Searching \ for 'Mattel trivia and Atmel Seminar [OT]' 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/index.htm?key=
Search entire site for: 'Mattel trivia and Atmel Seminar [OT]'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Mattel trivia and Atmel Seminar [OT]'
1997\10\30@112004 by Matt Bonner

flavicon
face
Winners are:
       Richard K (pdf  on the GIMINI Programmable Game Set)
       Steven T (offer of the complete specs and instruction set)
What do they win?  How about one of my 2 Microchip 1996 Technical
library CD coffee-coasters?  Let me know when you're coming to Calgary
to pick them up.

Due to the time warp that myself and others have experienced on this
list, both are winners.  Thanks to the others who pointed out that even
though GI became Microchip, the CP1610 was not officially an early PIC.

BTW, I was at an Atmel AVR seminar yesterday - only about 20 attendees.
The other month, the Calgary Microchip seminar drew about 200 (after the
fact estimate).  Some neat parts, even neater "soon-to-be" parts, some
Microchip-bashing, but NO plans to make them work at 125 deg C. :'-(

I also thought that it was a little unfair to keep comparing the Atmel's
S1200 to the 16C54 instead of something as recent as the 1200 (like the
16C61).  Oh well, sales.  To be fair, though (Microchip - you can start
listening here) there are 2 little ideas that MChip could steal that
would make my life easier: 1) no shared pre/postscaler between the WDT
and TMR0; 2) a 20 pin part with hardware USART.  The list (of course)
could be much more extensive but we've gone into that before (new
PIClisters - check the archive).  I think the thread was called
something like "Microchip, are you listening?".  That one may have been
about compilers, though.

--Matt

1997\10\30@131516 by wwl

picon face
>
>BTW, I was at an Atmel AVR seminar yesterday - only about 20 attendees.
>The other month, the Calgary Microchip seminar drew about 200 (after the
>fact estimate).  Some neat parts, even neater "soon-to-be" parts, some
>Microchip-bashing, but NO plans to make them work at 125 deg C. :'-(
A friend who fixes cellular phonbes tells me that Atmel TSOP eeproms
(unlike other makes) get corrupted by unsoldering temperatures  -
doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it?

1997\10\30@134347 by Matt Bonner

flavicon
face
Mike Harrison wrote:
>
> >
> >BTW, I was at an Atmel AVR seminar yesterday - only about 20 attendees.
> >The other month, the Calgary Microchip seminar drew about 200 (after the
> >fact estimate).  Some neat parts, even neater "soon-to-be" parts, some
> >Microchip-bashing, but NO plans to make them work at 125 deg C. :'-(
> A friend who fixes cellular phonbes tells me that Atmel TSOP eeproms
> (unlike other makes) get corrupted by unsoldering temperatures  -
> doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it?

An Atmel FAE sampled me on 2 ATC28C040 industrial temp versions.
Apparently they don't do mil on this part but one of his cutomers
claimed he got 220 deg out of it in testing - only 24 hours, but still
counting.  I'm setting out to do my own tests (long term at 150 deg) and
I'll be sharing my results with Atmel on this (in exchange for the parts
which cost approx $400 CND each).  So far Xicor has been great (we've
had some in our products close to a decade with no failures at high
temp).  Unfortunately, Xicor lags Atmel in its introduction of next
generation monolithic parts.  Fortunately, Xicor works well.  The 2
technologies differ: Xicor uses an older (but more reliable)
space-eating thick film deposition process while Atmel uses a higher
density process but builds in extra cells for redundancy (so I've been
told).  Which is the more reliable, only time and testing will tell.
I'd feel a lot more comfortable if Atmel worked on higher temps - it
could only result in a better commercially-targeted part also.

Scuttlebut of the day: apparently Xicor is in talks with Motorola to
license its 68HC11 core...

Further to past discussion on destructive testing of PICs (plugging them
in backwards, etc.) - my next rainy-day project is to run a '74A/JW up
to as high a temperature as it can stand.  This might take a while
(something like 1 deg steps every 24 hours above 150 deg).  My code will
test various parts functional blocks like the USART, timers, etc.  Any
suggestions as to good code for such a test?  Bear in mind that the
hardware must me minimal: '74A, crystal, and a couple of capacitors.

