audio recording on IC -help wanted

[Brian Drummond]

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:18:22 +0100, "James Varga" <james@jamesvarga.com>
wrote:

Okay - I've got a simple project going on here and being a bit of a noob I
need some help

I've got three x 3mm blue LED's hanging off a QT110 (touch sensitive IC)
Each LED consumes (i think) about 20mA.

So the current consumption looks like ... 60mA. But...

I only have 5mm height to put this in so I'm stuck with a button cell
battery.

So help me out - how long would a battery of say 620mA last under constant
use?

What is the battery voltage?
If it is less than the 4V or so that blue LEDs consume, you will have to
provide some way of stepping up the voltage.
If the battery is about 1.5V, you'll need to roughly triple the voltage,
and that will roughly triple (or quadruple, allowing for losses in the
voltage converter) the current consumption to, say, 200-250mA.

Giving around 3 hours at best from the button cell.

- Brian

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that James Varga <james@jamesvarga.com>
wrote (in <10m7e2urvamt183@corp.supernews.com&gt about 'battery
powered?', on Wed, 6 Oct 2004:

Okay - I've got a simple project going on here and being a bit of a noob I
need some help

I've got three x 3mm blue LED's hanging off a QT110 (touch sensitive IC)

In parallel?

The QT110 consumes 20uA

Each LED consumes (i think) about 20mA.

I only have 5mm height to put this in so I'm stuck with a button cell
battery.

The only other thing there is is a 10uF cap.

So help me out - how long would a battery of say 620mA last under constant
use?

What is the duty cycle (time on/total time)?

The other thing I would think of asking is that is there an easy
way/schematic for charging a battery like this?


What sort of 'button cell'? Only a few types can be charged.

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[N. Thornton]

"James Varga" <james@jamesvarga.com> wrote in message news:<10m7e2urvamt183@corp.supernews.com>...

Okay - I've got a simple project going on here and being a bit of a noob I
need some help

I've got three x 3mm blue LED's hanging off a QT110 (touch sensitive IC)

The QT110 consumes 20uA

Each LED consumes (i think) about 20mA.

I only have 5mm height to put this in so I'm stuck with a button cell
battery.

Theres your problem! Try ultra low current LEDs, ie either low current
ones @2mA or else ultrabrights run at even lower. Also try flashing
them, or using LCD if possible instead.

With no knowledge of your app, cant make any more useful suggestions.


NT

 

[Clarence]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:e5cdm0hutbeo0i7lfbmbndalnvn419c4qn@4ax.com...

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 01:17:13 +0100, "James Varga"
james@jamesvarga.com> wrote:

Okay - I had a look around and couldn't find any 2mA LED's - only the
typical 20mA and 30mA - any suggestions?

---
HLMP4700. About 35 cents at Digi-Key

Thanks John but all I see there are red, yell, and green ones - I need a
blue one - or do they exist?

---
Dunno...

You might want to Google around for "high efficiency blue LED" without
the quotes, or take Spehro's advice and get a superbright 20mA one and
run it at 2mA.
--
John Fields

http://www.mpja.com/productview.asp?product=12568+OP

$1.25 Each. 3900mcp, 4 volts, 20ma, 5mm dia.

I am ONLY a customer not a representative of this site.

 

[Ken Moffett]

Graham W wrote:

James Varga wrote:
Okay - I've got a simple project going on here and being a bit of a
noob I need some help

I've got three x 3mm blue LED's hanging off a QT110 (touch sensitive
IC)

The QT110 consumes 20uA

Each LED consumes (i think) about 20mA.

I only have 5mm height to put this in so I'm stuck with a button cell
battery.

The only other thing there is is a 10uF cap.

So help me out - how long would a battery of say 620mA last under
constant use?

The other thing I would think of asking is that is there an easy
way/schematic for charging a battery like this?

I've been reading this thread and I decided to Google for QT110.
It came up with this:

http://www.qprox.com/products/qtouch.php

from which it appears, on cursory examination, that the capacitor
is a 10 nF ceramic. The data there comments that:"Most QT110
family devices are designed for human touch; some, like the QT110
and QT118H even include piezo beeper drive logic"

I haven't found a spec for the /OUT pin but the chip is spec'ed for
+3 to +5vdc supply.

The blue LED I have here will light quite nicely as an indicator
when drawing 0.5mAmps. But whether the /OUT pin can drive
three of them I don't know.

