Wouldn't that require an additional line (CS)? Shared Din, Dout, and Clk plus a CS per node. Instead of Shared Din and Dout with a Clk per node? I cant really see the improvement, but maybe I'm missing something? -Denny > Opto-Isolated SPI. > > * > | __O Thomas C. Sefranek WA1RHP@ARRL.NET > |_-\<,_ Amateur Radio Operator: WA1RHP > (*)/ (*) Bicycle mobile on 145.41 MHz PL 74.4 > > > > > I'm looking at a project that will have several (4-8) PICs in the circuit. > > They need low bandwidth (~100 bytes/sec) communication between each node > > and the main controller. The problem is they need galvanic > > isolation, there > > could be a couple hundred volts difference between them. Main PIC will > > probably be a 16F877 handling front panel details (character LCD and > > buttons) as well as connection to host PC, nodes will probably be 12F675s > > or 16F676s. > > > > They'll be within a few inches of each other, and there shouldn't be any > > significant 'noise' to overcome. The USART on the main controller is > > already committed and I have to avoid using the interrupts on the nodes (I > > already have several processes happening there) And I'd like to avoid > > crystals/resonators on the nodes if possible. (cost, complexity, > > not needed > > for main task anyway) So I think typical RS232 is out. > > > > I was thinking of perhaps a clocked serial similar to a shift > > register. One > > pin on the central controller for data in, one for data out, and one per > > node for clock. > > > > Doable, but I was hoping for a more elegant solution. Any suggestions? > > > > Thanks, > > -Denny > > > > -- > > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > > email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body > > > > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body