Sign in

username:

password:



Not a member?

Search piclist



Search tips

Subscribe to piclist



piclist by Keywords

12F675 | 16F628 | 16F84 | 16f877 | 16F877A | 16F88 | 18F458 | ADC | AVR | Bootloader | CAN | CCS | CRC | EAGLE | EEPROM | ICD | ICSP | IDE | JDM | LED | Macros | Microchip | MPLAB | PCB-CAD | PIC10F | Pic12f675 | PIC16F84 | PIC16F84A | PIC16F877 | PIC18 | PIC18F452 | PicBasic | PICC | PICSTART | PWM | RS-485 | RS232 | SMT | SPI | UART | USART | USB | Wireless | Wisp628 | Xilinx


Ads

Discussion Groups

See Also

DSPFPGAElectronics

Discussion Groups | Piclist | PIC universal programmer

A discussion group for the PICMicro microcontroller. Also called the Microchip PIC, this list is dedicated to the use and abuse of this fine, simple, microcontroller. Close to topic posts are welcome, ie. general electronics.

PIC universal programmer - ydexter - Apr 7 10:36:00 2004

Hello,

I like to continue a post I canceled 1 week ago. It's about PIC
programming. The start idea was to find a real PIC programmer on the
net , I mean a programmer which can be fully controled and which is
able to provide clear signals respecting timings specified on
Microchip documentations.

I use JDM programmer. I tried to fully understand the JDM's
schematics, but I can't see all the details. I got the idea that the
builder tried to generate some power to feed the PIC and to program
it, then he uses some of the control lines of the RS232 to generate
the clock and the data signals. He cannot use the TX and RX lines for
clock and data since you can't fully control them when we are talking
about timing.

Next move was to use a PIC: wait for some data from the RS232 port,
and then write them into the target PIC using different timings,
shapes and patterns for the signal. Of course you need an agreement
between PIC and RS232 to avoid overflow.

Thanks to some people here, I had the oportunity to read some papers
from Microchip about PIC programming. I saw that data patterns (erase,
write, etc) are different if we talk about different families or even
models. I can't figure out if there are other differences for the
signals when you transmit the real data, after the write init sequences.

I think it is a nice idea to have a PIC with EEPROM data, togheter
with a PC software. The user can choose the PIC model, the application
may transmit this model to the PIC ( a few encoded bytes) using RS232.
The helper PIC can then read from EEPROM the proper timings and data
patterns for the target PIC model and start programming, using again
the RS232 port to gather the data.

I just want to talk about this idea, maybe it is something wrong from
the start. I'm still reading about PIC programming and I say it is not
an easy task.

many thanks




(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )


Re: PIC universal programmer - Stef Mientki - Apr 7 11:22:00 2004

A number of people build such a device,
here you can see mine:

http://oase.uci.kun.nl/~mientki/PIC/PicProg/PicProgrammer_hardware.htm

http://oase.uci.kun.nl/~mientki/PIC/PicProg/USB_PicProgrammer_software.htm

good luck,
Stef Mientki






	



______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
RE:  PIC universal programmer - Wouter van Ooijen - Apr 7 13:21:00 2004






> I can't figure out if there are other differences for the

> signals when you transmit the real data, after the write init 

> sequences. 



plenty of variation. but you can read about it all in the programming

specifications of the various chips. no secrets, just a lot of reading

and comparing work.



> I think it is a nice idea to have a PIC with EEPROM data, togheter

> with a PC software. The user can choose the PIC model, the application

> may transmit this model to the PIC ( a few encoded bytes) using RS232.

> The helper PIC can then read from EEPROM the proper timings and data

> patterns for the target PIC model and start programming, using again

> the RS232 port to gather the data.



I don't see the need for the EEPROM, but otherwise this is roughly how

most 'serious' (as opposed to PC-port fiddeling) programmers work. Stef

has already stated a link to his version, mine is www.voti.nl/wips628,

check also DIY-150 (www.kitsrus.com) and its variations, Fluffy, WARP-13

or whatever the current number is, and of course the good (?) old

PicStart+.



> I just want to talk about this idea, maybe it is something wrong from

> the start. I'm still reading about PIC programming and I say it is not

> an easy task.



Nothing wrong with it, especially if you want to spend the next year or

so on such a project, only to make a small variation on what is already

available :)



Wouter van Ooijen



-- -------------------------------------------

Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

consultancy, development, PICmicro products




	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - peterhawken - Apr 7 14:25:00 2004






Let me clarify this: Are you talking about a programmer that will 

programme EPROM as well as EEPROM chips, i.e. 'C' parts as well 

as 'F' parts?



If that is the case, you are suggesting that the device is built with 

variable programming voltages up to 14V and variable Vdd as well as 

the ability to programme serial and parallel parts, have variable 

width programming pulses and variable over-programming ratios. These 

are the variable parameters that I recall having read some of the 

programming specifications. I think there are others that I haven't 

recaled correctly.



