Hi I am working on a project lighting my house lights using an Arduino.
I have it working in a basic form, now I want to store the previous state of the light switch. I am using an array that stores the current state of the switch so it can be compared on the next loop. I have 7 switches, I have created it so one switch has the ability to turn on many lights, if required.
I need to store the previous state as the next part is to introduce web control the test project for this is already written
The strange thing is zones 7/8 work perfect. the other zones turn on, but don't turn off. When I turn on another switch a light may go off if it's switch is in the off position.
If I remove the condition for the previous state check all switches perfectly fine.
const int zone2[] = {8,13,0};
const int zone3[] = {11,0};
const int zone4[] = {7,0};
const int zone5[] = {9,0};
const int zone6[] = {12,0};
const int zone7[] = {6,0};
const int zone8[] = {14,0};
const int * zones[]={zone2,zone3,zone4,zone5,zone6,zone7,zone8};
int buttonState[] = {0,0}; // variable for reading the pushbutton status
int previousState[]={0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0}; // array for holding the previous state of the input button
void setup()
{
//initialize the output pins that will control lights
pinMode(6,OUTPUT);
pinMode(7, OUTPUT);
pinMode(8, OUTPUT);
pinMode(9,OUTPUT);
pinMode(11, OUTPUT);
pinMode(12, OUTPUT);
pinMode(13,OUTPUT);
pinMode(14,OUTPUT);
// initialize the pushbutton pin as an input:
//set all light switches to the same block ie pins 30 - 35
byte i;
//this loop sets all the 30-35pins as inputs
for (i=30;i< 37;i++) {
pinMode(i, INPUT);
digitalWrite(i,HIGH); // this makes it connect to the internal resistor
}
}
void loop()
{
int arrayPosition;
for (int z = 0; z < 7; ++z)//zero based array needs to be as many as there are zones!!!
{
buttonState[z] = digitalRead(z+30);
for (arrayPosition = 0;zones[z][arrayPosition] ; arrayPosition++)
{
if ((buttonState[z] == HIGH) ) && (previousState[z] == LOW )) {
// turn LED on:
digitalWrite(zones[z][arrayPosition],HIGH);
}
else if ((buttonState[z] == LOW) && (previousState[z] == HIGH )) {
// turn LED off;
digitalWrite(zones[z][arrayPosition],LOW);
}
}
//each light assigned to the zone has been turned on or off, now set previousstate
//the statement is here the inner loop has finsihed turning lights on or off that belong to that zone
previousState[z] = buttonState[z];
}
}
You allocate two elements to the array buttonState, but you are accessing seven:
[…]
int buttonState[] = {0,0};
[…]
for (int z = 0; z < 7; ++z)
{
buttonState[z] = digitalRead(z+30);
[…]
You should increase the number of elements in the buttonState array to be as many as you actually need.
It might be better to define the size of the arrays at a single place:
#define NUM_ZONES (7)
[…]
const int * zones[NUM_ZONES]={zone2,zone3,zone4,zone5,zone6,zone7,zone8};
int buttonState[NUM_ZONES] = {0,0,0,0,0,0,0};
int previousState[NUM_ZONES]={0,0,0,0,0,0,0};
[…]
for (int z = 0; z < NUM_ZONES; ++z)
[…]
This will also reveal that your previousState array is larger than needed (the compiler will complain that you have too many initialisers for that array). It is then important to re-use that constant everywhere instead of writing the magic number 7.
Related
i'm using code composer studio and data signals(D0-7) are obtained from tms320f28335
i have incremented and decremented specific led on 7-segment using switch statement. but that is kind if manual incrementing( where i already provide values as shown below)
void display(void)
{
B1 +=1;
if(B1 > B1_lim) { B1 = 0; }
switch(B1)
{
case 0: Display[0] = 0xf7; break; //9
case 1: Display[0] = 0xfF; break; //8
case 2: Display[0] = 0xf0; break; //7
case 3: Display[0] = 0x9F; break;
}
i have also tried to run counter but it never comes out of the loop because of while(1) statement and then i cant use other buttons, the code is shown below it works for 00-99 with never ending. furthermore, i tried to use button in below code but it loops like button can just start the increment/decrement process
void display(void)
{
unsigned char a[]={0xfb,0xb0,0xeD,0xf5,0xb6,0xd7,0x9F,0xf0,0xfF,0xf7}; //[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
unsigned char b[]={0xfb,0xb0,0xeD,0xf5,0xb6,0xd7,0x9F,0xf0,0xfF,0xf7}; //[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
int k,j;
while(1)
{
Display[0] = 0xfb;
Display[1] = 0xfb;
DELAY_US(200000L);
for(j=0;j<=9;j++)
{
Display[1]=b[j];
led_display(0x00); DELAY_US(200000L);
for(k=0;k<=9;k++)
{
Display[0] = a[k];
led_display(0x00); DELAY_US(200000L);
DELAY_US(2L);
}
}
}
}
on my 7-segment driver board, I have 4 buttons, and i want to use two of them for incrementing and decrementing.
