Chip with simple program for Toy

[Joerg]

Robert Baer wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Robert Baer wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Talal Itani wrote:

Can ExpressPCB receive files from other PCB software?


I've had good experiences with Advanced Circuits (http://www.
4pcb.com/). Make sure to use their free FDM service
(http://www.freedfm.com/), even if you don't end up going with
them for
manufacturing.

ExpressPCB is only good for quick-and-dirty stuff. Their advantage is
that they're cheap and their design software is pretty simple to use,
but the big disadvantage is that it locks you in to their software.
Also I've never done 4-layer stuff with them; I believe they're also
kind of limited in that department. They're great for quick-and-dirty
stuff though.

Regards,
-- Hauke D

On Jun 21, 4:19 pm, "Talal Itani" <tit...@verizon.net> wrote:



Hello,
I need to have a 4-layer board made, a prototype, 2 boards,
nothing fancy.
I did some research in this newsgroup and I narrowed it down to
Sierra Pro
Express, ExpressPCB, and AC Advanced Circuits. ?Do you think I
made the
right choice? ?Do you have any recommendations? ?I would like to
receive the
board 3-5 days.
T.I.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -



I've used ExpressPCB for small projects before, but always 2-layer
stuff.
I've never had a problem with them, or their boards.

As for being "locked-in" to their software, for an extra $60 (last
time I checked), they will send you the Gerber files. From there, you
can import to many of the other programs avail.


Then if you need to make a little change it'll be another $60?


Also, I recall hearing a while ago that a lot of these PCB prototype
houses are all built at the same place anyway. So, while you might
see 10 different company names (i.e., resellers), the boards
themselves all come from the same place. Sorry, I don't remember the
names of the companies involved, and don't know whether ExpressPCB is
one of them.


I have also used 4PCB, quite happy so far. They only messed up once
(unapproved Gerber edits) but made good on that with an additional
fast run, on the house. The nice thing is that I always have a real
contact person there. She really helped us when they defaulted to
this dreaded RoHS process which we absolutely did not want.

Not much differnce between tin/lead solder on pads and silver plate
*IF* one is not going above (say) 150C.
Tin/lead solder and tin/silver solders act esentially the same, so
what is the beef?



Non-RoHS parts on a RoHS PCB usually isn't a good idea.

Give at least one good reason...

http://www.maxim-ic.com/emmi/faq.cfm

Quote "However, reliability of leaded Maxim Integrated Products parts
are not guaranteed at higher reflow temperature (above 240°C). Some
reference sources show data that define a reduction in solder joint
reliability by as much as 33% less than Eutectic solder joints when lead
and lead-free metallurgies are mixed."

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joerg]

Terry Given wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:
Joerg wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:

Talal Itani wrote:

Hello,

I was looking at the schematics for a DSP-based board, running at
100 MHz. They have a tiny inductor with every bypass cap around the
DSP. Do you think this is necessary? This DSP has analog stuff
built-in. If we do not need analog, can the inductors be eliminated?

Thanks,
T.I.

Search for newsgroup postings with "Jeorg" and "ground" or
"grounding" in them.

You'll get a load of (AFAIK) good opinions.


Thanks for the kudos. It would have to be "Joerg" though. Sometimes I
wish I had an easier name.

'O' before 'E' unless I'm at sea?

Dunno why I can't keep it straight.


Inductors in series with the caps would tend to isolate the power
supply from noise in the DSP, but it would also create a bunch of
odd resonances. It's not how I'd want to isolate a power supply
from a chip.


It will become really interesting when the DSP exhibits a somewhat
burst-like load behavior. On the scope it'll look like Dolphins
frolicking in the ocean.

That's kinda what I thought. Plus I see no reason to do each power
line individually, and some good reasons not to (Different versions of
VDD at different points in the circuit, oh boy!).


they are also probably ferrite beads, rather than inductors per se. but
I have corrected a few designs where the "engineers" really did use
inductors. nasty little bobbin core things. yuk!

It never fails to impress clients when changes consist of lots of parts
being replaced with a snippet of wire.

