Stc-1000+

[alphaomega]

There you go, as easy as 16F1829. It is the same as the 16F1828 used on the STC but:

Program memory 14KB vs 7KB on the 16F1828
RAM 1KB vs 256B on the 16F1828

You guys have fun now, time for a beer.

Wait... what? That was not the challenge... Besides I already mentioned the 16F1829 a few posts ago.

 

[AngryMonk]

Wait... what? That was not the challenge... Besides I already mentioned the 16F1829 a few posts ago.

I did not read the whole thread, and do not want to take anything from you There is just so much you can fit in 256B/7KB, if somebody really want to get fancy with what that device will be doing, an upgrade is possible, I would actually upgrade and keep previous chip with stock SW if it was me...

 

[alphaomega]

I did not read the whole thread, and do not want to take anything from you There is just so much you can fit in 256B/7KB, if somebody really want to get fancy with what that device will be doing, an upgrade is possible, I would actually upgrade and keep previous chip with stock SW if it was me...

Yeah, that would not be a bad idea at all. I actually did not realise how tiny the chip was, when I reverse engineered the hardware. If I knew then, I probably would have done just that and developed STC-1000+ on a 'fresh' STC-1000.
Then I could have played a bit with fancier stuff on the 'supercharged' one.
As it stands now, I really would not want to perform that operation again. I didn't manage to get the board off without breaking a PCB trace, but granted I'm not great at desoldering.

 

[nickmv]

I feel like I'm being told what I can do and can't, not sure how much I like that. What about every one decide what they want to do ? And since I've been told no, I'll work on that and see what I can propose, most of us actually CAN replace a chip.

Brew free or die !

LOL, nobody's telling you what you can or can't do. I'm just telling you what Alpha is likely NOT going to do. He also just commented on that and pretty much affirmed what I already figured -- that his intentions are to get a stock STC-1000 flashed as easily as possible, for people to use with extra features. Obviously I don't speak for him, so if he decides to steer the project elsewhere, we'll see.

You're more than welcome to tackle it yourself. I was just simply saying that it's unlikely that the project's going to steer in the direction of replacing chips, etc.

That's just being realistic.

If you manage to do it, have at it and let us know how it goes.

 

[adam01]

Celsius to Fahrenheit IS simple. No multiplication or division.

F = 320 + 2*temp + 16*temp - stored as 10x real temp.

Both multiplies can be converted to left shifts.

F = ctemp + (ctemp <<3);
F = 2*F + 320;

Add it to your maybe list...

 

[nickmv]

Celsius to Fahrenheit IS simple. No multiplication or division.

F = 320 + 2*temp + 16*temp - stored as 10x real temp.

Both multiplies can be converted to left shifts.

F = ctemp + (ctemp <<3);
F = 2*F + 320;

Add it to your maybe list...

The project is open-source.....

It would help if others could create different versions of the software. Not sure if you have programming experience, but just noting that if you do, don't necessarily just leave it up to him to do something. Play with it. Wish I had the experience to, but unfortunately I can just read code, but not really contribute code.

 

[Setesh]

Wow, this is great work, and I'm definitely interested in doing this! The programmable profiles would be extremely handy, and not having to get my phone out to convert F to C every time I adjusted my controller would be soooo nice! Thanks alphaomega

 

[alphaomega]

Celsius to Fahrenheit IS simple. No multiplication or division.

F = 320 + 2*temp + 16*temp - stored as 10x real temp.

Both multiplies can be converted to left shifts.

F = ctemp + (ctemp <<3);
F = 2*F + 320;

Add it to your maybe list...

Hm.. I was stuck on the 9/5 fraction, I didn't even consider what it actually came out to...
You are right. That actually might work.
I will add this to the list, I can't promise anything, as I am approaching a very hard limit, but this is definitely good advice. I can promise I will look into it.

Edit: Ok, I thought about it. It will not be that easy. There is the issue of setting temperature values. This would still need to be done in C then, but converted to F for display. So one press, will give 0.2 increase most of the time, but not always, which would be weird.
Also, maintaining the code i think is pretty straight forward done this way. There are no special cases. If I were to change, then Fahrenheit mode, would actually be more costly than C mode and could potentially be more prone to stack overflows and stuff.

Edit2: Is it really that big of a deal anyway? I mean, who really wants to switch between scales?

 

[balrog]

"...I mean, who really wants to switch between scales?"

Nobody, especially while drinking.

 

[adam01]

If its only a display option then its easy. Compute in Celsius and display in Fahrenheit. Of course, setup either is convert back or always program in Celsius.

But priority first - get it stable...

 

[alphaomega]

If its only a display option then its easy. Compute in Celsius and display in Fahrenheit. Of course, setup either is convert back or always program in Celsius.

But priority first - get it stable...

I think programming in C and displaying in F would be a bad solution, and very confusing. Converting back does not seem feasible to me, the calculation will not be simple, and even if something clever could be done, it would probably be approximative, and not much better than just setting the value in C and displaying in F (like I said before, it will be weird).
I'm not saying no, I'm just not sure that the solution in the end would be good enough to warrant the effort. If it is not simple, and not perfect, then I actually think the current solution is better. If there is a way to implement it that is perfect (or at least near perfect) and don't add to much complexity, then I'm open to this.

