Need build a circuit that flashes 4x

[gophert]

You've not danced enough then

If there is a need to dance "enough", what kind of judgement are you using if you are recommending a Pic to someone who has never danced? You can claim, he has to learn sometime but, that is not even true because the OP has not hinted that he wants electronics to be his hobby. He clearly already has a hobby - so he will not likely need to learn sometime.

 

[DrG]

So, what gets recommended to maximize the chance of success? As I stated, I agree with recommending the embedded controller approach.

I feel reasonably certain that I could build that project (even if I can't calculate a base resistor ). A PIC would be preferable to the other circuits offered because of the flexibility - the ease of rebuilding and changing many parametrs and doing it easily. Yes, they have to be programmed with a programmer and a programming language. So too with the Arduino ProMini or similar, but those are MUCH easier to begin with.

I just feel that the chances of the canned circuits being built and succeeding right off the bat, are a bit low. If that is the case, re-building is harder than the controller approach.

Put it this way - what would you do - knowing how to use a PIC / ProMini or the ancient methods?

But, more important, what does the OP want to try?

 

[gophert]

Put it this way - what would you do - knowing how to use a PIC / ProMini or the ancient methods?

I would breadboard the AnalogKid solution and transfer to a perf-board. Done in less than an hour - or, if the OP needs to figure out pin assignments and figure out the datasheet, it could take a few hours but still much less than a PIC (and still faster than a first arduino project.)

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I would breadboard the AnalogKid solution and transfer to a perf-board. Done in less than an hour - or, if the OP needs to figure out pin assignments and figure out the datasheet, it could take a few hours but still much less than a PIC (and still faster than a first arduino project.)

You're rather assuming he's experienced at building electronic circuits?, if not (as seems likely) it's probably far faster to build a much simpler micro-controller circuit, even including the programming time.

For an absolute minimum 'building' requirement, an Arduino ProMini would probably be a good choice.

 

[gophert]

You're rather assuming he's experienced at building electronic circuits?, if not (as seems likely) it's probably far faster to build a much simpler micro-controller circuit, even including the programming time.

You have lost perspective.

For an absolute minimum 'building' requirement, an Arduino ProMini would probably be a good choice.

Note to OP: the Arduino ProMini has been discontinued for some time. Look for an Arduino Nano or other current device if you wish to go a microcontroller development board route (I.e. Arduino). Otherwise, for speed and simplicity, use one of AnalogKids designs.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

You have lost perspective.



Note to OP: the Arduino ProMini has been discontinued for some time.

??????????

ATMEGA328 328p 16MHz Pro Mini PCB Module Board 5V

Only US$3.40, buy best atmega328 328p 16mhz pro mini pcb module board 5v sale online store at wholesale price.

www.banggood.com

 

[gophert]

??????????

ATMEGA328 328p 16MHz Pro Mini PCB Module Board 5V

Only US$3.40, buy best atmega328 328p 16mhz pro mini pcb module board 5v sale online store at wholesale price.

www.banggood.com

Updates to the IDE do not necessarily accommodate unique features of retired boards - whether they are made by Arduino or in somebody's basement and sold on Banggood.com.

 

[be80be]

It still works fine with the pro mini after all it works with the chip not the name of the board
You could call it a uno and it would work

Bottom line is what chip is on it you can add names to the board txt file

 

[AnalogKid]

A PIC would be preferable to the other circuits offered because of the flexibility - the ease of rebuilding and changing many parametrs and doing it easily.

That assumes an experienced level of programming skill, one that can structure the code such that the many parameters are easy to alter. Again, this is *way* outside the OP's skill set, not even counting having to learn C in the first place.

You're rather assuming he's experienced at building electronic circuits?,

No, I'm explicitly not. I estimated it would take him 2 hours to wire the circuit on perf board because I remember how long it took me to wire my first perf-board circuit. And, as above, you are assuming the OP is a C savant, able to write structured, configurable code right out of the gate. I also remember how long it took to sort out the I/O port configuration registers on my first PIC project.

