Please see below
Just curious, why should we follow these standards?
Can you please explain the added value to use these gicren standards
- in customer terms
- in developer terms
- others
What other devices use this standard already? (installed base)
robtillaart:
Just curious, why should we follow these standards?
I had words with these guys recently, in this thread, over their use of the term Built-in Arduino as opposed to Arduino compatible.
gicren:
I hope this standard can help you to regulate your products.
Who the heck are you guys?
Doesn't regulation go against the very grain of open-source?
JimboZA:
gicren:
I hope this standard can help you to regulate your products.Who the heck are you guys?
Doesn't regulation go against the very grain of open-source?
No definitely not.
The open source is regulated in various ways, think of all the different license models there are. That's 100% regulation!
open source is not equal to free to use for whatever purpose, you must follow the rules...
So my interpretation is that they have a proprietary standard (connector layout ++?) and want that one to become a standard in the market (robotics) they operate in. I have seen that in many internet RFC discussions and other standardization committees. Every supplier of something wants their implementation to become the standard in their market. That gives a certain control and possible commercial advantage. In short business as usual, not exciting.
That said, it is a good thing to have standardization to improve operability between robots and e.g. diagnostic tools.
Because removing differences allow applications on a higher level to flourish.
No definitely not.
The open source is regulated in various ways, think of all the different license models there are. That's 100% regulation!
open source is not equal to free to use for whatever purpose, you must follow the rules...
Fair point.
Every supplier of something wants their implementation to become the standard in their market. That gives a certain control and possible commercial advantage. In short business as usual, not exciting.
Indeed.... HP-GPIB became a standard de jure in the IEEE-488; while IBM's PC became a standard de facto due to market forces.
Apologies if I said something wrong, but indeed I do not understand your intentions of the original post.
I am not against standardization (we would still be caveman or worse), but I miss the greater goal what you want to achieve by posting (well written) documents and stating
"Permanent free (only for GDS, GI2C_Vxx and G485_Vxx), but you need to specify that your products follow the gicren's standard.
I hope this standard can help you to regulate your products."
I must apologize for the previous vague expression
A specification for the robotic device
(PS: The robot mentioned below refers to educational robot, DIY robot, etc.)
Preface
The MCU industry had been growing swiftly and violently when I first got into electronics. The development kits(based on MCS51, PIC, AVR, MSP430, etc.) could be seen everywhere, which looked obviously different even the internal resources are almost the same.
After a few years, the popular Arduino controllers based on AVR MCUs appeared, which made a specification on the pinout and function of the controller boards combining the resources of MCU. Gradually, more and more Arduino compatible circuit boards had been mushrooming up. Later on, I was shocked when I saw Renesas(GR-SAKURA), TI(Arduino TRE), Intel(Galieo), etc., and realized that a proper specification is more important than an outstanding product(here, I want to pay my high tribute to Arduino team because of their excellent platform).
I like DIY and often immersed in the joys and pains of making. One day, I found that the robotic devices also require a proper specification, and the demand had been increasing gradually. However, so far there is no general specification for the robotic devices(indeed, the robot industry is diverse with various application requirements). In my opinion, it is better to choose a proper standard-connector to integrate several communication interfaces. So I would like to write this article to share my thoughts with you, and if you have any other ideas, please share with me(E-mail: gicren@outlook.com). Let us make the robotic devices more standard.
In my humble opinion, the robotic devices can be divided into short-distance devices and far-distance devices, and the short-distance devices also can be subdivided into regular devices and desktop devices. There are many kinds of common-used communication interfaces, UART, SPI, I2C, RS232, RS422, RS485, CAN, USB, etc., each have strengths and weaknesses. If I have to choose some among them, I prefer I2C, RS485 and USB above all others. Next, I need to choose a proper connector for I2C and RS485(there are many kinds of standard USB connectors, do not discuss here). In the robotic applications, both the continuous current-carrying capacity and the size of board also have to be taken into account, and I was troubled once again. I spent a lot of time comparing many standard connectors in many aspects(popularity, integration, size, current-carrying capacity, costs, etc.). Finally, I decided to chose DB9-Male(Gicren-H: the continuous current-carrying capacity of single pin can be up to 5A/7A, and note that there are many types of DB9 connectors) and JST-PH2.0-9PIN-Male(Gicren-L: the continuous current-carrying capacity of single pin can be up to 2A). Of course, this specification is just for the bus devices. You may quickly notice that there is no configurable pin in the Gicren specification because it is difficult to achieve high versatility. For example, a three-axis accelerometer(analog output) requires three analog ports. It is obviously unreasonable if there are three analog ports within a nine-pin connector or several nine-pin connectors are embedded into one circuit board. I think it is better to separate the basic devices(I/O, ADC, etc.) from the bus devices. For the basic devices, Gicren follows the specification(1-Signal, 2-VCC, 3-GND) which is the most common-used and followed by many devices(such as PWM-Syle actuator). In addition, the JST-PH2.0-3P-Male is recommended because of the smaller size and the suitable mechanical strength.
Read more: Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
Some hubs for gicren's high-power devices. Whether centralized control or distributed control are no problem.
GDD-HUBH2:
The protocols of gicren's device are realized on Arduino platform. All functions can be performed by reading or writing the user register, except for a few special operations(please refer to the corresponding communication protocols for details), which is similar to the MCU operation.
GI2C_V11 (for I2C interface)
G485_V11 (for RS485 interface)
GI2C_V11.cpp (4.5 KB)
GI2C_V11.h (1.35 KB)
G485_V11.cpp (4.65 KB)
G485_V11.h (1.58 KB)
Does anyone (other than the OP) have the slightest idea what this is all about?
JimboZA:
Does anyone (other than the OP) have the slightest idea what this is all about?
Maybe the gicren's specification is unsatisfactory, I'm just calling the perfect one, ^_^. I'm not an architect, I'm just an advocate. I hope that the robot peripherals can be standardized in some aspects, let the bolt quickly matched to the appropriate nut.