New board feasibility study

Projects General Guidance
1

I apologize for off-topic, but I have question here and would appreciate one minute of your time here

we all are using Arduino based devices for our project. But we want to get serious about deployed hardware and design specific CPU board for our Control/Monitoring/PLC projects. Goal is to develop reliable, industrial grade board with possibility of programming in Arduino IDE as well as in Atmel IDE. So there will be bootloader and JTAG interface for sure.

As we are planning to do it Open source later on the road, I would like to know some insights/wishes from you regarding hardware and 'on board' capabilities in terms of Processor (ATmega2560, SAMx), Communication interfaces (Wifi, BT, Ethernet, RS232/485, CANbus, 1-Wire, USB, GSM, etc.), Digital and Analog I/O interfaces, Oled display, Buttons, LED indicators, Real time (RTC), SDcard, EEPROM, FLASH, Environmental sensor, and so on...)

One question is, if there is preference to develop 'lean' module with CPU and supported circuitry only and communication and I/O connectors on separate base board where CPU module will be 'clicked' or to design few boards, with specific all-in-one configuration on board.

Second question is, if design of the board should match any standard DIN rail enclosure.

We are still not decided which way to go, therefore some advice from you guys is needed as you could be potential users of the HW too :slight_smile:

So please give it a though and let us know

Best regards

Tomas

2

torez:
One question is, if there is preference to develop 'lean' module with CPU and supported circuitry only and communication and I/O connectors on separate base board where CPU module will be 'clicked' or to design few boards, with specific all-in-one configuration on board.

As an average Arduino user (and thus perhaps not your target customer), my preference is to the "lean" board, to which I can add on the specific accessories I need. I'm not a big fan of the boards with a bunch of random devices thrown on because if I don't need that functionality it just adds extra cost, complexity, size, maybe takes up pins, etc. Of course, if your project just happens to need those specific devices, then you're happy as can be, but what are the chances? I do think there might be specific circumstances where it makes sense to put an accessory device right on the board with the microcontroller to avoid EMI/RFI issues that might be caused by putting that device on a separate module.

It might also be the case that the market is already saturated with "lean" boards for a particular microcontroller and the only viable new products will be an MCU + accessories board, targeted to the customers with need for that particular feature set.

3

torez:
design few boards, with specific all-in-one configuration on board.

Here you're trying to reinvent Arduino style shields. Those do pretty much exactly that.

At a risk of clashing with other shields' pins.

4

Have a good look in the market , there is industrino and several similar Arduino based boards with a variety of interfaces and “ real world I/O” - you will need a USP over many of these and a good study of what is available now is well worthwhile .

5

pert:
As an average Arduino user (and thus perhaps not your target customer), my preference is to the "lean" board, to which I can add on the specific accessories I need. I'm not a big fan of the boards with a bunch of random devices thrown on

Amen to that... "Thrown" is a very apt way of describing it. I would have thought there are quite enough Artduinos of various flavours around already, and I would imagine that any industrial operator would produce their own boards, specific to their industrial needs.

6

torez:
But we want to get serious about deployed hardware

Seems a strange objective when looked at on its own

design specific CPU board for our Control/Monitoring/PLC projects. Goal is to develop reliable, industrial grade board with possibility of programming in Arduino IDE as well as in Atmel IDE.

  • What customers have you in mind.
  • What market research have you undertaken to see what products those customers might want?
  • How many potential customers do you anticipate for the board you are thinking of?
  • What percentage of the potential customers might buy your board?
  • Why would they buy your board?

I would certainly not jump to the conclusion that industrial customers will buy something from a new producer just because it is cheaper. After-sales product support counts for a lot where a business depends on a piece of equipment. It does not take many hours of lost production to offset a saving in up-front cost - even if you give your product away for free.

Even if the product is mainly intended for in-house use the same sort of questions are still relevant PLUS the question

  • what return will the business get from all of the development time and cost

...R

7

when I was in industry - industry was very demanding and many companies would only accept industrial controls from major mfg's such as Allen-Bradley. The cost of down time in all the plants would eat up any savings in literally a few minutes. One plant I helped start up made airbag inflators for cars, I was told that if we shut down the car assembly line due to lack of inflators that out penalty would be $1,000,000/day - made chartering a Lear Jet to fly across the country to deliver parts a very good business decision.

the only exception to the must have an A/B sticker on it was for small commercially off the shelf items that were not in the main manufacturing line or sensors.

So expect some tough sell and hard questions.

