Lpc2000

> driver/isolator).  These
> > are simpler than CAN AFAIK.  How noisy is the environment where

CAN isn't difficult, some of the upper level protocols can be quite complex.

> It'll be about 10 ft of wire between sensor and controller. There
> doesn't need to be any other nodes on the network (at least that's
> what they say now). Data payload is about 3 bytes every 5mS and it'll
> be very noisy (automotive engine compartment) I suspect I could
> design it robust enough so that single packet loss could be
> tolerated.  Like I mentioned I have control over both ends of the
> system, so it could be any interface I see fit. I was thinking that
> CAN would be good for several reasons:
> It's a standard
> Noise resistant
> Easy to add to in the future

J1939 (CAN 250k Baud) is generally applied to this sort of concept: Heavy
equipment, bus, etc.  But in your case it may be overkill.  You might
consider microCANopen which I referenced in an earlier email would work
quite well for what you need, without much modification.  License for code
is ~$495.  www.canopenstore.com

CAN would be a very good solution for your application.

If you need more/smaller nodes check out the Atmel AT90CANxx(x) series.
These use a highly optimized CAN peripheral that greatly minimizes CPU
involvement.


Joel