I am thinking about tinkering…
My next project would be a digital chess clock.
Would use a microcontroller to drive LCD displays.
From what I have read, this could be done with Arduino, Basic Stamp, or PIC microcontrollers.
Does anybody have any experience with these and could give me some advice on why I would choose one over the other?
I’m ready to take the plunge and start buying the components. If anybody is interested in following along, I will be posting updates on my blog:
http://chess-for-engineers.blogspot.com/2015/03/building-my-own-chess-clock.html
Bob, sorry I missed this earlier, and good luck. In my amateur radio experience, I have used Arduino and found it intuitive, although others seem to prefer Basic Stamp or the Raspberry Pi platform.
I’ll be reading.
Do any TDs see this as a potential issue?
Speaking of amateur radio…is there any noticeable chess activity on ham radio? I know I’ve read there was active play-by-radio a long time ago, but I’d expect internet chess replaced a lot of that. But do ham/chess players ever just talk about chess? Perhaps discuss live games from super GM tournaments? (I’d love to find a place where people discuss live games that are not as full of idiots as are the chat rooms at places like chessbomb.com).
For those interested in microcontroller projects, such as building a chess clock, EdX.org has a free online course on embedded systems, aimed at beginners (you should know a little bit about programming, and enough electronics to apply Ohm’s law). It’s a lab based course, and the hardware you need costs around $30, and consists of a TI Tiva Series C LaunchPad (kind of like an Arduino, but more powerful…80 MHz ARM processor, and more RAM, ROM, I/O pins, timers, and such), a breadboard, and assorted discrete components. There’s an optional LCD graphical display for around $5 (used in a lab where you build a simple video game), and an optional TI CC3100 development board (around $15), which is a neat board that has another ARM processor and a Wi-Fi radio, and built-in firmware that provides a complete internet stack (TCP/IP, SSL, web server, FTP support, etc) and is very low power. It’s meant for “Internet of Things” applications, and provides a high level interface to your main board.
You can actually do the course without buying any of the hardware. The development software used for the class includes a simulator that is sufficient.
Only if the builder tries to use it in a tournament. Otherwise, no.
Thanks for the encouragement.
What issue do you see if he wants to use it in a tournament?
I don’t see anything offhand in the rules that would justify banning a home built clock, as long as the provider can, upon request, explain all relevant operational facts to the TD and each opponent as required by 42B, and it supports the time control being used.
The question was if any TDs see this homebuild as a potential issue. And you have articulated exactly the potential issue - proving it works properly. I would not plan to walk in and drop it on the table 30 seconds before the game starts and expect no problems. It might happen and it might not.
Further if one created a clock with an odd way to push it to signify a move is completed, that might keep it from being used. If a flag pops 10 feet in the air and a trumpet sounds at the end of the time control, that would be another issue. It is not quite as simple as “it works”.
but think of the entertainment factor here…
Indeed it would be pretty neat but it might disturb those on the next board. The confetti cannon would be a fantastic addition too, but might be problematic for some.
Especially the custodian.
Alex Relyea
I originally posted the question in “Running Chess Tournaments” but it was moved back here by the mods. So the assumption of tournament use was actually implicit to my original post.
Not meant to be discouraging, and I actually applaud what you are doing. Back in the earlier days of digital clocks, this concern sometimes came up because people were tinkering with their clocks to improve them (primarily to improve durability.)
But, it would seem reasonable that either a TD would have to test the clock, or that USCF would have to test it to ensure that it functions within standard tournament parameters.
A similar issue that has come up are “software clocks” on phones/tablets, or self written software clocks.
What would the over/under be concerning the number of rounds it is used in big money tournaments before somebody expresses concern that during the hours:minutes display phase it is set to deduct one minute every 45 seconds for one side and one minute every 75 seconds for the other? (the specific numbers may vary depending on the person expressing the concern and the concern may be that it won’t happen until 10% into the time control)
I’ve heard all sorts of claims over the years and people still remember how analog clocks can be set to vary the speed from one side to the other.
How about a silicone tentacle, as shown here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkPeF-sYQ-0?
It would certainly be hard to overlook, as a good flag should be, but would not require any clean up.
Is there actually a way to have the USCF examine a clock? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a clock advertised as USCF tested or approved, except the Excalibur, which is the USCF’s “official” clock.
Phones and tablets are problematic for several reasons.
If they are flat on the table, it is hard to read the time.
It’s hard to find the button to stop your clock on a touch screen without looking at it. (Physical touch buttons, like on a new style Chronos, are fine because you can tell if you have found it by feel).
There is no way to tell whose turn it is when you cannot see the screen.
FIDE rule 5.1(g) of the standard for equipment says that a battery powered clock must continue to function flawlessly for 10 hours after the low battery indicator triggers. I think most phones and tablets don’t have 10 hours left at that time (especially with the screen continuously on, as it must be for a clock app).
I also personally would not want to see someone in severe time trouble with a just captured triple weighted queen still in hand smashing his virtual button on my phone or tablet and cracking my screen.
That said, there could be a place for phones and tablets in chess timekeeping. Have a clock, similar to current clocks, that has displays and buttons, and handles the time keeping, but move the settings to a phone or tablet that is linked to the clock via Bluetooth? Then instead of having to try to cram all the settings into a couple of buttons that you have to push dozens of times to set things, you could have a nice friendly graphical settings interface on the phone or tablet. Note that this would make it easy to have unlimited presets, and to import and export settings, and support pasting time controls in right from the tournament’s web listing, because all of that is handled by the phone/tablet. The clock unit is just a simple, relatively dumb, time keeper.
Why would a home-built clock have to be tested by the USCF? Commercial clocks are not tested by the USCF. So, how do we know that it needs to be tested? The ZMF clocks showed up on the market and I didn’t see USCF verifying their performance. FIDE has a testing requirement but we don’t have one. If we did, we’d have to specify what the requirements are for a clock and right now we don’t have anything like that.
Mike Regan
Because a mass-produced clock does not easily have a “button” (or gizmo) by which one side can give itself a time advantage - and if it had such a gizmo, that would become quickly known. (Please, I am not implying that any person building their own clock is necessarily acting inappropriately - only that mass production implicitly drives a trust factor that a one-off does not.)
Actually, for decades mass produced clocks had a gizmo by which one side could give itself a time advantage. There was almost always a slider or other adjustment on the back of wind up mechanical clocks to make the clock faster or slower. That didn’t seem to be much of a problem.
Your USCF ID is lower enough than mine that surely you must have played with them, and not so much lower than mine that you would not be able to remember. 
I doubt there are any hidden time hacks in any current mass produced clocks, but there are some hidden easter eggs. Here’s a video showing two in Chronos clocks: youtube.com/watch?v=Y-WPj1vTOwE
The second is clearly a test mode that cycles through some patterns on the display to let you verify all the segments are working. The first flashes the lights and uses the speaker to play some music, and was probably put in for fun.