Searching \ for 'schematic' 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=schematic
Search entire site for: 'schematic'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'schematic'
1999\09\08@231322 by hal

flavicon
face
Does anyone have a simply designed programer to program the pic chips.
I Would like to build my own programmer, Just getting started in the pic
chips I can handle building simple projects so the simpler the design
the better.  I would appreciate the help.
Thanks
Hal
spam_OUTKF4ZXRTakeThisOuTspamqsl.net
ICQ  2535945

1999\09\09@003205 by John Hansen

picon face
<x-flowed>At 11:06 PM 9/8/99 -0400, Hal wrote:
>Does anyone have a simply designed programer to program the pic chips.
>I Would like to build my own programmer, Just getting started in the pic
>chips I can handle building simple projects so the simpler the design
>the better.  I would appreciate the help.
>Thanks
>Hal
>.....KF4ZXRKILLspamspam@spam@qsl.net
>ICQ  2535945

Take a look at my article in QST magazine from October last year.  It
includes a very simple PIC programmer and a lot of resources for getting
started.

John, W2FS

</x-flowed>

1999\09\09@021344 by Mark Willis

flavicon
face
The http://www.isc-durant.com/nolan/article.htm programmer's pretty
simple, 2 Cap's, 3 Resistors, a transistor and an LM317 Voltage
Regulator.  Perhaps easier to use is
http://www.picnpoke.com/projects/prog.html, not much more complex,
certainly pretty portable!

There's a lot to be said to using a more popular (like a Tait variant)
programmer - as if it doesn't work, you can ask the list for help, and
get it (If you use a programmer that only 1 other person in the world's
ever used, you're totally dependent on them.)  Look around on
http://www.dontronics.com, http://www.new-elect.com/,
http://www.dontronics.com, they all have good links sections to give you
lots of ideas & pointers to designs.

Other PICs than the C84/F84 have this situation: the 16C84/16F84 (&
F84a) self-clock during programming (They're "Flash" parts) - the EProm
parts require fairly close timing constraints, which can be done under
Dos but not under Win9x - so, basically, you need a programmed PIC to
program another PIC, for all but the F84 (The newer Flash parts may be
different, but I get the impression they're not simple enough for a
first project <G>)  Alternately, you can find someone on the list to
"blow" a PIC chip for you, I'll usually do it "when I get to it" if
people pay postage to & from me & ask nice <G>

 Mark

Hal wrote:
>
> Does anyone have a simply designed programer to program the pic chips.
> I Would like to build my own programmer, Just getting started in the pic
> chips I can handle building simple projects so the simpler the design
> the better.  I would appreciate the help.
> Thanks
> Hal
> KF4ZXRspamKILLspamqsl.net
> ICQ  2535945

1999\09\09@082612 by Myke Predko

flavicon
face
Hi Hal,

You might want to take a look at my "El Cheapo" programmer which can be
found at:

http://www.rentron.com/Myke4.htm

If you are willing to wait a couple of days, we'll get Version 3.10 up there
which will support EPROM parts.

I'm aware of 40+ people who have successfully built it (so it's not a
one-guy wonder).  In terms of costs, I built my latest prototype for $3.90
(Canadian) which includes everything except the extension parallel cable and
"Wall Wart".  In the package, I've also included the "El Debug" test
application for use with testing how the programmer works.


Mark brought up a number of good points about programmers that I just want
to comment on:

1.  What I found was the most critical parameter for EPROM programming was a
relatively high current Vpp capability.  I found that the current drawn
through Vpp increases to almost 50 mA during the programming operation.
This is why, in the latest El Cheapo design, I use a PMOS FET to switch Vpp
directly from the voltage regulator (and provide a 0.1 uF cap on the line as
well to help smooth out the current spikes).

2.  EPROM programming is much more sensitive to the Vpp value than with the
EEPROM parts.  Make sure you have 13.25+ volts.  For the latest El Cheapo, I
use two Silicon Diodes to shift the regulated voltage from 12 Volts to 13.4
Volts.  For EEPROM parts, I've found that anything over 9 Volts will work
fine.

