Dual Serial Input for Infrared control?

[Dee]

Hi all

I have a old P100 PC in the shed running DOS for a MP3 player, it's
equipped with a infrared sensor on the serial port for control by
remote.

What i'm wondering is it possible to splice another infrared sensor in
parallel to the existing one, so i can run the PC from outside the shed
as well as inside. So infact have 2 infrared sensors wired to the same
serial port.

Another serial port card is out of the question, due to the software
only able to access one port at a time, guess it's not really out of the
question, i could do it thru different boot loaders, but i couldn't have
both sensors working at the same time.

My other option is a remote extender, but seeing i already have a spare
infrared sensor it's the cheapest option.

Personally i can't see a problem as it's only recieving signals, but
thought i'd throw it past you ppl as well.

I'd probably make a "double serial adaptor" instead of butchering up the
plugs on both sensors.

cheers Dee

 

[Rod Speed]

Hi all

I have a old P100 PC in the shed running DOS for a MP3 player, it's
equipped with a infrared sensor on the serial port for control by
remote.

What i'm wondering is it possible to splice another infrared sensor in
parallel to the existing one, so i can run the PC from outside the
shed as well as inside. So infact have 2 infrared sensors wired to
the same serial port.

Another serial port card is out of the question, due to the software
only able to access one port at a time, guess it's not really out of
the question, i could do it thru different boot loaders, but i
couldn't have both sensors working at the same time.

My other option is a remote extender, but seeing i already have a
spare infrared sensor it's the cheapest option.

Personally i can't see a problem as it's only recieving signals, but
thought i'd throw it past you ppl as well.

I'd probably make a "double serial adaptor" instead of butchering up
the plugs on both sensors.

Its not going to work, you cant just have a double adapter for serial lines.

 

[Rod Speed]

It might work just wiring them in parallel, it might not.

You clearly dont have a clue how RS232 actually works.

you might need to fit an and or or and
gate of some sort between the sensors.

You clearly dont have a clue how RS232 actually works.

 

[Kwyjibo]

Hi all

I have a old P100 PC in the shed running DOS for a MP3 player, it's
equipped with a infrared sensor on the serial port for control by
remote.

What i'm wondering is it possible to splice another infrared sensor in
parallel to the existing one, so i can run the PC from outside the
shed as well as inside. So infact have 2 infrared sensors wired to
the same serial port.

The only way that could possibly work would be to have the remote photodiode
in parallel with the internal one (Not at the serial port level)

 

[Dave Goldfinch]

The only way that could possibly work would be to have the remote photodiode
in parallel with the internal one (Not at the serial port level)

Many years ago, when serial ports were common on mini computers, I
have seen a bar-code scanner connected in parallel with a terminal on
a single serial port. IIRC it involved fitting a diode (1N914 ?) in
the bar-code reader's Tx line. Being only a reader of course, there
was no Rx line.

This worked reasonably well, the only problem we had was that the
combination would not work at a distance ie a couple of floors down in
a fairly large library building. A 'wedge' connected reader, ie one
that connected in series with the terminal's keyboard was the only
solution at that distance.

Dave

 

[two bob]

I have a old P100 PC in the shed running DOS for a MP3 player, it's

Similar things have worked for others in the past.

if the sensors send automatically when they receive an infrared signal
and remain silent at other times wiring both to the same port should work.

it really depends on the protocol they use, if there's a dialigue between
the sensor and the computer it's npt going to work, but if all the data
flows in one direction there's no reason for it not to work.

Give us a sample cct diagram

 

[Rod Speed]

Similar things have worked for others in the past.

Nope, not one.

if the sensors send automatically when they receive an infrared signal
and remain silent at other times wiring both to the same port should work.

You clearly dont have a clue how RS232 actually works.

it really depends on the protocol they use,
Nope.

if there's a dialigue between the sensor and the computer it's npt going to work,
but if all the data flows in one direction there's no reason for it not to work.

You clearly dont have a clue how RS232 actually works.

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed wrote

You clearly don't have clue how an IR detector works.

Irrelevant when paralleling them at the RS232 level.

 

[Kwyjibo]

--
Kwyj

The OP didn't say anything about doing any such thing.
Wrong.

He wanted to
know, "What i'm wondering is it possible to splice another infrared
sensor in parallel to the existing one.....". Sounds clear enough to
me.