The OP should be aware that LEDs are not like filament bulbs
and that their operating current is part of the design of the
application.

HTH
--
Graham W http://www.gcw.org.uk/ PGM-FI page updated, Graphics Tutorial
WIMBORNE http://www.wessex-astro-society.freeserve.co.uk/ Wessex
Dorset UK Astro Society's Web pages, Info, Meeting Dates, Sites & Maps
Change 'news' to 'sewn' in my Reply address to avoid my spam filter.

See: http://www.qprox.com/downloads/datasheets/qt110_103.pdf
Bottom of page 5, right column.
QT110 and QT110H sinks 5mA and sources 1mA

See: http://www.qprox.com/downloads/datasheets/qt118h_104.pdf
Middle of page 6, right column
QT110H sinks 1mA and sources 1mA

Love these little chips!

 

[R.Lewis]

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> wrote
in message news:10mfclcsncg0i46@corp.supernews.com...

Weird. I dunno what to think.
http://www.luxeonics.com/

Interesting to note that on their home page they claim to be a "Manufacturer
of luxeon LED's" and that "Luxeon ..led lighting..lasts for 100,000hrs or
22 years" and "saves 95% of power compare to incandescent bulb" .

Presumably the Philips/Hewlett Packard 'Lumileds' venture is just a front
and the devices Lumileds offers are all bought-in products.
Maybe, however, since in the luxeonics world there are only 100,000 hrs in
22 years (or 4545 hrs in a year), in the other 4215hrs a year available in
the rest of the world, the luxeons are secretly copied by Lumileds - unknown
to luxeonics since this is outside luxeonics time continuum.

Impressively luxeonics leds 'save 95% of power compare to incandescents'.
Assuming a typical TH incandescent at 20 lumen per watt, a 95% power saving
gives efficacies of 400 lumen per watt for their luxeon leds.

Eat your heart out HID manufacturers - no longer can you gloat at your world
beating 200lm/W figures.

Lumileds claim a mere 30lm/watt for their 'copy' luxeons I believe.

I just wonder why, being the world manufacturer of luxeon leds, they show
pictures of (mainly) compact fluorescent tubes on their home page.

Yes - 'tis odd.

 

[R.Lewis]

"Ross Herbert" <rherber1SPAMEX@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:b9ojm05f4rktcmi51pv9r4cf9ukq149lak@4ax.com...

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 11:33:27 +0100, "R.Lewis" <h.lewis-not this
bit-@connect-2.co.uk> wrote:

|
|"Rich Grise" <null@example.net> wrote in message
|news:Yp_9d.2785$ua2.366@trnddc09...
|> On Saturday 09 October 2004 10:07 am, R.Lewis did deign to grace us
with
|the
|> following:
|> ...
|> > Best guess is that re-wiring the plug merely made good a poor
contact.
|> > Household mains powered equipment does not have a 'polarity'.
|
|> Oh, it most certainly does! It's just not "plus" and "minus," it's
"hot"
|> and "neutral." Reversing them is a safety issue.
|
|
|Reversing them is *not* a safety issue.
|American, canadian, australian, japanese & european standards (plus
|presumably many more) all require this to be so and have done for
decades.
|


As far as Australia is concerned, I do not agree entirely hwith your
statement...

http://www.accesscomms.com.au/powerplug.htm

If reversal of L and N were not a safety issue then one would expect
that plugs made for the Argentine market would be allowed to be sold
in Australia since they are identical except for the reversed L and N
terminal allocation. As such, Argentine plugs are not allowed in
Australia.

Why would you expect a plug that does not meet the aussie standard(s) to be
allowed to be used?

I have often wished that Australia had adopted the much better
designed plug and socket system used in the UK which is inherently
much safer and leaves less chance for wiring mistakes.

 

[Steve Landau]

All -
Luxeonics is not associated with Lumileds Lighting, nor are they the
manufacturer of Luxeon LEDs. Lumileds is the sole manufacturer of
Luxeon LEDs (Luxeon I, Luxeon III and Luxeon V). Luxeon LEDs are
available through Future Electronics.

Steve Landau
Lumileds Lighting
www.lumileds.com

"Watson A.Name - \"Watt Sun, the Dark Remover\"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> wrote in message news:<10mfclcsncg0i46@corp.supernews.com>...