I would like to know if there is any logical way to use a switch statement such that for each button press I can increment or decrement.
the simplest way show increment is shown in above code but i want to using second code.
I think you should use interrupt for button, don't use while(1) in your function.
Create a function to update value for 7-segment. When you press button, interrupt function will call. In this, you update your value to display.
First of all you need a coherent design following the tight cohesion, loose coupling principles. Your display function is attempting to doo too much - it is not cohesive - it contains logic related to your specific application and unrelated to display. It should do only what its name suggests and display a desired value. For example:
void display( uint8_t value )
{
// 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
static const uint8_t digits[]={0xfb,0xb0,0xeD,0xf5,0xb6,0xd7,0x9F,0xf0,0xfF,0xf7};
if( value < 100 )
{
uint8_t display[2] = {0,0} ;
display[0] = value % 10u ; // least significant digit
display[1] = value / 10u ; // most significant digit
led_display( 0x00 ) ;
}
}
Then let's assume (because you have not told us) that you have some GPIO input for the button and a clock source, hypothetically I will call these getSwitchState() and getClockMillisec(), then you might have a button state function something like:
bool getButtonState()
{
static const uint32_t DEBOUNCE_MILLIS = 20 ;
static uint32_t timestamp = getClockMillisec() ;
static bool debounced_button_state = getSwitchState() ;
uint32_t now = getClockMillisec() ;
uint32_t button_state = getSwitchState() ;
if( now - timestamp > DEBOUNCE_MILLIS &&
button_state != debounced_button_state )
{
debounced_button_state = button_state ;
timestamp = now ;
}
return debounced_button_state ;
}
Then you will want to act only on a button change of state, so you might have:
bool isButtonDownEvent()
{
static bool button_state = getButtonState() ;
bool button_down_event = false ;
// On change of state
if( getButtonState() != button_state )
{
button_state = !button_state ;
// True if button change was released to pressed (down event)
button_down_event = button_state ;
}
return button_down_event ;
}
Then your application loop can be built from those primitives thus:
uint8_t num = 0 ;
for(;;)
{
display( num ) ;
if( isButtonDownEvent() )
{
num++ ;
num %= 99 ;
}
}
Clearly if you have more than one button for separate increment/decrement that will need some modification to handle separate buttons, but since you have provided no information on the button hardware or software interface to it, I'll leave that to you to consider.
Also of course that is not the only possible solution to button input and debounce - you may already have suitable code. Usefully perhaps this method does not need a dedicated h/w timer or interrupt. It does however require regular polling to avoid missing events.
Critically note that the solution has no delays and no blocking, you can do other useful work in the loop whilst maintaining the display (so long as that too is non-blocking and does not take excessive CPU time such that button events might be missed.
I made a function, where PWM signal is generated at the output (PORTD) without usage of PWM control registers inside PIC microcontroller (PIC18F452). In order to slowly dim LED connected at the output, I was trying to increase the time needed for pulse to advance from 0% of one period to 100% of one period of square wave, while having square wave frequency constant. Everything should go as planned, except that second parameter being passed into pwm function, somehow resets, when going from 655 to 666 (that is, when duty cycle is at 65%). After this event, value being passed to pwm function proceeds from 0. Where as it should not reset at transition from 655 to 656 but at transition from 1000 to 1001.