And, let's not forget that a PIC-based circuit is still a circuit. 50% of the time it would take to complete the #9 circuit construction still is needed for a PIC circuit - acquiring, measuring, and cutting the perf board, wiring the connector(s) or power and I/O wires, mounting the switch, and soldering wires to the PIC pins and decoupling cap. That leaves less than one hour of wiring as the delta between the two circuits. Do you really think that cranking up a first-ever embedded controller project from scratch is less effort, less cost, or has a higher chance of initial success?

And, since the controller approach has two very different things (hardware and software) that can be wrong and need debugging, as opposed to the circuit in #9 (hardware-only), which approach do you think would be easier for the OP to debug? How long do you think it would take him to figure out where the problem is in a controller project, the software or the circuit? Note that in the #9 circuit, the Q14 output is running at 0.25 Hz. That's 2 seconds up and 2 seconds down, plenty slow enough to see sign a DMM and determine if the oscillator is running correctly.

ak

 

[Reloadron]

Well I guess we can pretty much sum things up in that there are several ways to get where you want to go.

While I looked at some of the images and before the micro-controller verse discrete component thing I am wondering exactly what the button pushes actually do? What would I see if I measure across the open pedal switch? I would think one would need to know that. Just for example if one side of the switch is ground and pressing the button/switch causes a logic low to be applied somewhere or does pressing a button/switch apply a logic high somewhere? I would think before using any approach be it a micro-controller or discreet component circuit there is a need to know exactly what the button/switch press actually does in circuit.

Each method has its advantages and disadvantages. If I were to do this using for example a micro-controller I would likely choose a PICAXE 08M2 simply because it's all you need. I just see using an Arduino as overkill. All you need is a two digital in/out pins to do what you want to do. The merit to using a single 8 pin chip is with the exception of maybe a resistor or two that is all you need. Chips like the PICAXE come with a boot loader or simply put they are easily programmed and really with online samples they require just about zero programming skills or knowledge. The chip cost under $3.00 USD. A PICAXE-08 Prototyping Board Kit runs under $4.00 USD. You do not need to read and comprehend a 300 page manual to work with micro-controllers like this. The links are merely examples of a single distributor, there are dozens globally.

Several circuits have also been posted using discreet components which would also get you what you want. All you need is a small handful of discreet components, some basic soldering skills and some perf board. A Google of "electronic project board" will get you plenty of results and the discreet components/parts can be purchased from any electronic parts distributor.

Pretty much up to you which solution you choose.

Ron

 

[DrG]

The problems are 1) assessing the OPs skill set and motivation without him weighing in, 2) not knowing the nature of that switch for any approach - which determines what *should* happen and 3) the OP thinks that this is some kind of a nuthouse and never comes back - never learns how to play "Smoke on the Water" with a massive fuzz and we never get to seem him on "Wherever has Talent ".

Seriously - more than one way to solve a problem. If it is easy for the OP to gen that circuit AND it works - Good Deal. If he gets hold of a nano clone for a few bucks and learns to write a few lines of code - Good deal.

 

[Gabriel R.T.br]

Ok guys, easy!

I'm a Engineering student, and I had classes of circuit and components basics. I don't know all deep theory about ICs and PICs, but I also know C and C++ (programming)
I know it's easier (at least for me) to find a PIC, write a code, compile and debug, and run tests... but at this moment I wanted to try analog circuit with ICs, and understand a little bit more about it.

About the circuit that Analogkid has sent here, ive tested (simulated) it on Proteus and it worked fine.
I'm gonna buy the components today and build it.
I'll be back with the results soon, once again, thank you guys for all your help.

 

[Gabriel R.T.br]

Aah, and also, I'm gonna check the Boss switch and see how it actually works, just to make sure that i may have a chance of success.

 

[AnalogKid]

To be clear, the circuit in #9 activates when you *release* the switch, not when you press it. If you want activation-on-press, it is a small modification (1-R, 1-C, 1-D) but there is a small switch-debounce delay of 50 ms or so.

If you want instant activation, another option is that you promise to hold down the switch for the entire half-second. This eliminates the debounce parts.

ak