I am assuming that this is what you want to do as there are so many 

low cost third party programmers that programme flash parts only that 

there seems little point in building yet another one.



I know that the issue of programming PICs has been mentioned numerous 

times. With the number of competant people in this group, do you 

think we might be able to produce a production standard programmer 

that can be used for all PICs? The cost and size should be better 

than the Picstart Plus and it should be flexible enough to cope with 

new parts as they become available.



I am now just thinking out loud - perhaps the project divided into 

several small parts could be handled with relative ease and without 

relying too much on one person doing a huge amount of work. The end 

result might be posted here as a schematic, a gerber file for a PCB 

layout and software that is all offered as public domain.



Ydexter has rightly pointed out that this is not an easy task. I 

agree in that there is a lot of microchip data to be studied and 

gathered, hardware and software for the programmer and PC based 

software to provide data handling and configuration data.



Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that of updating the 

programmer with new data when devices are released or Microchip 

announce more errata for existing models. I see that this can be 

handled in a disk based database that PC software can read and 

download to the programmer. In doing this, new devices can be added 

to the programmer's capability with a PC software download.



Personally, I would enjoy the task of writing PC code to support the 

programmer. Are others inclined to offer some time and expertise to 

produce a 'PicList Programmer'? If there are enough, we can look at 

our skills and decide if we have the resources to go ahead with the 

project.



I know that Ydexter should be willing to put some time into this and 

I believe that someone else said he would be happy to invest time to 

a project about three weeks back, so there are three so far. Any 

more?



Peter

--- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote:

> Hello,

> 

> I like to continue a post I canceled 1 week ago. It's about PIC

> programming. The start idea was to find a real PIC programmer on the

> net , I mean a programmer which can be fully controled and which is

> able to provide clear signals respecting timings specified on

> Microchip documentations.

> 

> I use JDM programmer. I tried to fully understand the JDM's

> schematics, but I can't see all the details. I got the idea that the

> builder tried to generate some power to feed the PIC and to program

> it, then he uses some of the control lines of the RS232 to generate

> the clock and the data signals. He cannot use the TX and RX lines 

for

> clock and data since you can't fully control them when we are 

talking

> about timing.

> 

> Next move was to use a PIC: wait for some data from the RS232 port,

> and then write them into the target PIC using different timings,

> shapes and patterns for the signal. Of course you need an agreement

> between PIC and RS232 to avoid overflow.

> 

> Thanks to some people here, I had the oportunity to read some papers

> from Microchip about PIC programming. I saw that data patterns 

(erase,

> write, etc) are different if we talk about different families or 

even

> models. I can't figure out if there are other differences for the

> signals when you transmit the real data, after the write init 

sequences. 

> 

> I think it is a nice idea to have a PIC with EEPROM data, togheter

> with a PC software. The user can choose the PIC model, the 

application

> may transmit this model to the PIC ( a few encoded bytes) using 

RS232.

> The helper PIC can then read from EEPROM the proper timings and data

> patterns for the target PIC model and start programming, using again

> the RS232 port to gather the data.

> 

> I just want to talk about this idea, maybe it is something wrong 

from

> the start. I'm still reading about PIC programming and I say it is 

not

> an easy task.

> 

> many thanks


	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - Charles Linquist - Apr 7 15:23:00 2004






I realize that people are trying to save money, but either a

PICSTART or an ICD2 programmer will program everything

Microchip makes. I have both and use them for DIP or

In-Circuit programming (homemade adaptor needed for PicStart).

It would seem cheaper in the long run to

get something that works without a lot of effort.




----- Original Message ----- 

From: "peterhawken" <>

To: <>

Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 12:25 PM

Subject: [piclist] Re: PIC universal programmer
> Let me clarify this: Are you talking about a programmer that will

> programme EPROM as well as EEPROM chips, i.e. 'C' parts as well

> as 'F' parts?

>

> If that is the case, you are suggesting that the device is built with

> variable programming voltages up to 14V and variable Vdd as well as

> the ability to programme serial and parallel parts, have variable

> width programming pulses and variable over-programming ratios. These

> are the variable parameters that I recall having read some of the

> programming specifications. I think there are others that I haven't

> recaled correctly.

>

> I am assuming that this is what you want to do as there are so many

> low cost third party programmers that programme flash parts only that

> there seems little point in building yet another one.

>

> I know that the issue of programming PICs has been mentioned numerous

> times. With the number of competant people in this group, do you

> think we might be able to produce a production standard programmer

> that can be used for all PICs? The cost and size should be better

> than the Picstart Plus and it should be flexible enough to cope with

> new parts as they become available.

>

> I am now just thinking out loud - perhaps the project divided into

> several small parts could be handled with relative ease and without

> relying too much on one person doing a huge amount of work. The end

> result might be posted here as a schematic, a gerber file for a PCB

> layout and software that is all offered as public domain.

>

> Ydexter has rightly pointed out that this is not an easy task. I

> agree in that there is a lot of microchip data to be studied and

> gathered, hardware and software for the programmer and PC based

> software to provide data handling and configuration data.