--Matt

1997\10\30@155714 by Rob

flavicon
face
On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Matt Bonner wrote:
>
> Further to past discussion on destructive testing of PICs (plugging them
> in backwards, etc.) - my next rainy-day project is to run a '74A/JW up
> to as high a temperature as it can stand.  This might take a while
> (something like 1 deg steps every 24 hours above 150 deg).  My code will
> test various parts functional blocks like the USART, timers, etc.  Any
> suggestions as to good code for such a test?  Bear in mind that the
> hardware must me minimal: '74A, crystal, and a couple of capacitors.

I would do tests on time related items, such as USARTS (as you have said),
I2C, pwm etc. Also, running the outputs at their rated currents on several
pins to led's.

Rob

>
> --Matt
>

1997\10\30@171413 by Matt Bonner

flavicon
face
Rob wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Matt Bonner wrote:
> >
> > Further to past discussion on destructive testing of PICs (plugging them
> > in backwards, etc.) - my next rainy-day project is to run a '74A/JW up
> > to as high a temperature as it can stand.  This might take a while
> > (something like 1 deg steps every 24 hours above 150 deg).  My code will
> > test various parts functional blocks like the USART, timers, etc.  Any
> > suggestions as to good code for such a test?  Bear in mind that the
> > hardware must me minimal: '74A, crystal, and a couple of capacitors.
>
> I would do tests on time related items, such as USARTS (as you have said),
> I2C, pwm etc. Also, running the outputs at their rated currents on several
> pins to led's.
>
Not possible on the last point: Ohm's Law has to come into play at some
point.  At 25mA per pin that's 1/8 W - pretty hard to dissipate at 150
deg C.  Anyway, the only way you can get high temp out of a part is to
run it at pretty close to "storage temperature" currents (i.e.: zero).
High loads should be buffered with a VFET (VN10KE) or whatever.  BTW, at
what temperatures do LEDs melt? <g>
--Matt

1997\10\30@190429 by Dmitry Kiryashov

flavicon
face
Matt Bonner wrote:

> > I would do tests on time related items, such as USARTS (as you have said),
> > I2C, pwm etc. Also, running the outputs at their rated currents on several
> > pins to led's.
> >
> Not possible on the last point: Ohm's Law has to come into play at some
> point.  At 25mA per pin that's 1/8 W - pretty hard to dissipate at 150
> deg C.  Anyway, the only way you can get high temp out of a part is to
> run it at pretty close to "storage temperature" currents (i.e.: zero).
> High loads should be buffered with a VFET (VN10KE) or whatever.  BTW, at
> what temperatures do LEDs melt? <g>

Why not possible ? It's more easy (and cheaper too) to glue PIC to some
radiator and not apply any additional switches like VFET or so.
You should use well temperature conducting glue and according radiator
and you will dissipate your 1/8 W at 150*C without any troubles.
Another way - to make a tight contact PIC with radiator through
termo-conducting paste .

BTW there are another way to eliminate overheating by using surface
layers of copper (usually GND or Ucc) in multilayer PCB as radiator
but 150*C is extremly high temperature for this method.

WBR Dmitry .

1997\10\31@003043 by Ram Krishnan

flavicon
face
If you really want to pump a lot of heat off the PIC, you can add a
Thermoelectric cooler, and a fan to remove the heat thru convection from
the hot face of the T.E. I know that some people have been overclocking
pentiums while cooling them with T.E.s. For a lot of good info on T.E.s,
checkout
http://www.melcor.com

1997\10\31@060743 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Bonner <spam_OUTmbonnerTakeThisOuTspamSUNADA.COM>
To: .....PICLISTKILLspamspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <PICLISTspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Friday, 31 October 1997 5:15
Subject: Re: Mattel trivia and Atmel Seminar [OT]

<snip>

>
>Further to past discussion on destructive testing of PICs (plugging them
>in backwards, etc.) - my next rainy-day project is to run a '74A/JW up
>to as high a temperature as it can stand.  This might take a while
>(something like 1 deg steps every 24 hours above 150 deg).  My code will
>test various parts functional blocks like the USART, timers, etc.  Any
>suggestions as to good code for such a test?  Bear in mind that the
>hardware must me minimal: '74A, crystal, and a couple of capacitors.

