Searching \ for 'RS-232 on the 12C508' 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/io/serials.htm?key=rs%2D232
Search entire site for: 'RS-232 on the 12C508'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'RS-232 on the 12C508'
2000\03\27@103933 by John C. Frenzel

picon face
Pic List,
Is the internal osc. of the 12C508/9 stable and accurate enough for RS-232?
It seems to work, but can I depend on it?   Microchip says resonators are
too variable for serial work, and so I have always used crystals.  Is the
internal osc on these chips stable enough for reliable indoor operation?
Thanks,
John


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

2000\03\27@105221 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
Ceramic resonators are stable enough for serial comms, though not as stable as
crystals.  RC oscillators are horribly thermally unstable.


Andy










"John C. Frenzel" <spam_OUTjohnfrenzelTakeThisOuTspamYAHOO.COM> on 03/27/2000 10:37:01 AM

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








To:      PICLISTspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU

cc:      (bcc: Andrew Kunz/TDI_NOTES)



Subject: RS-232 on the 12C508








Pic List,
Is the internal osc. of the 12C508/9 stable and accurate enough for RS-232?
It seems to work, but can I depend on it?   Microchip says resonators are
too variable for serial work, and so I have always used crystals.  Is the
internal osc on these chips stable enough for reliable indoor operation?
Thanks,
John


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

2000\03\27@110908 by Jerry Merrill

flavicon
face
No.  I believe the internal RC osc is rated at +- 8%.  That may not seem
like too much error, but when doing RS-232, the error is cumulative.  Over
a 10 bit word, you could drift up to 80% of a bit, pushing your sample well
into the next bit.

It is not impossible to use an RC though.  The maximum error occurs over
time, temperature, voltage and process.  It will not CHANGE rapidly.  If
you could calibrate the processor speed periodically, you could get away
with such large errors.  Doable, but requires a specific plan for dealing
with the uncertainties.

Resonators are accurate enough.  Most are better than 3% over temperature
and voltage, INCLUDING ageing.  That results in a maximum error of 1/3 bit.



At 09:37 AM 3/27/00 , you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Jerry Merrill

.....jerrymKILLspamspam.....tech-tools.com
http://www.tech-tools.com
FAX: (972) 494-5814
VOICE:(972) 272-9392
TechTools
PO Box 462101
Garland,  TX  75046-2101

2000\03\27@111523 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 09:37 AM 3/27/00 -0600, John C. Frenzel wrote:
>Pic List,
>Is the internal osc. of the 12C508/9 stable and accurate enough for RS-232?
>It seems to work, but can I depend on it?   Microchip says resonators are
>too variable for serial work, and so I have always used crystals.  Is the
>internal osc on these chips stable enough for reliable indoor operation?

As discussed before, the total error budget over 10 bits (start, 8 data,
stop) is 1/2 bit-time, but the stop bit is a special case, in that it just
has to be there. The last edge of the stop bit dosen't even really exist,
so I'd calculate the max error allowable as 1/2 bit time in 9 bits.

This works out to 5.5% error in timing. Of course that assumes that the
receiver is exactly correct, which seems doubtful.  2.75% is a more
workable figure. (Let the other guy be at least as sloppy as you are)

So in the chip spec, what's the tolerance on the internal osc over the
voltage/temp range you anticipate using?   If it's looser than 2.75%, then
you're questionable. If it's looser than 5.5%, you're not survivable.

Realize though, the other guy may have eaten more than half the error
budget in his receiver!

The other side of this is, hobby or production line? A hobby project can
push the envelope a lot harder than a commercial product.  I see things
"working" in hobby projects all the time that would be a "fire the
engineer" in a commercial environment.



Isn't serial fun?
:)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBON+ym4FlGDz1l6VWEQJiJgCgiDfY5EM2aYK+S9fONTdJJ+FxgM0An0NE
dx/u2hBPCa3DHcAvtAi17EdJ
=S7lI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2000\03\27@114818 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


>Resonators are accurate enough.  Most are better than 3% over temperature
>and voltage, INCLUDING ageing.  That results in a maximum error of 1/3 bit.

