Searching \ for '[PIC]: ICSP Connector pinout?' 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=icsp
Search entire site for: 'ICSP Connector pinout?'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC]: ICSP Connector pinout?'
2002\05\17@075823 by Hazelwood Lyle

flavicon
face
Greetings all,

I am sending my data off to the board house next week.
(thanks to everyone for the eagle pointers!)
My layout includes a 5 pin connector for ICSP.
I was able to reserve RB6 and RB7 exclusively for
this, and I've added a jumper between VCC and VDD so
that the chip power can be isolated while in circuit.

I am wondering if there is a "standard" order for the
pins in this connector. I don't mind making up my own,
but if there is a common sequence, I'd prefer to follow it.

I'm using a polarized header, AMP 5 pin 0.1" pitch,
AMP #641213-5,DK #A23900-ND

Thanks,
Lyle Hazelwood

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


2002\05\17@084609 by Lawrence Lile

flavicon
face
I have wondered the same thing.  For a while, I used a connector that mated
with my Microengineering Labs EPIC in-circuit programmer.  This was a rather
cumbersome 10 pin header.  Later, I hacked a 5 pin 0.100" centers adapter.
I think the pin order was gnd-RB6-RB7-MCLR-5V, but that is just what I made
up.

Some MCHIP proggers use a 6 position RJ-6 telephone jack, which I think is
kind of cumbersome.

I think you are on the right track, using about the smallest jack that can
talk to an ICSP programmer.  Use a polarized header.  Other than that I
don't think there is a standard.

On a similar note, when you have to use RB6 and RB7 in your circuit, what do
people do to isolate them during ICSP?  I have considered a jumper, which
seems klunky.  I understand some programmers drive these pins with an
impedance of about 1.75K, so any load on these pins would have to be much
higher, say 10K.  I could see driving a 10K resistor to the base of a
transistor to operate a load of some kind.  How have other people isolated
RB6 and RB7?

--Lawrence

{Original Message removed}

2002\05\17@105228 by uter van ooijen & floortje hanneman

picon face
One definite standard is the pinout of the chip as defined by uChip, so -
when you use a DIP housing - a DIP clip will never fail and does not take up
space on the PCB :)

Other than that I now often use a 2x8 pin header, because my programmer
happens to have a D15M connector and D15F <==> pin header cables are
abundant (from old PC game cards).

Wouter van Ooijen
--
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
Jal compiler, Wisp programmer, WLoader bootloader, PICs kopen

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


2002\05\17@110040 by John Dammeyer

flavicon
face
I use a six pin SIP type header where I don't have the room for the RJ
connector.  The pinout remains the same and I have a small converter I
wired up that has an RJ socket on one end and a 6 pin square post header
on the other.  I make the circuit board pins just small enough so the
header is a friction fit into the board.  I then dangle my PIC ICD
programmer into the project, program it or single step debug it.

My PIC16F877  CAN Activity board uses the RJ connector.

John



Wireless CAN with the CANRF module.
www.autoartisans.com/documents/canrf_prod_announcement.pdf
Automation Artisans Inc.
Ph. 1 250 544 4950


> {Original Message removed}

2002\05\17@120704 by Colin Constant

flavicon
face
Olimex had a serial programmer with a six pin plug.  They had a separate page
with the pinout.  I can't seem to find it now though.

Colin





Hazelwood Lyle <spam_OUTLHazelwoodTakeThisOuTspamMFGNC.COM>TakeThisOuTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU> on 05/17/2002 04:56:23 AM

Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list <.....PICLISTKILLspamspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>

Sent by:    pic microcontroller discussion list <PICLISTspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>


To:    .....PICLISTKILLspamspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU
cc:     (bcc: Colin Constant-NR/RMD/Raytheon/CA)

Subject:    [PIC]: ICSP Connector pinout?


Greetings all,

I am sending my data off to the board house next week.
(thanks to everyone for the eagle pointers!)
My layout includes a 5 pin connector for ICSP.
I was able to reserve RB6 and RB7 exclusively for
this, and I've added a jumper between VCC and VDD so
that the chip power can be isolated while in circuit.

I am wondering if there is a "standard" order for the
pins in this connector. I don't mind making up my own,
but if there is a common sequence, I'd prefer to follow it.

I'm using a polarized header, AMP 5 pin 0.1" pitch,
AMP #641213-5,DK #A23900-ND

Thanks,
Lyle Hazelwood

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

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


2002\05\17@173813 by Tom Handley

picon face
   Check out Microchip's ICSP document:

      DS30277C - In-Circuit Serial Programming (ICSP) Guide

   I don't have the link handy and the above document is from 2000 so it may
have been updated. They use a 5-pin header.

