Searching \ for '[PIC]:programming voltages' 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=programming
Search entire site for: 'programming voltages'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC]:programming voltages'
2000\10\04@110645 by Martin Hill

picon face
What are the effects of programming voltage?  If the part is just
programmed using a hobby rather than a professional programmer,
is it likely to fail?

Martin

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:" PIC only "[EE]:" engineering "[OT]:" off topic "[AD]:" ad's


2000\10\04@112105 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
The only difference between a production programmer and a regular programmer is
the production verifies the code on the PIC at two different voltage levels (max
and min).

It is an extra step which ought to be taken for large runs of chips (where a .1%
error rate would be significant) but which is not needed for a small run (unless
you like the extra assurance)

-Adam

Martin Hill wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:" PIC only "[EE]:" engineering "[OT]:" off topic "[AD]:" ad's


2000\10\04@151744 by w. v. ooijen / f. hanneman

picon face
> What are the effects of programming voltage?  If the part is just
> programmed using a hobby rather than a professional programmer,
> is it likely to fail?

The difference between prototype and production programming (the Microchip
terms) is the verification voltages. The programming is the same. For
verification a prototype programmer uses just what is available, a
production programmer must very at both (worst case) extremes of the power
supply voltage. So the chance of failed programming is the same, but a
production programmer should eliminate undetected (not detected during
production) programming failures.

Wouter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
"[PIC]:" PIC only "[EE]:" engineering "[OT]:" off topic "[AD]:" ad's


2000\10\05@045346 by Martin Hill

picon face
Would this still apply to PICs with the code protection set, as they
cannot be verified?

Martin

{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


2000\10\05@081045 by Bob Ammerman

picon face
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin Hill <spam_OUTeaxmjhiTakeThisOuTspamNOTTINGHAM.AC.UK>
To: <.....PICLISTKILLspamspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: [PIC]:programming voltages


> Would this still apply to PICs with the code protection set, as they
> cannot be verified?

First you program and verify the code, _then_ you set the code protection
bit.

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems
(contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
software)

--
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


2000\10\05@161507 by w. v. ooijen / f. hanneman

picon face
> > Would this still apply to PICs with the code protection set, as they
> > cannot be verified?
>
> First you program and verify the code, _then_ you set the code protection
> bit.

An then you verify that you can no longer read back the code!

Wouter

--
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


2000\10\05@162041 by Thomas McGahee

flavicon
face
Of course, there are those PICsters who have accidentally set the
code protection and *then* tried to program the sucker. Some
people like to learn the *hard* way!

Fr. Tom McGahee

{Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000 , 2001 only
- Today
- New search...