'PIC Programmer Questions'
|I hope to find a simple answer, but not sure if there is one to this
Whats the difference in the various PIC programmers I see on various
I have noticed alot of 16C84, or F84, programmers and the hardware is
straight forward. Parallax's 16Cxx programmer has a firmware chip but
extra hardware on their PCB. I have the parts to build a simple 16C84
programmer that I wanted to use for some 16F84's I just got but not sure
the programmer I was going to build will work for the 16F84, since there
seems to be some issue of it can only program the 16C84--I thought the
were (C84 and F84) about the same.
Question #1: Can I use a simple 16C84 programmer ( the one I had
on building is called the "COM84") to program 16F84's?
Question #2: Whats special about these programmers I see for all of the
other 16Cxx chips--is it firmware or what? If I use Parallax's SPEP.exe
software to program, lets say a 16C56 or 57, and use the simple
wanted to build for the 16C84, would this work or kill the 16C56 or 57?
Qestion #3: Whats the alternative if a simple programmer ( such as the
for 16C84's) won't work for other 16Cxx chips short of buying a
made programmer such as Parallax's? Are there any homebrew programmers
there for the 16Cxx series PIC chips that can be built from scratch?
Any help, suggestions, or direction would be graetly appreciated!!
Thanks in advance for any replies...
Mike Hall - "http://members.aol.com/mhall34450/"
Mike Hall - "http://members.aol.com/mhall34450/"
programming different devices not only depends on the "right" hardware,
but also, and this is the most important factor, the right software.
If you're looking for a good, simple, robust and -> inexpensive <-
PIC-Programmer, than have a look at
It allows programming of 45 different PICs (from DIL8 to DIL40) and the
list can be expanded simply by addig new parameters (fuses, word-length
and so on).
The software that comes with it is shareware.
BAMBERG & MONSEES GbR
Systeme f|r Wissenschaft und Technik
Am Postmoor 36 * D-28719 Bremen
Fon +49-421-646775 * Fax +49-421-646785
'pic programmer questions'
I have finally found the time to build a pic programmer (actually I broke
my foot and am stuck in bed for next 4 weeks) and am preparing the parts
list. I washoping some of you might be able to answer a few questions for
I'm preparing to build the david tait programmer, has anyone used a bread
board and wire for this circuit, and are there any problems going this
route over a pcb?
Is there windows 95 software available for this programmer that works with
no or little problems(I'm as new as can be to microprocessor programming)
Is the best programmer to make, or is there a better one. Once again I'm
using win 95.
my first real project will need to count 1222 pulses and the amount of time
it takes to get to each pulse and keep a total time as well, then it must
perform some calculation mostly division. and store the data for possible
upload to a pc. will the 16c84 be capable of these requirements, acuracy to
the thousandth of a sec is required.
I also plan on buyin' the ez pic n book, isthis a good book to use, any
others besides the data books from microchip, got the whole set and the cd
|Ah, the DIY programmer thread again ...
Oliver Praudisch wrote:
> I'm preparing to build the david tait programmer, has anyone used a bread
> board and wire for this circuit, and are there any problems going this
> route over a pcb?
Actually I have three programmer designs.
I doubt if my simple 16C84 programmer should be your first choice.
Octavio Nogueira's (TATO Computers) hardware is more or less the
same as my "classic" programmer but is enhanced by the addition of
variable VPP capability and comes with Windows software which is
able to program many PICs. His web site includes a PCB design:
For playing with the 16C84 (or the 16F84 if you don't need code
protection and embed config info in your source) I still find my
"TOPIC" programmer quite useful. It is relatively easily
integrated with MPLAB and programs the on-board PIC in-circuit
very quickly. It comes with a PCB layout.
My "UPP" design is what I use for my own development work with
EPROM-based devices. It can program all baseline and midrange
PICs but I only supply software for the 16C54/55/56/57. I don't
supply anything for the others because I can't guarantee the
programming pulse timing shown in Microchip's programming specs (I
don't know how the others do it) although in practice it doesn't
seem to be a problem. No PCB either.
If you don't want to tie up your printer port (or add another)
then the serial port design(s) by Jens Madsen look quite fun:
and have the advantages that no power supply is required (provided
your serial port is up to it) and construction errors are unlikely
to damage your computer. Again PCB details are provided.
There are numerous other DIY programmer options (including some
that require a PIC programmer to make!) but I'd better stop here.
On 5.3.1998, at 12:59, David Tait wrote:
>Octavio Nogueira's (TATO Computers) hardware is more or less the
>same as my "classic" programmer but is enhanced by the addition of
>variable VPP capability and comes with Windows software which is
>able to program many PICs. His web site includes a PCB design:
Well, I'd say it *should* be able to program many PICs. I've personally
seen the software usually just be buggy and lock up. I had no luck
with it. Hardware is ok though but software seems to not work at least
on my computer setup (WIN95, nothing special, P166). It seems it would
certainly be a great one if only it stopped being buggy.
Harri Suomalainen cc.hut.fihaba
We have phone numbers, why'd we need IP-numbers? - a person in a bus
In article <afs.mcc.ac.uk>, David Tait 15280.9803051259
<AFS.MCC.AC.UK> writes mbhstdj
>My "UPP" design is what I use for my own development work with
>EPROM-based devices. It can program all baseline and midrange
>PICs but I only supply software for the 16C54/55/56/57. I don't
>supply anything for the others because I can't guarantee the
>programming pulse timing shown in Microchip's programming specs (I
>don't know how the others do it) although in practice it doesn't
>seem to be a problem. No PCB either.
I am considering writing software to program 16C6X/7X.
Please can you explain which particular pulse timing specifications
cause the problem?
|Nigel Broad wrote:
> I am considering writing software to program 16C6X/7X.
> Please can you explain which particular pulse timing specifications
> cause the problem?
I'm replying to the list just in case anyone else is interested (if
you can't understand why anyone should want to waste their time
building their own PIC programmer hit delete now!).
My programming hardware more or less directly connects the PC parallel
port to the PIC. This means I have to get the PC itself to generate
the exact waveforms required. Needless to say this is the basis of
Some PICs (like the 16x84) have very lax timing requirements and it is
easy to meet the specs. Others (like the 16C5X chips) need a
particular line to be pulsed for 100us. I can get close to the specs
for these. I do this by using the PC's internal timer (approx 1us
resolution) and turning off PC interrupts for the whole length of the
pulse. The serial-mode EPROM-based PICs (16C6X/7X, 12C5XX, etc.)
should be programmed by sending a 6-bit command to start programming,
waiting a while and then sending a 6-bit command to stop programming.
The time between the PIC fully receiving the two commands should be
100us. This I can't do. Or at least I can't guarantee the timing is
There are basically two problems: if I want the hardware to work
reliably (particularly if its connected over a longish cable) then the
time taken to send a command can be close to 100us on its own; and, if
I don't turn off interrupts, the PC could steal time during the
critical period between the two commands being received. What little
I've learnt about PCs suggests it's not a good idea to turn off
interrupts for more than 200us or so.
I note that several people on the list have written software to
program the serial-mode EPROM PICs using similar hardware to my own.
Perhaps their software doesn't meet the specs either (some I've looked
at uses 1ms programming pulses for example) or they have a clever
solution which I haven't thought of (quite likely). In any case, it
may not even be necessary to meet the specs. My 16C6X/7X software is
certainly not within spec although it seems to work but I don't supply
it to anyone else just in case (the old "unerasable" code-protection
problem is another reason :-)
Good luck with writing your own software.
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998
, 1999 only
- New search...