Weird. I dunno what to think.
http://www.luxeonics.com/


--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@

 

[Ross Herbert]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:36:21 +0100, "R.Lewis" <h.lewis-not this
bit-@connect-2.co.uk> wrote:

|
|"Ross Herbert" <rherber1SPAMEX@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
|news:b9ojm05f4rktcmi51pv9r4cf9ukq149lak@4ax.com...
|> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 11:33:27 +0100, "R.Lewis" <h.lewis-not this
|> bit-@connect-2.co.uk> wrote:
|>
|> |
|> |"Rich Grise" <null@example.net> wrote in message
|> |news:Yp_9d.2785$ua2.366@trnddc09...
|> |> On Saturday 09 October 2004 10:07 am, R.Lewis did deign to grace us
|with
|> |the
|> |> following:
|> |> ...
|> |> > Best guess is that re-wiring the plug merely made good a poor
|contact.
|> |> > Household mains powered equipment does not have a 'polarity'.
|> |>
|> |> Oh, it most certainly does! It's just not "plus" and "minus," it's
|"hot"
|> |> and "neutral." Reversing them is a safety issue.
|> |>
|> |
|> |Reversing them is *not* a safety issue.
|> |American, canadian, australian, japanese & european standards (plus
|> |presumably many more) all require this to be so and have done for
|decades.
|> |
|>
|>
|> As far as Australia is concerned, I do not agree entirely hwith your
|> statement...
|>
|> http://www.accesscomms.com.au/powerplug.htm
|>
|> If reversal of L and N were not a safety issue then one would expect
|> that plugs made for the Argentine market would be allowed to be sold
|> in Australia since they are identical except for the reversed L and N
|> terminal allocation. As such, Argentine plugs are not allowed in
|> Australia.
|>
|
|Why would you expect a plug that does not meet the aussie standard(s) to be
|allowed to be used?
|

I wouldn't.. You said that reversal of L and N wasn't a safety issue
on Australian plugs.

The fact is that the Argentine plug is identical in all physical
characteristics to the Australian plug and for all practical purposes
would work (and be electrically safe) in Australia if the terminal
marking were ignored and the Active wire was terminated on the top
right (looking at the pins). The point is that if the polarity of the
L and N wires was unimportant from a safety viewpoint then it would be
quite safe for the Argentine plug to be used in Australia when wired
as per the Argentine standard. The fact is that it isn't considered
safe to use it in Australia when wired as per the markings therefore
polarity from a safety point is important.

 

"Watson A.Name - \"Watt Sun, the Dark Remover\""
<NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> wrote:

Our cart sat for a few weeks w/o being used. We tried to use it, but it
was completely dead. The transpo guy got it towed over to his shop, and
got a field tech to check it out. Turned out that the battery voltage
dropped so low that the 'intelligent' charging system thought that the
batteries were disconnected and refused to turn on.

Actually, IIRC it's that the battery voltage drops so low it can't
pull the relay in. Same difference though, it either needs an
external charge or a jumper to bypass the relay until the charge
level improves.

The reason why the damn thing was seldom used was that one couldn't put
a computer or monitor in the tiny space in the back where the golf clubs
were supposed to go. It had to go on the passenger seat, and even
strapping it in with the seat belt wouldn't secure it adequately.

Plenty of other options in the Utility vehicle marketplace, for
instance:
http://clubcar.com/products_landing.aspx?market=Commercial&category=Utility+Vehicles

 

[Clarence]

<William P.N. Smith> wrote in message
news:srtnn0dnn36n37qj0t6qfgat2km7be30gb@4ax.com...

"Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:
Let the Chargers be built into the Cart instead of lining up at one
station.

Oh, heavens, No! Besides the weight penalty, there's the inability to
share chargers between carts if one fails, and the mechanical
unreliability of the cord reel. Club Car has it as an option, but
IMHO it's a really bad idea (though I suppose in some applications
it's useful).

We designed one to plug into a socket under the seat, and lock in place. If
you had the key, it could easily be moved to another Cart. These were
requested for use at Airports and factory locations where you could recharge at
almost any parking spot near a wall with a 30 Amp AC outlet. Peak Charge was
only 100 Amps at 24Volts. But it only cost a abt a 4 pound carry penalty.

Not our design, we also integrated a small gas powered charger to mount on the
rear to allow some charging away from AC sources. Little genny, Only 30 Amps @
24Volts. Since we didn't install these, I have no idea how many were used.

