From:  John Brookes <[email protected]>
Reply-To:  <[email protected]>
Date:  Saturday, May 10, 2014 at 7:28 AM
To:  <[email protected]>
Subject:  Re: [beagleboard] BeagleBoard Data Acquisition Platform

> My dear Penguin,
> 
> Yes,  the desired SPS rate is rather low, as I was feeling limited by the
> actual possibilities here. I am a pattern recognizer
> bird myself, and looking primarily at 2 problems:
> 1. Non Invasive medical diagnostics. These use NIR, electronic noses, and
> perhaps EEG, EMG.
> 2. The quantum mechanical nature of consciousness. These onvolve detecting
> signals like 1 above - coupled with AI, like 1.
> 
> Both of these aims ask for rather many channels with rather low speeds. Why?
> Because the combinatorial pattern recognizer asks for
> a unique signature across many channels. Example (rough): Suppose you can
> detect a signal in the NIR at .8 microns. It has 32 levels,
> IOW a crappy signal. That's 2 exp 5. Now suppose you have 8 of these channels.
> Suddenly, the degree of freedom is 2 exp 40. IOW
> the signal is more unique, and noise has a harder time jamming.
> 
> That's the justification for many channels. Now, I wonder what your desire for
> high speed is. What would you use it for? I looked at the
> microchip pic24fj128gc010. That can do only 20 MSPS, though. (from memory)
> OTOH, I have a Tektronix scope that can do 10 GSPS on 4 channels.
> So I am not aware of ADC chips that fast - It's an interesting problem though
> - How would you design such a thing?
http://www.ti.com/tool/adc12d1800rb

Regards,
John
> 
> 
> Let's see - 120 MSPS would entail 240 MB/s at 16 bit res. (just for argument
> here.). That seems well within SATA 3  and USB 3 type rates these days.
> But this is not a vanilla ADC chip.
> 
> A SAR-type design (speaking very roughly) will require 240x16x10exp6
> comparisons per sec. That's a comparator speed of  4x10exp9 per sec -
> A comparator can get a speed (realistically) of 10 nanosec. Thats 10 exp 8
> comparisons per sec. So 4x10exp9/10exp8 = 40 comparators.
> 
> Seems doable, but I have shied away from it as being beyond my practicality
> (and needs) - since I am not skilled in high speed circuit design, as well as
> the issue of handling and data storage at the CPU level.
> 
> I estimate that, in order to get that rate, you would have to build a desk top
> super computer, made up of DSP board multiprocessors. (idea to get away from
> circuit design.)
> Then the DSP memory would be connected to 1TB SSD drives to collect data. At
> this rate, you are going to accumulate a gB in 4 seconds, so a 1TB SSD will be
> good for
> an hour of data collection.
> 
> What do you want this speed for? High speed events?
> JB
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 3:00 AM, sa_Penguin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 32 channels is - a lot. At 16-bit, too. On the other hand, the actual sample
>> rate is quite low: 200K sample/sec
>> This sounds like the backbone of a 32-channel audio mixing desk. Which is
>> fine, if that's what you are into...
>> 
>> Personally, I'd prefer 2 [or even 1] ADC channel, with a MUCH higher sample
>> rate. Say: 120 M sample/sec.
>> Sure there are faster ADC's - but original [parallel] ATA cables were rated
>> to 133MHz, so I'm aiming for a spec
>> that reduces the need for matching length tracks etc.
>> 
>> You'd probably need an FPGA to interface that with a Beagleboard, or
>> Beaglebone Black [my device].
>> 
>> -- Alan
>> 
>> 
>> On Wednesday, 12 May 2010 05:04:07 UTC+9:30, Ben Gamari  wrote:
>>> Hey all, 
>>> 
>>> For those who care, I have drawn up designs for the second iteration of my
>>> BeagleBoard-based data acquisition platform[1].
>>> 
>>> This new design features 32 DAC channels and 32 ADC channels, both with
>>> 16-bit 
>>> resolution. The ADC sampling rate is a little lower than I would have liked
>>> at 100ksamples/second (with the SPI bus running at 2MHz), but this should be
>>> more than enough for most tasks. The DACs on the other hand can run at up to
>>> 20MHz (limited by the level shifters).  Additionally, the board now exposes
>>> 8 
>>> GPIO pins behind a level shifter, making it possible to directly interface
>>> with 
>>> standard 5V TTL levels.
>>> 
>>> The ADC part I'm using is TI's ADS8344 and the DAC is TI's DAC8568. The
>>> level 
>>> shifters are TI's TXB0108 and the demultiplexer used for chip select is TI's
>>> SN74AHC139. Altogether, the board is quite expensive. Each of the four DACs
>>> are 
>>> $25.00 and each of the four ADCs are $10. Thus, a fully populated board is
>>> about $150 in parts alone. Far more expensive than I was hoping for, but it
>>> seems that these prices are pretty common in the world of converters.
>>> 
>>> The board is designed to fit on a BeagleBoard XM-style expansion connector
>>> and 
>>> thus sits beneath the BeagleBoard.
>>> 
>>> One issue I encountered with the last design[2] was the large in-rush of
>>> current at startup which seems to cause the BeagleBoard to brown-out. This
>>> makes it necessary to remove the board while starting up the BeagleBoard.
>>> While 
>>> I'm not certain of the cause of this, I suspect that the largish filter
>>> capacitors (330uF IIRC) on the voltage rails might be at least in part to
>>> blame. Anyone have any thoughts on this?  I've reduced the value of these to
>>> 100uF, but it would be nice to have a slightly more certain solution.
>>> 
>>> If anyone has any comments, I would love to hear them. I think this design
>>> is 
>>> orders of magnitude better than the original, but there is no doubt still
>>> room 
>>> for improvement. In particular, I would love to hear suggestions about the
>>> PCB 
>>> layout. I took some steps to ensure good analog characteristics (e.g.
>>> maintaining continuity in the ground plane), but I'm sure there are other
>>> things that could be improved. Moreover, the reference supply is little more
>>> than a RC filter. Is this sufficient or could there be a better option here
>>> (perhaps an active voltage reference or Zener regulator)?
>>> 
>>> Anyways, I look forward to hearing any feedback that folks have. Thanks for
>>> listening. 
>>> 
>>> Cheers, 
>>> 
>>> - Ben 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] http://goldnerlab.physics.umass.edu/wiki/BeagleBoardDaq
>>> <http://goldnerlab.physics.umass.edu/wiki/BeagleBoardDaq>
>>> [2] http://goldnerlab.physics.umass.edu/wiki/BeagleBoardDaq/Version1
>>> <http://goldnerlab.physics.umass.edu/wiki/BeagleBoardDaq/Version1>
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Beagle Board" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard?hl=en
>>> <http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard?hl=en> .
>>> 
>> -- 
>> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google
>> Groups "BeagleBoard" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/beagleboard/TMxuNnQ4zOQ/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> 
> 
> -- 
> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "BeagleBoard" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"BeagleBoard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to