void main(void) {
TRISD = 0x00; //port D set as output
LATD = 0x00; //port D output set LOW
unsigned int width = 1000; // length of T_on + T_off
unsigned int j;
unsigned int res;
while(1){
for (j = 1; j <= width; j++){
res = (unsigned int)((j*100)/width);
pwm(&LATD, res);
}
}
return;
}
void pwm(volatile unsigned char *lat, unsigned int cycle){
if(cycle > 100){ // reset the "cycle"
cycle = 100;
}
unsigned int i = 1;
while(i<=(cycle)){ // T_on
*lat = 0x01;
i++;
}
unsigned int j = 100-cycle;
while(j){ // T_off
*lat = 0;
j--;
}
return;
}
As for the program itself, it should work like so:
second parameter passed into pwm function is the duty cycle (in %) which changes from 0 to 100
with variable "width" the time needed for duty cycle to advance from 0% to 100% is controlled (width = 100 represents fastest time and everything above that is considered gradually slower time from 0% to 100%)
expression ((j*100)/width) serves as step variable inside "while" loop inside pwm function:
if width = 100, step is increased every increment of "j"
if width = 1000, step is increased every 10 increments of "j",
etc.
PORTD is passed into function as its address, whereas in function pwm, this address is operated via pointer variable lat
As for the problem itself, I could only assume two possibilities: either data type of second parameter of function pwm is incorrect or there is some unknown limitation within PIC microprocessor.
Also, here are definitions of configuration bits (device specific registers) of PIC, located int header file included in this program: https://imgur.com/a/UDYifgN
This is, how the program should operate: https://vimeo.com/488207207
This is, how the program currently operates: https://vimeo.com/488207746
The problem is a 16 Bit overflow:
res = (unsigned int)((j*100)/width);
if j is greater then 655 the result of the calculation j*100 is greater 16 Bit. Switch this to 32 Bit. Or easier make your loop from 0...100 for res.
e.g.
for (res = 0; res <= 100; res++){
pwm(&LATD, res);
}
I want to write a function for my AVR ATmega328 that debounces switches using state space to confirm a switch press. After finishing it I wanted to generalize my function so that I may reuse it in the future with little work, but that involves passing the pin I want to use as a function parameter, and I just can't get that to work.
This is what I have now:
int debounceSwitch(unsigned char *port, uint8_t mask)
{
int n = 0;
while (1)
{
switch (n)
{
case 0: //NoPush State
_delay_ms(30);
if(!(*port & (1<<mask))){n = n + 1;}
else {return 0;}
break;
case 1: //MaybePush State
_delay_ms(30);
if(!(*port & (1<<mask))){n = n + 1;}
else {n = n - 1;}
break;
case 2: //YesPush State
_delay_ms(30);
if(!(*port & (1<<mask))){return 1;}
else {n = n - 1;}
break;
}
}
}
I have a hunch my issue is with the data type I'm using as the parameter, and I seem to have gotten different answers online.
Any help would be appreciated!
Well in AVR ports are special IO registers and they are accessed using IN and OUT instructions. Not like memory using LDR etc.
From the port definition you can see that you need to make the port pointer volatile. which the compiler would have also told you as a warning when you would had tried to pass PORT to the function.
#define PORTB _SFR_IO8(0x05)
which maps to
#define _SFR_IO8(io_addr) _MMIO_BYTE((io_addr) + __SFR_OFFSET)
#define _MMIO_BYTE(mem_addr) (*(volatile uint8_t *)(mem_addr))
Various issues:
The function should be void debounceSwitch(volatile uint8_t* port, uint8_t pin). Pointers to hardware registers must always be volatile. It doesn't make sense to return anything.
Never use 1 signed int literals when bit-shifting. Should be 1u << n or your program will bug out when n is larger than 8.
Burning away 30ms several times over in a busy-delay is horrible practice. It will lock your CPU at 100% doing nothing meaningful, for an eternity.
There are many ways to debounce buttons. The simplest professional form is probably to have a periodic timer running with interrupt every 10ms (should be enough, if in doubt measure debounce spikes of your button with a scope). It will look something like the following pseudo code:
volatile bool button_pressed = false;
void timer_interrupt (void)
{
uint8_t button = port & mask;
button_pressed = button && prev;
prev = button;
}
This assuming that buttons use active high logic.
What I dislike on your implementation is the pure dependency on PORT/IO handling and the actual filter/debouncing logic. What are you doing then, when the switch input comes over a signal e.g. from CAN?
Also, it can be handled much easier, if you think in configurable/parameterizable filters. You implement the logic once, and then just create proper configs and pass separate state variables into the filter.
