Searching \ for '[PIC]: Automatic bulk programmer' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/devprogs.htm?key=programmer
Search entire site for: 'Automatic bulk programmer'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC]: Automatic bulk programmer'
2002\07\22@031254 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Recently we've been programming PICs by the 100, which
is a PITA with a picstart. :o)

I know production programmers are available, but since
the main chips we use (16c505) program in a few seconds,
even using a gang programmer will not save much time
because of the time to insert 10 chips into 10 sockets,
then remove them again. There is just as much labour
needed and not much time saved.

I have an idea for a auto-feeder programmer I would like
to bounce off the list. :o)

* The DIP chips are supplied in a standard plastic "tube".

* Tube is held vertically in the machine, so chips are gravity
fed out the bottom one by one.

* The chip can only fall one chip length, vertically, into
a very simple jig, with a solenoid "gate" at the bottom stopping
it falling any further.

* The chip is secure enough in the jig that a second solenoid
clamps 5 sharp "pins" onto the appropriate legs, 2 on one
side of the chip and 3 on the other, giving Vdd,Vss,Vpp,SDA,SCL.
This is only 2 simple mechanical levers and one solenoid.

* Programming is automatic, and after programming is complete
the pins are released, the bottom solenoid "gate" opens and the
chip simply falls into a tray, finished. The gate solenoid is
fast with an opto sensor, to eject only one chip. Another and
probably better option is a simple side ejector mechanism that
throws the chip out one side, and gravity feeds in the next chip.

* If a program error occurs, the units beeps etc, and operator
removes the suspect chip.

I think this device could be built at quite low cost, I have
a few solenoids in my junk box. Each tube of fresh PICs is simply
inserted, press the start button, and voila 30 programmed chips
sitting in the tray.
Any suggestions?? :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@032948 by lexandre_Guimar=E3es?=

flavicon
face
Hi, Roman

> * Tube is held vertically in the machine, so chips are gravity
> fed out the bottom one by one.

   45 degress can give you better results. Some tubes have enough space for
the chip to jam if held vertical.

> * The chip can only fall one chip length, vertically, into
> a very simple jig, with a solenoid "gate" at the bottom stopping
> it falling any further.

   Should work fine...

> * The chip is secure enough in the jig that a second solenoid
> clamps 5 sharp "pins" onto the appropriate legs, 2 on one
> side of the chip and 3 on the other, giving Vdd,Vss,Vpp,SDA,SCL.
> This is only 2 simple mechanical levers and one solenoid.

   A motor and spring loaded "bed of nails" contacts will give more
reliable connections without the impact of the solenoid.

> * Programming is automatic, and after programming is complete
> the pins are released, the bottom solenoid "gate" opens and the
> chip simply falls into a tray, finished. The gate solenoid is
> fast with an opto sensor, to eject only one chip. Another and
> probably better option is a simple side ejector mechanism that
> throws the chip out one side, and gravity feeds in the next chip.

   You can use another tube and a second solenoid to make sure just one
chip fall out.

> I think this device could be built at quite low cost, I have
> a few solenoids in my junk box. Each tube of fresh PICs is simply
> inserted, press the start button, and voila 30 programmed chips
> sitting in the tray.
> Any suggestions?? :o)

   More ??? :-) Please send us some pictures when you are done. I am
already sick and tired of seing my production personal programming some
12c508's one by one...

Best regards,
Alexandre Guimaraes

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@034904 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Thanks for the quick response Alexandre! :o)
My partner in programming has DEMANDED that if
I build this it MUST do the "squishing" of the pins as mentioned in a previous thread. The hand squisher
we have is still slow and hurts her little hands. :o)

So the design spec is now:
* tube not quite vertical (angle to be tested)
* one solenoid to release a chip from tube
* motor/screw thread operated CRUSHER that squishes
 the pins AND provides contacts for programming.
* another solenoid to drop the finished chip

I've been roughing up some designs on paper, and
trying to work out if I can build it to do all narrow
DIP packages, from 8 pin to 28 pin, ie 12c509, 16c505,
F84, F628, F876 etc. With two solenoids and one
motorised crusher it should be fairly easy.