3.  I have not found timing to be very critical for EPROM parts.  Once Vpp
is worked out, I found the application software to be very robust.

4.  Having a programmer that is PC timing insensitive is very important.  To
do this in the "El Cheapo", I added an RC Delay circuit.  I have seen
differences in Parallel Port (and other register I/O) of accesses from 100
nsec (for fast laptops) to 760 nsec (for ISA Port Adapters).  This doesn't
include the differences in processors, memory and busses (which can be a lot
more than what the processor clock speeds indicate they will be).  Over the
years, I've seen a bunch of programmers that had problems with the latest
and greatest from Intel (one big exception to this rule is Tony Nixon's
programmer which just keeps getting faster and faster...).  A big question
to ask is how many *different* PCs the programmer works on.  I've found that
if it works on modern laptops as well as desktops, you won't have any
problems.

5.  I'm just about to create a VB interface for the El Cheapo, so I'll find
out how timing sensitive Windows applications are.  From what I've generally
seen, this should not be a problem.

6.  The last point, that has always been important to me (but I've never
seen anybody else comment on it) is to program the the configuration fuses
from the object file (setting them using the "__CONFIG" directive) instead
of having the user set them manually.  When I first started with the
PICMicro, one of the biggest mistakes I always made with the part was
setting the configuration fuses incorrectly (or forgetting to change them
from their default values).  In the two programmers that I have designed, I
ONLY program the configuration fuses from the hex file.  This avoids having
to come up with an interface for users to select the fuses and avoids
complaints by new users that the programmer only works "some of the time".

I'm interested in what people have to say about these points,

myke

{Original Message removed}

1999\09\09@111519 by Edson Brusque

face
flavicon
face
Hello,

   I've asked some time ago and have no answer yet so, while on the
programmers subject, here I am, asking again... :-)

   Someone knows if David Taits programmers (or any other cheap programmer)
can be acessed by MPLAB?

   Best regards,

   Brusque

1999\09\09@114213 by eplus1

flavicon
face
<BLOCKQUOTE AUTHOR="Hal">
Does anyone have a simply designed programer to program the pic chips.
I Would like to build my own programmer, Just getting started in the pic
chips I can handle building simple projects so the simpler the design
the better.  I would appreciate the help.
Thanks
Hal
.....KF4ZXRKILLspamspam.....qsl.net
</BLOCKQUOTE>

BTY your reply address is set to EraseMEhalspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTatlantic.net and that address bounces.

PIC Programmers
David Tait's PIC Archive. See     also: http://www.picwiser.com/ modified
for 16F877

http://rasi.lr.ttu.ee/~sis/mirror/robin/picpro.html     (dead?)

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/people/cpaame/pic/pic.htm

http://www.ebar.dtu.dk/~c888600/files/newpics.htm     a "simple" serial-port
programmer

http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/2174/prog.html     16x8? series, simple,
docs in Spanish

http://www.gbar.dtu.dk/~c888600/newpics.htm

Telesystems http://www.ts.aha.ru/english/index.htm

Erics PIC page http://www.brouhaha.com/~eric/pic/

http://robotics.com/pic.html

Jim Roberts - Newfound Electronics
http://www.pipeline.com.au/users/newfound/

http://www.picnpoke.com/engine.html The engine. temp at: http://210.8.30.173

http://www.rentron.com/Myke4.htm

http://www.propic2.com

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/9620/

http://www.new-elect.com/ PICSTART PLUS - MPLAB compatible programmer. Also,
conversion kits for most other programmers to allow them to be used directly
with MPLAB

http://www.needhams.com/

http://www.ise.pw.edu.pl/~wzab/picprog/picprog.html

http://www.bobblick.com/bob/projects/f84pgm/index.html

James Newton, webmaster http://get.to/techref
(hint: you can add your own private info to the techref)
jamesnewtonspamspam_OUTgeocities.com
1-619-652-0593 phoneÊ