8

if you made a board with built in GPS & HC-12, and one of the built ins goes sour, you fling the whole thing.

or they come up with the HC-12A a week later

which is why I don't use shields

a shield I would use would have a few rows of headers that multiply access to those few signals that are shared by multiple devices: I2C, SPI, Ground and Power ( raw & 5V ), and a bonus would be the ability to power things off one of the mountain of 12 VDC wall warts around here

9

Halo guys,

thank you for answers and insights. I will try to summarize reply in one message and clarify purpose of the hardware bit more.

Yes, market is certainly saturated with zillions of Arduino shields, boards and everybody needs different boards for different purposes, right. If you will need some functionality, you need shield for that, then maybe another one if other functionality is needed, and so on. In the end you will end up with bunch of ugly boards stacked on top of each other to fulfill functionality. This is case of average user/hobbyist using Arduino platform for own purposes. And do projects using multiple shields is frankly a bit of pain.

So idea here was to combine multiple 'shields' into one board or 'shield'. Say Ethernet/RS232/RS485/Canbus/bunch of protected, isolated I/O to address needs of folks trying to do various home/control projects, for example. And this board/shield would contain components related only to 'control' with Oled display too for example. But we are still talking about average "buy this board in eshop' customer.

We will not be targeting industrial customers or projects. Arduino platform (Controllino and other home brews) are not suited for that job at all, as there is limited complexity and other major issues. For those projects we use ABB or Siemens equipment. We just want to produce combined industrial grade board/shield to make life easier and cheaper for average user/hobbyist. Meaning combined functionality, ESD protected, EMI/EMC friendly, etc. Just 'Get & Deploy'.

To answer the bullets:

what return will the business get from all of the development time and cost
Money :slight_smile: And we are exploring here if the idea is relevant and worth of the effort or not

What customers have you in mind.
Average Arduino users/Hobbyist/Students/Geeks

What market research have you undertaken to see what products those customers might want?
So far this is first post discussing whole idea and its validity

How many potential customers do you anticipate for the board you are thinking of?
Say 100/200 peoples would be fine to pay for development cost by buying final product

What percentage of the potential customers might buy your board?
Well, this is Million dollar question. But I believe this should be answered by Arduino equipment e-shop seller. Because thew will know what kind of boards/shields are sold most. Therefore creating 'one-in-all' board/shield combining all most needed features would be desirable and would address needs of major group of the potential users.

Why would they buy your board?
Because they are consumers, usually doing stuff for own use. Therefore cheapest, multiple functionality & $$$ friendly board/shield will be 'right on the spot'. Multiple, combined shields are expensive in the end. Lets say that you will need Ethernet, RS485, LTE/GSM, 8x8 I/O. You will easily end up 120USD for those 4 shields, to create 'Eiffel tower' of functionality. Or you can consider 100USD board/shield covering all of this plus some extras like RTC clock, SD card.

So idea is to get rid of multiple shield approach and create one comprehensive piece of hardware instead. Which would be neat and cheaper. And question is 'what to combine ..."

Best regards
Tomas

10

torez:
What customers have you in mind.
Average Arduino users/Hobbyist/Students/Geeks

That's perfectly reasonable, but then I don't understand the " reliable, industrial grade board".

Why not just the ordinary standard that is achieved in existing Arduino boards? I suspect there are very few hobbyists that need industrial quality.

Industrial quality is not just about the components, it is also about the development, testing, quality control and after-sales service. It would not be difficult to price yourself out of the hobby market. Especially as a large number of Forum users seem happy to buy real-cheap from China rather than support their local suppliers.

...R

11

The idea was to offer hardened boards in terms of EMI, with over voltage and over current protections of I/O. So people would not blast component due improper wiring on handling. But it was mostly about to put all what is needed on one board/shield.

But yes, you are right, cheap boards are mostly preferred. But I still think that there will be bunch of people which will find this option interesting or usable. But maybe I am wrong :slight_smile: That is why we are discussing this.

12

torez:
The idea was to offer hardened boards in terms of EMI, with over voltage and over current protections of I/O.

I have a vague memory of a board called a RuggedINO or similar which had protection for the I/O pins.

...R

13

Sounds a lot like the offerings by Rugged Circuits.

14

if you want combinations:

RTC, GPS, SD for a datalogger. with a socket for an LIR-2032 and a provision for an external battery

add ethernet to the shield for an NTP server. by this time you may need to build it for a mega

15

torez:
If you will need some functionality, you need shield for that, then maybe another one if other functionality is needed, and so on. In the end you will end up with bunch of ugly boards stacked on top of each other to fulfill functionality. This is case of average user/hobbyist using Arduino platform for own purposes. And do projects using multiple shields is frankly a bit of pain.