Some fine points of design are the possibility of dual
eject system, ie good chips and failed chips end up in
different trays.
Another is to design a good way of having one standard
crusher, but with attachable spike pins to suit the
different packages. Needs to be easy to adapt from
one package to another, ie simply unscrew the pins
assembly from each side of the crusher.
-Roman


Alexandre Guimarães wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@053056 by Mircea Chiriciuc

flavicon
face
<Another is to design a good way of having one standard
<crusher, but with attachable spike pins to suit the
<different packages. Needs to be easy to adapt from
<one package to another, ie simply unscrew the pins
<assembly from each side of the crusher.

Since crush pressure is involved and the pressure is relativelly low you
could use a simple piece of  PCB with golden contacts on each side of the
crusher to provide the programming contacts. You can easily change the PCB
for every DIP by creating a slide in mountig for the adapter PCB and an
connector on the bottoms of each crusher side.
Because of my pour english I have attached a drawing.

Success,
Mircea Chiriciuc
EMCO INVEST

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@053923 by Mircea Chiriciuc

flavicon
face
part 1 68 bytes content-type:text/plain; (decoded 7bit)

Sorry, here is the attachement.


part 2 1369 bytes content-type:image/gif; (decode)


part 3 144 bytes
--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@065326 by Sean Alcorn (SYD)

flavicon
face
Roman,

If you are only program "100s" at a time, check out;
http://www.mannincontrol.com/prog/index.html

It's a production quality programmer, and we use them to program 1000s of
chips at a time.

Graham at Mannin Control is also great to deal with.

Regards,

Sean

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@095042 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
Awhile ago someone else on the list drew up plans for a simple
programmer like that, except it was based on a rotating wheel.

The wheel is slotted so the chip falls into it with pins on either side.
It spins in the direction opposite the pins so the pins can run by a
set of programming contacts, past a crusher and into another tube (or a
tray, or whatever)

It wouldn't be hard to adapt that with a gate (or even a moving ramp)
that puts the chip at the bottom into the good or bad bin.

Furthermore a wheel can hold and program several chips at once - load 6
chips, move them into the 6 programmer positions, program, spit them all
out while loading the next six.

I suspect a rotating wheel is going to be easier (mechanically) to
manage that a moving carriage.  A simple motor with opto sensing will
tell you what position the wheel is in.

You add another plate to the wheel to increase the thickness for wide
dips, or (better yet) create different wheels for different chips (to
account for chip length).

This method would reauire only one moving part and one motor at its
simplest.  Add a solenoid to gate the outgoing chips into proper bins.

-Adam

Roman Black wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@104704 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Sean Alcorn (SYD) wrote:
>
> Roman,
>
> If you are only program "100s" at a time, check out;
> http://www.mannincontrol.com/prog/index.html
>
> It's a production quality programmer, and we use them to program 1000s of
> chips at a time.


Hi Sean, please don't take offence but that programmer
only does one chip at a time. The greatest cost in
programming is operator labour, ie insert a chip(s)
wait, remove chip(s).

What i'm proposing will outperform a 30-gang unit that
does 30 at a time, which would still require
inserting/removing 30 chips into zif sockets, which is
a lot of work. Auto feed is the only answer, ie; insert
tube of 30 chips, come back later and 30 chips are
programmed.
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@111327 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
I don't remember that. But using a wheel was the very
first thing that came to mind, and the very first thing
I eliminated from the design. :o)

You need 2 solenoids to give good release from the tube,
one gate to release the bottom chip and one holder for
all the chips above. Then you need another solenoid for
the bottom gate to drop the finished chip.
You still need a crusher to program the chip and crush
the legs.
Gravity-fed in a straight line eliminates all need for
a wheel (which is very fussy to make) and uses the same
number of feed solenoids etc.

There is no moving carriage needed, the chip falls down
vertically, is crushed/programmed, and drops out the bottom.
Like you mentioned it would be viable to program more than
one chip at a time, by stacking 2 or 3 etc vertically
where they are crushed/programmed in one movement. BUT
I think it not necessary, the total time to program is
much less important than the elimination of operator
labour, at least in our case.

