Go to Post The neat thing about regionals, is that they ARE big robot parties! - MrForbes [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Motors
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2013, 18:35
ferret_guy ferret_guy is offline
Registered User
AKA: Mark Omo
FRC #1703 (RATS)
Team Role: Leadership
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Henderson
Posts: 97
ferret_guy is on a distinguished road
that sounds like a great personal project but in order to match the c-rio you would need something far faster and more advanced. If you really wanted to do this you could use the dio pins and set them to correspond to a single motor controller output
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2013, 18:38
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Lightbulb Re: Motor Drivers

I am basing it off the arduino, but placing a much better processor instead of an Atmel AVR. Currently I am designing with the P8X32A-D40
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2013, 19:10
cgmv123's Avatar
cgmv123 cgmv123 is offline
FRC RI/FLL Field Manager
AKA: Max Vrany
FRC #1306 (BadgerBOTS)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,087
cgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by team1165wins View Post
Currently I am designing with the P8X32A-D40
Which can't come close to the cRIO. Unless you're trying to do very intensive vision processing/process multiple images simultaneously, the cRIO can handle whatever you throw at it. I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish.

With regards to (this year's*) rules: Coprocessors are allowed, but the cRIO has to control the robot. [R67, R55] Altering PWM pathways is expressly disallowed. [R54, R67] You have to go through the cRIO anyway, so I don't see what you'd gain.

*I (not an expert nor insider) do not anticipate any of the relevant rules changing significantly for (near) future seasons.
__________________
BadgerBOTS Robotics|@team1306|Facebook: BadgerBOTS
2016 FIRST Championship Tesla Division | 2016 Wisconsin Regional Engineering Inspiration Award

2015 FIRST Championship Carson Division | 2015 Wisconsin Regional Chairman's Award

2013 FIRST Championship Curie Division | 2013 Wisconsin Regional Chairman's Award

2012 FIRST Championship Archimedes Division | 2012 Wisconsin Regional Engineering Inspiration Award, Woodie Flowers Finalist Award (Lead Mentor Ben Senson)


Last edited by cgmv123 : 14-02-2013 at 19:16.
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2013, 22:47
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Talking Re: Motor Drivers

This is to continuously drive the motors. When the cRIO is busy with another task, it cannot output another signal to the Jaguar or Talon. Also, I wanted all sensors to be connected to this. The final output to the cRIO could be possibly: LEFT | RIGHT | BACK | FORW, and the driver input. I really like Parallax products because I find them robust, powerful, efficient and high quality. Parallax has a nice support team, even though they are such a small corporation. They are also quite resistant to some dangerous things like electrostatic discharge. For example, the cRIO could send this chip a command, like RETRIEVE [sensor name], for example, and the chip could give the data. Using a laser range finder, for example, would allow you to get an accurate distance from a point, like the goal in this year's challenge. The cRIO would only have to make the final decisions. Also, I could integrate a CAS into this chip so that when the cRIO needs to calculate large numbers, the coprocessor could do it. When there is only one processor doing a ton of work, the whole system becomes laggy. It is common about how the robot will stop in place while processing an image.
  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2013, 23:15
Joe Ross's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Joe Ross Joe Ross is offline
Registered User
FRC #0330 (Beachbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 8,599
Joe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Ross has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by team1165wins View Post
This is to continuously drive the motors. When the cRIO is busy with another task, it cannot output another signal to the Jaguar or Talon.
As others have told you, this isn't true.
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2013, 23:23
cgmv123's Avatar
cgmv123 cgmv123 is offline
FRC RI/FLL Field Manager
AKA: Max Vrany
FRC #1306 (BadgerBOTS)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,087
cgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond reputecgmv123 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by team1165wins View Post
This is to continuously drive the motors. When the cRIO is busy with another task, it cannot output another signal to the Jaguar or Talon. .... It is common about how the robot will stop in place while processing an image.
The FPGA controls the outputs. The CPU does image processing. They can are designed to work in parallel. With proper coding, the cRIO should never be too busy to not set the outputs.

Co-processing complex inputs, like cameras is feasible, legal, and in many cases, recommended.

