Seeking suggestions on what type of Arduino board

Hello, Arduino community.

I am seeking assistance in choosing the best possible board for my project.

I am building a wireless ultrasonic distance measure unit with 1x transmitter and 1x receiver. I am using a Maxbotix sensor for the distance data. On the receiving side, I have an OLED 1.3" to show me the data.

Here are the criteria:

  • As small as possible
  • Able to accept input voltage 7v-16v
  • Built-in wireless communication Bluetooth/RF/wifi/etc. (distance at least 50 meters)
  • Prefer original Arduino if possible
  • Easy programmable, like Arduino nano

Thank you in advance.

All the best, Lasse.

lass5216:

  • Built-in wireless communication Bluetooth/RF/wifi/etc. (distance at least 50 meters)

50 metres is quite a distance for 2.4Ghz wireless and pretty much impossible if there are obstacles in the way.

For longer distances lower frequency wireless is needed, such as the HC12 module and I am not aware that any Arduino board or clone comes with an in-built 433MHz wireless

...R

Well, if you want WiFi, you are looking at an ESP8266 system.

If you want to run from 7 to 16 V, you need a switchmode "buck" converter to regulate this to 5 V.

If you want WiFi range, you want an antenna external to the ESP8266 board.

lass5216:
I have an OLED 1.3" to show me the data.

Here are the criteria:

  • As small as possible

"As small as possible" means little, its "possible" to reduce the size of a lot of standard Arduinos and associated components given a lot of effort and design. You dont say if your wanting to used standard readily available Arduinos or are prepared to build and design your own.

I have an OLED 1.3" to show me the data.

So use a 0.96" one that will cut the size.

Perhaps describe what the actual project is, what it will be used for, where it will be used etc etc.

50 metres is quite a distance for 2.4Ghz wireless and pretty much impossible if there are obstacles in the way.

Depends on what you mean by wireless. This assertion would come as a surprise and shock to r/c enthusiasts who now use 2.4Ghz at several times that distance easily.

NRF24L01, A7101 and a third whose part type escapes me are all available in cheap modules and work reliably. Code examples all over the place, these are reasonably easy to deploy.

Now if we could just get the companion 5.8Ghz video link to be as good at similar distances we'd be all set. Damn trees…

HTH

a7

alto777:
Depends on what you mean by wireless. This assertion would come as a surprise and shock to r/c enthusiasts who now use 2.4Ghz at several times that distance easily.

Indeed so.

2.4Ghz RC will let my fly a 3m powered hang glider to the limit of what I can see and control, around 1.5km.

And there is now LoRa at 2.4Ghz, with the current distance record (that I am aware of) at 89km.

alto777:
Depends on what you mean by wireless. This assertion would come as a surprise and shock to r/c enthusiasts who now use 2.4Ghz at several times that distance easily.

They don't generally have the transmitter behind a concrete wall or behind a stand of trees. The OP has not given any details of the application so I was being cautious. It would be much less of a problem to say 50m was difficult and be proved it was too short than to say 1500m was possible and be proved it was too long.

And the Tx has a substantial antenna which would seem to be ruled out by the OP's requirement for it to be small.

I confess to not being aware that LoRa could operate at 2.4GHz.

...R

And the Tx has a substantial antenna which would seem to be ruled out by the OP's requirement for it to be small

Yeah no, again. r/c transmitters often use a linear dipole antenna with a build-in "ground plane", ~ 60 mm long. That's a stick of wire with a little bell below it. The width of a pencil.

The receiver is often a monopole w/o any kind of official ground plane, a stick of wire 30 mm long.

So I guess it depends on what you mean by small.

I was in fact surprised and amazed that 5 people can assemble, set up 5 r/c links and 5 video links and succeed with operation and video of aircraft at distances comfortably in excess of 100 meters. With only the occasional serious lack of connection.

Given that this at multiples frames or whatever you wanna call them per second, using a 2.4Ghz link to do something less ambitious should be only more possible.

a7