Does anyone have a fully auto-fed programmer machine
that takes tubes of chips and spits them out programmed?
Machines like that must cost $10k etc.
-Roman



M. Adam Davis wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@111753 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Hi Mircea, I love this idea! I have some 0.1" spaced
edge connectors which are gold plated pcb, can mount one
on each side of the crusher clamps. Then maybe solder
a line of 0.1" header pins on each side, so for different
chips it just needs one plug on each side. Brilliant. :o)
-Roman


Mircea Chiriciuc wrote:
> Since crush pressure is involved and the pressure is relativelly low you
> could use a simple piece of  PCB with golden contacts on each side of the
> crusher to provide the programming contacts.>
>
>     ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                               Name: crusher.gif
>                Part 1.2       Type: GIF Image (image/gif)
>                           Encoding: base64

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@112004 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 05:10 PM 7/22/02 +1000, you wrote:

>I think this device could be built at quite low cost, I have
>a few solenoids in my junk box. Each tube of fresh PICs is simply
>inserted, press the start button, and voila 30 programmed chips
>sitting in the tray.
>Any suggestions?? :o)

While I'd love to see the pictures of this thing working, and I'm
sure you could do it, why not just get them programmed by your
distributor? IME they do it cheap when you buy the chips from them
(a value-added service)

(I know, 'boo', 'hiss' ... )

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
spam_OUTspeffTakeThisOuTspaminterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com
9/11 United we Stand

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@113953 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Spehro Pefhany wrote:
>
> At 05:10 PM 7/22/02 +1000, you wrote:
>
> >I think this device could be built at quite low cost, I have
> >a few solenoids in my junk box. Each tube of fresh PICs is simply
> >inserted, press the start button, and voila 30 programmed chips
> >sitting in the tray.
> >Any suggestions?? :o)
>
> While I'd love to see the pictures of this thing working, and I'm
> sure you could do it, why not just get them programmed by your
> distributor? IME they do it cheap when you buy the chips from them
> (a value-added service)
>
> (I know, 'boo', 'hiss' ... )


Sure that's very sensible for large runs, but the
bulk of what I do is 25 of this, 50 of that, 100
of the other. The ideal quantities for a machine
like that. Heck if I just had to program 5 chips,
chuck them in and press one button. :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@133415 by Paul Hutchinson

flavicon
face
> -----Original Message-----
> [.....PICLISTKILLspamspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Roman Black
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 11:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [PIC]: Automatic bulk programmer
<SNIP>
> Does anyone have a fully auto-fed programmer machine
> that takes tubes of chips and spits them out programmed?
> Machines like that must cost $10k etc.
> -Roman

These companies make them some of the units even print and apply labels at
the same time.
http://www.dataio.com/
http://www.bpmicro.com/

It was quite a while ago that I checked into these machines but IIRC they
cost closer to $100K

Paul

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@200820 by Tony Nixon

flavicon
picon face
part 1 287 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset=us-ascii (decoded 7bit)

Roman Black wrote:

> I have an idea for a auto-feeder programmer I would like
> to bounce off the list. :o)

How about something cheap like this.


--
Best regards

Tony

mICros
http://www.bubblesoftonline.com
salesspamKILLspambubblesoftonline.com


part 2 4677 bytes content-type:image/gif; name=Prog.gif (decode)


part 3 144 bytes
--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\22@203403 by Brendan Moran

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Look out! I have comments, and I know how to use them!!

- {Original Message removed}

2002\07\22@204013 by Sean Alcorn (SYD)

flavicon
face
Hi Roman,

> Hi Sean, please don't take offence but that programmer
> only does one chip at a time.

None taken. We have two of these machines, and of course I have noticed they
only do one at a time.

> The greatest cost in programming is operator labour, ie insert a chip(s)
> wait, remove chip(s).

Yes. I understand this. However this machine is a huge step up from a
PICStart+ - the operator need not have any interaction with a PC. They
simply insert the chip that is displayed on the LCD - ie "PIC12C508-04E/P"
and press a button.

The unit will program, do a low verify, high verify, burn the fuses and beep
when ready. The operator needs to only open a lever, remove the programmed
chip, replace with a new chip, close the lever and press a button. We are
finding that a good operator can program around 100+ chips in an hour.

> What i'm proposing will outperform a 30-gang unit that
> does 30 at a time, which would still require
> inserting/removing 30 chips into zif sockets, which is
> a lot of work. Auto feed is the only answer, ie; insert
> tube of 30 chips, come back later and 30 chips are
> programmed.

Yes. I understand, and it's a great idea. I was just suggesting what might
be perhaps an interim step for you.

