0
\$\begingroup\$

I am a software engineer and have limited experience with conventional circuitry. Recently, I have built a prototype device that uses an Arduino Uno, a Bluetooth module, an array of temperature/humidity sensors, and an OLED readout display, which currently relies on I2C. The function of my device is to simply wait to receive a BT signal, which wakes it from low power, then enables data acquisition by the temp. sensors for a fixed length of time while averaging at each read interval, and then displaying the averaged temp. & humid values on the OLED.

Ultimately, I am trying to determine if can move away from the ATmega328p chip and design a MCU-less circuit with conventional electronics for a production model. My project objectives motivating this idea are: achieving lower material and labor costs and eliminating the dependence on software and firmware. Both are equally important to me. However, I do not know if I am creating other substantial obstacles for myself in doing so. How can I determine 1) if what I’m asking is even possible to do given the functional requirements of my device and 2) if it’s the right choice going the MCU-less approach based off my project objectives?

\$\endgroup\$
12
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ MCUs are being pretty conventional for decades. Anyway, having BT implies a usage of some MCU anyway. You can get some better suited MCU with integrated BT though for your purposes. \$\endgroup\$
    – Eugene Sh.
    Mar 9, 2021 at 22:56
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Might have misunderstood the requirements but what you describe without MCU/etc sounds practically unfeasible. I mean, you need I2C, Bluetooth, low power/sleep, etc right? \$\endgroup\$
    – Wesley Lee
    Mar 9, 2021 at 23:01
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ OLED display, BT and so on are going to require either an MCU or equivalent implemented in some (extremely complex) manner. Forget about MCU-less and choose which MCU. \$\endgroup\$
    – Spehro Pefhany
    Mar 9, 2021 at 23:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ If the task has multiple disparate steps, go MCU. Your entire first paragraph = multiple disparate steps. \$\endgroup\$
    – DKNguyen
    Mar 9, 2021 at 23:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ $1 Pic uC can do this. \$\endgroup\$
    – Tony Stewart EE75
    Mar 9, 2021 at 23:49

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, you could reduce the part count by getting an IC that has bluetooth and a microcontroller in on IC (there are some to look at here) which are becoming more prevalent on the market right now.

It wouldn't be a MCU-less circuit necessarily because the MCU and the bluetooth module would be combined.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ With BT is there no real way of integrating it without some sort of MCU. I am quite unfamiliar with the inner workings of BT. Maybe worth some time to understand... \$\endgroup\$
    – Bryan A.
    Mar 10, 2021 at 1:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ The modules make it easy in many cases with AT commands instead of needing to write software \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike ♦
    Mar 10, 2021 at 2:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ @VoltageSpike I think you may have a mistranslation or an auto-correct mistake in your comment \$\endgroup\$
    – user253751
    Mar 10, 2021 at 13:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ Woah, yeah, that is not what I intended! You never know what your phone is going to throw out when you use voice commands! I missed it because there was another error that I corrected, definitely editing that comment \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike ♦
    Mar 10, 2021 at 16:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.