 

[alphaomega]

Oh yeah. I forgot.
I've been working on the "power off" function and I think I might have something soon that is good enough. Also, I'm adding functionality to show setpoint when pressing 'up' button when temperature is showing.
These are pretty much the last features I wanted to add. I also know that changing step manually during a profile, does not really function as one might expect. It won't change until the profile calculation is run (which might be an hour away). I've been thinking about this and fixing that issue will not be easy and the fix might be worse than the problem.
So, I'll try to run some more tests myself, but if no major issues are found, I'm thinking v1.0 might not be far away.

 

[nickmv]

Oh yeah. I forgot.
I've been working on the "power off" function and I think I might have something soon that is good enough. Also, I'm adding functionality to show setpoint when pressing 'up' button when temperature is showing.
These are pretty much the last features I wanted to add. I also know that changing step manually during a profile, does not really function as one might expect. It won't change until the profile calculation is run (which might be an hour away). I've been thinking about this and fixing that issue will not be easy and the fix might be worse than the problem.
So, I'll try to run some more tests myself, but if no major issues are found, I'm thinking v1.0 might not be far away.

Great news! Thanks for the update and the hard work. I'll of course be flashing and testing once it comes out.

Also, what about, for pressing 'down' button, to show duration elapsed, or remaining duration? It would complement the setpoint feature well.

I also think a thorough testing by a few of us would be a good idea before declaring a 1.0 version, just in case. Mainly just want to ensure that all the substeps of a profile work properly, and that all other features (swing, delay, etc) work properly. Shouldn't take more than 2-3 days max.

I'm more than happy to document those results in a QA-style format, since I work around those folks every day (Proj Mgr here).

 

[disney7]

Just curious, how many people are there out there actively flashing the latest version of Alpha's code onto an STC?

1. Alpha (I assume )
2. Myself (disney7)

 

[nickmv]

Count me in. I check Github every day for updates.

 

[alphaomega]

Great news! Thanks for the update and the hard work. I'll of course be flashing and testing once it comes out.

Also, what about, for pressing 'down' button, to show duration elapsed, or remaining duration? It would complement the setpoint feature well.

I also think a thorough testing by a few of us would be a good idea before declaring a 1.0 version, just in case. Mainly just want to ensure that all the substeps of a profile work properly, and that all other features (swing, delay, etc) work properly. Shouldn't take more than 2-3 days max.

I'm more than happy to document those results in a QA-style format, since I work around those folks every day (Proj Mgr here).

Thanks! I'll try to test a bit more when I get home, and hopefully push the changes. If you are eager, I push to my 'work' branch before I push to master.

Yes I thought about that as well. I might need to think about that for a bit, because you'd really need to show both step and duration, ideally even which profile is running. It might not be impossible, but again, it might not fit either. I could give it a try though.

Setting up a few test cases would not be a bad idea. I'm even thinking about if I could set up a test rig, for running a profile and logging temperature, time and maybe even relay output, it would be nice to be able to run some kind of long term test. I do have a couple of TEC's that would be cool (pun intended) to use for that.

 

[disney7]

I have my BrewPi working and a spare dorm fridge, so I can do some pretty good logging.

 

[atoughram]

I'm still waiting on my spare STC to arrive before flashing - it shipped via Amazon yesterday.

 

[disney7]

I'm still waiting on my spare STC to arrive before flashing - it shipped via Amazon yesterday.

Which did you get? The one from Elitech, Image, AGPTek, or something else?

 

[atoughram]

Which did you get? The one from Elitech, Image, AGPTek, or something else?

Elitech - like the other two I have.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008KVCPH2/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

 

[srice]

sub'd

 

[gueykewl]

Just waiting on my Arduino and then I'll be flashing away...

 

[balrog]

Still waiting for the slow boat from China to deliver.

 

[nickmv]

Still waiting for the slow boat from China to deliver.

Amazon Prime FTW, every time. $17 + free 2day shipping.

 

[sdgenxr]

Curiosity, can you flash these with a raspberry pi as well?

 

[alphaomega]

Curiosity, can you flash these with a raspberry pi as well?

You might, but it won't be as easy. This might be a good starting point.

 

[seabass07]

It seems like it would be easy enough to have both a F and C version. There's absolutely no reason to be switching between the two. Just a thought.

 

[alphaomega]

There is some new code in the work branch on GitHub if anyone like to test. I added button down shortcut to show profile, current step and current step duration.
I haven't had enough time to test the changes myself, so I'll hold off a bit more before merging to master.

 

[nickmv]

Word, I'll check it out in a bit. Got some klipsch surround speakers I'm installing first.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Home Brew mobile app

 

[atoughram]

Curiosity, can you flash these with a raspberry pi as well?

I will attempt to flash the pic with one of these

http://www.ebay.com/itm/USB-PIC-Aut...706?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item48545cf5da

and a program called Microbrn