Cheers,

Sean

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics


2002\07\23@050047 by Vasile Surducan
flavicon
face
> Roman Black wrote:
>
> >Recently we've been programming PICs by the 100, which
> >is a PITA with a picstart. :o)
> >
  oh, this lazyess...  :o)


> >
> >* The DIP chips are supplied in a standard plastic "tube".
>
  yes

>
> >* Tube is held vertically in the machine, so chips are gravity
> >fed out the bottom one by one.
> >
  no, horizontally, the tube have already holes coresponding with
 Vcc, Vpp, SCK, SD, Gnd for a atandard package ( PDIP )
 Stoppers on both tube ends avoid PIC movement inside the tube. A stepper
is moving linear the whole tube ( could be a linear stepper, but a
standard one and an old
fashion 5inch FDD style for head movement ( using steel cable ).
Positioning mechanism for PICs alignement using digitaly encoder or
optical device.
Pin programmer connector using gold plate pin with internal bow ( the same
as used in laptops for battery connecting ) driven by a solenoid as you
said.

regards, Vasile

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\23@064904 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Tony Nixon wrote:
>
> Roman Black wrote:
>
> > I have an idea for a auto-feeder programmer I would like
> > to bounce off the list. :o)
>
> How about something cheap like this.
>  [Image]


That is almost exactly what I had pictured Tony!
Aussie engineers unite! :o)

I have roughed up some paper drafts, some details:

* Use a top gate solenoid too, at the cost of one more
solenoid you get to use the device for all size chips,
8,14,18,28 etc.

* 45 degrees is not enough, i've tested and found about
15 degrees from vertical is about best for feeding.

* I measured the "crush" pressure of the pins on my digital
scales, this is >4kg. Probably about 6kg needed to do a
good reliable crush. Most solenoids won't do this, so a
simple "vice" style clamp with motor, screw thread, and
2 limit switches will do +6kg easy.

* with high crush pressures you need a top and bottom
chip guide, as the chip tends to crush away from the
base. So the chip plastic needs to be held firmly between
2 solid pieces, with just enough clearance for gravity feed.
I also agree with your "program A" clamp, I think it is
worth one solenoid to clamp the chip well before the
crush is started.

* After crush the chip legs have some small elasticity,
just enough to crush onto a 1/4" thich acrylic guide,
then they spring out just enough to still slide easily
on the guide to fall out. Couldn't ask for more. :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\23@073349 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Brendan Moran wrote:

> Here's how (rotary) it works:
> You have a tube which is aligned to the wheel axially.  There is one
> (or more) axial slot in the wheel that is equal in depth to the
> length of a PIC, and equal in width to the height of a PIC body.  The
> wheel is made of non-conductive material.  There is a retaining
> device, only slightly larger than the wheel that is mounted around
> the wheel, along the travel of the PIC.  The PIC falls, using
> gravity, into the slot, such that its pins stick back beyond the
> slot, in the direction opposite that of the rotation of the wheel.

I'm with you, this removes the need for top feed
solenoids as the wheel acts as a feed cam to only let
the chip feed when the wheel is in the right position.
It will be fiddly and require wheel cam profiling
to get the feed just right.

> The crusher is a non-moving or sprung component.  The PIC moves past
> it, which squishes the pins against the wheel.  The wheel stops at
> the crusher position while the PIC is programmed.

This is where the wheel idea has problems. The crush
pressure is quite considerable, +4kg from the side, but
to push the chip into a v-shaped groove to crush is still
over 3kg measured by my crude test. Assuming your wheel
is 2 inch radius this is 7lbs @ 2 inches, give it 100%
overhead for stepper reliability and you get 28 lb @ 1
inch or 448 oz/in stepper motor needed. You will need
gearing on the stepper, probably about 10:1 even with
a larger stepper. Using rubber rollers on the side of
the main wheel reduces this by maybe half, but still
requires a large stepper with gearing, ie toothed belt
+ 2 pulleys.

Next for programming, the wheel system is much harder
to clamp the pins onto the PIC pins, considering it
has to rotate. The obvious solution is to have a motor
driven clamp, but if you have a motor driven clamp you
really don't need the wheel. :o)


>  The wheel, having
> completed the PIC programming phase, rotates more, to the opposite
> gravitational polarity, as it were, and dumps the PIC out into a bin
> or tube.

Yep, with the wheel you can eliminate the bottom gate
and have auto dumping. BUT the linear feed system is
much better if you want to feed the chips back into
a chip tube. :o)

{Quote hidden}

But you need a large precise wheel, quite hard to make
with 4 precise PIC slots that have to feed and position
perfectly. Easier with just one PIC slot per wheel,
you only have to fiddle with one profile. But you still
need stepper gearing, with pulleys and belts, etc to
give necessary torque.

