BEGINNERS: We rarely write code for you, but will help you write it for yourself

GoForSmoke:
I have to wonder now where that thread is.

This is the thread Cap sense advice please! - General Electronics - Arduino Forum
I think you will see that he has moved the goal posts a lot since my original comments. My thoughts were:-

  1. He wanted a capacitive slider sensor that was a meter long. The commercial cap sensor chips do not go that long, I provided a link to one to show him.
  2. The cap sensor he wanted would have to have transparent conductive coatings applied to the inside of a bent tube. A bit "ship in a bottle" given that conductive coatings are normally put on with vacuum deposition.
  3. Even bending a 1 meter tube is not something that is practical for a non commercial outfit.

As you see Tony came up with a capacitivly coupled potential divider which gave the promise that it might offer a partial solution but it failed on the transparency requirement and required almost floating pins. That is it was not very reliable. In the meantime GreyArea came up with a sequence of capacitave sensor "notches" that would sometimes work if the hand was dragged from one end to the other.

None of those developments, interesting though they might be, in my mind invalidated my original low key comment that I didn't think his project was possible even if GreyArea thought it did, as mentioned in his linked video.

Most of the time an "impossible" project is made possible by changing the requirements, or making it so unreliable or poor as to be not remotely the same project. I am reminded of the person here who wanted to stream live video using an Arduino. I said it was impossible, and someone jumped in and said it was and "proved it" by showing a project where a 4 by 4 pixel image was streamed off an SD card.

I rest my case. :wink:

Oh, that thread. Yeah I read and avoided chipping in.

You know how when a magnet is in contact with ferrous metal the metal becomes part of "the magnet"? Even close, a field is induced and the strength of the field may vary in the metal.

So anyway we have linear Hall sensors that could likely measure field strength at both ends of a steel wire and determine some facts about a close-held magnet. Of course orientation of the magnet would matter and Murphy gets a say....

Someone did suggest a Hall effect sensor but I wanted to avoid the need for a magnet or other gizmo...it’s not that I want it to be magic only the magician can do, I want it to be magic ANYONE can do.

Still haven’t given up, awaiting materials for more tests. Bit of miscommunication on my part...the tube is just a straight tube...I looked back and I used the word “curved” just to mean it was a curved surface, but it was a poor choice of words.

And yes...depositing the contacts on the inside of a tube would be difficult. Which is why I’m not going to do it...but there are other ways Mike...wheels within wheels ;-).

By the way, I’m not one for adhominem attacks...I never originally mentioned Mike by name and if he hadn’t recognised himself and spoke up, I never would have. I don’t think I’ve called him anything worse than he calls himself (“Grumpy”) and I hope you’ll see it’s good natured...I have learned things from Mike, but just because I’m new here doesn’t mean I have zero knowledge of everything; this isn’t an area where I have much hope of success I’ll admit...the main challenge would seem to be reliability...but I’ve learned a few tricks already that MAY produce exactly the effect I was looking for, WITH the main restriction that it not use too many pins or occupy too much volume.

And yes, in a few weeks I may be back here, tail firmly between legs with a “guess what, I couldn’t get it to work” post...

But I’m allowed to TRY aren’t I? I mean, isn’t that what the other posts are lamenting too...the fact that people just give up or want it done for them?

That was the thrust of my post...it seems a lot is expected of us people who are new. If we get told too often that “it can’t be done”, then we’ll lose interest. Again the failing may be ours in that we use the wrong terms and not a lot of vocabulary to explain what we THINK we want; I was just politely suggesting that experts might tease out of us what we ACTUALLY want using some of their knowledge.

And patience...which if nothing else Mike has proved he has in bucketloads.

This Thread is no longer a Tutorial.

I reckon it should be moved to Project Guidance so as not to confuse newbies looking for tutorials.

...R

Well I think part of this should be hived off into the communities web site section as it involves more of a how we respond to questions than an actual project.

GreyArea:
I’d also hope if Mike’s been doing it so long that occasionally, particularly when he’s used replies 3, 3(a) or 4, (even perhaps 5 if I’m right about Tony’s work) someone has actually come back and surprised him.

A "not always right but won't say how much or what, just the loaded word surprised" innuendo is attacking the person rather than what he posted even if it is in a weak manner like the use of faint praise.

THAT is what I referred to.

Since then you duck and dodge like a pro.

sigh

I think experienced programmers will not try to do everything in one in the first place.

Jerryphan:
I think experienced programmers will not try to do everything in one in the first place.

It makes debugging a hell of a lot easier.

You're able to develop a toolkit to support Input, Processing and Output as modules ahead of time, learning each piece.

It really pays to learn or refresh at least to HS level physics to handle basic electronics and what's behind buttons and other sensors we use. OTOH just about all of this can be bought and cookbooked for those who can merge code properly, but you won't have as clear a picture without the background. Oh well, stick to whatchano and keep learninmo.

LOL, the word ‘physics’ has just hit about 30% of newbie makers between the eyes...!
You can knock out another 20% by mentioning ‘computer science’, and a few more with ‘engineering’...

That might clean out some of the cobwebs.

lastchancename:
LOL, the word ‘physics’ has just hit about 30% of newbie makers between the eyes...!
You can knock out another 20% by mentioning ‘computer science’, and a few more with ‘engineering’...

That might clean out some of the cobwebs.

Is that the aim of the experts then? To put newbies off?

Is that the aim of the experts then? To put newbies off?

No, on behalf of all the ‘experts out there’, this is simply an observation of where many/most beginners are starting from.