We looked at the Braking option, but our customer rejected it due to the small
size of the savings. Do not remember the numbers, we didn't go any further
with it.

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

<William P.N. Smith> wrote in message
news:d1unn05e53iheh7b0dpo8hbbaispekg1um@4ax.com...

"Watson A.Name - \"Watt Sun, the Dark Remover\""
NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> wrote:

Our cart sat for a few weeks w/o being used. We tried to use it, but
it
was completely dead. The transpo guy got it towed over to his shop,
and
got a field tech to check it out. Turned out that the battery
voltage
dropped so low that the 'intelligent' charging system thought that
the
batteries were disconnected and refused to turn on.

Actually, IIRC it's that the battery voltage drops so low it can't
pull the relay in. Same difference though, it either needs an
external charge or a jumper to bypass the relay until the charge
level improves.

The reason why the damn thing was seldom used was that one couldn't
put
a computer or monitor in the tiny space in the back where the golf
clubs
were supposed to go. It had to go on the passenger seat, and even
strapping it in with the seat belt wouldn't secure it adequately.

Plenty of other options in the Utility vehicle marketplace, for
instance:

http://clubcar.com/products_landing.aspx?market=Commercial&category=Util

ity+Vehicles


We didn't have that option. We got seven of them in a grant, without
any choice. And that's why after a year, they got taken back.

 

[Joerg]

Hi Gary,

1. Is there any way to do a quick check on a microprocessor to
determine if it's "alive"? I realize manufacturers use million-dollar
testers for functional testing, but is there a way to "generically" do
a quick check on the bench using standard test equipment?


Tough. The only crude way I have used in the past is a coil placed on

top of it in a precisely repeatable position and looking at the
spectrum. But that is crude and only comparative. I just needed it to
see if something was running on it and to figure out if any of the
spectrum would be synchronous to noise I was chasing.

2. Ditto for speed? How can one determine if a microprocessor will run
at its marked speed on a bench?


Only via a full electrical test, since all its functions must keep up at

the rated speed.

3. If there is a "generic" feature set that is common to most
microprocessors, and what might that be?


For me it is the noise spectrum emitted from the enclosure and the lines

but that is different for every processor and circuit board. Kind of
like submarine guys who are able to determine what kind of vessel is
cruising above just from hearing its noise.

4. How can one check for this - as far as hardware and software
requirements?

I guess I am looking for a "generic" test setup that can do something
like a bare-bones electrical QC on different microprocessor families.


It'll be different for every processor and you would have to obtain the

QC procedure from the manufacturer, if they are willing to share it for
incoming QC purposes.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Rich Grise]

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:58:38 -0500, gary s wrote:

I have a question that I hope someone on here can answer, or give me
an insight:

1. Is there any way to do a quick check on a microprocessor to
determine if it's "alive"? I realize manufacturers use million-dollar
testers for functional testing, but is there a way to "generically" do
a quick check on the bench using standard test equipment?

Use a scope. The clock should be clocking, and the address, data, and
control lines will all be going up and down, assuming it's executing
something.

Issue a reset, and you should see some kind of change in the waveforms.

2. Ditto for speed? How can one determine if a microprocessor will run
at its marked speed on a bench?

Build up the circuit, and test it. I think it's extremely unlikely that
you'll get one that doesn't meet its own spec.

If you're at the chip factory, and they're chips coming off the line,
then shame on you! ;-)

3. If there is a "generic" feature set that is common to most
microprocessors, and what might that be?

More or less - they have all the features of a processor. Clock,
address, data, ALU, some control logic. Other than that, it's a
free-for-all. ;-)

4. How can one check for this - as far as hardware and software
requirements?

In-circuit test is the only way to really verify the whole thing,
and this shouldn't be in the end item, but a dedicated bench
fixture with some diagnostic firmware and misc. peripherals and
stuff, which will depend on your needs there.

I guess I am looking for a "generic" test setup that can do something
like a bare-bones electrical QC on different microprocessor families.

I'm afraid each family will need its own tester, or at least personality

modules.

I don't even know if any manufacturers sell different versions that are
plug-compatible, except maybe versions of the HC11 or so. But from
one manufacturer to another, they're different enough that this would
be a wild goose chase.

Thanks for your help.

Sorry I couldn't be more helpful.

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Robert Redelmeier]

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips gary s <gary_s@remexcite.com> wrote:

1. Is there any way to do a quick check on a microprocessor
to determine if it's "alive"? I realize manufacturers use
million-dollar testers for functional testing, but is there
a way to "generically" do a quick check on the bench using
standard test equipment?