I submit this is just nonsense. The shield system is what Arduinos is all about. You get/make the shield of choice and use it - no pain, and ugly is as ugly does.

So idea here was to combine multiple 'shields' into one board or 'shield'. Say Ethernet/RS232/RS485/Canbus/bunch of protected, isolated I/O to address needs of folks trying to do various home/control projects, for example.

More nonsense. The more you try to put on a shield, the more likely it is to have something wrong or superfluous, and hence the less likely it is to fit the customer's needs.

Just as an opinion, I think it is virtually impossible to make an "ideal shield for everyman" and the only ones I have ever known that are would be.

  1. SIM800
  2. Ethernet + SD
  3. 1602 plus buttons
    all of which have minimum purpose, wherein lies their success. Even blank protoboards have their compromises, and the first shield I ever bough remains unused. This was mainly because I have never seen a plug that goes into its sockets.
16

@torez, one thing you might consider is making very small boards at an affordable price. By small I mean a lot smaller than a nano.

For example I have been building small RC receivers using an Attiny84 and an nRF24 and ROHM BD6212 motor driver. I don't have space for a PCB using stripboard. I don't have the capability to work with SMD devices and I don't need enough of them to get custom boards made.

20190120_151943.png
20190120_151943.png640×610 484 KB

I have also used Attiny1634s which have more I/O but are a lot of trouble to solder

...R

20190120_151943.png
20190120_151943.png640×610 484 KB

17

Hmm, design of micro board is not problem at all. Its actually interesting idea. I guess it would be also handy for IoT...

T.

18

sounds like tracking device :slight_smile: Interesting idea.

T.

19

jremington:
Sounds a lot like the offerings by Rugged Circuits.

Oh, didn't know about this website, looks good. Google didn't show this up when I did my searching.

Nick_Pyner:
I submit this is just nonsense. The shield system is what Arduinos is all about. You get/make the shield of choice and use it - no pain, and ugly is as ugly does.More nonsense. The more you try to put on a shield, the more likely it is to have something wrong or superfluous, and hence the less likely it is to fit the customer's needs.

Just as an opinion, I think it is virtually impossible to make an "ideal shield for everyman" and the only ones I have ever known that are would be.

  1. SIM800
  2. Ethernet + SD
  3. 1602 plus buttons
    all of which have minimum purpose, wherein lies their success. Even blank protoboards have their compromises, and the first shield I ever bough remains unused. This was mainly because I have never seen a plug that goes into its sockets.

Nick_Pyner:
I submit this is just nonsense. The shield system is what Arduinos is all about. You get/make the shield of choice and use it - no pain, and ugly is as ugly does.More nonsense. The more you try to put on a shield, the more likely it is to have something wrong or superfluous, and hence the less likely it is to fit the customer's needs.

Just as an opinion, I think it is virtually impossible to make an "ideal shield for everyman" and the only ones I have ever known that are would be.

  1. SIM800
  2. Ethernet + SD
  3. 1602 plus buttons
    all of which have minimum purpose, wherein lies their success. Even blank protoboards have their compromises, and the first shield I ever bough remains unused. This was mainly because I have never seen a plug that goes into its sockets.

As written since beggining, there is no intention to develop 'ideal shield for every man'. This is of course impossible. Intention is to combine functionality on one shield for specific user group! So if guy is controlling relays and is reading buttons and temperatures with humidity and need to send this information somewhere and display it on small screen, then one handy shield would do job.

If other folks needs to do real time tracking, them shield with 3G/4G/LTA/GPRS, RTC and flash memory will do the job for them. And so on...

Yes, Arduino is about shields. Amen to that. Multiple shields approach is very good for evaluation, testing and playing around. But I know few people trying to implement Arduino in some repeated projects and applications due to 'Programming convenience'. In this case multiple shield approach is definitely nonsense (space, price, etc. ) and comprehensive shield would do better job.

But it looks like it would be difficult to find proper 'audience' for this kind of HW to use in Arduino community.

And thinking it around, maybe it would be better to develop some HW with possibility to be used with Arduino, STM32, PIC, ESP32, RPI, BBB and other platforms. More platforms targetet, more people involved :slight_smile:

Therefore no shield approach, but universal module easily connected/communicated to all platforms.

Hmm...

20

torez:
Therefore no shield approach, but universal module easily connected/communicated to all platforms.

Sounds like a fantasy.

One board to rule them all.