I've seen quite a few app notes with FBs liberally sprinkled everywhere.
I presume this is because its easier than thinking. that being said, I
have a design thats soon to undergo EMC testing where I have exactly
followed the manufacturers recommendations for the FPGA & HY ships, but
I plan on muntzing most of the FBs during a day at the EMC lab. odds on
I can leave ALL of them off...

You had Muntz TV sets in NZ???

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Vladimir Vassilevsky]

Joel Koltner wrote:

"Vladimir Vassilevsky" <antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> wrote:

Despite of the popular beliefs, many
analog or digital designs can be built in two layers just fine. It takes
care, understanding and attention to details.

For many companies, coming up with that "care, understanding, and attention to
detail" requires both significant time and often money -- so I think MK's
point is valid, since those are not always available!

Classic question of the development cost vs production cost; it depends.

But I think that all of us would be interested to hear your advice on
designing high-speed/low-noise circuitry on two-layer PCBs; it's not the sort
of material that's commonly discussed.

There is no magic to it; just understanding which way the current flows
and distinguishing a ground and a signal return path.

Do you recommend any microcontrollers or DSPs with decent references on-board?

Analog Devices ADUCxxxx series.

We use a number of Atmel AVR microcontrollers and most often it's with an
external reference, as the internal one is pretty bad; about +/-10% (!).

The good thing about AVR is that it is possible to use the external
reference, and that the ADC input range is from 0 to Vcc. The ADC of TMS
28xx can't do that.

Being charitable, I want to believe that you just can't build a reference
that's much better using whatever process they have available to them, but
perhaps it is just a lack of better circuit designers (e.g., someone like Jim
could easily build them 1% references using the same process).

Perhaps there is a limitation of the high speed CMOS process which
doesn't allow making reasonable on-chip ADCs. May be Jim can explain us why.

---Joel

Vladimir Vassilevsky
DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
http://www.abvolt.com

 

[Terry Given]

Joerg wrote:

Terry Given wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:

Talal Itani wrote:

Hello,

I was looking at the schematics for a DSP-based board, running at
100 MHz. They have a tiny inductor with every bypass cap around
the DSP. Do you think this is necessary? This DSP has analog
stuff built-in. If we do not need analog, can the inductors be
eliminated?

Thanks,
T.I.

Search for newsgroup postings with "Jeorg" and "ground" or
"grounding" in them.

You'll get a load of (AFAIK) good opinions.


Thanks for the kudos. It would have to be "Joerg" though. Sometimes
I wish I had an easier name.

'O' before 'E' unless I'm at sea?

Dunno why I can't keep it straight.


Inductors in series with the caps would tend to isolate the power
supply from noise in the DSP, but it would also create a bunch of
odd resonances. It's not how I'd want to isolate a power supply
from a chip.


It will become really interesting when the DSP exhibits a somewhat
burst-like load behavior. On the scope it'll look like Dolphins
frolicking in the ocean.

That's kinda what I thought. Plus I see no reason to do each power
line individually, and some good reasons not to (Different versions
of VDD at different points in the circuit, oh boy!).


they are also probably ferrite beads, rather than inductors per se.
but I have corrected a few designs where the "engineers" really did
use inductors. nasty little bobbin core things. yuk!


It never fails to impress clients when changes consist of lots of parts
being replaced with a snippet of wire.


I've seen quite a few app notes with FBs liberally sprinkled
everywhere. I presume this is because its easier than thinking. that
being said, I have a design thats soon to undergo EMC testing where I
have exactly followed the manufacturers recommendations for the FPGA &
HY ships, but I plan on muntzing most of the FBs during a day at the
EMC lab. odds on I can leave ALL of them off...


You had Muntz TV sets in NZ???

nope, I just read widely. and this design absolutely had to work first
time, so I just corrected the obvious errors, and planned the muntzing
for a 2nd spin cost-down


oh yeah, I too know the evil twisted wire trick.