1999\09\09@115645 by eplus1

flavicon
face
<BLOCKQUOTE AUTHOR="Edson Brusque">
Someone knows if David Taits programmers (or any other cheap programmer)
can be accessed by MPLAB?
</BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.new-elect.com/ PICSTART PLUS - MPLAB compatible programmer. Also,
conversion kits for most other programmers to allow them to be used directly
with MPLAB

James Newton, webmaster http://get.to/techref
(hint: you can add your own private info to the techref)
@spam@jamesnewtonKILLspamspamgeocities.com
1-619-652-0593 phoneÊ

1999\09\11@021050 by Max

flavicon
face
Hi to the list! I'm a new italian subscriber and a 16F84 fan.
To Hal:
Point your browser at http://www.tanzilli.com/progetti. Here you can
find
the YAPP (Yet Another PIC Programmer), a programmer that relies on a PIC

16F84 (so you must have someone that can program this PIC) and uses the
serial port (instead of the parallel port). If you like this programmer
you
can download the Yapp95, a complete W95/98 software to program the PIC.
Soon          Max

P.S. Sorry for my english....

Hal wrote:
>Does anyone have a simply designed programer to program the pic chips.
>I Would like to build my own programmer, Just getting started in the
pic
>chips I can handle building simple projects so the simpler the design
>the better.  I would appreciate the help.
>Thanks
>Hal
>KILLspamKF4ZXRKILLspamspamqsl.net
>ICQ  2535945

--
--------------------
 Massimo Battisti
 RemoveMEbattistiTakeThisOuTspamisa.it
--------------------

1999\09\11@063058 by w. v. ooijen / f. hanneman

picon face
Since you asked...

> 2.  EPROM programming is much more sensitive to the Vpp value than with
the
> EEPROM parts.  Make sure you have 13.25+ volts.  For the latest El
Cheapo, I
> use two Silicon Diodes to shift the regulated voltage from 12 Volts to
13.4
> Volts.  For EEPROM parts, I've found that anything over 9 Volts will work
> fine.

Not my experience with the 16x84's. Maybe Vpp can sink somewhat after it
has
been avove ~13V, but in my experience)  ~9V is not enough.

> In the two programmers that I have designed, I
> ONLY program the configuration fuses from the hex file.  This avoids
having
> to come up with an interface for users to select the fuses and avoids
> complaints by new users that the programmer only works "some of the
time".

Totally right. A programmer should just burn what is in the hex file,
determining
fuse settings is a task of the assembler or compiler. No user interface
(except
a command line or a go button) wanted or needed.

Wouter.

1999\09\11@113152 by Mark Willis

flavicon
face
Here's MY heretical beliefs <G>

w. v. ooijen / f. hanneman wrote:
>
> Since you asked...
> <snipped>
> > In the two programmers that I have designed, I
> > ONLY program the configuration fuses from the hex file.  This avoids
> having
> > to come up with an interface for users to select the fuses and avoids
> > complaints by new users that the programmer only works "some of the
> time".
>
> Totally right. A programmer should just burn what is in the hex file,
> determining
> fuse settings is a task of the assembler or compiler. No user interface
> (except
> a command line or a go button) wanted or needed.
>
> Wouter.

I have had a number of times where, given ONLY the hex file, I've needed
to burn 1 code protect OFF part to read or even send back to someone (to
make sure I did indeed have the right .hex file, etc.) - and then many
more parts that're set with Code Protect=all.  (or just plain ON,
depending on the part.)  Definitely could be an advanced users option
that you have to dig in a little to change intentionally, I'd definitely
LIKE to keep all abilities there, though - When you need something, no
use having the system harass you about it.  (Also I've been coding on
one machine & burning chips on another machine in another room, so
moving back and forth has been REALLY inconvenient - That could change
here in the new digs.)

I could definitely see a few things, of course:

*  It'd be nice if the PIC chips ID'ed themselves to the programmer, so
setting IC type was not necessary;  This one's water under the bridge.