Of course. Plug it into a known-good mobo, fix a heatsink
& boot.

2. Ditto for speed? How can one determine if a microprocessor
will run at its marked speed on a bench?

Leave booted for a while and watch for lockups.
You could try running one of my cpuburn utils

3. If there is a "generic" feature set that is common to
most microprocessors, and what might that be?

Yes, the x86 instructions set is common to all x86
processors. At least the original IBM PC BIOS tested
some basic functionality.

4. How can one check for this - as far as hardware and
software requirements?

There are pgms that will check operations.

I guess I am looking for a "generic" test setup that can
do something like a bare-bones electrical QC on different
microprocessor families.

JTAG might work if you've got the money.

-- Robert

 

[gary s]

Thanks for all the prompt replies I've seen so far.

I work for a reseller, and my company acts as the broker for large
batches of different types of microprocessors bought on the "gray"
market to meet production shortages. There is no longer any
manufacturer's warranty, therefore there is a desire to screen out
parts that are dead, slow, or counterfeit. It appears there are folks
out there who are making a living remarking slow parts, or assembling
parts that have been scrapped off the manufacturer's production
line...

I've been told that after a microprocessor leaves the manufacturer,
there is really no way to test it except on a motherboard/application
board (or some kind of evaluation board). My customers are doing this
after their assembly process. But it would be nice to have some kind
of meaningful acceptance testing at my end before they get the part.

I've received suggestions that (1) maybe there is a way to see if the
thing wiggles (the assumption is if you can wiggle it (maybe getting
it in and out of reset?), it's probably good - or there is a live chip
inside anyway), and (2) maybe there is a way to do something like
adding 2 and 2 (or loop on something) to see if the thing can perform
at the advertised speed.

Evidently I would need the services of an EE to attempt something like
this. And if this "generic microprocessor checker" can be built, I
suspect it's going to be a challenge mechanically, owing to all the
different pin-outs and package types. I just wanted to know from the
experts on here if this is something that is worth pursuing, or
proposing to my management.

Thanks again -

Gary

 

[Tom Seim]

gary s <gary_s@REMexcite.com> wrote in message news:<qfetn0tohn45q767g4okh70obnol7g9a1f@4ax.com>...

I have a question that I hope someone on here can answer, or give me
an insight:

1. Is there any way to do a quick check on a microprocessor to
determine if it's "alive"? I realize manufacturers use million-dollar
testers for functional testing, but is there a way to "generically" do
a quick check on the bench using standard test equipment?

2. Ditto for speed? How can one determine if a microprocessor will run
at its marked speed on a bench?

3. If there is a "generic" feature set that is common to most
microprocessors, and what might that be?

4. How can one check for this - as far as hardware and software
requirements?

I guess I am looking for a "generic" test setup that can do something
like a bare-bones electrical QC on different microprocessor families.

Thanks for your help.

Gary

Do you have a known "good" board?

If so, you can probe around with an oscope and you will get some
repeatible waveforms. Now go to your "bad" board and do an A-B
comparison. With some trial and error you will find some waveforms
(pins) that will give you a "state-of-health". And this without
knowing anything about the processor or application.

 

[Bill Bowden]

gary s <gary_s@REMexcite.com> wrote in message news:<qfetn0tohn45q767g4okh70obnol7g9a1f@4ax.com>...

I have a question that I hope someone on here can answer, or give me
an insight:

1. Is there any way to do a quick check on a microprocessor to
determine if it's "alive"? I realize manufacturers use million-dollar
testers for functional testing, but is there a way to "generically" do
a quick check on the bench using standard test equipment?

Just use a scope and look for square waves on various pins of the
micro. That will tell you something is happening, maybe correct,
maybe not. If you don't have a scope, use a DMM to measure the
DC voltage on various pins. The DC voltage will vary from 0 to 5 volts
or 0 to the power supply voltage indicating something is happening on
that particular pin. But it's hard to tell exactly what is going on
without knowing the program. And then it would be difficult to
interpret the digital signals from the program. If you have a good
micro, you can compare the waveforms of the test micros to the known
good micro and usually identify the problems.

2. Ditto for speed? How can one determine if a microprocessor will run
at its marked speed on a bench?

You probably need to use a external clock to drive the micro
at the rated speed or greater.