// Structure to keep state
typedef struct {
boolean state;
uint8 cnt;
} deb_state_t;
// Structure to configure the filters debounce values
typedef struct {
uint8 cnt[2]; // [0] = H->L transition, [1] = L->H transition
} deb_config_t;
boolean debounce(boolean in, deb_state_t *state, const deb_config_t *cfg)
{
if (state->state != in) {
state->cnt++;
if (state->cnt >= cfg->cnt[in]) {
state->state = in;
state->cnt = 0;
}
} else {
state->cnt = 0;
}
return state->state;
}
static const deb_config_t debcfg_pin = { {3,4} };
static const deb_config_t debcfg_can = { {2,1} };
int main(void)
{
boolean in1, in2, out1, out2;
deb_state_t debstate_pin = {0, 0};
deb_state_t debstate_can = {0, 0};
while(1) {
// read pin and convert to 0/1
in1 = READ_PORT(PORTx, PINxy); // however this is defined on this architecture
out1 = debounce(in1, &debstate_pin, &debcfg_pin);
// same handling, but input from CAN
in2 = READ_CAN(MSGx, SIGxy); // however this is defined on this architecture
out2 = debounce(in2, &debstate_can, &debcfg_can);
// out1 & out2 are now debounced
}
I'm coding with the Arduino Uno software and have ran into a problem. I'm trying to turn 8 LEDs on in a random order and then turn them all off at once. My problem is that the LEDs would turn on the same ones multiple times which in the end would not turn them all on. This makes the circuit not give the effect that I'm looking for. I've been working to fix the problem for about two hours and have tried many fixes which haven't worked. Here's the code that I'm working with:
void randomLED()
{
int i;
int index;
int delayTime;
int tracker;
int ledPin1 = ledPins[0];
int ledPin2 = ledPins[1];
int ledPin3 = ledPins[2];
int ledPin4 = ledPins[3];
int ledPin5 = ledPins[4];
int ledPin6 = ledPins[5];
int ledPin7 = ledPins[6];
int ledPin8 = ledPins[7];
boolean ledPinOne = digitalRead(ledPin1);
boolean ledPinTwo = digitalRead(ledPin2);
boolean ledPinThree = digitalRead(ledPin3);
boolean ledPinFour = digitalRead(ledPin4);
boolean ledPinFive = digitalRead(ledPin5);
boolean ledPinSix = digitalRead(ledPin6);
boolean ledPinSeven = digitalRead(ledPin7);
boolean ledPinEight = digitalRead(ledPin8);
for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
bailout:
index = random(8); // pick a random number between 0 and 7
if (ledPinOne != HIGH && index == 0 || ledPinTwo != HIGH && index == 1 || ledPinThree != HIGH && index == 2 || ledPinFour != HIGH && index == 3 || ledPinFive != HIGH && index == 4 || ledPinSix != HIGH && index == 5 || ledPinSeven != HIGH && index == 6 || ledPinEight != HIGH && index == 7){
digitalWrite(ledPins[index], HIGH); // turn LED on
}
delay(100); // pause to slow down
}
delay(1000);
for (i = 0; i < 8; i++){
digitalWrite(ledPins[i], LOW);
}
}
I have a large if statement because I needed to have separate conditions for each LED to turn on. These condition were needed because the random number generator would turn on the same LEDs twice which I didn't want. I was hoping that putting all of these conditions in and if statement would make the LEDs act how I wanted. I've tried changing the == and != in the if statement to every combination and it still didn't work. I'm hoping I can find and answer to my problem here that'll fix my problem.
There are multiple problems with your code. You are picking 8 random numbers because you want to have all 8 LEDs lit at the end, but what if you get the same number twice? So you have to somehow make sure that you pick a number that corresponds to a LED that is not already lit. Another problem with your code is that you read each LED pin only once, outside the loop. So when you are checking each pin in your large if-statement the values are not up to date.
Here is a quick but bad way of solving both these issues:
int numberOfLEDsLit = 0;
while (numberOfLEDsLit < 8) {
int index = random(8);
int ledLit = digitalRead(ledPins[index]);
if (ledLit == LOW) {
digitalWrite(ledPinds[index], HIGH);
numberOfLEDsLit++;
}
}
Basically you pick a random led, if it is not lit then light it otherwise do nothing. Continue until all 8 LEDs are lit.