   Tech Tools has released a new PIC programmer called QuickWriter which
supports ICSP and includes a cable with a 7-pin header for the target
(one pin is the key). They have a good application note about implementing
ICSP in your design. Though they focus on QuickWriter, it applies to any
ICSP application. For more info see:

      http://www.tech-tools.com/hwt20.htm

   For more info on QuickWriter, see:

      http://www.tech-tools.com/qwmain.htm

   - Tom

At 05:43 17-05-02, Lawrence wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>{Original Message removed}

2002\05\17@203156 by Matt Pobursky

flavicon
face
On Fri, 17 May 2002 07:43:23 -0500, Lawrence Lile wrote:
>I have wondered the same thing.  For a while, I used a connector
>that mated with my Microengineering Labs EPIC in-circuit
>programmer.  This was a rather cumbersome 10 pin header.  Later,
>I hacked a 5 pin 0.100" centers adapter.
>I think the pin order was gnd-RB6-RB7-MCLR-5V, but that is just
>what I made up.

I normally use a single row 5 pin .1" header with the pinout
shown in the Microchip ICSP Guide. It matches the pinout of my
ProPIC ICSP programmer (an excellent programmer, BTW). If I'm
going to use a different programmer (like a Promate II with ICSP
module), I make a custom cable that matches that pinout.

>On a similar note, when you have to use RB6 and RB7 in your
>circuit, what do people do to isolate them during ICSP?  I have
>considered a jumper, which seems klunky.  I understand some
>programmers drive these pins with an impedance of about 1.75K,
>so any load on these pins would have to be much higher, say 10K.
>I could see driving a 10K resistor to the base of a transistor
>to operate a load of some kind.  How have other people isolated
>RB6 and RB7?

Most of my designs have either switches, keypads, or option
jumpers. I make sure I put them on RB6 and RB7, that way they are
normally open and present no load on the pins at all. You have to
be careful with option jumpers though, so these are a "last
resort" solution. Another benefit of putting switch type inputs
on Port B is the programmable internal pullup resistors, which
eliminates the need for external resistors and lowers the design
cost.

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

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


2002\05\17@203859 by Matt Pobursky

flavicon
face
On Fri, 17 May 2002 08:02:44 -0700, John Dammeyer wrote:
>I use a six pin SIP type header where I don't have the room for
>the RJ connector.  The pinout remains the same and I have a
>small converter I wired up that has an RJ socket on one end and
>a 6 pin square post header on the other.  I make the circuit
>board pins just small enough so the header is a friction fit
>into the board.  I then dangle my PIC ICD programmer into the
>project, program it or single step debug it.
>
>My PIC16F877  CAN Activity board uses the RJ connector.

I hate RJ type connectors. They take up a ton of PC board space
for so few connections. Cables (good ones at least) for them are
kind of a pain to obtain/make too, unless you want to use
Cat3/Cat5 cable and tools.

Just my 2¢...

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

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


2002\05\17@220444 by Mark J. Dulcey

flavicon
face
Matt Pobursky wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2002 08:02:44 -0700, John Dammeyer wrote:
>
>>I use a six pin SIP type header where I don't have the room for
>>the RJ connector.  The pinout remains the same and I have a
>>small converter I wired up that has an RJ socket on one end and
>>a 6 pin square post header on the other.  I make the circuit
>>board pins just small enough so the header is a friction fit
>>into the board.  I then dangle my PIC ICD programmer into the
>>project, program it or single step debug it.
>>
>>My PIC16F877  CAN Activity board uses the RJ connector.
>
>
> I hate RJ type connectors. They take up a ton of PC board space
> for so few connections. Cables (good ones at least) for them are
> kind of a pain to obtain/make too, unless you want to use
> Cat3/Cat5 cable and tools.

But premade Cat5 cables are so readily available in various lengths and
colors. And they're cheap. Why would you want to make them?

Yes, they do take up some board space. But so will anything else that's
suitable for connections to the outside world. Yes, there are some
smaller alternatives, such as the connectors for USB, but those
connectors aren't easy to find yet.

I think Microchip's choice of modular connectors is partly motivated by
that. The idea is that you may want to retain ICSP capability in a
finished product, not just at the breadboard stage, so you need a
connector that's appropriate to expose to the outside world. SIP headers
and the like won't fill that need.

(Disclaimer: I'm working on a project that will use Cat5 cables to
connect the various pieces together, largely because the cables are so
easy to get. I want the thing to be easily reproduced by others, and
taking fiddly cable building out of the picture is one way to do that.)

