CR3-S02 · ESP32 y sistemas de control · Learn

Back to your course / CR3-S02

Computing and Robotics · 3.º ESO · Learn

ESP32 and control systems

A controller connects physical signals, remembered state and output commands. You will follow that path and justify when a model should act or stop.

10 planned lessonsCR3-S02
Understand the idea. Design, test and explain your solution.

Your mission

In pairs, build a model access controller with ESP32, detection sustained for 1000 ms, actuation and priority stopping. Test logic and hardware separately and then together. This is an educational model, not a safety system for a real door.

Original illustration of students planning and testing a computing project.
Ilustración original de apoyo visual · Sintaxis Divergente, 2026.

Read the explanation, study the diagram and try the activity in each section. You can choose another version at any time.

Your tools

Use Google Docs for written explanations and diagrams.net for diagrams. Save the editable file as well as the evidence requested in each task.

2.1. From program to controller

Learn · theory and practice

A microcontroller executes a program and communicates with physical inputs and outputs. We retain variables, decisions and functions learned in Python but must adapt language, libraries and environment. In Arduino C++ for ESP32, setup() prepares the device at startup and loop() repeats while it operates. Braces delimit blocks, many statements end in semicolons and indentation helps readability. Copying a Python file does not convert it to C++.

A type describes what kind of data a variable handles. bool represents true or false; a constant declared with const must not be reassigned. The classroom timing pattern uses unsigned long. A void function returns no value to its caller, although it can perform an action such as Serial.println(). Defining a function does not execute it: a call with arguments is needed. A serial message reports program behaviour but does not demonstrate physical movement. Separating information from actuation lets us test decisions before attaching a mechanism.

  1. Program
  2. Setup
  3. Loop
  4. Read and decide
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

A practice function receives a Boolean and writes “occupied” or “free” to serial. It can be checked with known arguments before using a sensor. If the message changes, we know that decision executed; we do not yet know whether the module detects correctly or the mechanism responds. Each piece of evidence answers a different question along the complete path.

An ESP32 development board with rows of connection pins.
Una versión de placa ESP32; el kit del aula puede ser diferente. Foto de Ubahnverleih / Wikimedia Commons, CC0 1.0; versión a menor tamaño.

Arduino desde cero en Español – Capítulo 1 – Introducción Arduino e inicio del Curso

Published by: Bitwise Ar · Open on YouTube

Watch in short sections. Connect one explanation with the diagram and try the example in this section. The written theory lets you complete the activity without playing the video.

The video keeps its original spoken language. Use the captions available in the player if they help.

Your turn

  1. In Arduino IDE, open the classroom practice program and locate setup, loop, a constant, a bool, a definition and its call.
  2. In Google Docs, explain what a serial run demonstrates and which physical evidence is missing.
Pause and check

Why does printing ACTUANDO not demonstrate that the actuator acted?

↑ Back to the index

2.2. Power, signal and reference

Learn · theory and practice

Power supplies energy; a signal communicates information. A module can have one power requirement and a different signal requirement. An ESP32 GPIO does not accept any voltage simply because the module connector says 5 V. Before assembly, consult the exact board, shield and component models to check compatibility, polarity and any required adaptation. Do not infer pins from resemblance to another board.

A shield connector number may differ from the GPIO number used in code. The assembly sheet maps both and states power, signal and a common GND reference where the validated interface requires it. A digital input represents HIGH or LOW; whether LOW means detection depends on the module. A pin without a defined level can float and change without real detection. Pull-up and pull-down help establish levels, but their use depends on the GPIO and circuit. Validate configuration against documentation before making connections with the system powered off.

  1. Module sheet
  2. Electrical compatibility
  3. Configured GPIO
  4. Interpretable level
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

A fictional sensor sheet states active-LOW detection. The program interprets HIGH as presence and appears to respond backwards. Before reversing wires, compare the read level with its agreed meaning. Correcting the logical translation may suffice, but only after checking that wiring and signal meet the sheet for the actual model; this example supplies no universal pin.

Micro:bit board with LED display, buttons and connection pins.
Una placa micro:bit; el aspecto puede variar según su versión. Foto de Jodiepedia / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0; sin cambios.

Your turn

  1. In Google Docs, complete the sheet with model reference, connector, GPIO, power, signal, GND and polarity from kit documentation validated in class.
  2. In diagrams.net, draw that path and mark any signal adaptation; assemble only the connection reviewed with the teacher.
Pause and check

Which two checks are missing if we only know the sensor’s power supply?