Bottom line: You are not allowed under current FRC rules to use a separate processor to control or modify the control signal to the motors. It isn't feasible anyway and what you're proposing won't do anything but be very hard to accomplish. The cRIO is an excellent product, get to know it.
__________________
BadgerBOTS Robotics|@team1306|Facebook: BadgerBOTS
2016 FIRST Championship Tesla Division | 2016 Wisconsin Regional Engineering Inspiration Award

2015 FIRST Championship Carson Division | 2015 Wisconsin Regional Chairman's Award

2013 FIRST Championship Curie Division | 2013 Wisconsin Regional Chairman's Award

2012 FIRST Championship Archimedes Division | 2012 Wisconsin Regional Engineering Inspiration Award, Woodie Flowers Finalist Award (Lead Mentor Ben Senson)

  #22   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2013, 00:47
apalrd's Avatar
apalrd apalrd is offline
More Torque!
AKA: Andrew Palardy (Most people call me Palardy)
VRC #3333
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Auburn Hills, MI
Posts: 1,347
apalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

The point of a real-time pre-emptive operating system is to manage high priority timing critical tasks and low priority less critical tasks on the same CPU.

An operating system can pre-empt the slower or more resource-intensive task to execute a higher priority task, then return to the slower task. In FRC, the slower task could be vision, and the faster task could be everything else. Since it takes at least 100ms to process an image, the faster task could pre-empt the image processing several times for each image processed. The higher priority stuff gets done on time, and the lower priority stuff gets done eventually.

The cRio's PowerPC actually sends data to the FPGA (I'm not entirely sure if it's through mapped memory or something else, but it gets transferred to the FPGA's RAM space) which then deals with the actual sensors. It's almost like your input/output coprocessor except it runs fully parallel at 40mhz. Since an FPGA describes hardware, instead of operating on a vector of instructions to execute it actually arranges logic gates to pipeline the operations all in parallel, so everything happens at once or at a lower clock frequency (e.g. many DIO loops run at only ~150khz to match the max speed of the DIO data).

If things ever stop happening because vision is too demanding, then you need to architect the code to run vision in a lower priority task and VxWorks will schedule it like a lower priority task, pre-empting it when the control code needs to run. This is possible and not very difficult to do, it's quite trivial in LabVIEW.



I also suggest you try to find the time it takes to do a 64-bit double precision floating point divide on the cRio's PowerPC vs the Propeller. Actually, tell me if the Propeller can even do it at all.

The propeller and it's cousin the BASIC stamp are probably my definition of low-power microprocessor. There are many far better chips available which can do a far better job at handling embedded controls.


A far better design direction would be to put vision on a co-processor. There are many solutions that have been tried, I can't recommend any of them personally but some sound reasonably fast.
__________________
Kettering University - Computer Engineering
Kettering Motorsports
Williams International - Commercial Engines - Controls and Accessories
FRC 33 - The Killer Bees - 2009-2012 Student, 2013-2014 Advisor
VEX IQ 3333 - The Bumble Bees - 2014+ Mentor

"Sometimes, the elegant implementation is a function. Not a method. Not a class. Not a framework. Just a function." ~ John Carmack
  #23   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2013, 14:09
philso philso is offline
Mentor
FRC #2587
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 940
philso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

Devyash

You are attempting to do something that is pretty complicated and difficult. In order for you to be even moderately successful, you will have to climb up a very long and steep learning curve. The first thing you must learn is to realize who around you possess the knowledge that you need. Next, you must learn to listen to those people and to take their advice. It is pretty clear to me that the other posters in this thread have extensive experience in evaluating and selecting microprocessors.


Quote:
Originally Posted by team1165wins View Post
I am in a STEM program and I have teachers that help me with these problems.
If your teachers have extensive experience doing this kind of work, then they can help you. Otherwise, you all have the opportunity to experiment and learn together. I must say that in the last 30 years, I have never seen a fresh (university) graduate who had the required skills to design such a PCB. Maybe one of the other people posting here have but it is probably pretty rare. Regardless, the kind of PCB you need should not be your first PCB design project.


Quote:
Originally Posted by team1165wins View Post
The system I am currently designing is supposed to be modular, kind of like the cRIO. an ADC breakout, PWMPAL Breakout are what I am wanting to create. The modules can easily be swapped, taken out, or be changed in order.
This is a very admirable goal but making it modular is going to make an already difficult task many times more difficult.

Last edited by philso : 15-02-2013 at 14:33. Reason: make language more concise
  #24   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2013, 18:00
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Motor Drivers

I completely agree. However, another reason why I like this product is because it is cheap. I can go down to a store and get it for $8 plus tax (~$8.08 per chip) that means that we can add more processors if we need and that we dont need to worry too much if we fry a chip. If possible, I would be using a Raspberry Pi with a completely trimmed down linux kernel. However, this processor will take 300mA at a max, with all outputs high (or low) and driving something. I agree that I don't have as much knowledge and experience as a professional, as I am only a high school freshman, but I use AutoCAD Electronics, and I am pretty sure it tries to create the most efficient route as possible. Currently, the biggest problem is that I cant build a PCB with mor than two layers. However, There is something similar, called the HoverFly Pro, that uses a lot of the same technology.
  #25   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2013, 23:08
philso philso is offline
Mentor
FRC #2587
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 940
philso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

As I have stated previously, this should not be your first design project.

