Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 18 replies
  • Subscribers 2563 subscribers
  • Views 1665 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

How Would You RoadTest: Isolated Digital USB 3.0 I/O Module

rscasny

Today I was approached about roadtesint this USB 3.0 I/O Module. so, I wanted to take a moment to introduce it to you, mention a few salient points, and ask the RoadTester group how they would roadtest it. Here goes:

 

This is a 16-channel isolated digital input and output USB 3.0 I/O module. It has a built in USB hub that supports a daisy chain topology. All digital input and digital output channels are protected by 2,500 VDC isolation. A few other points are:

image

  • USB 3.0 SuperSpeed
  • Daisy chainable by built in USB hub
  • 16-ch digital input and 16-ch digital output with 2,500 VDC isolation
  • Wide input voltage range (10 ~ 30 VDC)
  • Wide output voltage range (5 ~ 40 VDC) and high output current (350 mA/ch)
  • Quick removable European type connector
  • LED indicators for I/O status
  • Supported operating systems: Windows XP/7/8/10 and Linux

 

 

Would you be interested in RoadTesting this product? What would you like to test or build?

Attachments:
image
Parents Reply Children
  • in reply to hlipka

    Hi Hendrik,

     

    Thanks for the comment. I pointed this out to the supplier. They have sent me the Linux drivers. So, yes, you would be able to use it.

     

    Randall

  • in reply to hlipka

    Hendrik,

     

    A clarification: the supplier told me they are developing linux drivers for these distributions:

     

    • Ubuntu 12.04/14.04/15.10 (desktop).  kernel version 3.2/3.13/4.2
    • OpenSUSE Leap42.1, kernel version 4.1.12
    • Fedora 23, kernel version 4.2.3
    • Debian 8.3, kernel version 3.16.0
    • Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.2, kernel version 3.10.0

     

    Should there be any others to include?

     

    Thanks

     

     

    Randall

  • in reply to rscasny

    I cannot really comment on the other distributions, but the Ubuntu versions look really old. 12.04 is 6 years old by now, and AFAIK not maintained anymore for quite a while now. The list should at least include the latest stable version. This would be 16.04 by now, and 18.04 will be the next one - so it should be included as well.

    For Debian, the current version is 9.3, so it 8.3 also looks quite old, and the Redhat version also seems to be quite old.

    But does this mean there are no current drivers for Linux available? Because that would mean I would not need to think about applying for that road test (even when they exist I would hesitate given how I expect my available time in spring, but without drivers I do not plan further)

  • in reply to hlipka

    Hendrik,

     

    I won't launch the roadtest without the Linux versions done.

     

    I contacted them and they want to write the following: Ubuntu 16.04 and Debian 9.3.

     

    Is that okay?

     

    Randall

  • in reply to rscasny

    Hi ,

    now you're putting me into a difficult position... As much as I would like to test that module, I will not participate in road tests in the near future. I still have two to finish, have some projects of my own that  waiting to be finished for too long now, and my family would also like to see me now and then. Especially since testing this means going down the programming route (at least on Linux - on Windows I guess there is more software available to make this easier), so I think it will take several weeks of work. I also reckon that with the Linux driver being new there will be problems that cost additional time.

    To answer your question: There is a good chance that these driver versions will work on more recent version of Ubuntu and Debian, but both are quite old. Since the drivers are new I would expect them to work at least with the latest long-term-support release - for Ubuntu this is 17.04 (with 18.04 coming up in two months). Its still worth a shot, Linux APIs are usually stable enough that it might work, but I would still consider such old drivers a risk.

  • in reply to rscasny

    I won't launch the roadtest without the Linux versions done.

    Given that we embrace Open Source and we like sharing here in the community, this sounds like a very good plan.

    (not that I'll be entering).

     

     

    Mark

  • in reply to rscasny

    Hi ,

     

    Interesting product! If this becomes a Roadtest then I'd apply to use it with Ubuntu Linux if Advantech are interested in this. For an example application, it could be used to control motors for a CNC machine. I have the CNC XY compound table compound table and some other bits and pieces, but I do not have an isolated interface designed - and this one seems like it could be an interesting solution for automation.

  • in reply to shabaz

    I don't think this would be very good at motor control, it's only offering slowish digital on/off.

    It's intended for typical factory automation: turning valves on or off, maybe some solenoids and getting input from digital sensors (like proximity, push buttons etc).

     

    MK

  • in reply to michaelkellett

    Hi Michael,

     

    That's a shame : ( I hadn't realized 100-usec would be insufficient. I just ran the calculation, and the table would move at less than 1mm/sec : ( The latency and jitter is the thing that attracted me to consider USB 3.0, but the 100usec rate is too slow : (

    Oh well - back to the drawing board. Most home CNC machines are still using parallel ports! but I'm ruling that out - I have one or two ideas, that won't require a PCI connected interface card.