The thing that really puts me off the wheel is that you
need to make one wheel for each chip size you do, ie
8,14,18,28 pins etc, where the linear feed design will
feed any chip in that width, and doesn't need stepper
driver or stepper positioning, just "open gate and chip
falls in".
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\23@081035 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
Roman Black wrote:

>* 45 degrees is not enough, i've tested and found about
>15 degrees from vertical is about best for feeding.
>
>
You might consider 15 degrees from horizontal with a vibratory feeder -
much less chance of a chip falling to far (stuck at the top for awhile)
and destroying some bonding wires or bending some pins, not to mention
the chips you're dropping into the bottom tube.

A little more complex, perhaps, but there's probably a really good
reason that the rest of the industry continues to do it this way.

-Adam

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\23@081047 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
It seems to me that what is being asked for could be simplified still
further.

If the input tube is on a slope so the chips will slide out nicely, then how
about the stop being a motor/wheel with a spongy rubber tyre, which is close
enough to the runner that the chip cannot slide under it.

To load chip into programmer start wheel slowly so it pushes chip through.
Using opto sensor, sense when chip leaves wheel, which leaves following chip
still trapped under wheel - no calibration requirements between 8 pin and 28
pin chips :))

Stepper motor probably best device for this use. To minimise problems it may
be worth setting the number of steps that it rotates before deciding there
is an error somewhere, or tube is empty, hence sounding operator reload
signal.

Chip proceeds to continue to slide down runner until reaching stop. At this
point runner is a piece of paxolin/tufnol/fibreglass or similar insulating
material, still on same angle as input tube - well no-one specifies that the
programming station has to be level!.

When chip stops, then clamps come in from sides onto pins. Clamps carry all
contacts to keep runner smooth so sliding chip does not snag during entry
and exit of programming area. After programming, clamps open, and stop lifts
allowing chip to carry on sliding into deposit tube.

Stop returns to stop position, and then motor releases next chip.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\23@131626 by Brendan Moran

flavicon
face
part 1 3837 bytes content-type:text/plain; (decoded 7bit)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> I'm with you, this removes the need for top feed
> solenoids as the wheel acts as a feed cam to only let
> the chip feed when the wheel is in the right position.
> It will be fiddly and require wheel cam profiling
> to get the feed just right.

I don't think it would.  Just round your edges a bit :)
If a second chip falls in a little, it will just get pushed back up.

{Quote hidden}

You may be quite right on this one, but it's worth a closer look, I
think.

> Next for programming, the wheel system is much harder
> to clamp the pins onto the PIC pins, considering it
> has to rotate. The obvious solution is to have a motor
> driven clamp, but if you have a motor driven clamp you
> really don't need the wheel. :o)

Once again, I think you've missed something.  I was suggesting again
that you use the .1" edge connector as the crusher.  Place an opto
sensor near the wheel, and stop it when the slot gets to the crusher
point, where programming will occur.

> >  The wheel, having
> > completed the PIC programming phase, rotates more, to the
> > opposite gravitational polarity, as it were, and dumps the PIC
> > out into a bin or tube.
>
> Yep, with the wheel you can eliminate the bottom gate
> and have auto dumping. BUT the linear feed system is
> much better if you want to feed the chips back into
> a chip tube. :o)

All you need is a funnel-like device on the output.  It's not that
hard to build.  You just need a strip of metal around the wheel with
gaps in it to hold the PIC in place when it's not falling in or out.


> But you need a large precise wheel, quite hard to make
> with 4 precise PIC slots that have to feed and position
> perfectly. Easier with just one PIC slot per wheel,
> you only have to fiddle with one profile. But you still
> need stepper gearing, with pulleys and belts, etc to
> give necessary torque.

That's just the point.  Only the diameter and the crusher/programmer
mount need to be at all precise.  Use optosensors to detect position,
then who cares where the slots are?

> The thing that really puts me off the wheel is that you
> need to make one wheel for each chip size you do, ie
> 8,14,18,28 pins etc, where the linear feed design will
> feed any chip in that width, and doesn't need stepper
> driver or stepper positioning, just "open gate and chip
> falls in".

Use rubber shims that fit in the bottom of the slot.  You want a
piece of rubber down there anyways, since you don't want the chip
falling in hard.