3. If there is a "generic" feature set that is common to most
microprocessors, and what might that be?

A generic feature would be the number of I/O lines and internal
program RAM and ROM available.

4. How can one check for this - as far as hardware and software
requirements?

Is this a homework problem?

I guess I am looking for a "generic" test setup that can do something
like a bare-bones electrical QC on different microprocessor families.

You need different tests for different processors. The pin assignments
will be different, so you have to look at different pins for different
activity of different processors.

-Bill

 

[Gareth Magennis]

It is not beyond feasible to build a test jig for each microprocessor
family.

For example, I've been messing about learning the 8051 processor family. I
have an EPROM / Flash programmer I bought new from ebay for about $45 which
will program almost everything. My "Test Jig" consists of a prototyping
breadboard into which I've plugged a simple power supply, the processor
(with onboard flash memory), one crystal and 2 capacitors (for the clock)
and a reset switch. You can write a trivial looping program to output a
square wave, program the processor using your PC, use the maximum crystal
frequency, and see if you get a square wave. For processors without onboard
program space you can add an EPROM to the breadboard and blow that instead.
This jig should work for all processors in the 8051 family of the same
package (number of pins). This will indicate the processor can run a basic
function at maximum rated speed. There could be other faults of course
(falty onboard RAM) but it sounds like this simple test is what you need.

If all this sounds too daunting, get a Microprocessor Programming book and
spend a few evenings reading it, and you may find it's well within your own
capability. This isn't rocket science despite appearances.


Gareth.









"gary s" <gary_s@REMexcite.com> wrote in message
news:qfetn0tohn45q767g4okh70obnol7g9a1f@4ax.com...

I have a question that I hope someone on here can answer, or give me
an insight:

1. Is there any way to do a quick check on a microprocessor to
determine if it's "alive"? I realize manufacturers use million-dollar
testers for functional testing, but is there a way to "generically" do
a quick check on the bench using standard test equipment?

2. Ditto for speed? How can one determine if a microprocessor will run
at its marked speed on a bench?

3. If there is a "generic" feature set that is common to most
microprocessors, and what might that be?

4. How can one check for this - as far as hardware and software
requirements?

I guess I am looking for a "generic" test setup that can do something
like a bare-bones electrical QC on different microprocessor families.

Thanks for your help.

Gary

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Gareth Magennis" <sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:clnris$c7d$1@titan.btinternet.com...

It is not beyond feasible to build a test jig for each microprocessor
family.

For example, I've been messing about learning the 8051 processor
family. I
have an EPROM / Flash programmer I bought new from ebay for about $45
which
will program almost everything. My "Test Jig" consists of a
prototyping
breadboard into which I've plugged a simple power supply, the
processor
(with onboard flash memory), one crystal and 2 capacitors (for the
clock)
and a reset switch. You can write a trivial looping program to output
a
square wave, program the processor using your PC, use the maximum
crystal
frequency, and see if you get a square wave. For processors without
onboard
program space you can add an EPROM to the breadboard and blow that
instead.
This jig should work for all processors in the 8051 family of the same
package (number of pins). This will indicate the processor can run a
basic
function at maximum rated speed. There could be other faults of
course
(falty onboard RAM) but it sounds like this simple test is what you
need.

If all this sounds too daunting, get a Microprocessor Programming book
and
spend a few evenings reading it, and you may find it's well within
your own
capability. This isn't rocket science despite appearances.

Gareth.

You're right about a microcontroller like the 8051. But the common
microprocessor has more than ten times the number of pins, and it's a
lot more than rocket science to get it running without any support
system.

"gary s" <gary_s@REMexcite.com> wrote in message
news:qfetn0tohn45q767g4okh70obnol7g9a1f@4ax.com...
I have a question that I hope someone on here can answer, or give me
an insight:

1. Is there any way to do a quick check on a microprocessor to
determine if it's "alive"? I realize manufacturers use
million-dollar
testers for functional testing, but is there a way to "generically"
do
a quick check on the bench using standard test equipment?

2. Ditto for speed? How can one determine if a microprocessor will
run
at its marked speed on a bench?

3. If there is a "generic" feature set that is common to most
microprocessors, and what might that be?

4. How can one check for this - as far as hardware and software
requirements?

I guess I am looking for a "generic" test setup that can do
something
like a bare-bones electrical QC on different microprocessor
families.

Thanks for your help.

Gary