How about adding some rated passive load to the outputs, and toggling them
rapidly?  This would stress the port pins, and increase device dissipation.

MikeS
<.....mikesmith_ozKILLspamspam.....relaymail.net>

>
>--Matt
>

1997\10\31@105933 by Matt Bonner

flavicon
face
Dmitry Kiryashov wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Dmitry, sometimes it's not possible to use any sort of heat sink (space
constraints etc.).  Anyway, the 74A works great in my design at 150 deg
- the point I was making was that I plan to go _much_ higher (at least
to 200 deg).  Also, the 1/8 W was only _one_ pin.  It's been years since
I've done any proper thermal transfer equations, but common sense tells
me that, at an ambient temperature of 150 deg, it is impossible to
dissipate any amount of power and still maintain the IC die at its rated
storage temperature of 150 deg.  What I'm counting on (but not making
any bets on) is that, with minimal operating current, the 74A will
function much hotter.  I cannot believe that long term operation out of
spec is possible if I overly "abuse" the part.

When destructive testing the 74A, I want to test _only_ the 74A.  If it
survives, I'll add more parts one at a time to find the weak link -
memory, analog components, etc.

BTW, the reason I can't use a heat sink is that my board is 0.95" wide,
14" long, and fits it a stainless steel tube.

--Matt

1997\10\31@111612 by Matt Bonner

flavicon
face
Mike Smith wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >
> >Further to past discussion on destructive testing of PICs (plugging them
> >in backwards, etc.) - my next rainy-day project is to run a '74A/JW up
> >to as high a temperature as it can stand.

<snip>

> How about adding some rated passive load to the outputs, and toggling them
> rapidly?  This would stress the port pins, and increase device dissipation.
>
I've spent years reducing the operating current of my system and you
want me to throw it all away? <g>

Actually, I guess it didn't explain myself very well originally.  (I've
rectified that a bit in a posted reply to Dmitry a few minutes ago.)  I
want to determine what the highest _ambient_ temperature the 74A can
survive, not what self-generated heat it can stand.  When I mentioned
testing all its functional blocks, I was referring to things like the
counters, WDT, USART, etc.  My guess is that the WDT will be the first
to go, since it is RC timed and capacitors (in my experience) tend to be
the most affected by excess heat.

--Matt

1997\10\31@124520 by wwl

picon face
On Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:23:35 +1030, you wrote:

>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mike Harrison <EraseMEwwlspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTnetcomuk.co.uk>
>To: PICLISTspamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU <@spam@PICLISTKILLspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>Date: Friday, 31 October 1997 4:45
>Subject: Re: Mattel trivia and Atmel Seminar [OT]
>
>
>>>
>>>BTW, I was at an Atmel AVR seminar yesterday - only about 20 attendees.
>>>The other month, the Calgary Microchip seminar drew about 200 (after the
>>>fact estimate).  Some neat parts, even neater "soon-to-be" parts, some
>>>Microchip-bashing, but NO plans to make them work at 125 deg C. :'-(
>>A friend who fixes cellular phones tells me that Atmel TSOP eeproms
>>(unlike other makes) get corrupted by unsoldering temperatures  -
>>doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it?
>
>
>Observations:
>- Unsoldering temperatures tend to be a lot higher than soldering ones -
Not much higher, if it's done properly
>eeproms are known temperature sensitives.
Only Atmel's seem to have problems - others are OK
>- Perhaps its a security feature, to stop ppl desoldering and reading said
>devices. (?)
yeah, right
>- Noone would want the chip after it had been thru a desolder process,
>anyway - removed parts get binned here.
The reason in this case is to re-initialise the contents after they
have become corrupted (a common fault). The mfr refuses to supply
software to do this via the phone's port (they will only do board
exchange, which is often uneconomic for non warranty repairs).
Obtaining small qtys of tsop eeproms can be a real problem. There is
no reason why ICs cannot be removed and resoldered, if it's done with
sufficient skill - OK, it may be uneconomic for cheap chips, but with
practice & the right equipment, it only takes a minute or two.

