(bluetooth) do i need a ftdi usb to serial adapter

do i need an "ftdi usb to serial adapter" or can just i use an arduino to change the baud rate and name of my bluetooth unit?

...JY-MCU
...3.6v-6v
...3.3v level
...BT_BOARD V1.06

cant unerstand why i would need one as you can program the arduino cant the arduino pass this info to the bt adapter just the same as an "ftdi unit"

what's your BT board?

lifelight:
cant unerstand why i would need one

You're right, you don't.

You need to know what the actual module is in order to configure it. It will be HC-05 or HC-06, and the procedures are different. If there are four pins, it will be an HC-06. The JY-MCU is just the code for the breakout board it is soldered to.

its a hc-06
I think

just found a link to the same looking module

and have just un solderd the diode Going to try this to see if i get any responce now

I don't know why you need to unsolder any diodes. What you might try doing is just plug it in and use it like everybody else does, with the possible exception of those idiots in the link you refer to.

I recognise that there is a lot of junk on the internet but this is a prime example of the blind leading a bunch of morons into a dead end.

An upgrade was made with V1.06 of that board, I understand that is why it is version 1.06 and, rather than some Chinese incompetence or sinister conspiracy as implied, an upgrade is an upgrade, and properly identified as a version and documented.

As indeed is actually recognised within the University of Lucern, the extra diode will prevent the module futilely attempting to power Arduino when it has power and Arduino doesn’t. This requires the line

pinMode(0, INPUT_PULLUP);

in typical code, where 0 is Tx. No soldering iron required.

You appear to be new to bluetooth and therefore might find the following basic notes useful

http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~npyner/Arduino/GUIDE_2BT.pdf
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~npyner/Arduino/BT_2_WAY.ino

although I only fleetingly address configuration.

I recognise that there is a lot of junk on the internet but this is a prime example of the blind leading a bunch of morons into a dead end.

That's a bit harsh comment for someone in an "Applied Sciences and Arts" department. I actually would encourage the scientific approach he applied to test ideas and find out what was going on and without any external doc he concluded rightly the diode was causing a pb.

His lack of electrical engineering and computer science background probably then misguided his choice to a sub-optimal conclusion. He did not see the value of the diode and he found a working solution that has some drawbacks but was functional for him.

Many would have just given up and go purchase something else. Some would have just come to a forum and ask but not do any homework.

The body of the blog also has been updated to provide additional information and a correct reference to the use of the diode and how to fix this in software or hardware so I don't think this is misleading anyone (well - should not).

So I applaud the energy spent, the intellectual curiosity, the tentative for a scientific approach and the honesty to keep his thoughts out there while offering the real answer from the comments.

I'm sure he learnt a great deal doing so - and stopping learning is starting to die...

J-M-L:
misguided his choice to a sub-optimal conclusion.

Well that is a charitable way of putting it. The way things were, going to a forum to ask would have been a hell of a lot smarter, with or without the homework. In the light of the device being made and sold with Arduino in mind, surely there has to be a better way to get it to do its job than remove a diode, particularly one that he knows has only recently been added thereto. I’m not sure that would qualify as homework, a grain of common sense might be a better description.

J-M-L:
so I don’t think this is misleading anyone (well - should not).

Well it did mislead at least one person, and unsurprisingly too. It is a colourful, well-prepared blog, with all the bells and whistles and academic implications, and accompanied by congratulatory comments from other technobabbling idiots. If Styger had any sense of responsibility, he would have taken that junk down, or rewritten it as a humourous piece on what V1.06 is about, and how he stupidly drove down a blind alley. He would then be making a contribution.

Ok fair enough - I see your point

let's agree to disagree - I just don't see any good in making judgement values on other people smartness or calling people morons...

They will just learn the hard way that what they did was not needed - no pain no gain :slight_smile: