Searching \ for ' Cheap or In Circut 16C54C 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: 'Cheap or In Circut 16C54C Programmer'.

No exact or substring matches. trying for part
PICList Thread
'[PICLIST] Cheap or In Circut 16C54C Programmer.'
2001\11\08@044525 by Andrew Hooper

flavicon
face
Is anyone aware of either and in circut 16C54C programmer or
a simple and cheap programmer similar to what was avalible for
the 16C/F84's

Regards
Andrew

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


2001\11\08@100608 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 10:43:31PM +1300, Andrew Hooper wrote:
> Is anyone aware of either and in circut 16C54C programmer or
> a simple and cheap programmer similar to what was avalible for
> the 16C/F84's

Not a chance. The original 16C5X series of chips have several programming
issues:

1) They only have a parallel programming interface that requires 12 of the 13
available I/O pins.

2) They are EPROM based, which makes them OTP, or requiring removal with the
windowed versions.

In circuit works for serial interfaced FLASH based parts because they eliminate
these issues.

Now having addressed the question, can you tell us why you need to use the
16C54C? You can replace it with a 16F628 (cheaper) or a 16F84[A] and have
a simple ICSP interface for development.

Parts like the 16C54C and the 16C505 are better utilized in large scale
production of finished product because of their sub $1 US price in quantity.

But they certainly are not the right part for ICSP.

Hope this helps,

BAJ

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


2001\11\08@111822 by Tsvetan Usunov

flavicon
face
>Now having addressed the question, can you tell us why you need to use the
>16C54C? You can replace it with a 16F628 (cheaper) or a 16F84[A] and have
>a simple ICSP interface for development.

PIC16F628 cheaper than PIC16C54C ?
you must be kidding...

Best regards
Tsvetan
---
PCB prototypes for $26 at http://run.to/pcb (http://www.olimex.com/pcb)
Development boards for PIC, AVR and MSP430  (http://www.olimex.com/dev)

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


2001\11\08@124521 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 06:07:14PM +0100, Tsvetan Usunov wrote:
> >Now having addressed the question, can you tell us why you need to use the
> >16C54C? You can replace it with a 16F628 (cheaper) or a 16F84[A] and have
> >a simple ICSP interface for development.
>
> PIC16F628 cheaper than PIC16C54C ?
> you must be kidding...

One of the reasons I like talking better than writing.

Cost chart:

16C54C < 16F628 < 16F84[A]

In the original post the author compared setting up an environment like the
16F84[A]. What I was trying to say is that the 16F628 is cheaper than the
16F84A. And I now qualify that statement with "within the US."

Sorry for the confusion...

BAJ

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


2001\11\08@145544 by Andrew Hooper

flavicon
face
Byron,

Im building a DC Speed Controller based on this one.
http://www.mcmanis.com/chuck/robotics/projects/servo.html

I also have 4X16C54C's allready, and since code has allready
been written i dont have to reinvent the wheel :)

Actually the situation is this, Im the president of Robot Gladiators Inc
a NP Club and we are looking for an inexpensice tank steer ESC that
we can build on and modifiy.

What i was going to use is 2 of these ESC's and a reworked v-tail mixer
as the normal v-tails steer better one way than the other.

Thanks for your help.

Regards
Andrew
{Original Message removed}

2001\11\08@150014 by Andrew Hooper

flavicon
face
The 16C84's cost me $16.00 over here in small qty's
the 16C54C cost me about $8.50 each.
I would love to use the 16C/F84's for the ESC but i have
been told that it would not do the job as the servo input needs
to be decoded and converted to PWM that drives a FET h
bridge with smoke protection.

Regards
Andrew
{Original Message removed}

2001\11\08@153856 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 08:54:02AM +1300, Andrew Hooper wrote:
> Byron,
>
> Im building a DC Speed Controller based on this one.
> http://www.mcmanis.com/chuck/robotics/projects/servo.html

Just took a look. Typical server controller. The 16C54 doesn't seem to be
critical.

>
> I also have 4X16C54C's allready, and since code has allready
> been written i dont have to reinvent the wheel :)

The source is on the page and should run with any midrange PIC with minimal
modifications. But you run into the standard "one in hand, two in bush"
problem.

I took a 5 second stroll and found David Tait's original 16C5X programmer.
I'm attaching the schematic. Quite complicated.

In comparison take a look at my Trivial Low Voltage Programmer also attached.
A lot simpler. One chip. One resistor.  BTW it'll program 16F62X and 16F87X
chips in low voltage mode.

>
> Actually the situation is this, Im the president of Robot Gladiators Inc
> a NP Club and we are looking for an inexpensice tank steer ESC that
> we can build on and modifiy.

Understood.
>
> What i was going to use is 2 of these ESC's and a reworked v-tail mixer
> as the normal v-tails steer better one way than the other.

Any 18 pin PIC will work in its place. The 16C54C isn't critical.

So here's your likely choices:

1) Buy a complete PIC programmer that does both parallel and serial parts.
2) Spend time/effort putting together a complicated single use programmer
  to program the 16C54C parts you have.
3) Scrap the 16F54C parts, move up to a newer chip what has a simpler
  programmer.

Personally I'd choose 3 because I'm cheap ;-) and I don't want to spend a lot
of time/effort developing tools. Even if the chips cost more, it's worth it
if you can reduce your tool development time.

BAJ

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


2001\11\08@163244 by Andrew Hooper

flavicon
face
Byron,

Yea, I see what you mean.. Atleast 3 would allow me to roll the 2
controllers into
one and incluce the tank steer :)

I just dont think my programming skills are quite that good, Any volenteers
:)

Guess it would be nice also to have an incircut programmable unit that would
enable the user to reprogramme without to much hastle.

Andrew
{Original Message removed}

2001\11\08@184018 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 09:53:40AM +1300, Andrew Hooper wrote:
> Byron,
>
> Yea, I see what you mean.. Atleast 3 would allow me to roll the 2
> controllers into
> one and incluce the tank steer :)

Well that wasn't my intent. The only three points that I was trying to make is
that a 16C54 would be difficult to build simply and cheaply, that the
current crop of chips are pin compatible, and that they should run the code
with minor modifications.

>
> I just dont think my programming skills are quite that good, Any volenteers
> :)

I don't think you'll have to change much. Just follow the specified guidelines
for modifying the code.

>
> Guess it would be nice also to have an incircut programmable unit that would
> enable the user to reprogramme without to much hastle.

Absolutely.

BAJ
>
> Andrew
> {Original Message removed}

2001\11\09@050725 by dr. Imre Bartfai

flavicon
face
Hi,

I must correct you: ICSP has also its advantage with OTP chips: u can
e. g. make a SMD circuit and put an unprogrammed PIC into. Then, using
ICSP, program it. Disadvantage: ICSP has some challenges regarding the
circuit. Advantage: u do not need to buy an expensive socket for the SMD
circuit.

Imre

On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, Byron A Jeff 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


2001\11\09@050744 by dr. Imre Bartfai

flavicon
face
Hi,

16C505 has ICSP feature. It IS cheaper than 16C54 (but has less pins :-(
).
Imre


+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity |
| to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or          |
| privileged material.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination or    |
| other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this          |
| information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient  |
| is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the      |
| sender and delete the material from any computer.                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, Tsvetan Usunov 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


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2001 , 2002 only
- Today
- New search...