1997\10\31@210826 by M Walter

flavicon
face
>Not possible on the last point: Ohm's Law has to come into play at some
>point.  At 25mA per pin that's 1/8 W - pretty hard to dissipate at 150
>deg C.  Anyway, the only way you can get high temp out of a part is to
>run it at pretty close to "storage temperature" currents (i.e.: zero).
>High loads should be buffered with a VFET (VN10KE) or whatever.  BTW, at
>what temperatures do LEDs melt? <g>
>--Matt
>
We build automotive sensors which use IR LED's. The sensor sits in the oil
pan or the radiator, so the max operating temperatures are 150 C and 125 C
respectively. We pulse the LED with 100 mA; 'course it is 0.1% duty cycle.

1997\10\31@231441 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
-----Original Message-----
From: M Walter <KILLspamMWalterKILLspamspamCTCONNECT.COM>
To: RemoveMEPICLISTTakeThisOuTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU <spamBeGonePICLISTspamBeGonespamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Saturday, 1 November 1997 12:38
Subject: Re: Mattel trivia and Atmel Seminar [OT]


<snip>

>We build automotive sensors which use IR LED's. The sensor sits in the oil
>pan or the radiator, so the max operating temperatures are 150 C and 125 C
>respectively. We pulse the LED with 100 mA; 'course it is 0.1% duty cycle.
>

What are they detecting?  Level?  Purity?
I've always felt conventional radiator sensors have a weakness here - lose
your coolant (eg burst hose) and your enginge has to get *VERY* hot before
this info is transmitted to the temp sender.

MikeS
<TakeThisOuTmikesmith_ozEraseMEspamspam_OUTrelaymail.net>


'Mattel trivia and Atmel Seminar [OT]'
1997\11\01@032922 by Eric van Es
flavicon
face
Well well. My 16C84 died. RIP.

The duco on it says PIC16C84-04/P    9543CBW

>From the last number I gather it to be manufactured in 1995 4Q 3rd week?
I've used this PIC since Jan '97. Must have programmed it about 500 times. I
thought they'd last longer.....:-(

It reads ok in my programmer - but won't program. Another PIC works fine in the
programmer.

I remember that someone out there was testing a PIC with write/wipe/write
cycles... I think it was Don McKenzie, but I'm not sure. If he's listening: What
happened to that PIC?

Ah well. Now I got to go buy a new one. Thats 6 beers less!

Cheers!
--
Eric van Es               | Cape Town, South Africa
RemoveMEvanesspamTakeThisOuTilink.nis.za | http://www.nis.za/~vanes
LOOKING FOR TEMPORARY / HOLIDAY ACCOMODATION?
http://www.nis.za/~vanes/accom.htm

1997\11\01@040335 by Eric van Es

flavicon
face
Mike Smith wrote:

> >We build automotive sensors which use IR LED's. The sensor sits in the oil
> >pan or the radiator, so the max operating temperatures are 150 C and 125 C
> >respectively. We pulse the LED with 100 mA; 'course it is 0.1% duty cycle.
> >
>
> What are they detecting?  Level?  Purity?
> I've always felt conventional radiator sensors have a weakness here - lose
> your coolant (eg burst hose) and your enginge has to get *VERY* hot before
> this info is transmitted to the temp sender.

Ah - and then your temp sensor is high 'n dry and if you are lucky the air will
be hot enough to give an almost good reading....

--
Eric van Es               | Cape Town, South Africa
vanesEraseMEspam.....ilink.nis.za | http://www.nis.za/~vanes
LOOKING FOR TEMPORARY / HOLIDAY ACCOMODATION?
http://www.nis.za/~vanes/accom.htm

1997\11\01@112342 by Rob Zitka

flavicon
face
At 10:18 AM 11/1/97 +0200, you wrote:
>Well well. My 16C84 died. RIP.
>
>The duco on it says PIC16C84-04/P    9543CBW
>
>>From the last number I gather it to be manufactured in 1995 4Q 3rd week?

I believe it means year 95, week 43.  Unless Microchip is different from
other manufacturers when labelling date codes.

Rob

1997\11\02@185916 by M Walter

flavicon
face
>What are they detecting?  Level?  Purity?
>I've always felt conventional radiator sensors have a weakness here - lose
>your coolant (eg burst hose) and your enginge has to get *VERY* hot before
>this info is transmitted to the temp sender.
>
Mike, we're detecting level only. The car has both coolant level AND
temperature sensors. We do just the level sensor.
Mark Walter
Mark Walter

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1997 , 1998 only
- Today
- New search...