>

> Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that of updating the

> programmer with new data when devices are released or Microchip

> announce more errata for existing models. I see that this can be

> handled in a disk based database that PC software can read and

> download to the programmer. In doing this, new devices can be added

> to the programmer's capability with a PC software download.

>

> Personally, I would enjoy the task of writing PC code to support the

> programmer. Are others inclined to offer some time and expertise to

> produce a 'PicList Programmer'? If there are enough, we can look at

> our skills and decide if we have the resources to go ahead with the

> project.

>

> I know that Ydexter should be willing to put some time into this and

> I believe that someone else said he would be happy to invest time to

> a project about three weeks back, so there are three so far. Any

> more?

>

> Peter

> --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote:

> > Hello,

> >

> > I like to continue a post I canceled 1 week ago. It's about PIC

> > programming. The start idea was to find a real PIC programmer on the

> > net , I mean a programmer which can be fully controled and which is

> > able to provide clear signals respecting timings specified on

> > Microchip documentations.

> >

> > I use JDM programmer. I tried to fully understand the JDM's

> > schematics, but I can't see all the details. I got the idea that the

> > builder tried to generate some power to feed the PIC and to program

> > it, then he uses some of the control lines of the RS232 to generate

> > the clock and the data signals. He cannot use the TX and RX lines

> for

> > clock and data since you can't fully control them when we are

> talking

> > about timing.

> >

> > Next move was to use a PIC: wait for some data from the RS232 port,

> > and then write them into the target PIC using different timings,

> > shapes and patterns for the signal. Of course you need an agreement

> > between PIC and RS232 to avoid overflow.

> >

> > Thanks to some people here, I had the oportunity to read some papers

> > from Microchip about PIC programming. I saw that data patterns

> (erase,

> > write, etc) are different if we talk about different families or

> even

> > models. I can't figure out if there are other differences for the

> > signals when you transmit the real data, after the write init

> sequences.

> >

> > I think it is a nice idea to have a PIC with EEPROM data, togheter

> > with a PC software. The user can choose the PIC model, the

> application

> > may transmit this model to the PIC ( a few encoded bytes) using

> RS232.

> > The helper PIC can then read from EEPROM the proper timings and data

> > patterns for the target PIC model and start programming, using again

> > the RS232 port to gather the data.

> >

> > I just want to talk about this idea, maybe it is something wrong

> from

> > the start. I'm still reading about PIC programming and I say it is

> not

> > an easy task.

> >

> > many thanks
>

>

> to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the

instructions

> Yahoo! Groups Links







	















______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - Scott Lee - Apr 7 17:29:00 2004






--- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...> 

wrote:

> Nothing wrong with it, especially if you want to spend the next 

year or

> so on such a project, only to make a small variation on what is 

already

> available :)



Okay Wouter, you set yourself up for this one...



Would you care to explain why *you* chose to spend a year or so only 

to make a small variation on what was already available? :-)



BTW, I agree and can think of other things I would rather do with my 

time. On the other hand I can't fault anyone else for choosing to do 

it because I quite often do things "just because I can". For 

example, I've got a PIC "breakout" implementation almost ready for 

the 12F683 when it is released just for the cool factor of having a 

video game complete with sound being implemented on an 8 pin chip. I 

know someone else already did this game but they used a larger chip 

and I don't think they had sound. On the otherhand this project 

hasn't taken anywhere near a year. (Though I would venture to guess 

that it is the ultimate cycle counting project.)


	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - peterhawken - Apr 7 18:10:00 2004






I agree with you that a Picstart represents good value for litle 

effort, and indeed I use one daily within the MPLAB IDE. I would go 

as far as saying that anyone who has any commercial value to his time 

should buy one and start working on real projects rather than messing 

around with half baked ideas on programming $1 chips. I have 

suggested the idea of a piclist programmer for two or three reasons:



The Picstart is not regarded as a production standard and Microchip 

don't release the data on the use of the programer outside MPLAB. 

For repeat programming of chips (I have a library of several hundred 

variations of software that are all used from time to time) I find 

the IDE is a slow and clunky way to do it.



I also have PC software that analyses infra red control codes and 

produces an ASM file. Once I have that, I need to go to MPLAB and 

assemble the file before I can download it. If I had a programmer 

that I could talk to directly, the software can be changed to 

programme a PIC directly and save a significant amount of time. I 

confess that I don't know whether the ProMate can be used outside of 

MPLAB. It may well be documented and I just haven't seen the 

documentation and I haven't thought seriously about buying one so far.



Apart from anything else, for some time, Ydexter has been discussing 

the idea of building a programmer to save money among other reasons 

and he isn't alone in this. A search of the web brings up dozens of 

ideas, circuits and schemes for programming PICs, some of which look 

elegant while others are fairly hideous. There are many people who 

wil build their own programmer to save money, to learn about the 

product they are about to use and others simply because they can.