Here's an image to help you see what I mean:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPT2PGgVk8xtQuK+BEQK7/ACfZBYNbnoa5z4v4Z5yoaDOD801Nh8AoPTF
8czDFAbc/HCVCwtIWDRW7okD
=rZuE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



part 2 4329 bytes content-type:image/png; (decode)


part 3 131 bytes
--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\24@031012 by Vasile Surducan

flavicon
face
I like this picture!

Vasile

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Tony Nixon wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email EraseMElistservspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@033838 by Pic Dude

flavicon
face
part 1 296 bytes content-type:text/plain; (decoded 7bit)

Oh c'mon, we all know you aussies engineers really
pictured *this*... (see attachment)...



-----Original Message-----

Roman Black wrote after Tony Nixon wrote:
>
> That is almost exactly what I had pictured Tony!
> Aussie engineers unite! :o)
>


part 2 5061 bytes content-type:image/gif; (decode)


part 3 136 bytes
--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@081828 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Pic Dude wrote:
>
> Oh c'mon, we all know you aussies engineers really
> pictured *this*... (see attachment)...

>                              Name: Prog-aussie-version.gif


Ha ha! Yep we do reverse everything here in the
southern hemisphere. Did you know electrons flow
the other way here, so conventional current actually
does equal electron current if you are in Australia
or New Zealand?
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email @spam@listservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@082700 by Vasile Surducan

flavicon
face
On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Roman Black wrote:

> Ha ha! Yep we do reverse everything here in the
> southern hemisphere. Did you know electrons flow
> the other way here, so conventional current actually
> does equal electron current if you are in Australia
> or New Zealand?
> -Roman


 heeeee heh ! that it was for me, eh ?

 best & succes with your gravitational programmer !
 take care at crows, those eats everything is shining, includig pics :)

Vasile

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email KILLspamlistservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@092823 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Brendan Moran wrote:

> Once again, I think you've missed something.  I was suggesting again
> that you use the .1" edge connector as the crusher.  Place an opto
> sensor near the wheel, and stop it when the slot gets to the crusher
> point, where programming will occur.

My apologies, I did miss something! :o) I had imagined
your wheel with the PIC mounted axially, ie around the
outside which made me think about problems lining up the
contacts and the crush pressure.

Now you have clarified that the PICs are radially mounted,
like a "spoke" it sounds like a great idea. Feeding should
be fully reliable, as only one PIC can fall into the slot.
Then contact positioning will be reliable as all the contacts
are moved into range simultaneously. Thanks for the picture.
:o)

I'm almost converted to the "wheel" design now, shame I went
out and bought solenoids today. :o) The only thing that
still puts me off the wheel idea is the amount of torque
required. I have a car windscreen wiper motor which puts
out mega torque at about 1 rev/second, this might be good
to turn the wheel directly. Deserves a think anyway! :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservTakeThisOuTspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@101504 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
I think you shouldn't use a large torque motor.  If you do then when a
pic gets stuck you shear off the pins (or say someone accidently puts
the tube in backwards so the pins face the wrong way.

Use your two sets of solenoids to crush and program the pic, rather than
moving the pic past a crusher (which, IMO, is going to cause problems
down the road).  If you make the wheel just thinner than the distance
you want the pins to be crushed, then you can simply have the
solenoid/programmer travel it's full length (where it'll hit the pins
against the wheel) and you don't have to worry about adjusting the
crusher for different PICs.  If the crusher PCB has a trace for every
pin of a 40 DIL package, then the only thing you have to change for a
pic changeover is the wheel, and a few connections on the PCB.  If you
wire it like the picstart, and make sure the PIC is always at the top
with pin one up then you can simply wire it to the picstart and the pins
will line up correctly with no rewiring in changeover - only the wheel
now needs to be changed.

There are more ways to make the wheels more universal (one wheel for
wide, one for thin packages, put springs in the hole so the pic is
always at the outermost of the wheel) but they become more and more
complex (and thus prone to failure).

-Adam

Roman Black wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email TakeThisOuTlistservEraseMEspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@135237 by Brendan Moran

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> > Once again, I think you've missed something.  I was suggesting
> > again that you use the .1" edge connector as the crusher.  Place
> > an opto sensor near the wheel, and stop it when the slot gets to
> > the crusher point, where programming will occur.
>
> My apologies, I did miss something! :o) I had imagined
> your wheel with the PIC mounted axially, ie around the
> outside which made me think about problems lining up the
> contacts and the crush pressure.