Cheers
Terry

 

[Tom2000]

fOn Sun, 22 Jun 2008 03:38:10 GMT, tom@nospam.com (Tom) wrote:

One model that I have used is this one:
http://www.dynoninstruments.com/products_elab080.php
It's a DSO, logic analyzer, and waveform generator all in one.
It's only 80 MS/s but for $500 you can't expect much more. I've actually found
myself using the digital waveform generators on this thing quite often.

That's good to know, Tom. I recently purchased one of those to
supplement my ol' reliable Tek 2235 for my hobbyist work, but haven't
had a chance to really shake it out yet.

From the little bit I've played with it, it looks pretty good,
although it will never totally replace my Tek. I now need to figure
how to best integrate it into the sort of work I do.

The logic analyzer adds new capability to my bench, which pleases me
immensely. I'm hoping that it will make my micro experiments easier
and my time more productive.

Tom

 

[Tom2000]

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:15:00 GMT, "Talal Itani" <titani@verizon.net>
wrote:

We are debugging some serial
protocols, so a buffer larger than 2.4 is really needed.

For that, your best tool is a protocol analyzer. If you want to use a
hardware-based protocol analyzer, consider renting one until your
project is up and running.

As an alternative, there are software protocol analyzers all over the
net. Google, and you'll find more than you need.

Good luck!

Tom

 

[JW]

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:45:21 -0700 Tom2000 <abuse@giganews.net> wrote in
Message id: <8hc2641a9otlpod1vvucplql46530i5s7a@4ax.com>:

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:15:00 GMT, "Talal Itani" <titani@verizon.net
wrote:

We are debugging some serial
protocols, so a buffer larger than 2.4 is really needed.

For that, your best tool is a protocol analyzer. If you want to use a
hardware-based protocol analyzer, consider renting one until your
project is up and running.

You can buy used ones pretty cheap, might even be cheaper than renting:
http://www.used-line.com/c6324552s108-HP_Agilent_4951C.htm

 

[Tom2000]

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:30:34 -0400, JW <none@dev.null> wrote:

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:45:21 -0700 Tom2000 <abuse@giganews.net> wrote in
Message id: <8hc2641a9otlpod1vvucplql46530i5s7a@4ax.com>:

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:15:00 GMT, "Talal Itani" <titani@verizon.net
wrote:

We are debugging some serial
protocols, so a buffer larger than 2.4 is really needed.

For that, your best tool is a protocol analyzer. If you want to use a
hardware-based protocol analyzer, consider renting one until your
project is up and running.

You can buy used ones pretty cheap, might even be cheaper than renting:
http://www.used-line.com/c6324552s108-HP_Agilent_4951C.htm

FWIW, if you're going the used route, my all-time favorite protocol
analyzer is just about anything from the HP4951 family. Very capable,
small and light as those things went back in the day, and simple to
use. Suitable for both field and engineering use.


Tom

 

[Alex.Louie]

On Jun 21, 9:15 am, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Talal Itani wrote:

I am sorry, I did not understand what you are telling me.

Please do not remove attributions. Those are the initial lines
that say "Whozit wrote". In addition avoid losing all quotations
from previous messages by top-posting. Your answer belongs after
(or intermixed with) the quoted material to which you reply, after
snipping all irrelevant material. See the following links:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconerat maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net
Try the download section.

** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

Yet another "content free" post. Ugh.

 

[CBFalconer]

"Alex.Louie" wrote:

CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Talal Itani wrote:

I am sorry, I did not understand what you are telling me.

Please do not remove attributions. Those are the initial lines
that say "Whozit wrote". In addition avoid losing all quotations
from previous messages by top-posting. Your answer belongs after
(or intermixed with) the quoted material to which you reply, after
snipping all irrelevant material. See the following links:

.... snip ...

Yet another "content free" post. Ugh.

Without which many newbies would never learn the basic rules for
Usenet use. Your addition did nothing to improve the newsgroup and
was totally useless.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

 

[C. Nick Kruzer]

Hi Kris, you wrote:

I'm a beginner, so sorry if this is a really basic
question, but, what is the advantage of
soldering them in, rather than using a battery
holder?