I know that in commercial terms, producing a home grown programmer 

makes no sense to most of us in the west but there are a significant 

number of people in countries where the cost of even a Picstart is 

right out of reach. I have had some dealings with engineers in 

Eastern Europe a while ago. I was struck by the huge difference in 

purchasing power between me and the locals. I arrived with a laptop 

in one hand and a picstart in the other to find the workshop was 

equipped with a very elderly PC (almost steam driven) and a homemade 

programmer. They had one PIC for development. This was a place 

where they save for a month or more to be able to go to Macdonalds 

for a Big Mac. I was also struck by the talent that some fo the 

engineers had as well as the amount of work they were prepared to put 

into projects. With this in mind, I believe that a piclist 

development could offer a great benefit to many people. 



Perhaps it is unfortunate that those of us who are in the best 

position to develop such a product are those who would benefit least 

from the end result, bearing in mind that most of us who have the 

experience will have most of the tools we need already. It must be 

considered as something to take on for the pleasure of doing it and 

to see the end result being used effectively.



That's my sales pitch over. I hope that what I have said might 

inspire a few to do something rather than nagging people into it. If 

one is realistic, this is a project that cannot be done by one 

person. As (I think) Stefan pointed out, the project would be timed 

in years rather than weeks for one person so it will only happen if 

enough people commit to taking on a part of the design.



Peter



--- In , "Charles Linquist" <Charles@L...> 

wrote:

> I realize that people are trying to save money, but either a

> PICSTART or an ICD2 programmer will program everything

> Microchip makes. I have both and use them for DIP or

> In-Circuit programming (homemade adaptor needed for PicStart).

> It would seem cheaper in the long run to

> get something that works without a lot of effort.
> 

> 

> ----- Original Message ----- 

> From: "peterhawken" <peterhawken@s...>

> To: <>

> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 12:25 PM

> Subject: [piclist] Re: PIC universal programmer
> > Let me clarify this: Are you talking about a programmer that will

> > programme EPROM as well as EEPROM chips, i.e. 'C' parts as well

> > as 'F' parts?

> >

> > If that is the case, you are suggesting that the device is built 

with

> > variable programming voltages up to 14V and variable Vdd as well 

as

> > the ability to programme serial and parallel parts, have variable

> > width programming pulses and variable over-programming ratios. 

These

> > are the variable parameters that I recall having read some of the

> > programming specifications. I think there are others that I 

haven't

> > recaled correctly.

> >

> > I am assuming that this is what you want to do as there are so 

many

> > low cost third party programmers that programme flash parts only 

that

> > there seems little point in building yet another one.

> >

> > I know that the issue of programming PICs has been mentioned 

numerous

> > times. With the number of competant people in this group, do you

> > think we might be able to produce a production standard programmer

> > that can be used for all PICs? The cost and size should be better

> > than the Picstart Plus and it should be flexible enough to cope 

with

> > new parts as they become available.

> >

> > I am now just thinking out loud - perhaps the project divided 

into

> > several small parts could be handled with relative ease and 

without

> > relying too much on one person doing a huge amount of work. The 

end

> > result might be posted here as a schematic, a gerber file for a 

PCB

> > layout and software that is all offered as public domain.

> >

> > Ydexter has rightly pointed out that this is not an easy task. I

> > agree in that there is a lot of microchip data to be studied and

> > gathered, hardware and software for the programmer and PC based

> > software to provide data handling and configuration data.

> >

> > Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that of updating the

> > programmer with new data when devices are released or Microchip

> > announce more errata for existing models. I see that this can be

> > handled in a disk based database that PC software can read and

> > download to the programmer. In doing this, new devices can be 

added

> > to the programmer's capability with a PC software download.

> >

> > Personally, I would enjoy the task of writing PC code to support 

the

> > programmer. Are others inclined to offer some time and expertise 

to

> > produce a 'PicList Programmer'? If there are enough, we can look 

at

> > our skills and decide if we have the resources to go ahead with 

the

> > project.

> >

> > I know that Ydexter should be willing to put some time into this 

and

> > I believe that someone else said he would be happy to invest time 

to

> > a project about three weeks back, so there are three so far. Any

> > more?

> >

> > Peter

> > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote:

> > > Hello,

> > >

> > > I like to continue a post I canceled 1 week ago. It's about PIC

> > > programming. The start idea was to find a real PIC programmer 

on the

> > > net , I mean a programmer which can be fully controled and 

which is

> > > able to provide clear signals respecting timings specified on

> > > Microchip documentations.

> > >

> > > I use JDM programmer. I tried to fully understand the JDM's

> > > schematics, but I can't see all the details. I got the idea 

that the

> > > builder tried to generate some power to feed the PIC and to 

program

> > > it, then he uses some of the control lines of the RS232 to 

generate

> > > the clock and the data signals. He cannot use the TX and RX 

lines

> > for

> > > clock and data since you can't fully control them when we are

> > talking

> > > about timing.

> > >

> > > Next move was to use a PIC: wait for some data from the RS232 

port,

> > > and then write them into the target PIC using different timings,

> > > shapes and patterns for the signal. Of course you need an 

agreement

> > > between PIC and RS232 to avoid overflow.