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


2002\05\17@220645 by John Dammeyer
flavicon
face
Hi Matt,

I quite agree.  An if you decide to save space and use the vertical ones
the 1..6 pinout is reversed.  That caught an engineer friend of mine.  I
tried to program the units and they wouldn't.  Some troubleshooting and
we found the problem and made up a special 4" cable. Aarrrrggghh.

However,  they are nice wiping contacts,  are easy to slip in and out
and I went back to them after trying the molex keyed locking connectors.
Like I said earlier,  for some boards they are easy to use,  for others
there are other options.

For one project I'd like to fabricate a bed of nails tester/programmer
panel.  Does anyone have any experience with those spring like pins.
Where to get small qty, what size holes to install into. Etc.

Thanks.

John Dammeyer


{Quote hidden}

Wireless CAN with the CANRF module.
www.autoartisans.com/documents/canrf_prod_announcement.pdf
Automation Artisans Inc.
Ph. 1 250 544 4950

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


2002\05\17@225851 by Matt Pobursky

flavicon
face
On Fri, 17 May 2002 22:00:38 -0400, Mark J. Dulcey wrote:
>Matt Pobursky wrote:
>>I hate RJ type connectors. They take up a ton of PC board space
>>for so few connections. Cables (good ones at least) for them
>>are kind of a pain to obtain/make too, unless you want to use
>>Cat3/Cat5 cable and tools.
>
>But premade Cat5 cables are so readily available in various
>lengths and colors. And they're cheap. Why would you want to
>make them?

True, as long as you are connecting RJ jack to RJ jack... No
commercial device programmers I've used have ever used RJ jacks
for connections though ;-)

{Quote hidden}

Maybe it's because I've been designing "real world" products for
so long, but the last thing I want is for an end user to have
easy access to my ICSP port. Fine if you are designing a
development board or other tool that requires software to be
changed a lot. But for a production product that will be used by
a non-technical end user, it's a jack that screams out "Plug a
phone line into me!". Of all the field software upgradeable
products I've designed, I'd say they average less than *one*
actual software upgrade over the life of the product. As long as
it's not incredibly inconvenient to get at the programming jack,
I'd rather make it somewhat "out of the way". To me, hanging the
ICSP (and PIC pins) open to the world is just asking for trouble.

>(Disclaimer: I'm working on a project that will use Cat5 cables
>to connect the various pieces together, largely because the
>cables are so easy to get. I want the thing to be easily
>reproduced by others, and taking fiddly cable building out of
>the picture is one way to do that.)

I think this is a *fabulous* use of RJ jacks. Dead easy for the
end user and they have a function which must be easily accessible
to the end user. Using standard cables makes perfect sense.

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

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


2002\05\17@231133 by Matt Pobursky

flavicon
face
On Fri, 17 May 2002 19:08:46 -0700, John Dammeyer wrote:
>For one project I'd like to fabricate a bed of nails
>tester/programmer panel.  Does anyone have any experience with
>those spring like pins.
>Where to get small qty, what size holes to install into. Etc.

John,

Interesting, I just got done converting a PIC16C926 based board
away from a spring contact programming setup. We had lots of
problems with intermittent contact and bad programming. Not such
a large problem for flash based MCU's, but deadly on a tiny (1.5"
x 2.5"), dense board with a TQFP64 PIC chip. Can you say "Program
Error - trash the board"? The PC board layout could accept .1"
pin headers though, so we added the small cost of them (maybe 10¢
or so) and the problem is no more... glad I used the "stick a
header in the holes for programming my prototypes" method -- it
turns out that a permanent header was the most reliable solution
and required no additional changes to the board.

I have used the spring pins before with success. One company is
(was) Augat Pylon. They are brand named Pogo contacts. Since
being acquired by Tyco, I'm not sure what their name is anymore.
You should be able to do a google search and find their web site.

The above mentioned board assembly is still being tested on a
"bed of nails" fixture, using Pogo contacts. Pylon also makes
blank test fixture enclosures and can provide applications
notes/help to get you started.

It seems the main problems I've run into are intermittent
contacts caused by PC board manufacturing variations which can
result in uneven pressure on the contact-to-board interface.
Oxidation and corrosion, as well as surface contaminants can also
cause problems. It seems like every board assembly and test
fixture has it's own personality. I'm getting ready to design a
PC based bed-of-nails test fixture for a 9" x 11" board assembly,
so I expect some interesting surprises along that road too.

Good luck!

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

--
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...