Searching \ for 'Confusion on PIC part numbers' 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/devices.htm?key=pic
Search entire site for: 'Confusion on PIC part numbers'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Confusion on PIC part numbers'
1999\07\08@191904 by Greg Wiley

picon face
I am confused by Microchip's device number assignment.

In the mid-range PIC overview documentation, they
claim that parts with Fs use EEPROM for program store,
and that parts with Cs use EPROM for program store.

Thus, my little brain says:  16F84 is electrically erasable
and 16C84 is UV erasable or OTP, depending on the
package.  They are probably similar in other respects.

Well, I know that the F84 is electrically erasable.  It's
the one I have been messing with.  But now I want a
compatible part that is OTP so I pull up the spec sheet
for the 16C84 and it says that the device uses elect-
rically erasable program store.  The only difference wrt
the F84 seems to be the amount of RAM.

So, am I missing something?  Is there a OTP equivalent
to the 16F84?

TIA,

 -greg

1999\07\08@200453 by Tony Nixon

flavicon
picon face
Greg Wiley wrote:

> So, am I missing something?  Is there a OTP equivalent
> to the 16F84?

The short answer is no :-(

--
Best regards

Tony

'The Engine' - Design your own programmer.

http://www.picnpoke.com
Email spam_OUTpicnpokeTakeThisOuTspamcdi.com.au

1999\07\08@210731 by Peter van Hoof

picon face
<x-flowed>Yup there is ... 16cr84

Peter


{Quote hidden}

_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

</x-flowed>

1999\07\08@211147 by Peter van Hoof

picon face
<x-flowed>I stand corrected the cr is the mask rom version ,not otp

{Quote hidden}

_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

</x-flowed>

1999\07\08@214646 by Jim Paul

picon face
You're both right and wrong.  The 16C84 uses EEPROM technology.  This makes
it erasable electrically, obviously.  The F84 parts use FLASH EPROM, making
it electrically erasable also.
The OTP parts use EPROM technology, but due to the fact that they're in a
solid plastic package,
they cannot be erased.  There's no way for the UV light to get to the array.
Hope this clears up your confusion.


Regards,


Jim

{Original Message removed}

1999\07\08@222442 by Tony Nixon
flavicon
picon face
Peter van Hoof wrote:
>
> Yup there is ... 16cr84
>

Oh well. Such is life.

I nearly turned a JW 74 chip into an OTP just now. I put it in the
programmer the wrong way around and it started sending smoke signals.
The chip survived somehow, but it destroyed a component in the power
switching circuitry on the programmer board.

With all the talk lately on reversed biassed transistors lately, I
expected to see a light show coming out of the little window :-)

Hey, I thought the early 74's could have the code protect undone. I
accidently programmed the code protect fuse and it refuses to erase :-(


--
Best regards

Tony

'The Engine' - Design your own programmer.

http://www.picnpoke.com
Email spamBeGonepicnpokespamBeGonespamcdi.com.au

1999\07\08@230306 by Greg Wiley

picon face
Jim Paul <TakeThisOuTjamespEraseMEspamspam_OUTINTERTEX.NET> wrote


> You're both right and wrong.  The 16C84 uses EEPROM technology.  This
makes
> it erasable electrically, obviously.  The F84 parts use FLASH EPROM,
making
> it electrically erasable also.

>From what I've read, while Microchip calls the electrically eraseable
program PROMs "Flash" for marketing reasons, they are standard
EEPROM.  Regardless, they behave the same operationally.

> The OTP parts use EPROM technology, but due to the fact that they're in a
> solid plastic package,
> they cannot be erased.  There's no way for the UV light to get to the
array.
> Hope this clears up your confusion.

This I understand.  What I am confused by is their use of "C" in the
part number when their published naming system reserves the use of
"C" for EPROM program store, windowed or not.

It's not too big a deal--I can read the sheets and make my own table.
I was just hoping for an easier targeting method based on mnemonic
part numbers.

Thanks,

 -greg

1999\07\09@023841 by Jim Robertson

flavicon
face
At 12:19 9/07/99 +1000, you wrote:

>Hey, I thought the early 74's could have the code protect undone. I
>accidently programmed the code protect fuse and it refuses to erase :-(

Hi Tony,

They can. If there is no "A" or "B" suffix then it WILL erase, code protection
and all. However the erase time could be several hours or more. There is
some more information on my web page under the "knowledge base" link.

Jim

{Quote hidden}

________________________________________
Email: newfoundEraseMEspam.....pipeline.com.au
http://www.new-elect.com
MPLAB compatible PIC programmers and firmware
upgrades for many programmers.
________________________________________

1999\07\09@024056 by Jim Robertson

flavicon
face
At 19:37 8/07/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Jim Paul <EraseMEjamespspamINTERTEX.NET> wrote
>
>
>> You're both right and wrong.  The 16C84 uses EEPROM technology.  This
>makes
>> it erasable electrically, obviously.  The F84 parts use FLASH EPROM,
>making
>> it electrically erasable also.
>
>From what I've read, while Microchip calls the electrically eraseable
>program PROMs "Flash" for marketing reasons, they are standard
>EEPROM.  Regardless, they behave the same operationally.

True.

>> The OTP parts use EPROM technology, but due to the fact that they're in a
>> solid plastic package,
>> they cannot be erased.  There's no way for the UV light to get to the
>array.
>> Hope this clears up your confusion.
>
>This I understand.  What I am confused by is their use of "C" in the
>part number when their published naming system reserves the use of
>"C" for EPROM program store, windowed or not.

"C" is for CMOS. The original PICs were NMOS devices.

Jim
________________________________________
Email: RemoveMEnewfoundEraseMEspamEraseMEpipeline.com.au
http://www.new-elect.com
MPLAB compatible PIC programmers and firmware
upgrades for many programmers.
________________________________________

1999\07\10@180807 by Sean H. Breheny

face picon face
BTW, I am just curious, when were the first PICs?

Sean

At 04:48 PM 7/9/99 +1000, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

| Sean Breheny
| Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM
| Electrical Engineering Student
\--------------=----------------
Save lives, please look at http://www.all.org
Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
RemoveMEshb7TakeThisOuTspamspamcornell.edu ICQ #: 3329174
________________________________________________________
NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet.  Shouldn't you?
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999 , 2000 only
- Today
- New search...