*  For burning "many" OTP copies of a particular PIC chip, at least,
it'd sure be nice if the programmer had some nice RAM in there & it
could accept the entire image into that RAM, verify all the checksums to
make sure that your serial or parallel cable didn't have a loose
connection (or your PC or OS had hardware-related timing problem, or a
software problem like NT <G>), and then, once THAT was done, the
programmer could start to burn the part.  Yes, more complex, definitely
- and those who've MIS-burned code-protected OTP parts & had too many
come out bad unusable units for their liking, may have another, better
idea of how to handle this.  (Right now, when I move the programmer off
the machine I use to a different machine, I just burn 3-4 'F84 or /JW
chip programs to test the data link - I'm about to move to another
machine again, and Ram is fairly cheap.  I'd like it, maybe I'll make a
programmer someday.  "Mark's finnicky, expensive complex programmer" <G>

 Mark (Still moving so may've forgotten other ideas)

1999\09\11@175728 by paulb

flavicon
face
Mark Willis wrote:

> I have had a number of times where, given ONLY the hex file, I've
> needed to burn 1 code protect OFF part to read or even send back to
> someone (to make sure I did indeed have the right .hex file, etc.) -
> and then many more parts that're set with Code Protect=all.

 I think you're better editing the hex file.  The point is made that
with no standardization, it's a bit much to expect the chip programmer
to know which way is which.  You really end up having to tell it a
"magic" address *and* data pair to modify the hex file.

 Since the hex file already contains (or should) the "magic" address
and a *mostly* correct value, you're much safer to edit this with a text
editor in the situation you gave.  And in general, safer to re-compile
with the chip-specific option in the more "knowledgeable" compiler.

>  *  For burning "many" OTP copies of a particular PIC chip, at least,
> it'd sure be nice if the programmer had some nice RAM in there & it
> could accept the entire image into that RAM, verify all the checksums
> to make sure that your serial or parallel cable didn't have a loose
> connection (or your PC or OS had hardware-related timing problem, or a
> software problem like NT <G>), and then, once THAT was done, the
> programmer could start to burn the part.

 Isn't that what all the "high-end" programmers do?  The ones that you
program in the shop, take to the field and use hand-held to update your
firmware?

 Now, since moderately capable serial (IÓC) EEPROMs are available, this
should be dirt easy for a PIC-based (16F84 for instance) programmer.
--
 Cheers,
       Paul B.

1999\09\12@101233 by KF4ZXR

flavicon
face
Hi all,  I would like to thank those who responded to my request for a
simple programmer board. The help was greatly appreciated I'm sorry for
the dely in this response the refrigeration buisness calls for long
hours this time of year. However I have managed to buildtwo of the
boards one for serial an one parallal, I haven't been able to get the
serial to work, not sure if it's the board or what, would like to try
the parallal but haven't found software  to support it.

Again thanks for the help
Hal
spamBeGoneKF4ZXRspamBeGonespamqsl.net

1999\09\12@102302 by Peter van Hoof

flavicon
face
For software that supports most parallel port programmers try Nigel
Goodwin's Software http://www.lpilsley.demon.co.uk/programs.htm
It's free , programs all 16x8x parts, and is available in windows and dos
flavors

Peter van Hoof

> {Original Message removed}

1999\09\12@145437 by w. v. ooijen / f. hanneman

picon face
> I have had a number of times where, given ONLY the hex file, I've needed
> to burn 1 code protect OFF part to read or even send back to someone (to
> make sure I did indeed have the right .hex file, etc.) - and then many
> more parts that're set with Code Protect=all.  (or just plain ON,
> depending on the part.)

Seems to me that this could be easiliy handled by the compiler/assembler
(mine at least can do this from the command line), but I see the point.
OK rephrase: there should at least be a command-line or go-button driven
interface that asks no questions. But I am only a lowly hobbyist 16x84
user,
and I want to be able to compile/burn/run from a single command line.
Things
might be very different in a professional (non-hobby) production (large
number of OTP) evironment.

