go_away

Author Topic: simple rf sender and receicer or bluetoth ?  (Read 1027 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline blingblingTopic starter

  • Beginner
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Helpful? 0
simple rf sender and receicer or bluetoth ?
« on: October 24, 2010, 04:35:33 PM »
Hi guys im very new to this i repair plasmas so im a bit tech minded but not when it comes to rf or bluetooth. what im trying to do is build a simple cheap sender and receiver i have a sensor down at the dam and i want to have a little display to come up with temp from sensor ive looked at rf but i dont know if i can transfer data were as bluetooth i should be able to do it can anyone show me how to build this or what would be the best option. i know its off topic? thank you

Offline waltr

  • Supreme Robot
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,944
  • Helpful? 99
Re: simple rf sender and receicer or bluetoth ?
« Reply #1 on: October 24, 2010, 05:15:37 PM »
Check the XBee modules from Digi International.
There are discussion here on SoR and other places.

Offline Soeren

  • Supreme Robot
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,672
  • Helpful? 227
  • Mind Reading: 0.0
Re: simple rf sender and receicer or bluetoth ?
« Reply #2 on: October 24, 2010, 06:18:14 PM »
Hi,

[...] i have a sensor down at the dam and i want to have a little display to come up with temp from sensor ive looked at rf but i dont know if i can transfer data were as bluetooth i should be able to do it
You didn't say how far away the dam is, but if you can do it with BlueTooth, it must be within 100m (300'), so take a look at this transmitter and this receiver.
$9,- a pair and with a much better range than BT (500' vs. 300').
Regards,
Søren

A rather fast and fairly heavy robot with quite large wheels needs what? A lot of power?
Please remember...
Engineering is based on numbers - not adjectives

Offline cyberfish

  • Robot Overlord
  • ****
  • Posts: 163
  • Helpful? 3
Re: simple rf sender and receicer or bluetoth ?
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2010, 11:12:32 AM »
In case you are wondering, the reason why bluetooth is so expensive is because it supports much higher data rate (this is irrelevant for your project), has high resistance to interference, and supports encryption/authentication.

In your case, only the interference resistance may matter, especially if you want to do multiple connections in close proximity (you can't do that with the $9 pair, because they don't do any frequency hopping, and doesn't support channels).

But then it only costs a tiny fraction of bluetooth.

 


Get Your Ad Here