> > >

> > > Thanks to some people here, I had the oportunity to read some 

papers

> > > from Microchip about PIC programming. I saw that data patterns

> > (erase,

> > > write, etc) are different if we talk about different families or

> > even

> > > models. I can't figure out if there are other differences for 

the

> > > signals when you transmit the real data, after the write init

> > sequences.

> > >

> > > I think it is a nice idea to have a PIC with EEPROM data, 

togheter

> > > with a PC software. The user can choose the PIC model, the

> > application

> > > may transmit this model to the PIC ( a few encoded bytes) using

> > RS232.

> > > The helper PIC can then read from EEPROM the proper timings and 

data

> > > patterns for the target PIC model and start programming, using 

again

> > > the RS232 port to gather the data.

> > >

> > > I just want to talk about this idea, maybe it is something wrong

> > from

> > > the start. I'm still reading about PIC programming and I say it 

is

> > not

> > > an easy task.

> > >

> > > many thanks

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the

> instructions

> > Yahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

> >

> 


	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - Charles Linquist - Apr 7 19:49:00 2004








It is too bad that PICs don't have a native bootloader. I program all my

parts in-circuit

one time with a bootloader, and from then on program all kinds of chips

through the

serial port. Even though most bootloaders require a hardware serial port,

there are some

that don't. Some good bootloaders that I have tried are:

Mecanique's MCLOADER is good, as is the tiny booloader

http://www.ac.ugal.ro/staff/ckiku/software/picbootloader.htm

I'm sure there are others.



Once a chip has a resident bootloader, a nearly universal programmer can be

built on a proto-board

in 20 minutes with a MAX232 and a few capacitors.
Charles Linquist
----- Original Message ----- 

From: "peterhawken" <>

To: <>

Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 4:10 PM

Subject: [piclist] Re: PIC universal programmer
> I agree with you that a Picstart represents good value for litle

> effort, and indeed I use one daily within the MPLAB IDE. I would go

> as far as saying that anyone who has any commercial value to his time

> should buy one and start working on real projects rather than messing

> around with half baked ideas on programming $1 chips. I have

> suggested the idea of a piclist programmer for two or three reasons:

>

> The Picstart is not regarded as a production standard and Microchip

> don't release the data on the use of the programer outside MPLAB.

> For repeat programming of chips (I have a library of several hundred

> variations of software that are all used from time to time) I find

> the IDE is a slow and clunky way to do it.

>

> I also have PC software that analyses infra red control codes and

> produces an ASM file. Once I have that, I need to go to MPLAB and

> assemble the file before I can download it. If I had a programmer

> that I could talk to directly, the software can be changed to

> programme a PIC directly and save a significant amount of time. I

> confess that I don't know whether the ProMate can be used outside of

> MPLAB. It may well be documented and I just haven't seen the

> documentation and I haven't thought seriously about buying one so far.

>

> Apart from anything else, for some time, Ydexter has been discussing

> the idea of building a programmer to save money among other reasons

> and he isn't alone in this. A search of the web brings up dozens of

> ideas, circuits and schemes for programming PICs, some of which look

> elegant while others are fairly hideous. There are many people who

> wil build their own programmer to save money, to learn about the

> product they are about to use and others simply because they can.

>

> I know that in commercial terms, producing a home grown programmer

> makes no sense to most of us in the west but there are a significant

> number of people in countries where the cost of even a Picstart is

> right out of reach. I have had some dealings with engineers in

> Eastern Europe a while ago. I was struck by the huge difference in

> purchasing power between me and the locals. I arrived with a laptop

> in one hand and a picstart in the other to find the workshop was

> equipped with a very elderly PC (almost steam driven) and a homemade

> programmer. They had one PIC for development. This was a place

> where they save for a month or more to be able to go to Macdonalds

> for a Big Mac. I was also struck by the talent that some fo the

> engineers had as well as the amount of work they were prepared to put

> into projects. With this in mind, I believe that a piclist

> development could offer a great benefit to many people.

>

> Perhaps it is unfortunate that those of us who are in the best

> position to develop such a product are those who would benefit least

> from the end result, bearing in mind that most of us who have the

> experience will have most of the tools we need already. It must be

> considered as something to take on for the pleasure of doing it and

> to see the end result being used effectively.

>

> That's my sales pitch over. I hope that what I have said might

> inspire a few to do something rather than nagging people into it. If

> one is realistic, this is a project that cannot be done by one

> person. As (I think) Stefan pointed out, the project would be timed

> in years rather than weeks for one person so it will only happen if

> enough people commit to taking on a part of the design.

>

> Peter

>

> --- In , "Charles Linquist" <Charles@L...>

> wrote:

> > I realize that people are trying to save money, but either a

> > PICSTART or an ICD2 programmer will program everything

> > Microchip makes. I have both and use them for DIP or

> > In-Circuit programming (homemade adaptor needed for PicStart).