Wouter

1999\09\12@154217 by Mark Willis

flavicon
face
Paul B. Webster VK2BZC wrote:
>
> Mark Willis wrote:
>
> > I have had a number of times where, given ONLY the hex file, I've
> > needed to burn 1 code protect OFF part to read or even send back to
> > someone (to make sure I did indeed have the right .hex file, etc.) -
> > and then many more parts that're set with Code Protect=all.
>
>   I think you're better editing the hex file.  The point is made that
> with no standardization, it's a bit much to expect the chip programmer
> to know which way is which.  You really end up having to tell it a
> "magic" address *and* data pair to modify the hex file.

Do-able, though I'd actually have to open a {Gasp!} Manual or Datasheet
to do that - you really expect me to be able to do that?  <G>  I could
see having a "control panel" type applet in there that does the advanced
options, and have the usual interface be VERY much simplified;  Let's be
honest, though, by the time someone's taken the time to learn assembly
for the PIC series, they probably CAN cope with the current MPLab
interface (I deal with Needham's EMP-10, EMP-20, MLab, the gang
programmer, the Parallax interface, the Atmel interface, and about 8
other IDE's some months, it's not THAT bad - after the first time, you
usually have it fairly well figured out.)

>   Since the hex file already contains (or should) the "magic" address
> and a *mostly* correct value, you're much safer to edit this with a text
> editor in the situation you gave.  And in general, safer to re-compile
> with the chip-specific option in the more "knowledgeable" compiler.

Trust the user, though <G>

{Quote hidden}

I've thought of a "Laptop-based" mobile development system, for in the
field - battery powered, able to supply power to an attached DataRase ][
on a timed basis, maybe some day I'll get moved in & do it.  Don't hold
your breath, tho <G>  If Canon can put a printer in a laptop, I can put
this in one <G>

 Mark

1999\09\14@121140 by Tom Handley

picon face
  Wouter, I prefer the option to manually override configuration Bits.
For example; if I'm evaluating PWRT issues, rather than `muck' with my code
to bump revisions, dates, and the device spec, I can simply turn off the Bit
from the programmer. For you folks doing the PC-side software, I do
recommend popping-up a warning box to get confirmation of the Bit change.
I would also recommend another warning box whenever any of the code protect
Bits are set either from a file or the GUI.

  I'm currently doing some beta testing for the Carmacon update to the
Parallax programmer which provides manual control of the configuration Bits.
Carl uses a tabbed dialog control to get at the Bits.

  While I can understand the desire to make a programmer `bullet proof' for
novice users, I think it would be a mistake to remove the manual control
option.

  - Tom

At 08:05 PM 9/9/99 +0200, w. v. ooijen wrote:
[someone else wrote:]
{Quote hidden}

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Handley
New Age Communications
Since '75 before "New Age" and no one around here is waiting for UFOs ;-)

1999\09\15@083835 by Edson Brusque

face
flavicon
face
Hello,

>    While I can understand the desire to make a programmer `bullet proof'
for
> novice users, I think it would be a mistake to remove the manual control
> option.

   I think it could even be usefull an option of actually *saving* the
configuration bits on the .hex files (I sure would have used it in some .hex
files I've downloaded who cames with RC setting).

   Peace,

   Brusque

___________________________________________________________________________
| | || |\| | || || |\|\ Edson Brusque :-^= (TakeThisOuTbrusqueEraseMEspamspam_OUTflynet.com.br)
| | || ||| | || || |||| Musician, Tech Consultant, Programmer, Developer
| |_||_||| |_||_||_|||| Rodeio / SC / Brazil / Earth / Solar Syst / Milk...
| \_\\_\|| \_\\_\\_\||| Giro In'Italia homepage: http://flynet.com.br/giro
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  || C.I.Tronics Lighting Designers: citronics.com.br
|__|__|__|__|__|__|__||---------------- ICQ# 15937748 ---------------------
\__\__\__\__\__\__\__\|        The SoundFont Users Group Mailing List is at
----------------------|   www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Port/6619/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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