Taking a look at the reference for random()
If it is important for a sequence of values generated by random() to differ, on subsequent executions of a sketch, use randomSeed() to initialize the random number generator with a fairly random input, such as analogRead() on an unconnected pin.
So you need to call randomSeed(seed) just before your random() call if you want the sequences to be different on each run of the program.
I am working on an Arduino project controlling a DIY RC truck that reads the output pins of an RC reciever and is supposed to PWMs a couple of pins accordingly. The pins are hooked onto a motor controller that takes PWM.
That is where the problem comes in. My reverse is working perfectly, but on the pin that does forward, I only get random activity. I'm using the Arduino Mega 2560.
Here is the code. The problem has been posted below it:
#include <Servo.h>
//Create variables for three channels
int RXCH[3];
volatile int RXSG[3];
int RXOK[3];
int PWMSG[3];
byte vooruit;
byte achteruit;
Servo stuur;
int mv = 13;
int ma = 10;
void setup() {
Serial.begin(115200);
stuur.attach(8);
//Assign PPM input pins. The receiver output pins are conected as below to non-PWM Digital connectors:
RXCH[0] = 6; //Throttle
RXCH[1] = 7; //Steering
//RXCH[2] = 5; //Nothing yet
//RXCH[3] = 2; //Nothing yet
//RXCH[4] = 7; //Nothing yet
//RXCH[5] = 8; //Nothing yet
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++){
pinMode(RXCH[i], INPUT);
}
//TCCR1B = TCCR1B & 0b11111000 | 0x01;
//TCCR2B = TCCR2B & 0b11111000 | 0x01;
}
void loop() {
// Read RX values
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++){ //For each of the 6 channels:
RXSG[i] = pulseIn(RXCH[i], HIGH, 20000); //Read the receiver signal
if (RXSG[i] == 0) { //Error catching
RXSG[i] = RXOK[i];
} else {
RXOK[i] = RXSG[i];
}
//Substitute the high values to a value between -255 and 255
PWMSG[0] = map(RXSG[0], 1000, 2000, -255, 255);
//Servo values, calibrated according to my steering servo.
PWMSG[1] = map(RXSG[1], 1000, 2000, 24, 169);
//Make sure that the value stays within the desired boundaries.
constrain (PWMSG[i], -255, 255);
//For debugginf purposes
Serial.print(" || Ch: ");
Serial.print(i);
Serial.print(" / PWMSG: ");
Serial.print(PWMSG[i]);
}
delay (5);
// Car goes forwards
if (PWMSG[0] > 40)
{
MV();
}
// Car goes backwards
if (PWMSG[0] < -40)
{
MA();
}
// Car stops
else
{
stopmotor();
}
stuur.write(PWMSG[1]);
Serial.println();
}
void MV()
{
vooruit = PWMSG[0];
analogWrite (mv, vooruit);
digitalWrite (ma, LOW);
Serial.print(" vooruit: ");
Serial.print(vooruit);
}
void MA()
{
achteruit = abs(PWMSG[0]);
analogWrite (ma, achteruit);
digitalWrite (mv, LOW);
Serial.print(" achteruit: ");
Serial.print(achteruit);
}
void stopmotor()
{
digitalWrite (ma, LOW);
digitalWrite (mv, LOW);
}
I don't really know if the code is considered pretty, or if I made some basic mistakes for that matter.
This is one of my first projects that I tried to do the right way, making comments and such, all well commented criticism is welcome.
What the code is supposed to do:
Move the stick on the transmitter forwards, the car goes forwards, and speed should be according to position of the stick.
Move the stick on the transmitter backwards, the car goes backwards, and speed should be according to position of the stick.
Move stick on the transmitter left or right, the servo in the car should react according to the value the Arduino calculated. You might wonder why I don't place the servo directly on the transmitter. Well, that's because I have many more future things in mind with this project, and now I can calibrate it way easier.
Problem:
When I move the stick on the transmitter forwards, and the Serial monitor is open, I get the right values on the Serial monitor, but the LED present on pin 13 just randomly blinks, very dim I must say.
I already tried to replace things like byte with int, but it had no effect. The rest of the code works fine.
Using some new code, I get a Serial response from every "stage", except the final stages that controls the pins.