> > It would seem cheaper in the long run to

> > get something that works without a lot of effort.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ----- Original Message ----- 

> > From: "peterhawken" <peterhawken@s...>

> > To: <>

> > Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 12:25 PM

> > Subject: [piclist] Re: PIC universal programmer

> >

> >

> > > Let me clarify this: Are you talking about a programmer that will

> > > programme EPROM as well as EEPROM chips, i.e. 'C' parts as well

> > > as 'F' parts?

> > >

> > > If that is the case, you are suggesting that the device is built

> with

> > > variable programming voltages up to 14V and variable Vdd as well

> as

> > > the ability to programme serial and parallel parts, have variable

> > > width programming pulses and variable over-programming ratios.

> These

> > > are the variable parameters that I recall having read some of the

> > > programming specifications. I think there are others that I

> haven't

> > > recaled correctly.

> > >

> > > I am assuming that this is what you want to do as there are so

> many

> > > low cost third party programmers that programme flash parts only

> that

> > > there seems little point in building yet another one.

> > >

> > > I know that the issue of programming PICs has been mentioned

> numerous

> > > times. With the number of competant people in this group, do you

> > > think we might be able to produce a production standard programmer

> > > that can be used for all PICs? The cost and size should be better

> > > than the Picstart Plus and it should be flexible enough to cope

> with

> > > new parts as they become available.

> > >

> > > I am now just thinking out loud - perhaps the project divided

> into

> > > several small parts could be handled with relative ease and

> without

> > > relying too much on one person doing a huge amount of work. The

> end

> > > result might be posted here as a schematic, a gerber file for a

> PCB

> > > layout and software that is all offered as public domain.

> > >

> > > Ydexter has rightly pointed out that this is not an easy task. I

> > > agree in that there is a lot of microchip data to be studied and

> > > gathered, hardware and software for the programmer and PC based

> > > software to provide data handling and configuration data.

> > >

> > > Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that of updating the

> > > programmer with new data when devices are released or Microchip

> > > announce more errata for existing models. I see that this can be

> > > handled in a disk based database that PC software can read and

> > > download to the programmer. In doing this, new devices can be

> added

> > > to the programmer's capability with a PC software download.

> > >

> > > Personally, I would enjoy the task of writing PC code to support

> the

> > > programmer. Are others inclined to offer some time and expertise

> to

> > > produce a 'PicList Programmer'? If there are enough, we can look

> at

> > > our skills and decide if we have the resources to go ahead with

> the

> > > project.

> > >

> > > I know that Ydexter should be willing to put some time into this

> and

> > > I believe that someone else said he would be happy to invest time

> to

> > > a project about three weeks back, so there are three so far. Any

> > > more?

> > >

> > > Peter

> > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote:

> > > > Hello,

> > > >

> > > > I like to continue a post I canceled 1 week ago. It's about PIC

> > > > programming. The start idea was to find a real PIC programmer

> on the

> > > > net , I mean a programmer which can be fully controled and

> which is

> > > > able to provide clear signals respecting timings specified on

> > > > Microchip documentations.

> > > >

> > > > I use JDM programmer. I tried to fully understand the JDM's

> > > > schematics, but I can't see all the details. I got the idea

> that the

> > > > builder tried to generate some power to feed the PIC and to

> program

> > > > it, then he uses some of the control lines of the RS232 to

> generate

> > > > the clock and the data signals. He cannot use the TX and RX

> lines

> > > for

> > > > clock and data since you can't fully control them when we are

> > > talking

> > > > about timing.

> > > >

> > > > Next move was to use a PIC: wait for some data from the RS232

> port,

> > > > and then write them into the target PIC using different timings,

> > > > shapes and patterns for the signal. Of course you need an

> agreement

> > > > between PIC and RS232 to avoid overflow.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks to some people here, I had the oportunity to read some

> papers

> > > > from Microchip about PIC programming. I saw that data patterns

> > > (erase,

> > > > write, etc) are different if we talk about different families or

> > > even

> > > > models. I can't figure out if there are other differences for

> the

> > > > signals when you transmit the real data, after the write init

> > > sequences.

> > > >

> > > > I think it is a nice idea to have a PIC with EEPROM data,

> togheter

> > > > with a PC software. The user can choose the PIC model, the

> > > application

> > > > may transmit this model to the PIC ( a few encoded bytes) using

> > > RS232.

> > > > The helper PIC can then read from EEPROM the proper timings and

> data

> > > > patterns for the target PIC model and start programming, using

> again

> > > > the RS232 port to gather the data.

> > > >

> > > > I just want to talk about this idea, maybe it is something wrong

> > > from

> > > > the start. I'm still reading about PIC programming and I say it

> is

> > > not

> > > > an easy task.

> > > >

> > > > many thanks

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the

> > instructions

> > > Yahoo! Groups Links

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > 
>

>

> to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the

instructions

> Yahoo! Groups Links







	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Dave Mucha - Apr 7 20:20:00 2004






--- In , "Charles Linquist" <Charles@L...> 

wrote:

> I realize that people are trying to save money, but either a

> PICSTART or an ICD2 programmer will program everything

> Microchip makes. I have both and use them for DIP or

> In-Circuit programming (homemade adaptor needed for PicStart).

> It would seem cheaper in the long run to

> get something that works without a lot of effort.



I agree that the simple hobby versions are low cost and are much 

easier than doing something yourself, and I agree that not all list 

members can spend $20.00 to just buy something.
Assuming that the design of a programmer were to occur, I think that 

there should be some targets for such a design.



For one, I would like to see a USB device. self powered and a simple 

connection.



ICSP



Also, the idea of using a PIC as part of the device would require 

programming of that pic so either some method to self program is 

needed or yet another programmer would be needed.



My question comes to the end result. Although I would like to see a 

new device, the questions that would need to be asked are 



#1) is it better than any or all of the other free designs on the 

web ?



#2) is there software that can work with it ?
If it is not better than all the existing designs, then why bother ?



Second, if there is no supporting software, how does one use it ?



Also, I would recomend that the guys working on such a project, form 

a group and someone host the eventual web page. And on that web-

page, make anyone wanting to see the schematic, agree that they will 

not sell it for profit without some portion being returned to those 

involved with the design.



I am very curious if such a design can be done with more features 

than exist on the free units avalible today.



Dave




	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
RE:  Re: PIC universal programmer - Wouter van Ooijen - Apr 7 23:55:00 2004






> I also have PC software that analyses infra red control codes and 

> produces an ASM file. Once I have that, I need to go to MPLAB and 

> assemble the file before I can download it.



MPASM is the command line assembler component of MPLAB. I use it a lot

as part of the test scripts for my compiler. A separate command-line

interface to PS+ does exists, but it is third-party so it might not be

updated to new chips as fast as you would like. But is is open source,

so you could do that yourself. My Wisp628 progger (note: flash only)

also has a command line interface (in fact it has several).



Wouter van Ooijen



-- -------------------------------------------

Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

consultancy, development, PICmicro products




	















______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
RE:  Re: PIC universal programmer - Wouter van Ooijen - Apr 7 23:55:00 2004






> Would you care to explain why *you* chose to spend a year or so only 

> to make a small variation on what was already available? :-)



That was years and years ago and at that time no such thing was

available. And nowadays I sell this design as kit (and as

build-and-tested, and it is available for DIY) so it is worthwile for me

to keep updating the Wisp628.



But I agree: when you want to do this for a challenge why not. You might

mine www.piclist.com and try to find out why Olin tried this and stopped

(I am not realy sure why).



Wouter van Ooijen



-- -------------------------------------------

Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

consultancy, development, PICmicro products




	



______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Vasile Surducan - Apr 8 1:40:00 2004







On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Dave Mucha wrote:



> I agree that the simple hobby versions are low cost and are much

> easier than doing something yourself, and I agree that not all list

> members can spend $20.00 to just buy something.
this is a great step, thank you
>

> Assuming that the design of a programmer were to occur, I think that

> there should be some targets for such a design.

>

> For one, I would like to see a USB device. self powered and a simple

> connection.

>

> ICSP



This is easy enough. Any serial programmer topology (ie the infamous

JDM, which is a very clever ideea (if the user understood

completely how it works) can be ported on USB with a minimal hardware

requirements. I don't know if already made software programs can drive the

USB ( ie ICprog which can be considered a standard for a free software

with such a large number of supported devices)
best regards,

Vasile


	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - ydexter - Apr 8 3:09:00 2004






OK, here I am confused again. I just asked before for a real

programmer, abd when I say real I think to a programmer without

compromises. 

- it has to own a true power source ( not necesarly a separated one,

USB can deliver 500mA per hub I think, but really I don't like things

like 'you have to hold DTR from time to time or so to load C2

capacitor just to prevent PIC running out of power, or just to be able

to ....')

- it has to be able to generate a good shape signals ( I saw on some

schematics that you have to wait after some pulses to calm down, for

some you have to put an extra resistor to cut spikes ....)



About PIC families, it is a great idea to build an universal PIC

programmer. Someone asked me if I want to program flash PIC and EEPROM

pic also. Right now I use a 16F84A, but I can't answer yet to this

question. I saw there are many memory areas inside a PIC - I'm not use

with all of them. I don't have so much PIC experience, maybe Microchip

will use flash in the next future. As a matter of fact I don't like

PICs with EEPROM where you have to use some UV rays to clear the

memory. Are those on use anymore ? 



About Wouter said, he is right , there is no need of an EEPROM

external memory to store the PIC signal characteristics - you can send

them all to the PIC just before programming the target, these settings

can be stored in application software.



I use ICPROG to upload the hexa code, and I choose like all people the

model of te PIC from menu. I think the programming sequences are

loaded depending of what PIC model you choose. This is OK, but I don't

like JDM programmer because it uses RS232 power (not very reliable for

some designs, people still argue on the net on how much power can you

steal from a RS232 port), and the programming signal's shapes are not

so OK.