You might want to remove your foot from your mouth, then continue reading
the rest of his post. Particularly the bit that says 'I'd probably make a
"double serial adaptor" instead of butchering up the plugs on both sensors.'

Clear now?

 

[Rod Speed]

The OP didn't say anything about doing any such thing.

I wasnt commenting on what the OP said, I was clearly
JUST commenting on what that fool 'Jansen' said.

Do TRY to keep up.

He wanted to know, "What i'm wondering is it possible to
splice another infrared sensor in parallel to the existing one.....".
Sounds clear enough to me.

More fool you.

 

[The Real Andy]

Similar things have worked for others in the past.

Please explain.

if the sensors send automatically when they receive an infrared signal
and remain silent at other times wiring both to the same port should work.

Please define silent? It can never work

it really depends on the protocol they use, if there's a dialigue between
the sensor and the computer it's npt going to work, but if all the data
flows in one direction there's no reason for it not to work.

It has nothing to do with the protocol or data flow

Bye.
Jasen

The only way it could possible work is if you could drive the output
of the 'sensor' into a hi-z mode, essentially isolating it from the
other device. There is no other possible way to make this work.

 

[Rod Speed]

Didn't you read this part: "What i'm wondering is it possible to
splice another infrared sensor in parallel to the existing one, so i
can run the PC from outside the shed as well as inside. So infact
have 2 infrared sensors wired to the same serial port"?

Thats another way of saying running them in parallel at the RS232 level, fuckwit.

Apparently, neither you nor Rod know how most of these IR receivers work.

Odd, could have WORN I have assembled quite a few, child.

They do not use TXD or RXD pins of the serial port,
they communicate by pulling the DCD pin low.

Complete and utter pig ignorant drivel.

IOW, two sensors can be wired in parallel at any level
you'd like as long as only one is active at a time.

Clear now?

Nope, you clearly dont have a fucking clue about how they actually work.

 

[Kwyjibo]

Didn't you read this part: "What i'm wondering is it possible to
splice another infrared sensor in parallel to the existing one, so i
can run the PC from outside the shed as well as inside. So infact
have 2 infrared sensors wired to the same serial port"?

Make up your mind, dickhead.
First you were saying that the OP didn't want them in parallel at the RS232
level. Now you are saying that he does.

Apparently, neither you nor Rod know how most of these IR receivers
work.

Heh. This ought to be good.......

They do not use TXD or RXD pins of the serial port,

Well done. You finally got something right.

they
communicate by pulling the DCD pin low.
Yep.

IOW, two sensors can be wired
in parallel at any level you'd like as long as only one is active at a
time.

WRONG unless you remove the pull-up resistor that sits between DCD and RTS
on one of the units.
Now what were you saying about not knowing how these things work?

Clear now?

Clear that you don't have a fucking clue.

 

[Kwyjibo]

No, I'm saying that it doesn't matter in this case.


Then please explain that to Rod.


What are you talking about? The pull-up will not need to be removed.

It does. I've tried it without doing that and it doesn't operate.
Try for yourself and see.

You don't think that one IR receiver can pull them both low?

Clearly not.

Yet another filthy mouth from Oz.

Fucking oath.

 

[Rod Speed]

The circuitry is so simple that they are virtually the same thing.

Not a fucking clue, as always.

Then it appears that you haven't actually assembled any at all.

Not a fucking clue, as always.

One of them has a full micro that allows the IR codes
to be programmed in the PC etc allowing the PC to
effectively replace an IR remote, fuckwit child.

At least kwyjibo knows how they work.

There might just be rather more than just one type around, child.

I know enough about them to know that they can be connected in parallel.

No they cant when they use the RS232 RX and TX lines, fuckwit child.

The circuitry is so simple that even you should be able to understand
that much. Here take a look at a very typical IR to PC interface:
http://www.lirc.org/images/schematics.gif

Irrelevant to what she actually has, fuckwit child.

Is it becoming clear yet?

Yep, its always been clear that you have never
ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.

So stupid that you couldnt even manage to work out what
she was saying in that last para of her original either.

<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

 

[Guest]

Yet another filthy mouth from Oz.

Agreed entirely (although I'm from Oz too, and we're not all filthy mouths).
Although he has much sense to say his language and dismissive attitude (eg
'wrong - as always') spoils it utterly, so I have killfiled him to remove
the pollution from my screen but IMHO if people will keep replying quoting
the filth this defeats the purpose of a killfile.

 

[Rod Speed]

Some argument.