If a beginner doesn’t have fundamental, logical concepts of physics, electricity, engineering and science - then seriously - you’re making it hard on yourselves. Repeatedly plugging a LED different ways until it works... isn’t science or engineering. It’s looking for dead LEDs (and a bit of observational psychology).

Buy the training wheels, then grow into the role. Cut & paste isn’t being a software developer. Yes, believe it or not, many devs do cut & paste, but it’s not the architecture or critical parts of their code... and they review and optimise that pasted code later to make it more readable, relevant and efficient.

Let’s go back and reconsider that “30%...” statement again.

GreyArea:
Is that the aim of the experts then? To put newbies off?

Certainly not.

But learning, especially adult learning, is a two-way street. The student needs to put in some effort as well as the teacher. In many ways, for adult education the role of the teacher is to give the occasional nudge to the tiller to keep the boat moving in roughly the right direction.

...R

R2... Now you tell me!
I thought we were supposed to buy the hardware, write the code, and define the application! In that order :wink:
(I wish we were neighbours!)

lastchancename:
Cut & paste isn’t being a software developer.

If that's all you do then yeah that's right and you won't be able merge programs that step on each other.

However if you write or paste tasks into loop() and do take care over resources and labels, developing the sketch can go quickly and well.

If someone is stopped merely by seeing the word "physics" in a sentence, regardless of context then perhaps they are not suited to reading, much less writing logic. That is not to say that they can never get suited to it but that they will need become so over time to be more than clueless even with all the (entirely logical) help and docs in the world.

When I start one sentence with "It pays to" and the very next with OTOH, I do expect reasonable people with Jr. High reading skills or better to figure it out and unreasonable people to be "triggered" into their own little worlds which may be good for them; the compiler will be far harder to deal with and their own runtime errors will finish them off.

For those willing to be active in learning, simple code only takes simple understanding. What you learn raises the "simple" bar which opens up new things as simple that were previously not. Work it that way and all your steps can be "simple".

lastchancename:
R2... Now you tell me!
I thought we were supposed to buy the hardware, write the code, and define the application! In that order :wink:
(I wish we were neighbours!)

LOL! Isn't it buy the hardware then ask others to "make it go" while you manage them?

LOL! Isn't it buy the hardware then ask others to "make it go" while you manage them?

Nah, that’s government outsourcing.
Private outsourcing lets someone else choose the wrong hardware.:slight_smile:

Seems to be a host of unreasonable expectations on both sides.

For the newbies; yes, expecting unpaid third party effort just because you ask for it would not happen in any other field...well, maybe design, where people who should know better will often suggest that the work be done pro bono “for the exposure”...though to be fair, it’s normally a newbie that’s asked to provide it...

For the experts...if you think every newbie is a wannabe dev, you’re asking for disappointment. Lots of people are discovering Arduino for the first time often after it’s been portrayed to them as the magic box that can do anything. They get one and then realise they’ve done the equivalent of buying a Lotus kit car with no idea of how to put it together and don’t even have a driving license. They probably should just put it back on eBay, but having made the investment, they’re damn well going to give it a shot.

I don’t think this thread is going to make any difference to the attitude of either newbies or experts. The experts write it in the expectation that the newbies must improve. The newbies won’t read it...cos they’re newbies; and when you’ve got one expert admitting that he doesn’t read sticky posts or FAQs in his role as a newbie on other forums...you’d think some awareness of the intractable nature of the problem might appear, but it doesn’t.

However...if you want to reduce numbers of ridiculous requests, then an offhand “read the stickies” comment is one way to go, but you might want to bear in mind what image that gives. Newbies talk. Are they telling their friends about the wonderful, helpful people at the Arduino forums, or are your online ears burning? I just worry you might end up throwing the baby out with the bath water.

But whatever, this thread has run its course I feel. If any newbie DOES read this best to view it as an ambitious wish list for a utopian society where everyone on earth holds good physics qualifications, knowledge of programming structure and the etiquette of Oscar Wilde.

Please don’t despair; in reality, help will be found here.

Argh, meant to end on a positive note...so...help will be found here.

GreyArea:
Lots of people are discovering Arduino for the first time often after it’s been portrayed to them as the magic box that can do anything. They get one and then realise they’ve done the equivalent of buying a Lotus kit car with no idea of how to put it together

There is a lot of truth in that - especially the magic box bit.

But it is a great "magic box" when you know how to use it.

How do you get that message across while at the same time saying to the person who knows nothing about it "but you need to be prepared to take the trouble to learn how"

Just to illustrate the "magic box" bit - someone asked me if a simple display could be automated. I will probably knock up a demo using an Uno and show it to them. You could probably do what is required a bit more cheaply with a few transistors and a relay - but it would take me a lot longer to do it that way.

...R

For the newbies; yes, expecting unpaid third party effort just because you ask for it would not happen in any other field...

I don’t believe that’s always the case... often they want to create that ‘killer app’ equivalent, but are simply too lazy to put in even the minimal effort to understand the difference between input & output, or ‘blocking’ code.

Engage the effort wth meaningful conversation, uninterrupted by your xbox...

For the experts...if you think every newbie is a wannabe dev, you're asking for disappointment. Lots of people are discovering Arduino for the first time often after it's been portrayed to them as the magic box that can do anything.

I think we can all agree and understand that sentiment, but a beginner honestly asking a question (which can be rare), is even less likely to listen or participate in answering his own question.

Sure, we all want to help each other, but the one-way street isn’t appealing to those that have already put in the hard work... 10-20 year ago. Sadly, Over time, goodwill evaporates, and all forums will devolve when the experience leaves, and the remnants are learners spruiking ‘String’ functions, and robot-in-a-box projects on Indiegogo.