#include <Servo.h>
//Create variables for channels
Servo wheel;
int MFORWARD_PIN = 13;
#define MBACKWARD_PIN 10
#define WHEEL_PIN 8
#define THROTTLE_PIN 6
#define STEERING_PIN 7
void setup() {
Serial.begin(115200);
wheel.attach(WHEEL_PIN);
pinMode(THROTTLE_PIN, INPUT);
pinMode(STEERING_PIN, INPUT);
pinMode(MFORWARD_PIN, OUTPUT);
pinMode(MBACKWARD_PIN, OUTPUT);
//TCCR1B = TCCR1B & 0b11111000 | 0x01;
//TCCR2B = TCCR2B & 0b11111000 | 0x01;
}
void loop() {
int throttle = read_throttle();
int steering = read_steering();
delay (5);
throttle_handle(throttle);
steering_handle(steering);
}
// Read RX values
int read_throttle(){
int throttle = pulseIn(THROTTLE_PIN, HIGH, 20000);
throttle = map(throttle, 1000, 2000, -255, 255); //Substitute the high values to a value between -255 and 255.
constrain (throttle, -255, 255); //Make sure that the value stays within the desired boundaries.
//Serial.println(throttle);
}
int read_steering() {
int steering = pulseIn(STEERING_PIN, HIGH, 20000);
steering = map(steering, 1000, 2000, 24, 169); //Servo values, calibrated according to my steering servo.
constrain (steering, 24, 169); //Make sure that the value stays within the disired boundaries.
//Serial.println("steering");
}
void move_forward(int val) {
analogWrite (MFORWARD_PIN, val);
digitalWrite (MBACKWARD_PIN, LOW);
Serial.print(" vooruit: ");
Serial.print(val);
}
void move_backward(int val)
{
val = abs(val);
analogWrite (MBACKWARD_PIN, val);
digitalWrite (MFORWARD_PIN, LOW);
Serial.print(" achteruit: ");
Serial.print(val);
}
void move_stop()
{
digitalWrite (MFORWARD_PIN, LOW);
digitalWrite (MBACKWARD_PIN, LOW);
}
void throttle_handle(int throttle) {
//Serial.print("throttle");
if (throttle > 40) {
move_forward(throttle);
}
if (throttle < -40) {
move_backward(throttle);
}
else {
move_stop();
}
}
void steering_handle(int steering) {
wheel.write(steering);
// Serial.println("steering:");
// Serial.print(steering);
}
Unused index:
Everywhere you loop over three values, whereas you only use two items in the array. So you'd better change all your sizes to 2 instead of 3, or you can define a NB_INPUT constant at the top of your source code, that you can change easily for more flexibility:
#define NB_INPUT 2
...
for (int i = 0; i<NB_INPUT; ++i) {
...
RXOK in setup():
your comment about arrays is justified, the first bug I can see in your code is that you read from the RXOK array, whereas you did not put any values in it. If you're sure that RXSG gets only zeroes from pulseIn() on the first pass of the Read RX values loop it can be ok, but I doubt it is. e.g.:
for (int i=0; i<3; ++i)
RXOK[i] = 0;
So you should put values in RXOK values in setup().
constant indexes in a for loop:
Then you map() the values from 1000->2000 to -255->255 for RXSG[0] and RXSG[1] inside the for loop, which will be done for the three iterations. I'm not sure what you want there, but if you want to do it for constant indexes, you'd better do it outside of the loop. But as you're checking a constraint on the -255->255 domain for each value of the iteration loop, I think you may want to do it on relative values:
PWMSG[i] = map(RXSG[i], 1000, 2000, -255, 255);
but it seems the domain is dependent on the index, so you may want to make a couple of defines at the top of your source code:
#define THROTTLE_IDX 0
#define STEERING_IDX 1
and put your map() in a if statement:
if (i == THROTTLE_IDX)
PWMSG[i] = map(RXSG[i], 1000, 2000, -255, 255);
elif (i == STEERING_IDX)
PWMSG[i] = map(RXSG[i], 1000, 2000, 24, 169);
# add a else statement if you need to do a map for the other values of the array
constrain(PWMSG[i], -255, 255)
general algorithm
I'm not sure you really need an array for your use case. You'd better keep a few variables around and have a better use of functions for your code to be readable and less bugprone:
#define THROTTLE_PIN 6
#define STEERING_PIN 7
#define WHEEL_PIN 8
#define MFORWARD_PIN 13
#define MBACKWARD_PIN 10
Servo wheel;
// sets up the arduino
void setup() {
Serial.begin(115200);
wheel.attach(WHEEL_PIN);
pinMode(THROTTLE_PIN, INPUT);
pinMode(STEERING_PIN, INPUT);
}
// input data handling
int read_throttle() {
int throttle = pulseIn(THROTTLE_PIN, HIGH, 20000);
return map(throttle, 1000, 2000, -255, 255);
}
int read_steering() {
int steering = pulseIn(STEERING_PIN, HIGH, 20000);
return map(throttle, 1000, 2000, 24, 169);
}
// output actions handling
void move_forward(int val) {
analogWrite(MFORWARD_PIN, val);
digitalWrite(MBACKWARD_PIN, LOW);
// Serial.print...