A microprocessor board like what you are contemplating will require 4-6 layers. I have seen examples of such boards done in 2 layers with much less demanding processors than what you are using and they ended in grief. They were ultimately redone in 4 layers.

There are parts of the circuit where it is very unwise to use an autorouter. The real art in PCB layout is in where you place all the components, relative to each other, based on their function. Only then can you get effective and efficient trace routings. CAD programs are only tools for running traces. You still need to know why a trace should be routed in a particular way before running the trace.

Have you priced all the other components that you will need? The bare board will cost you somewhere around $50 from a reputable prototype manufacturer. I am skeptical that you can make a useable board that will take the QFP packages yourself due to the fine pitch of the pins.

Engineering is solving problems by making wise choices. If you want vision processing, you will have to pay a price, one way or another. It may mean paying some money and/or calculating your current consumption and making adjustments in your overall robot design.
  #26   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-02-2013, 22:58
yash101 yash101 is offline
Curiosity | I have too much of it!
AKA: null
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: devnull
Posts: 1,191
yash101 is an unknown quantity at this point
Lightbulb Re: Motor Drivers

Would it be possible to use the fpga to do all the io processing while the powerpc is doing the image processing and instruct the fpga. after talking to my pltw teacher, he told me that an fpga can do parallel processing continuously.
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-02-2013, 00:09
Jaxom Jaxom is offline
Registered User
AKA: Michael Hartwig
FRC #1986 (Team Titanium)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Lee's Summit, MO
Posts: 379
Jaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant futureJaxom has a brilliant future
Re: Motor Drivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by team1165wins View Post
I am pretty sure that vxWorks (on the cRIO) uses a lot of the processing power itself, just like how a slow netbook might have a 50% processor usage, running nothing but the operating system.
If your OS uses 50% of your CPU you need a new OS. vxWorks isn't that bad. Heck, even Windows isn't that bad.

But to reiterate the answer others have given to your original question: that kind of coprocessing is not legal for FRC; the cRIO has to control your motors. If you're experiencing lag you should spend the time to learn more about your current environment & find out *why* you have lag. It's pretty easy to introduce unwanted lag via programming.
__________________


Mentor http://www.teamtitanium.org/
  #28   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-02-2013, 12:10
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

Not only can someone do this, I already have a Parallax Propeller powering a brushed DC motor control and it does CAN with a Microchip transceiver. That controller is not a FIRST allowed part and can not be used on a FIRST robot without review by FIRST which at this time I have no reason to do.

I also constructed a robot control system with Parallax Propellers at the heart (plural if you like).

There are other people out there with plenty of experience that share your interest though please keep in mind that FIRST does retain the rights to ultimately decide what is on your FIRST approved robot and at this time you'll require far more than a working prototype to achieve what you desire.

So far as I know you can use the Parallax Propeller as a co-processor to the cRIO per the custom circuit rules, but these circuits as others have said, may not operate the motor outputs themselves. So you can't put the motor controllers, hobby servos or even relays on your Parallax Propeller board I/O. You could plug the Parallax Propeller board into the cRIO via the digital side car to...for instance...create a port for an SVGA monitor (though I don't know if having the actual monitor on the robot on the field would be legal you'd have to investigate). I currently see no reason you couldn't interface sensors to the Parallax Propeller such that you could service it with the cRIO. I can see how it might have some value in that sense.

As to the rest....the Parallax Propeller is a very different design philosophy than is common to much of the rest of the microcontroller industry.

It is not realistic to compare the clock speed of the cRIO with the Propeller.

The entire concept behind the Propeller is parallelism. It does not implement interrupts, but it does implement timers and PLL. It also implements shared memory space and common access to that shared memory and I/O using a round-robin fixed timing system.

The Propellor 1 for better for worse is very sparse on peripherals.
This means less idiosyncrasy in the integration.
However that means more glue and extra hardware (which can lead to cost but also to flexibility).

I come from a background of parallel computing using CPUs in mainframes.
To me for some applications the raw parallel nature of the Parallax Propeller makes a heck of a lot of sense when the target system parameters get unspecific.