The cells I used were of a flatenned box-shape [90° corners], (about
1cm×2.5cm×6cm) I think they might be called prism cells but they are
not of a true geometric prism configuration. I don't know why they might
be called prism cells or prismatic, or, if indeed it is even accurate
nomenclature that I am using.

I soldered the cells together using the cell/battery manufacturer's very
short pre-existing solder tabs. I made a new holder out of flat and
angled pieces of plastic from the original surplus battery case, which
previously held the cells.

I used a multi-purpose thick plastic paint to hold the plastic pieces
together and to insulate electric connections as well as fasten the
metal cells to my newly constructed plastic battery case.

I purchased about a 14 oz. container of the paint for around ten dollars
at Home Depot. It comes in three colors: red, blue and black. I like the
product and prefer the black color. I have used it most often to
insulate wires where taping was impractical.

insula

 

[donald]

CBFalconer wrote:

"Alex.Louie" wrote:
CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Talal Itani wrote:

I am sorry, I did not understand what you are telling me.
Please do not remove attributions. Those are the initial lines
that say "Whozit wrote". In addition avoid losing all quotations
from previous messages by top-posting. Your answer belongs after
(or intermixed with) the quoted material to which you reply, after
snipping all irrelevant material. See the following links:

... snip ...
Yet another "content free" post. Ugh.

Without which many newbies would never learn the basic rules for
Usenet use. Your addition did nothing to improve the newsgroup and
was totally useless.

Yours (CBFalconer) added nothing to the topic at hand either.

Thank you Mother Falconer.

donald

 

[msg]

CBFalconer wrote:

"Alex.Louie" wrote:

CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Talal Itani wrote:


I am sorry, I did not understand what you are telling me.

Please do not remove attributions. Those are the initial lines
that say "Whozit wrote". In addition avoid losing all quotations
from previous messages by top-posting. Your answer belongs after
(or intermixed with) the quoted material to which you reply, after
snipping all irrelevant material. See the following links:


... snip ...

Yet another "content free" post. Ugh.


Without which many newbies would never learn the basic rules for
Usenet use. Your addition did nothing to improve the newsgroup and
was totally useless.

Educating newbies may be pointless; the following appeared in
comp.dcom.telecom regarding major ISPs yanking nntp services:

Verizon has pulled all but the "big8" hierarchies plus the vz newsgroups. A
lot of people are up in arms, as alt.* is gone. So, look before you leap.

Some folks are going to the free or pay 3rd party news servers. In my
opinion, whatever you call it; Usenet or newsgroups; it's dying if not dead.
Aside from this recent spate of porn related changes in service by the big
providers, news users are generally from an aging population that isn't be
replaced. The quality and quantity of discussions even with groups like
this has fallen dramatically in recent years. The kids all want HTML,
wireless doo-dads and easy answers; newsgroups just aren't "hip."

Michael

 

[C. Nick Kruzer]

Hi Kris, you wrote:

insula@webtv.net (C. Nick Kruzer) wrote in
news:1824-4862E7F4-273
@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net:

...I used a multi-purpose thick plastic paint to
hold the plastic pieces together and to insulate
electric connections as well as fasten the metal
cells to my newly constructed plastic battery
case.
I purchased about a 14 oz. container of the
paint for around ten dollars at Home Depot. It
comes in three colors: red, blue and black. I like
the product and prefer the black color. I have
used it most often to insulate wires where
taping was impractical.
insula

Kris:

I never heard of that paint - sounds like a useful
thing to have around, so that's a good tidbit to
know

Yeah, It's handy. Although it is multi-purpose it is marketed as a

"tool-dip". If you dip the bare metal handles of a pair of pliers, upon
drying it gives the tool a nice, insulated, hand-grip surface.

When the paint almost ran out at the bottom of the container it became
to thick to use. I think I thinned it with a combination of naphtha
(lighter fluid), acetone and toluol. Very, very flammable!
Be careful if you do this. Follow thinning instructions on label, I
might have not followed instructions and improvised using materials I
had on hand.