↑ Back to the index

2.3. Reading, interpreting and acting

Learn · theory and practice

Before a controller can decide, it needs inputs with an agreed meaning. pinMode configures a GPIO’s use, digitalRead obtains its digital level and digitalWrite sets the level of an output configured for that purpose. However, HIGH and LOW describe levels rather than complete situations. The adapter interprets the module’s polarity and supplies detection, stop and validity to the logic. An analogue reading also requires its range, resolution and relationship to the measured quantity: naming a raw value distance does not turn it into centimetres.

This translation separates reading inputs, deciding the state and applying the output. The logic works with stable meanings, while the adapter contains hardware details. It can therefore be checked first with known conditions generated through serial. Command 1 enables detection and 0 removes it; p enables stop, r releases it and x simulates invalidity. These test inputs allow a sequence to be repeated. When the sensor is introduced, its signal must be checked against the expected meaning.

Each test establishes one part of that path. Simulating invalidity checks the logic’s response but adds no ability to discover a physical fault. The basic digital reader does not automatically identify a disconnected cable; that diagnosis needs an additional validated check. Likewise, receiving correct detection does not yet demonstrate mechanism movement. Output starts disabled and is applied after the state is decided, allowing the different conditions to be resolved before issuing a command and avoiding contradictory actions.

  1. Physical level
  2. Input adapter
  3. Detection, stop, validity
  4. Output command
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

The logic receives deteccion = true without knowing whether it comes from a serial command or the module. This separation allows a known test to be repeated. However, switching to the sensor requires checking the translation: a correct software test does not guarantee polarity or wiring. Simulated validity tests a branch but does not add a diagnostic capability absent from the circuit.

👀 Encender un LED con ESP32 usando Arduino IDE – Capitulo 1 👽

Published by: RSlicing3D · Open on YouTube

Watch in short sections. Connect one explanation with the diagram and try the example in this section. The written theory lets you complete the activity without playing the video.

The video keeps its original spoken language. Use the captions available in the player if they help.

Your turn

  1. In Arduino IDE and serial monitor, identify read, decision and output functions; test 1, 0, p, r and x without a moving actuator.
  2. In Google Docs, compare a physical reading from the validated assembly with a test command and state what each checks.
Pause and check

What changes when a simulated input is replaced by a sensor, and what can remain?

↑ Back to the index

2.4. States, transitions and priority

Learn · theory and practice

A state summarises a previous situation that matters for the current decision. REPOSO, DETECTADO, ACTUANDO and PARADO represent situations of the same controller, not different devices. A transition relates current state, condition and next state. REPOSO becomes DETECTADO when valid detection begins; DETECTADO keeps checking while detection continues and becomes ACTUANDO when the interval is met. If detection disappears earlier, it returns to REPOSO and that verification is lost.

Stopping or an invalid reading takes priority and leads to PARADO from any state, disabling output. Releasing stop and recovering validity does not resume an old actuation: if detection remains, a new verification starts. A transition table makes these cases explicit, including ones a drawing might omit. An enumeration names the set of states in code. Condition order must preserve priority; several independent if statements can conflict if a later branch reactivates what stopping disabled.

  1. Current state
  2. Priority condition
  3. Transition
  4. Next state
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

Two tests have detection present at the observed instant. One has just started and the other has been acting for some time. The same instantaneous input can produce different states because the controller retains history. Adding stop must send both to PARADO. This comparison shows why an input-output table without state and priorities is insufficient for the design.

Your turn

  1. In diagrams.net, draw the four states and label every arrow with its condition; complete the transition table in Google Docs.
  2. In Arduino IDE, trace a brief detection and stopping during actuation through serial; compare with the table before editing code.
Pause and check

Why should releasing stop not directly restore an earlier actuation?

↑ Back to the index

2.5. Timing while continuing to read

Learn · theory and practice

The project’s detection must remain present for 1000 ms, or one second, before actuation is allowed. Other inputs still matter during that interval: a stop can arrive while detection is being verified. delay(1000) pauses the continuation of the sequence executing it and can delay a stop checked there. Nonblocking timing meets this need by retaining the starting instant and checking time later while loop continues its reading and decision cycle.

millis() provides a counter in milliseconds. The pattern uses unsigned long times and calculates ahora – inicioDeteccion to determine how much time has elapsed since the start. The >= comparison includes the instant when the interval is reached. The start is stored on entering DETECTADO; updating it on every iteration would restart the count repeatedly. Losing detection before the interval ends, however, does require abandoning that verification: the requirement is continuity rather than adding separate intervals together.

Reaching the interval is only one condition for actuation. Loop iterations also check detection, validity and stop, whose priority is preserved during waiting and actuation. The counter has finite size, so the unsigned subtraction pattern is retained rather than replaced with arbitrary additions. The program also observes the interval only when it checks again. Other instructions can introduce delays, and loop frequency limits that observation; nonblocking timing promises neither instantaneous response nor unlimited precision.

  1. Stored start
  2. Continued readings
  3. Time subtraction
  4. Interval reached
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

A practice detection begins when the counter reads 2500 ms. At 3100, 600 ms have elapsed, not 3100. If the start were continually updated, that difference would become small on every iteration. A trace of start and current time distinguishes that fault from another case: detection disappearing and legitimately requiring verification to restart.

Your turn

  1. In Google Docs, prepare a trace with brief detection, continuity just before and at 1000 ms, and stopping during verification.
  2. In Arduino IDE, run those cases through serial and record start, elapsed time and state without replacing the pattern with delay.
Pause and check

What fault results from storing inicioDeteccion on every iteration?

↑ Back to the index

2.6. Configuration, movement and support

Learn · theory and practice

A mechanism relates parts to transmit or guide movement. An idealised barrier rotates around one axis: one independent angular variable describes its position, giving it one degree of freedom in that model. Counting closed, intermediate and open positions does not add degrees of freedom. A mobile base translates and turns on a surface; an articulated arm combines joints; a Cartesian configuration moves along axes. Counting motors does not fully describe mobility.

Selection depends on the task, reach, load, workspace and structure. For the model, an indicator first checks the command without movement. If a servo is added later, check its power, signal, library and permitted travel. A position command alone guarantees neither an exact physical angle nor an unobstructed path. The support must allow movement, return, access and maintenance without forcing stops or cables. Inspect the mechanism with power disconnected before a supervised functional test, keeping parts removable and reusable.

  1. Movement need
  2. Configuration
  3. Axis and travel
  4. Physical test
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

A barrier and an arm may each use a servo in a test yet serve different functions. The barrier must clear a passage; the arm positions an endpoint within its reach. Comparing only the actuator hides differences in structure and task. The sketch should show which part rotates, around which axis and which area must remain clear during travel.

Your turn

  1. In diagrams.net, represent a barrier, mobile base and arm; explain the independent movements and tasks compared in Google Docs.
  2. Using the validated kit mechanism, perform a movement or fastening microtest, record travel and return and identify the support’s function.
Pause and check

How does a mechanism position differ from a degree of freedom?

↑ Back to the index

2.7. Finding the first failing stage

Learn · theory and practice

A logic test checks decisions with known inputs; a physical test adds sensor, connections, power and mechanism. Both are necessary and provide different evidence. To investigate a fault, follow reading, interpretation, state, command and physical effect. The first discrepancy guides a hypothesis without proving it yet. A final photograph cannot reconstruct the path or establish whether a message belongs to the current program version.

If the system remains in DETECTADO, it may continually restart timing or receive unstable detection. A stable serial input helps distinguish these before changing the filter. If ACTUANDO appears without movement, inspect output and assembly using the validated sheet; do not randomly alter transitions already working. After repair, repeat the original case and other relevant ones, including stop and recovery. Record version, conditions, expected and observed results, hypothesis and outcome. A sustainable improvement can ease maintenance or reuse but must preserve the verified function of the integrated system.

  1. Reading
  2. Interpretation
  3. State and command
  4. Physical effect
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

A sensor alternates presence and absence while someone remains in front of it. Timing correctly restarts because continuity is required. With a stable serial input, the interval is reached. This comparison points towards sensor reading or interpretation rather than shortening the interval until the system appears to work. Repair must address observed behaviour and be retested with the physical assembly.

Your turn

  1. In Arduino IDE, record reading, state and command in stable and interrupted tests; compare with the validated assembly’s physical effect.
  2. In Google Docs, document an incident with hypothesis and repeated test, distinguishing serial checks from physical checks.
Pause and check

Which comparison distinguishes a timing error from unstable detection?

↑ Back to the index

2.8. Accepting the system through tests

Learn · theory and practice

An acceptance test connects a requirement with an action and an observable result. The controller must disable output at rest, ignore detection shorter than 1000 ms and act when detection continues through the interval. It must also respond to stop or invalidity during actuation and verify again after recovery. Exact temporal equality matters, as does stopping during verification; these are not equivalent to testing only the beginning and end.

The record states whether input comes from the sensor or serial and what diagnostic capability actually exists. Simulated invalidity checks logical priority without establishing physical detection of disconnection. The product combines editable code, connection sheet, mechanism diagram and tests of the integrated assembly. Improvement requires a before-and-after comparison under stated conditions, and each partner must explain a decision and modification. Recognising limitations belongs to the result: the model studies educational control and certifies neither protection of people, mechanical precision nor the safety of a real door.

  1. Requirement
  2. Test sequence
  3. Observable result
  4. Acceptance with limits
Original diagram · Sintaxis Divergente

A worked example

A pair tests opening and stopping but not recovery while detection remains present. Immediate reactivation could stay hidden. Adding that sequence checks a different requirement from correct closing. The test must describe action order and expected state at each point so another person can repeat it without deciding during the test which result counts as acceptable.

Your turn

  1. In Google Docs, prepare five cases: rest, brief detection, continuity through the interval, priority during actuation and recovery with detection.
  2. Run them using Arduino IDE and the validated assembly, preserve results and repeat affected cases after a functional or maintenance improvement.
Pause and check

Which claim cannot be supported by a serial-only test?

↑ Back to the index

Your project and submissions

A01 · Design the solution

  1. In Google Docs, define the access need, reusable resources and sensor and actuator choice; complete the validated model, shield, GPIO, signal, power and polarity sheet.
  2. In diagrams.net, draw structure, mechanism, reading, control and output; compare the barrier with mobile and articulated robots and explain independent movements.
  3. Describe REPOSO, DETECTADO, ACTUANDO and PARADO, table, pseudocode and trace covering continuity, equality at 1000 ms, stop and recovery.
  4. In Arduino IDE, execute a text microprogram and an initial physical sensor–output interaction; add a movement or fastening test and compare the real signal with test input.
  5. Save CR3-S02_control_A01_Apellidos with expected results, sources, microtest scope and both partners’ contributions and individual explanations.

What to submit

  • Editable design, electrical sheet, mechanical diagram and configuration comparison.
  • Executed text code, trace and physical microtests of reading, interaction and movement or fastening.
  • Acceptance plan, materials, sources and individual explanation.

A02 · Model access controller

  1. Build the revised assembly and program states and timing in Arduino IDE without blocking stop checks; integrate sensor, structure and actuation using the validated sheet.
  2. Record rest with input 0, detection shorter than 1000 ms without action, continuous detection through 1000 ms with action, stop or invalidity during actuation disabling output, and recovery with new verification.
  3. Add stopping during the interval and physical travel and return checks; distinguish simulated invalidity from any actual physical diagnostic capability.
  4. Document an incident, correction and verified improvement, materials and limits; save editable code, connections and record in CR3-S02_control_A02_Apellidos.
  5. Each partner explains components, configuration, degree of freedom and a code decision; predict or perform a short modification within A02.

What to submit

  • Integrated model, editable code and final assembly sheet.
  • Five acceptance cases, stop during verification and physical travel and return tests.
  • Improvement record, limits, reuse and individual demonstrations.

Before you submit

  • Learner descriptors for reviewing learning; they do not replace official criteria.
  • I can follow signal, interpretation, state and output without confusing simulation with physical readings.
  • I can explain priority, continuity and elapsed time using a trace.
  • I can demonstrate the integrated mechanism’s operation and improvement and recognise model limitations.

Templates and files

Open the blank A01 or A02 template and make your own copy in Google Docs. Keep the editable file from your project platform as well.

These reusable templates help you organise your work. Follow the specific instructions and evidence list for this unit; remove fields that do not apply. The blank master is read-only. Keep your answers private and share them only as your teacher instructs.

A01 · Design the solution

  • Editable design, electrical sheet, mechanical diagram and configuration comparison.
  • Executed text code, trace and physical microtests of reading, interaction and movement or fastening.
  • Acceptance plan, materials, sources and individual explanation.

A02 · Model access controller

  • Integrated model, editable code and final assembly sheet.
  • Five acceptance cases, stop during verification and physical travel and return tests.
  • Improvement record, limits, reuse and individual demonstrations.

Classroom rubrics

The classroom assessment reference is preserved below in its original Spanish. Use the checklist above to prepare your work and ask your teacher about any descriptor you need to clarify.

Consultar la rúbrica de A01

Diseño y microprueba

CYR.3.1.1 Señales y recorrido del controlador ESP32

Comprender el funcionamiento de los sistemas de computación física, sus componentes y principales características.

Evidencia. Ficha GPIO interfaz alimentación y polaridad, esquema y lectura física de microensayo.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9Confunde alimentación con nivel de señal o número de conector con GPIO sin comprobarlo.
3–4,9Identifica placa y sensor, pero omite referencia, polaridad o naturaleza de la señal y no explica el dato leído.
5–6,9Describe componentes, señales analógicas y digitales y recorrido entrada control salida. Usa ficha validada y documenta una lectura física sin inventar pines ni diagnóstico de desconexión.
7–8,9Contrasta dos condiciones y explica cómo la adaptación traduce HIGH o LOW al significado detección.
9–10,0Justifica sustituir un módulo e identifica qué niveles, interfaz y validez habría que volver a comprobar.

CYR.3.1.2 Configuración robótica y grados de libertad

Reconocer los conceptos básicos de la robótica, así como las configuraciones morfológicas más comunes.

Evidencia. Comparación del acceso con robot móvil y articulado, más microprueba del mecanismo preparado.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9Confunde eje con posición o clasifica robots solo por aspecto sin relacionarlo con su tarea.
3–4,9Nombra configuraciones, pero no identifica grados de libertad ni relación con el acceso de maqueta.
5–6,9Define robot móvil y articulado, identifica su configuración y compara grados de libertad con el mecanismo de acceso, apoyándose en una microprueba.
7–8,9Relaciona configuración, alcance y tarea y explica por qué varias posiciones no añaden por sí solas otro grado de libertad.
9–10,0Justifica una configuración alternativa para una necesidad nueva considerando movimiento y alcance.

CYR.3.1.4 Ingeniería del mecanismo y relación con el control

Comprender los principios de ingeniería en los que se basan los robots, su funcionamiento, componentes y características.

Evidencia. Boceto mecánico, estructura sensor control actuador y prueba de movimiento o fijación.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9El boceto impide el movimiento previsto o no relaciona mecanismo y orden del controlador.
3–4,9Identifica actuador, pero omite apoyo, fijación o recorrido y no verifica una parte mecánica.
5–6,9Explica estructura mecánica, sensorial y de control, dibuja el mecanismo y ejecuta una prueba de movimiento o fijación con montaje validado.
7–8,9Justifica recorrido, apoyo y posición de referencia y revisa un choque o desajuste observado.
9–10,0Compara dos mecanismos adecuados y argumenta elección por recorrido, componentes y esfuerzo cualitativo.

CYR.3.2.1 Máquina de estados y temporización

Conocer y resolver la variedad de problemas posibles, desarrollando un programa informático y generalizando las soluciones, tanto de forma individual como trabajando en equipo, colaborando y comunicándose de forma adecuada.

Evidencia. Estados, pseudocódigo, traza temporal y microprograma textual ejecutado.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9La lógica activa tras parada o confunde tiempo absoluto y transcurrido sin reconocerlo.
3–4,9Define estados, pero reinicia continuamente el tiempo o conserva una espera tras invalidarse la entrada.
5–6,9Resuelve reposo, detección, actuación y parada, ejecuta una microprueba y traza continuidad, igualdad temporal y recuperación. Explica aportaciones y revisión con la pareja.
7–8,9Contrasta entradas simultáneas y localiza una prioridad o reinicio de tiempo incorrectos.
9–10,0Adapta el intervalo y predice una secuencia nueva con interrupciones, justificando los cambios de estado al equipo.

CYR.3.3.1 Acceso físico integrado y mejora sostenible

Ser capaz de construir un sistema de computación o robótico, promoviendo la interacción con el mundo físico en el contexto de un problema del mundo real, de forma sostenible.

Evidencia. Necesidad, microprototipo físico, aceptación y materiales reutilizables.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9No hay interacción física comprobada o el acceso no se relaciona con la necesidad.
3–4,9Se muestra código serie, pero no una primera interacción física ni plan de aceptación mecánica.
5–6,9Construye una primera interacción sensor salida o mecanismo, define necesidad y pruebas y justifica materiales y reutilización. Identifica el alcance de la microprueba.
7–8,9Revisa una decisión al observar una limitación de montaje o respuesta y actualiza el diseño.
9–10,0Compara alternativas de integración con prueba, utilidad y recursos sin afirmar funciones de una puerta de seguridad real.
Consultar la rúbrica de A02

Producto pruebas y mejora

CYR.3.1.1 Señales y recorrido del controlador ESP32

Comprender el funcionamiento de los sistemas de computación física, sus componentes y principales características.