I also have experience and close ties with Atmel, Microchip, Intel and Motorola. If you know the parameters of your project specifically sometimes it makes the best sense to use a microcontroller / microprocessor that is most closely designed for that purpose as compared to the Propeller which you can probably massage into that purpose.

As far as raw horsepower is concerned...there are plenty of things that a pile of Parallax Propellers can be tweaked to do that the purpose built cRIO would need to be redesigned for.

There is, at least to me, a comfortable middle ground where the Parallax Propeller is a real design option just as the ARM, the Atmel, and the PIC.

As far as the concerns about math, floating point, hardware support....virtually no student I have seen in FIRST is writing code for the cRIO in assembler. The ability to yield pure untainted performance is highly dependent on the quality of the byte interpreter or the compiler optimization. If you really need that kind of raw math performance there are many options including software and hardware coprocessors. One could debate the deciding factors on the impact for a very long time.

Obviously there is a very real limit in which the students will get lost in the large piles of minutia that will ensue.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 19-02-2013 at 13:25.
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-02-2013, 13:59
apalrd's Avatar
apalrd apalrd is offline
More Torque!
AKA: Andrew Palardy (Most people call me Palardy)
VRC #3333
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Auburn Hills, MI
Posts: 1,347
apalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond reputeapalrd has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

The propeller has basically no peripherals. While that gives you a lot of flexibility in code, there are some things that should stay peripherals.

I work professionally with a MPC5600 series processor, which has a lot of peripherals. The eTPU (Time Processing Unit), eMIOS (Modular Input Output System), and DMA (Direct Memory Access) alone on the chip I am currently working with would take around 192 propeller cogs to get something close in functionality, and the TPUs also additional peripherals to synthesize clocks (e.g. angle clock/angle timestamp) and manage timestamps/clocks that would have to be replicated somehow. This dosen't include SPI, QADC or the actual PowerPC itself. While you could likely move some of the algorithms into the cogs that deal with the IO, you would basically need over 200 cogs to get the low and some mid-level software done, and we haven't even touched comm, OS, or high-level application code.

A good C compiler is basically a requirement for an embedded platform these days, especially with autocoding tools which generate C code from models.
__________________
Kettering University - Computer Engineering
Kettering Motorsports
Williams International - Commercial Engines - Controls and Accessories
FRC 33 - The Killer Bees - 2009-2012 Student, 2013-2014 Advisor
VEX IQ 3333 - The Bumble Bees - 2014+ Mentor

"Sometimes, the elegant implementation is a function. Not a method. Not a class. Not a framework. Just a function." ~ John Carmack
  #30   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-02-2013, 14:11
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Motor Drivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by apalrd View Post
The propeller has basically no peripherals. While that gives you a lot of flexibility in code, there are some things that should stay peripherals.

I work professionally with a MPC5600 series processor, which has a lot of peripherals. The eTPU (Time Processing Unit), eMIOS (Modular Input Output System), and DMA (Direct Memory Access) alone on the chip I am currently working with would take around 192 propeller cogs to get something close in functionality, and the TPUs also additional peripherals to synthesize clocks (e.g. angle clock/angle timestamp) and manage timestamps/clocks that would have to be replicated somehow. This dosen't include SPI, QADC or the actual PowerPC itself. While you could likely move some of the algorithms into the cogs that deal with the IO, you would basically need over 200 cogs to get the low and some mid-level software done, and we haven't even touched comm, OS, or high-level application code.

A good C compiler is basically a requirement for an embedded platform these days, especially with autocoding tools which generate C code from models.
I can't speak for the cog count you've assigned to these functions but realistically if you really need purpose built peripherals there are many choices to achieve that result. For example I had no trouble at all gluing a Xilinx CoolRunner CPLD or Spartan 3 to the Propeller and I have a rough prototype using the XCore. More importantly I could change the glue to multiply the number of CPLD/FPGA connected to one or many cogs or Propeller chips. (Interestingly the prototype for the Propeller was made in an FPGA).

Realistically speaking if we can compare the Parallax Propeller 1 to the cRIO which includes the FPGA it's only fair to consider the inclusion of similar hardware.

Also there are OS for the Parallax Propeller.

I can't argue that you should back-hand your way to the sort of integrated functions you enjoy on your microcontroller / microprocessor of choice if you don't have some other reason to do it. Surely if those peripherals are your highest priority you'd be foolish to try to round the square peg to fit that hole. Especially if those peripherals are some kind of proprietary IP.

Still I can drive a FIRST robot on a single Parallax Propeller and it would be sort of like the performance of a bunch of the old IFI control systems.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 19-02-2013 at 14:15.
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:30.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi