and metrology (the science of measurement). He even builds his own measurement equipment for his bench.

Ralph Berres built this workspace for his radio and metrology projects

“I am a licensed radio amateur with the call sign DF6WU… My hobby is high-frequency and low-frequency metrology,” Berres wrote in his submission.

Amateur radio is popular among Circuit Cellar readers. Countless electrical engineers and technical DIYers I’ve met or worked with during the past few years are amateur radio operators. Some got involved in radio during childhood. Others obtained radio licenses more recently. For instance, Rebecca Yang of chronicled the process in late 2011. Check it out: and

Do you want to share images of your workspace, hackspace, or “circuit cellar” with the world? Click here to email us your images and workspace info.


Project Spotlight: Electronics + Wood Fab Speakers

MIT graduate student David Mellis is interested in how designers are combining high-tech parts like microcontrollers with low-tech materials in clever ways. Yesterday, I pointed everyone to Mellis’s inspiring 3-D Printed Mouse project. Now let’s look at another creative design—Fab Speakers.

Whether you’re a microcontroller fanatic, professional engineer, audiophile, musician, or all of the aforementioned, this open-source Fab Speakers project will surely inspire you to customize your own. I’d love to see how others tackle a similar DIY project!

Fab Speakers (Source: D. Mellis)

Mellis writes:

These portable speakers are made from laser-cut wood, fabric, veneer, and electronics. They are powered by three AAA batteries and compatible with any standard audio jack (e.g. on an iPhone, iPod, or laptop).

The speakers are an experiment in open-source hardware applied to consumer electronics. By making their original design files freely available online, in a way that’s easy for others to modify, I hope to encourage people to make and modify them. In particular, I’d love to see changes or additions that I didn’t think about and to have those changes shared publicly for others to use or continue to modify. The speakers have been designed to be relatively simple and cheap in the hopes of facilitating their production by others …

Use 6mm (1/4″) plywood. For the veneer, 1 9/16″ edging backed with an iron-on adhesive is ideal (like this one from Rockler), but anything should work if you cut it to that width. Pick whatever fabric you like. For the electronic components, see the bill-of-materials above. You’ll also need two-conductor speaker wire, available at Radio Shack… There’s also a wall-mounted, oval-shaped variation on the design. It uses the same circuit board, but combines both speakers into a single unit that can hang on a nail or screw in the wall. You’ll want to replace the batteries with a 5V power supply (included in the bill of materials); just cut off the connector and solder the wires directly into the + and – holes for the battery holder. You’ll also want to omit the power switch and just solder together the holes where it would have gone.

The design's battery holder (Source: D. Mellis)

Mellis gave me permission to write about the projects and post some of the photos from his website.

Click here to check out all the files for this project.

Hollow-State Amps & Frequency Response

“Glass audio” has been growing in popularity among average audio enthusiasts for the past decade. Music-loving consumers worldwide enjoy the look and sound (i.e., the “warmth”) of tube amps, and innovative companies are creating demand by selling systems featuring tubes, iPod/MP3 hookups, and futuristic-looking enclosures. I suspect hybrid modern/retro designs will continue to gain popularity.

Many serious audiophiles enjoy incorporating glass tubes in their custom audio designs to create the sounds and audio system aesthetics to match their tastes. If you’re a DIYer of this sort, you’ll benefit from knowing how amps work and understanding topics such as frequency responses. In the April 2012 issue of audioXpress, columnist Richard Honeycutt details just that in his article titled “The Frequency Response of Hollow-State Amplifiers.”

Below is an excerpt from Honeycutt’s article. Click the link at the bottom of this post to read the entire article.

Early electronic devices were intended mainly for speech amplification and reproduction. By the 1930s, however, musical program material gained importance, and an extended frequency response became a commercial necessity. This emphasis grew until, in the 1950s and 1960s, the Harmon Kardon Citation audio amplifier claimed frequency response from 1 to 100,000 Hz flat within a decibel or better. Although today, other performance metrics have surpassed frequency response in advertising emphasis—in part because wide, flat frequency response is now easier to obtain with modern circuitry—frequency response remains a very important parameter …

Just which factors determine the low- and high-frequency limitations of vacuum tube amplifiers? In order to examine these factors, we need to discuss a bit of electric circuit theory. If a voltage source—AC or DC, it doesn’t matter—is connected to a resistance, the resulting current is given by Ohm’s Law: I = V/R. If the voltage source is of the AC variety, and the resistor is replaced by a capacitor or inductor, the current is given by: I = V/X where X is the reactance of the capacitor or inductor. Reactance limits current flow by means of temporary energy storage: capacitive reactance XC does so via the electric field, and inductive reactance XL stores energy in the magnetic field.

Figure 1 - The values of reactance provided by a 0.1-μF capacitor and a 254-mH inductor, for a frequency range of 10 to 30,000 Hz (Source: R. Honeycutt, AX April 2012)

Figure 1 shows the values of reactance provided by a 0.1 μF capacitor and a 254 mH inductor, for a frequency range of 10 to 30,000 Hz. Notice that capacitive reactance decreases with frequency; whereas, inductive reactance increases as frequency increases.

Click here to read the entire article.

audioXpress is an Elektor group publication.