Evidencia. Montaje revisado, esquema final y explicación de lectura interpretación y salida.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9La explicación no corresponde al GPIO o atribuye validez automática a una entrada sin esa capacidad.
3–4,9Actúa una salida, pero no explica señal, polaridad o diferencia entre prueba serie y lectura física.
5–6,9Demuestra el recorrido físico y explica componentes y características, polaridad y diferencia entre dato simulado y señal real.
7–8,9Aísla un fallo de adaptación frente a uno de estados usando lecturas y resultados.
9–10,0Evalúa otra interfaz de sensor y justifica límites de medida y diagnóstico sin extrapolar de la simulación.

CYR.3.1.2 Configuración robótica y grados de libertad

Reconocer los conceptos básicos de la robótica, así como las configuraciones morfológicas más comunes.

Evidencia. Demostración del mecanismo y comparación argumentada de configuraciones.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9No reconoce la configuración del mecanismo ni distingue posiciones y movimientos independientes.
3–4,9Describe el acceso, pero la clasificación o comparación de robots es incompleta o contradictoria.
5–6,9Describe la configuración del acceso, reconoce configuraciones móvil y articulada y explica sus grados de libertad y usos con ejemplos correctos.
7–8,9Compara ventajas y límites de las configuraciones para la tarea y lo relaciona con la prueba.
9–10,0Evalúa una alternativa de configuración para otra tarea y justifica qué movimiento independiente adicional sería necesario.

CYR.3.1.4 Ingeniería del mecanismo y relación con el control

Comprender los principios de ingeniería en los que se basan los robots, su funcionamiento, componentes y características.

Evidencia. Mecanismo integrado, esquema y pruebas de recorrido y referencia.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9El mecanismo no realiza el recorrido y no puede explicar la causa física o de control.
3–4,9Actúa parcialmente, pero no verifica fijación, espacio o retorno ni relaciona orden y efecto.
5–6,9Integra el mecanismo y demuestra recorrido y referencia, explicando estructura, sensor, control y actuación y documentando su montaje.
7–8,9Aísla y corrige un problema mecánico o de actuación y repite la prueba física.
9–10,0Justifica otra solución mecánica para la tarea y contrasta una condición nueva manteniendo el control previsto.

CYR.3.2.1 Máquina de estados y temporización

Conocer y resolver la variedad de problemas posibles, desarrollando un programa informático y generalizando las soluciones, tanto de forma individual como trabajando en equipo, colaborando y comunicándose de forma adecuada.

Evidencia. Código textual, trazas de transiciones, parada durante espera y corrección individual.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9El controlador no cumple prioridades y no puede seguir una transición del código.
3–4,9Funciona en detección continua, pero falla ante interrupción, parada o recuperación sin explicación.
5–6,9Programa estados y temporización sin bloquear la comprobación, prueba continuidad, límite y parada y explica su contribución individual y colaboración.
7–8,9Diagnostica y repara una transición o marca temporal y demuestra el efecto con la traza original.
9–10,0Resuelve una variante temporal o de entrada y generaliza una regla de control explicando sus límites y pruebas.

CYR.3.3.1 Acceso físico integrado y mejora sostenible

Ser capaz de construir un sistema de computación o robótico, promoviendo la interacción con el mundo físico en el contexto de un problema del mundo real, de forma sostenible.

Evidencia. Controlador integrado en maqueta, pruebas físicas, mejora y límites.

BandaDesempeño observable
1–2,9No demuestra interacción física ni puede justificar el montaje como solución al problema.
3–4,9Hay piezas y programa, pero falla un requisito esencial o se presenta simulación como validación física.
5–6,9Integra sensor, control y actuación en maqueta, verifica aceptación y documenta mejora, recursos y límites de uso.
7–8,9Compara antes y después de una mejora física o funcional y verifica que conserva parada y referencia.
9–10,0Contrasta una condición nueva y una alternativa de integración justificando utilidad y recursos sin extrapolar a seguridad real.

Videos, resources and sources

Domótica DIY: Servidor Web ESP32 para Control de Iluminación – Paso a Paso

Published by: Edison R. Sasig · Open on YouTube

Watch in short sections. Connect one explanation with the diagram and try the example in this section. The written theory lets you complete the activity without playing the video.

The video keeps its original spoken language. Use the captions available in the player if they help.

Keep learning

Editorial revision: October 2026.