Forgot your password?
No account? Register one!
November 19, 2012
News - Your SparkFun January Cap… |
about 2 months ago
“Check out the new Zero Point Energy Field Manipulator app I just downloaded. How does it work? Here… Let me show you!”
News - Enginursday - Stupid Eagl… |
about 3 months ago
Absolutely. I definitely don’t want to discredit having a thorough understanding of the schema, or XML in general. Pairing those abilities, like you said, reduces the hair-pulling moments substantially: knowing both would almost certainly bump up productivity.
This is a great explanation of the inner-workings of Eagle lbrs! I’ve run into this very problem myself. It turns out, if you run a built-in ULP, you can extract all the components from your schematic or board directly into their original respective libraries (or merge them into one unified library).
That would be: from your board or schematic view File -> Run (ULP) -> Open exp-lbrs.ulp -> Select export path -> Select whether to merge libraries -> Hit OK
Then, you can import the resultant libraries, pick them apart, reorganize them, etc. Note: older versions of eagle may have “exp-project-lbr.ulp” instead.
I think it’s important to understand the nuances of the xml involved in storing library data and the open possibilities for creating those custom scripts or programs to modify components. So Byron’s tutorial is still a great resource, kudos!
Product WRL-12030 |
about 5 months ago
If you are referring to the 915 MHz freq. vs 434 MHz, chances are that the range and penetration will suffer slightly due to the higher frequency. The difference may not be noticeable if you use this in an open-air environment, but generally, higher frequencies are reflected more easily than low ones and require more power to cover the same area as a transmitter with a lower frequency.
Lots of variables play into the answer to your question (antenna type, obstructions, etc.). I can only speak to the 434 MHz model, however, which I was able to get about 200 meters in open air. What might interest you, if you need more range, is the RFM69 series. Felix at LowPowerLab.com claims to have achieved 250m with the standard RFM69W, but pushed the high powered version to +400 meters. http://lowpowerlab.com/blog/2013/06/20/rfm69-library/
Again, YMMV, so err on the side of caution if a wireless link is crucial in your project.
I can tell you that it is possible… it doesn’t look particularly nice, though. I did this on a few of the 434 MHz transceivers so they were nice and 0.1" spaced, but in all honesty, it was ugly and made the transceiver stand about .5" off a breadboard. It seemed to work better than soldering jumper wires to each pad, but it’s far better to use a BoB or design your own pcb with the correct spacing.
Let me know if you want photos of my attempt on the 434 MHz module.
News - July Caption Contest |
about 8 months ago
Now, where did I leave my giant sponge?
When we decided to do giant checks for this year’s AVC winners, it seemed like a no-brainer… Now, it just felt like a shame to let it go to waste.
News - According to Pete - The T… |
Let Rob try this when he gets back from Chernobyl. Sometimes a little radiation makes all the difference.
News - Your March Caption Contes… |
Whenever my conjoined twin gets out of line, I just forget to duck through doorways.
No public wish lists :(