Pic programming and SPI connections

[Charmquark]

Hi,

I need a solution to transmit and receive some kind of code (simple, a word or so, just
to prevent too much false triggering).
- Two way operation is requested : one transmitter and one receiver on each side.
- Both transmitters don't have to operate simultaneously.
- It is not requested (but not a problem either if it does) that receiverA also receives
transmitterA and not only its source transmitterB.
- Activation by a NO-contact. Output stage activated as long as the contact is closed.
- Pauses allowed between two send-activations : max 200mS (so please avoid long
initiation times etc).
- Battery operation 4V5 max. Very little space available.

Hope the diagram helps.
I do not succeed in configuring the transceiver-modules nor in programming the pic's.
I already bought modules, but fail to fully understand the datasheets, so other types
may also be used. I think with the right pic's chosen, their total can be reduced to two
instead of the four in the diagram.

Hope someone knows this well enough to help me with connecting the SPI on the
modules to pic's, programming the pic's and configuring the modules.
Thank you.

 

[KrisBlueNZ]

I don't really understand what you're after, but this site might be useful:

http://rfsolutions.co.uk/

 

[Charmquark]

Thank you for the reply KrisBlueNZ.

But what is not clear ?
The site you linked to sells about the same modules as the ones I
suggested. What I don't know about is how to configure them, and
how to connect their SPI to a pic.

 

[KrisBlueNZ]

Your English is not clear. But I think I'm beginning to understand what you want.

Please provide links to the data sheets for the transmitter and receiver modules you have. These should have been in your first post.

 

[Charmquark]

Hello again Kris,

Yep, you almost had me there ...
Of course English is not my native language, and yes, there's no doubt
I will write mistakes. But you really worried me.

You worried me so much by saying that you simply couldn't understand my
posting because of the poor English, that I (in complete panic) hurried to
my former English teacher for acknowledgement.

Fortunately she managed to appease me by assuring there were only
some minor mistakes written (e.g. she never again wanted to hear about
"little space"). In the end she convinced me by thoroughly explaining the
problems I told about in my posting (and she probably knows a lot about
cooking but I assure you she's far from technical).

I can always provide you with her email Kris, she's very willingly to help
people.

But enough English language. This was about horrific four wired SPI and
cruel pic language. Let me quote you concernig the links to datasheets :

These should have been in your first post.

No Kris, they shouldn't have been.
First of all, both suggested modules are easily available in Europe, but
I don't know about America. Perhaps they appear here under another name
(likely), or maybe they just don't exist at all oversea.
In second place, I didn't want to give the impression that I was asking for
a complete solution over a problem, without having made any effort myself.
In my belief the way to do so is posting datasheets and shouting : "Help !".

But no more worries.
A bit because of the English teacher (and therefore also because of you
Kris) who mistakenly switched RX and TX stages, a new idea occured.
It's not yet tested, other modules are needed now and they're already
ordered, but it seems to me that there no longer will be a problem .

Sorry to all and especially to Kris if this wasn't readable, it is because of
poor English from a foreigner.

 

[KrisBlueNZ]

I feel that you have taken a patronising attitude to me in your last post.

I found your initial description difficult to understand. The English was not good, but I can deal with that, if I can see that the intended description behind the words is clear and thorough. After re-reading it several times, I see that it is adequate but could have been a lot more explicit.

I believe that when someone is asking for help from volunteers, he should make it as easy as possible for them to help. This includes making a serious effort to explain the requirements clearly and thoroughly, providing as much background information as possible (especially web links), and taking an attitude of receptiveness.

Edit: There are many examples of such questions in these forums. You can recognise them because they usually get replies from many different users, and those replies are immediately applicable and useful. The thread then progresses quickly to clear and definite answers. You can also recognise questions that fail. These generate requests for clarification, and often multiple vague and conflicting suggestions because different forum users make different assumptions. A lot of time is wasted on "post tennis", forum users may get frustrated and give up, and the thread takes a lot of time to reach a point where users are able to give clear, useful advice.

I believe that you should have included links to the data sheets for the transmitters and receivers that you have. You still have not given these.

I will now bow out of this conversation. I don't know whether I would have been able to help anyway. I have no prior experience with that kind of radio module.

 

[Charmquark]

Well, it sure wasn't meant insulting.
Somewhat patronising, yeah maybe it was.
But so where your first two answers ...

I gave two examples of RF-modules which I was trying to investigate,
the RFM12b and the RFM73. You seem to adore links, so your answer
consisted of ... a link to more RF-modules.
Your second answer claimed my thread was not understandable. I am
aware of possible limitations due to not knowing a foreign language perfectly.
Therefore I posted the diagram (already removed) to make things clear.
That answer also contained what can only be read as a reprimand for not
providing ... exactly, links.
I explained why I deliberately decided not to bother with -most likely useless-
links. And your final answer emphasized that I still hadn't posted ... links.
My previous reply yet pointed out that a solution had been found.
So, sorry Kris, still no links.
I don't want to do that to people who may be following this thread. I may not
know about English, but I'm not that bad.

Obviously everyone knows at least one company that provides some
kind of RF-modules. And some seem very eager to show this 'knowledge'
somewhere on a forum.
But, considering all circumstances, it was not help. And definitely not an
answer to my questions which turned out to be not so woolly after all.

Thanks to everyone who gave it some thought and, to manifest I really
am not bad, a link for Kris .

 

[(*steve*)]

You are going great guns charmquark.

You continue to pile on the insults, and yet you have still not managed to post a link to the datasheets for the modules you have.

The link you posted is to images of RF modules, and not even limited to a single type.

How you expect anyone to help you when you can't provide basic information is beyond me. You say you have the modules and can't understand the datasheets. I really don't know what modules you have.