Tibbo Project System (TPS) from Tibbo Technology: “Take what you need. Leave out what you don’t.”

RE: Tibbo Project System (TPS) from Tibbo Technology: “Take what you need. Leave out what you don’t.”

jshtech — Mon, 27 Jul 2020 05:04:57 GMT

Hi Dmitry,

This is P. K. Srivastava from JSH Technologies (India).

This is to inform you that right now we are using Analog Devices ADuC series micro controllers for our products which are being used in the industrial environment. We have come across your product 3 year back in an exhibition here in India. Since then we started to use DS1102 and EM1206 to convert our serial data to TCP/IP.

We are in process of major revamp of our product design to increase its capability. In this course we bought your EM2001 module and some other products from Toradex and Analog Devices. Since the micro controller used on EM2001 is capable enough to cater our current requirement we started to explore its capability using your programming environment. Though the chip is capable to do time critical application but we are unable to utilize those capacities as the same is not available using Tibbo Basic/C.

We tried the on_sys_time event for our requirement but there are two issues in the implementation:

1. The minimum time interval available is 10 mili second, we require less than that up to 1 mili second. The Time critical code to be executed is taking approximate 80 to 200 uSec (80 uSec in case of 1 miliSecond interval) on each call.

2. We have noticed that the time between two event is not accurate and same every time as well as there are some missing events. We checked with logic analyzer for 1 second time and found that 10 to 15% events are getting missed.

We had also tried to use INT0 to INT7 pin and interrupt handler On_io_int(linestate As Byte) by providing fixed duration pulse from Tektronix Function generator to check the execution of interrupt event handler and found that it is also not getting executed on time and there is also some events got missed.

Is there any possibility to configure and use ARM core timer and/or interrupt for these cases.

I have also dropped an mail to Allan. Your early response will be highly appreciated, as it will help us finalizing the core system and development environment for our future designs.

Waiting for your prompt and positive reply.

Regards

RE: Tibbo Project System (TPS) from Tibbo Technology: “Take what you need. Leave out what you don’t.”

balearicdynamics — Tue, 17 May 2016 08:08:34 GMT

[mention:a5312e9762dd4699ba5d3876da34ffe5:e9ed411860ed4f2ba0265705b8793d05] ,

just for a simple comparison, I followed the suggestion of Dimitry and checked the components list in their site and related prices...

41 - 8 bit port : 14.00$

Trying to think like a newbie, I can expect 8 I/O digital pins. Instead this is I2C component.

39 - Large [color] LED : 3.00$

In the pseudo-schematics it is just a LED + resistor.

38 - Pushbutton : 2.40$

A pushbutton and resistor. As this pushbutton has its own form-factor, I suppose puts some limitations in the point where it should be wired to be reachable.

37 - RF Connector : 10.00$

... but not sure what do they mean exactly. The "show details" option just show a nice image.

25 - High power 5V supply : 29.00$

Sounds a bit expansive, and it is unregulated power supply. Not exactly what we are seeing in the micro controller boards / projects strongly oriented to the low-power and ultra-low-power features.

23 - Isolated POE 5V supply : 39.00$

Sounds the VIP alternative to #25

00 - Four directly I/O lines of the micro controller : 2.00$

Just a box with wires and LED inside. Need at least three of them for a normal project.

To reach the bare minimum components that we expect to find in a micro controller board we should invest about 50.00$ (!!!) Then, where is the micro chip???

You should buy the Project PCB: the cheapest one cost 55.00$.

Sorry to be co critical but I at least expected that with a so well-done modular system there was to option to setup the maiboard with blocks in different configurations and use the same to make an incredible number or projects ! Instead this is a bare PCB board with no option to make any kind of test. After you have bought your components and your Dream Board you should just solder them, hopefully in the right way because then the board is on, running (or not) as expected.

About this last detail, irony apart, IMHO there is a big big incongruence. What is the sense to create an entire system shown as - citing from their site:

Tibbo Project System (TPS) is a highly configurable and affordable automation platform. Its flexibility is based on Tibbits^{[emoticon:6abd1cb2558648488dbea31d006afc59]} – miniature blocks that implement specific I/O features. Need a certain I/O function? Install the right Tibbit. Have no use for something? There is no need to have it in your device. This module-based approach saves you money by allowing you to precisely define the features you want in your automation controller. With TPS, we have completely rethought not just the hardware, but also the configuration and ordering process. Read on and see for yourself!

When you can just do this once? And what is the sense to make a so aesthetic coloured block set if the final point is to solder them (hopefully in the right position) then there is no more option but using the board? It seems to me something really away from the concept of experimenting.

Probably the - almost - right application environment maybe the PLC world and industrial applications. But in this case the almost total absence of technical information and robustness specifications and serious environmental test benchmarks plays against the product.

Last but not least, there is also on the site an interesting series of pre-selected projects. An appoint on this: maybe I am too old and I lost the last most recent updates in the world of the development languages but the choice of BASIC as the easy alternative to the C (No C++?) language sound a bit outdated to me.

Enrico

RE: Tibbo Project System (TPS) from Tibbo Technology: “Take what you need. Leave out what you don’t.”

balearicdynamics — Mon, 16 May 2016 14:33:27 GMT

IMHO The result for a custom really usable machine in a project is something at least 3 times expensive than many other alternatives. And after the box has been assembled, the project is not finished, it's just started.

Frankly, if this concept will really start on the market (with positive answer from makers), the most probable thing that should be expected is a wide hacking. What about circuits, technical features, limits and possibilities? Nice idea, sure, but what is this idea? [View:/resized-image/__size/16x16/__key/commentfiles/f7d226abd59f475c9d224a79e3f0ec07-e87e9b28-98ce-4f78-8674-b7838b526d00/contentimage_5F00_1.png:16:16]

Enrico

RE: Tibbo Project System (TPS) from Tibbo Technology: “Take what you need. Leave out what you don’t.”

dougw — Sat, 14 May 2016 01:17:12 GMT

Very interesting concept. I like the great modularity.

What are the specifications for the T1000 CPU?

RE: Tibbo Project System (TPS) from Tibbo Technology: “Take what you need. Leave out what you don’t.”

DAB — Fri, 13 May 2016 18:57:02 GMT

Nice product approach.

If the software is as easy to configure as the hardware, you just might have a good modular system, depending upon the price of course.

DAB