Looking back over past messages, it looks like I used the wrong term
for the chip positioning in my first message.  Now that we've got
that sorted out, the idea makes a lot more sense.

{Quote hidden}

With a 4-slot wheel, the majority of the time would depend on the
delay for programming, and the time for setting up the PICs would be
minimal.

If you want to use those solenoids, one could be used for redirecting
bad PICs on the ouput side.

I want to see diagrams and such for this guy, when it's finished.  It
should be impressive to see it in action.

- --Brendan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPT7pBAVk8xtQuK+BEQJ3BwCgjbI8sq8MSYnWvZicXQZWzaT34s8AoNMj
LI+YaoV21IjFCn+D4XQZCFkg
=Rvk2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@141324 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
> Ha ha! Yep we do reverse everything here in the
> southern hemisphere. Did you know electrons flow
> the other way here, so conventional current actually
> does equal electron current if you are in Australia
> or New Zealand?

I have read that the definition of forward vs. reverse on
3-phase current (phase sequence, not current flow)
is reversed in the Antipodes vs. North America.

OT: (sorry) Are there maps (or globes) available there
that show Australia on the top? Seems kind of arbitrary
the way it is typically shown.

Best regards,
Spehro
Pefhany

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservEraseMEspam.....mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@141742 by Brendan Moran

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> OT: (sorry) Are there maps (or globes) available there
> that show Australia on the top? Seems kind of arbitrary
> the way it is typically shown.

I don't know about it being arbitrary... If you consider the mass of
water, then the majority of the mass of the planet should be on the
southern side, thus making the only stable orientation for the planet
to have north pointing up.

:o)

- --BJM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPT7vLQVk8xtQuK+BEQL/rgCbBB8yYRDK9epRZWs2diQDKNvo1nwAoIpJ
VrjQIjB7WWP3vJa0dahABdxU
=GCuE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email EraseMElistservspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@142419 by Eoin Ross

flavicon
face
Indeed there is ... I used to own one ages ago ; )
Actually - for us in the south the maps with north as up make sense - you face the sun looking at the map and you could orient the map using an analogue clock - to use the same method in the nth you would need to turn the same map upside down line it up - then go to the right side of the map

http://www.wizard.gen.nz/

http://www.wizard.gen.nz/box/index.htm

South Up Map of the World - The Wizard has sold over 50,000 thousand of these posters in Cathedral Square Christchurch since 1974. They back up his message that reality, even physical reality, is always controlled by an elite. On the back is a scientific demonstration that the Universe could be inside the earth.

<snip>

OT: (sorry) Are there maps (or globes) available there
that show Australia on the top? Seems kind of arbitrary
the way it is typically shown.

Best regards,
Spehro
Pefhany

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservEraseMEspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@153108 by Dave King

flavicon
face
At 10:16 PM 24/07/02 +1000, you wrote:
>Pic Dude wrote:
> >
> > Oh c'mon, we all know you aussies engineers really
> > pictured *this*... (see attachment)...
>
> >                              Name: Prog-aussie-version.gif
>
>
>Ha ha! Yep we do reverse everything here in the
>southern hemisphere. Did you know electrons flow
>the other way here, so conventional current actually
>does equal electron current if you are in Australia
>or New Zealand?
>-Roman

Then what do they do at the equator? Some kind of
banana shaped a/c styled dc current?

Here we just but the electrons in the top and they drain
out the bottom of things. You guyz down under must use lighter
than air so it goes in the bottom and floats out the top.....

Everything is much clearer now..... I think I need another layer on my
tinfoil hat.


Dave

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservspam_OUTspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\24@234917 by Pic Dude

flavicon
face
The Outback restaurant here in many parts of the US
(and authentic Aussie food I bet :-) has some pretty
cool maps on the wall with Australia as the center of
the world, and everything else is relatively smaller
as well.  Interesting perspective, and quite amusing.

Cheers,
-Neil.



> {Original Message removed}

2002\07\26@100753 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Has anyone built a quick low-cost PIC copier that
will program 16c505 chips? I would like something
very simple where I can insert the "original" chip
in one socket and read that chip and program another
with the same code. (Obviously not copy protected)

This will enable my auto-programmer to make copies
based on a "master" PIC without needing the PC.
Yes I know Tony Nixon/Olimex/Piclist etc have an
excellent pocket programmer, but I think it is overkill
for such a simple need. :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2002 , 2003 only
- Today
- New search...