To pick a nit, that's not the maximum error if you're bit-banging.  From
the design point of view, you'd have to consider that the minimum error.

You also have to consider the accuracy of your algorithm, and the effects
of any interrupts you may have turned on. Unfortunately, nobody else can
tell you what that will be, you'll have to walk the code yourself.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBON+6HYFlGDz1l6VWEQJZpQCePPIZIdgoDw+cykf1YZhIXgK7Ma0An1Q5
/5AXiUkoh+f2VAf1oIEnR7gj
=blqP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2000\03\28@230345 by J Nagy

flavicon
face
John C. Frenzel wrote:

>Pic List,
>Is the internal osc. of the 12C508/9 stable and accurate enough for RS-232?
>It seems to work, but can I depend on it?   Microchip says resonators are
>too variable for serial work, and so I have always used crystals.  Is the
>internal osc on these chips stable enough for reliable indoor operation?
>Thanks,
>John
>

       ... to which several replies were made. I agree with all the
responses thus far, but would like to stress that it is good practice to
use more than one stop bit whenever you can. This allows the receiver to
resync to the next start bit, so that errors don't accumulate (as they
would if exactly one stop bit is used). For most applications, the speed
reduction from using 8N2 instead of 8N1 is imperceptable.
       We make several RS232 based products based on the '508 with the
internal RC osc, and find consistent operation as long as the rate isn't
pushed beyond 9600 baud. With a crystal time base, you could easily get
57600 and could probably push 90K (in bursts).


       Jim Nagy
       Elm Electronics
 ICs for Experimenters
http://www.elmelectronics.com/


'RS-232 on the 12C508'
2000\04\04@084856 by Marc
flavicon
face
> As discussed before, the total error budget over 10 bits (start, 8 data,
> stop) is 1/2 bit-time

I would not suggest that a bit sent 1/2 bit time late is always correctly
received.  A 16x oversampling UART will need the edge 2/16 _before_ the
bit middle (to ensure that the "middle" 3 samples are always correct).

Other receiver designs may vary.

At least the mentioned 2/16 should be substracted from 1/2 _before_ dividing
the rest into the equal error budgets for the two parties.


The stopbit must be included into the calculation (and not stripped out
as you did) because the error can be "early" _or_ "late".  When the stopbit
is sent _late_, the receiver might sample the previous bit as stopbit.


With all that taken into account, the maximum error per party on 8N1 comm
is 1.875%.


But it assumes that when you mathematically know you're 1.875% off, that
you physically don't introduce _more_ errors.  In reality you do! XTAL
and line driver tolerances limit that further, so even a baudrate
divider value that hits 1.875% exactly can still lead to comm errors.

Therefore you should never exceed 1.5% approx.


2.75% is definately way too much!!!!!      Almost twice the rationally
suggested value, and therefore eating almost everything of the (real
world) error budget.

2000\04\04@164505 by Wagner Lipnharski

picon face
For a visual understanding of the RS232 clock error, take a look at:
http://www.ustr.net/8051pc/starting.htm
and check from the middle to the end of that page, "CLOCK SIGNAL", where
you will see that up to 2.1% of frequency shift is yet acceptable, for
8N1 assync comm.
Wagner.

Marc wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2000\04\04@170018 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
> > As discussed before, the total error budget over 10 bits (start, 8 data,
> > stop) is 1/2 bit-time
>
> I would not suggest that a bit sent 1/2 bit time late is always correctly
> received.  A 16x oversampling UART will need the edge 2/16 _before_ the
> bit middle (to ensure that the "middle" 3 samples are always correct).

If your frequency is off because of an inconvenient clock speed, rather
than temperature variations, AND you're receiving using some sort of
software-driven UART, THEN you ought to be able to adjust the time of
your first sample (from the nominal 1/2 bit time) to allow for larger
percentages of KNOWN ERROR.  ie, if you're sampling a bit slow, then
take the first sample earlier so that the last sample will still be
within the last bit.  If you're sampling a bit fast, start later.  A
KNOWN ERROR can be corrected for, it's only the unknown errors that you
need to keep within parameters.  (unfortunately, this doesn't help when
transmitting, since even your "known error" is an unknown error for the
receiver.

BillW

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