Your in spades, child.

Whoop-d-doo, I have built IR receivers/transmitters using a PIC, so what?....

So your stupid pig ignorant claim that they all use the DCD on the
serial port and nothing else is clearly just plain wrong, fuckwit.

I have also built complicated things using a PIC and again so what?....

So your stupid pig ignorant claim that they all use the DCD on the
serial port and nothing else is clearly just plain wrong, fuckwit.

So you've managed to duplicate LIRC, and what for?

So your stupid pig ignorant claim that they all use the DCD on the
serial port and nothing else is clearly just plain wrong, fuckwit.

Using a whole PC solely for such a simple task is just ridiculous.
Can't you program a PIC?

It does use a PIC, fuckwit. And communicates
back to the PC using RS232, fuckwit.

When you can implement a 1200 baud modem receiver in software on a
PIC to decode the caller-id info and display it on an LCD, and power the
whole thing from phone line leakage come and talk to me about complex things.

Never ever said a word about 'complex things',
you silly little posturing fuckwit child.

I was JUST exposing your stupid pig ignorant claim that
they ALL use JUST the DCD line as pig ignorant drivel, child.

I don't see you posting any schematics.

No need for any schematic when a PIC is involved and
its communicating with the PC using RS232, fuckwit child.

I bet the OP is using one just like the circuit I posted.

Even if she is, you STILL cant just run them
in parallel at the RS232 level, fuckwit child.

Did I say that? no... The one I described (and any that you
are likely to find in the real world) don't use RXD or TXD.

Pity you STILL cant just run them in parallel at the RS232 level, fuckwit child.

And exactly how do you know that?

You dont know what she has, fuckwit child.

When the OP posts a circuit we will see.

Unlikely that she is actually capable of doing that, or she is unlikely
to have needed to ask the original question, fuckwit child.

And as I originally said, the OP can parallel the IR detectors themselves

She clearly said she doesnt want to butcher the current detectors, fuckwit child.

And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that they arent anything like adjacent anyway, fuckwit child.

and it will work fine as long as only one is receiving
a signal. You do grasp open-collector outputs, right?...

Yep. Pity we happened to actually be discussing whether its feasible to
RUN BOTH DETECTORS IN PARALLEL AT THE RS232 LEVEL, fuckwit child.

Its absolutely no news to anyone at all that its always going
to be possible to design a new two head IR detector.

I certainly didn't let my imagination fill up the gaping
hole in her description with incorrect assumptions.

No assumption involved what so ever with that last para of hers, fuckwit child.

As I said before, I bet the OP is using a
receiver just like the circuit I posted a link to.

YOU STILL CANT RUN TWO OF THOSE IN PARALLEL
AT THE RS232 LEVEL EVEN IF IT IS, FUCKWIT CHILD.

To assume that the OP is using a complex receiver
capable of decoding the multitude of protocols and
assorted variations/timings is a giant stretch to say the least.

Pity I didnt assume anything of the sort, fuckwit child.

Since you can't feed raw IR to the RXD pin,
YOU ARE ASSUMING this level of complexity

Nope, YOU STILL CANT RUN TWO OF THOSE IN PARALLEL AT THE RS232
LEVEL EVEN IF IT IS JUST USING THE DCD LINE, FUCKWIT CHILD.

and YOU are very likely to be wrong. It's far more likely that the
hardware (purchased or homemade) is likely to be as I've shown
since the DCD (or some other input control pin) is the only
thing capable of responding predictably to the raw IR data.

YOU STILL CANT RUN TWO OF THOSE IN PARALLEL
AT THE RS232 LEVEL EVEN IF IT IS, FUCKWIT CHILD.

Now show us all how much you know about serial comms
and explain how raw IR can be fed to an async serial
input pin and sensible information passed to software.

Never ever said you could, fuckwit child.

<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old
could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

 

[Guest]

OK mate (says he, top posting). They all do it. It's established Usenet
custom but it does have that weakness. Filth gets propagated even if the
perpetrator is killfiled!

 

[Rod Speed]

Some silly little terminal fuckwit child claiming to
be Anthony Fremont <[email protected]>
desperately attempted to bullshit its way out of its
predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

 

[Rod Speed]

You just don't get it do you?

We have all got the fact that you couldnt
bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag, child.

It's a simple open-collector interface, try to understand that.

Pathetic, really.

<reams of your puerile shit that any 2 year old
could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>