WARNING! Acetone is a polar liquid and can develop a static charge when
pouring from one metal container into another metal container. A small
static discharge can easily ignite acetone which burns like gasoline
when ignited. To safely transfer acetone, securely connect the two metal
containers together with wire before pouring. The metal handles are a
good place to do this. Strong clamps or sturdy clips on the ends of the
wire is smart.

Many tradegies have occurred when pouring acetone from one metal
container into another.

To understand how static charges can develop from a polar liquid being
poured, search terms: Lord Kelvin's Electrostatic Water Machine.

insula

 

[C. Nick Kruzer]

Here is an interesting and simple experiment that demonstrates the
generation of an electrostatic charge from the pouring of a polar
liquid. If you are going to do this make sure to use water and not a
flammable liquid.

http://bizarrelabs.com/buckets.htm

insula

 

[rickman]

On Jun 21, 3:04 pm, n...@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote:

John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:56:31 GMT, "Talal Itani" <tit...@verizon.net
wrote:

Thanks. This is nice stuff, yet the buffer length (2.4k points) is too
small, I think, for our needs.

Why do you need a lot of buffer? I test and debug realtime uP-based
things, delay generators and arbs and such, with a Tek TDS2012, which
only has enough buffer for the screen you see.

At some point, a lot of memory is too much memory. It's easier to
think about why something's broken than to analyze a few million
stored events. Even easier to design it right in the first place, ie,
review the design more, debug it less.

Not having to think or jump through hoops to trigger at the right
point can save a lot of time. That is where a big buffer comes in
handy. Also being able to zoom in at a 'problem spot' without having
to re-capture data saves a lot of time and hassle. I do a lot of
checking on FPGA designs using a 2M point logic analyzer. One
acquisition usually gives me all the data I need to verify the design.

But a logic analyzer is not a scope. It is pretty rare that I need
this sort of buffer for an analog waveform. It is a trade off between
features you actually need and ones that you will use once in a blue
moon.

In fact, I don't feel the need for a 4 input scope anymore. But what
I do want is a scope that can work with a logic analyzer. It has been
awhile, but I seem to recall analog scopes that have a trigger output
on the back which can be used to trigger other devices.

My customer buys PC attached devices. He is very happy with their
Intronix logic analyzer. But they have a PC attached scope that he
was having trouble figuring out the triggering. I might ask to borrow
the scope and see if I can make it work for me.

Rick

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:07:16 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
wrote:

In fact, I don't feel the need for a 4 input scope anymore.

This week I'm finishing up the firmware for a 4-channel arbitrary
waveform generator, so a 4-channel scope is perfect.

Next week, I start on the 8-channel version...

John

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (26 Jun 2008 15:57:58 GMT) it happened Scott Seidman
<namdiesttocs@mindspring.com> wrote in
<Xns9AC979B9FD445scottseidmanmindspri@130.133.1.4>:

The Z-input also seems to have disappeared from modern scopes. and I miss
it.

Yes, very valuable:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/scope_tv/index.html

 

[Blarp]

On 26 Jun 2008 15:57:58 GMT, Scott Seidman
<namdiesttocs@mindspring.com> wrote:

The Z-input also seems to have disappeared from modern scopes. and I miss
it.

I want the Y-output back.

To connect an audio amp to.

(it is simply amazing what can be measured by ear! Just sensing e.g. a
adress line will make "audible" the software flow in a CPU board.)

My old analog hobby scope has one. And I dearly miss it on the office
LeCroy.

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:17:34 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Jun 26, 11:23 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:07:16 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnu...@gmail.com
wrote:

In fact, I don't feel the need for a 4 input scope anymore.

This week I'm finishing up the firmware for a 4-channel arbitrary
waveform generator, so a 4-channel scope is perfect.

Next week, I start on the 8-channel version...

John

What can you do with a 4 channel scope that you can't do with a 2
channel one by moving the probe, when testing a 4 channel AWG? This
looks to me like the perfect example of why you don't need 4
channels.

Rick

I can work my way through a list of 265 distinct serial commands,
testing each one and its arguments, and watch what happens to all 4
waveform generators after each command, without mating/unmating cables
about a thousand times.

John