}
void move_backward(int val) {
analogWrite(MFORWARD_PIN, val);
digitalWrite(MBACKWARD_PIN, LOW);
// Serial.print...
}
void stop_motor() {
digitalWrite(MFORWARD_PIN, LOW);
digitalWrite(MBACKWARD_PIN, LOW);
}
void handle_throttle(int throttle) {
if (throttle > 40)
move_forward(throttle);
elif (throttle < -40)
move_backward(throttle);
else
stop_motor();
}
// general algorithm
void loop() {
int throttle = read_throttle();
delay(5);
handle_throttle(throttle);
}
There are more code duplication, but sometimes it is better to duplicate code than to make a code almost unreadable, and hard to debug while not offering any kind of flexibility/modularity. And here are a few other things I found in your code that should be corrected:
Naming convention: try to use good names for your functions (two letters variables, or dutch variables are not a good idea, I'm not english native and I always avoid to use my own language based names in code even for code I don't share, you never know who will read your code in 2 days, 2 months, or 2 years).
globals: Try to avoid using global variables as much as possible. Declare only constant in the global scope : const int foo = 1; or preprocessor defines #define foo 1, so that you do not spend too much of the little RAM space you have on your arduino. The only exception to that rule, which is very specific to arduino development, are objects (like Servo in your code) that you need to declare globally so you can set them up in the setup() function, and use them in the loop() function.
If I extrapolate on what you've written, you may want to add a handle_steering() function such as:
void handle_steering(int steering) {
if (steering > NN)
turn_left(steering);
elif (steering < NN)
turn_right(steering);
else
keep_straight();
}
and change the loop() to :
void loop() {
int throttle = read_throttle();
int steering = read_steering();
delay(5);
handle_throttle(throttle);
handle_steering(steering);
}
To make it a more general case of handling dynamically and flexibly a number of features, you could keep a few arrays:
PIN[]: containing the pins,
DOM_MIN[]: containing the minimum of the features' domain (for the map),
DOM_MAX[]: containing the maximum of the features' domain (for the map),
BOUND_MIN[]: containing the minimum boundaries (for the handle_steering condition),
BOUND_MAX[]: containing the maximum boundaries (for the handle_steering condition),
ACTION[]: containing the pointers to functions.
and then your algorithm would look like:
int read_input(int i) {
int value = pulseIn(PIN[i], HIGH, 20000);
return map(value, 1000, 2000, DOM_MIN[i], DOM_MAX[i]);
}
int handle_action(int i, int value) {
if (value > BOUND_MIN[i])
*(ACTION[i])(value);
elif (value < BOUND_MAX[i])
*(ACTION[i])(value);
else
*(ACTION[i])(-1);
}
void loop() {
for (int i=0; i<NB_INPUTS; ++i) {
int value = read_input(i);
delay(5);
handle_action(i, value);
}
}
but as you're still not comfortable with arrays (and I assume pointers as well), I would not recommend going further that way for the time being. First do it simple and make it work and then you could try to factorize it following the idea I'm exposing here. But you're making a software that is embedded, where the RAM is rare and the processing power is low, while your code space is cheap. So it's one of the few occasions where you'd better want to make a more redundant code that will stay in program space, whereas you want to manipulate as little symbols in the RAM. That's why I'm not showing you how the arrays are being declared/defined, and how to handle function pointers, because I don't think that solution (where you were heading) is the right way to do what you want.
Always remember, simpler is better!
HTH