3 ms·
Another way of looking at it is the 555 is useless without multiple extra parts, where as most MCUs can operate with only a bypass cap (and even that is often o
by tdeck 2y ago
Another way of looking at it is the 555 is useless without multiple extra parts, where as most MCUs can operate with only a bypass cap (and even that is often optional in practice). But you do have to buy a programmer ($5 these days) and get comfortable with firmware, which puts some analog folks off. I'll admit that there is a certain elegance and appeal to using only parts you fully understand and nothing extraneous.
- dragontamer 2y agoEven if you have a microcontroller, there are simple situations where the 555 can come in handy. For example, switch debouncer could be solved in code, resistor+capacitor or other methods. But you know what's one of the best performing switch debouncers? 1-bit of memory with an analog comparator. Aka: a 555 Timer. > 555 is useless without multiple extra parts Not needed for bistable multi vibrator (aka: just a flip flop mode). Which happens to be the debouncer circuit.
- tdeck 2y agoI'm curious what the circumstances are where that would be worth the extra BOM count if you're already feeding the input into a microcontroller. Needing to detect extremely short pulses where you can't spare a pin interrupt? Something else I can't think of?
- dragontamer 2y agoBlack Box engineering. You can add the 555 Timer to an already completed design if it is later discovered that debouncing was an unsolved problem. I don't think it is always appropriate to assume that code can be rewritten (or rearchitected) to fit your needs. Sometimes its easier to solve problems with a touch of extra external hardware.