I don't want to start another PIC programmer project, just I want to

be sure PIC is programmed at specified standards.



About ICSP , I found some docs on the web on how you should isolate

some pins of the PIC from the rest of the working hardware. HEre

again, some people preffers to use some tricks instead of phisically

disconnect the pins. I think 'that's OK but it's not right' .



keep in touch


	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - peterhawken - Apr 8 3:10:00 2004






Thanks Wouter



Way back in the distant past, I remember reading about the command 

line interface and decided that I would never need it. Perhaps I 

should revisit the manual.



Thanks also for the mention of the PS+ interface. Microchip in the 

UK have said that they will not release the information on the 

interface, but I should have guessed that someone would have found it 

somehow. I'll have a hunt for it.



Peter



--- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...> 

wrote:

> > I also have PC software that analyses infra red control codes and 

> > produces an ASM file. Once I have that, I need to go to MPLAB 

and 

> > assemble the file before I can download it.

> 

> MPASM is the command line assembler component of MPLAB. I use it a 

lot

> as part of the test scripts for my compiler. A separate command-line

> interface to PS+ does exists, but it is third-party so it might not 

be

> updated to new chips as fast as you would like. But is is open 

source,

> so you could do that yourself. My Wisp628 progger (note: flash only)

> also has a command line interface (in fact it has several).

> 

> Wouter van Ooijen

> 

> -- -------------------------------------------

> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

> consultancy, development, PICmicro products


	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - Chad Russel - Apr 8 11:13:00 2004






Peter,



I believe I suggested and volunteered to help in something similar to

an open source group/association/consortium a week or so ago. As you

mentioned in a follow up, I really don't need a programmer, between the

ones I have and my distributors, I am set. But, that is my job. 

Besides not having the motivation, we who don't need also have the

least time to contribute.



The paradigm is already there in Linux, Mozilla and others. But it

takes a few leaders working together(not one director/dictator).



Volunteers? Start a Yahoo group the UPPP(Universal PIC Programmer

Project) with, I suggest, at least 3 moderators.



Chad



--- peterhawken <> wrote:

> Let me clarify this: Are you talking about a programmer that will 

> programme EPROM as well as EEPROM chips, i.e. 'C' parts as well 

> as 'F' parts?

> 

> If that is the case, you are suggesting that the device is built with

> 

> variable programming voltages up to 14V and variable Vdd as well as 

> the ability to programme serial and parallel parts, have variable 

> width programming pulses and variable over-programming ratios. These

> 

> are the variable parameters that I recall having read some of the 

> programming specifications. I think there are others that I haven't 

> recaled correctly.

> 

> I am assuming that this is what you want to do as there are so many 

> low cost third party programmers that programme flash parts only that

> 

> there seems little point in building yet another one.

> 

> I know that the issue of programming PICs has been mentioned numerous

> 

> times. With the number of competant people in this group, do you 

> think we might be able to produce a production standard programmer 

> that can be used for all PICs? The cost and size should be better 

> than the Picstart Plus and it should be flexible enough to cope with 

> new parts as they become available.

> 

> I am now just thinking out loud - perhaps the project divided into 

> several small parts could be handled with relative ease and without 

> relying too much on one person doing a huge amount of work. The end 

> result might be posted here as a schematic, a gerber file for a PCB 

> layout and software that is all offered as public domain.

> 

> Ydexter has rightly pointed out that this is not an easy task. I 

> agree in that there is a lot of microchip data to be studied and 

> gathered, hardware and software for the programmer and PC based 

> software to provide data handling and configuration data.

> 

> Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that of updating the 

> programmer with new data when devices are released or Microchip 

> announce more errata for existing models. I see that this can be 

> handled in a disk based database that PC software can read and 

> download to the programmer. In doing this, new devices can be added 

> to the programmer's capability with a PC software download.

> 

> Personally, I would enjoy the task of writing PC code to support the 

> programmer. Are others inclined to offer some time and expertise to 

> produce a 'PicList Programmer'? If there are enough, we can look at 

> our skills and decide if we have the resources to go ahead with the 

> project.

> 

> I know that Ydexter should be willing to put some time into this and 

> I believe that someone else said he would be happy to invest time to 

> a project about three weeks back, so there are three so far. Any 

> more?

> 

> Peter

> --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote:

> > Hello,

> > 

> > I like to continue a post I canceled 1 week ago. It's about PIC

> > programming. The start idea was to find a real PIC programmer on

> the

> > net , I mean a programmer which can be fully controled and which is

> > able to provide clear signals respecting timings specified on

> > Microchip documentations.

> > 

> > I use JDM programmer. I tried to fully understand the JDM's

> > schematics, but I can't see all the details. I got the idea that

> the

> > builder tried to generate some power to feed the PIC and to program

> > it, then he uses some of the control lines of the RS232 to

> generate

> > the clock and the data signals. He cannot use the TX and RX lines 

> for

> > clock and data since you can't fully control them when we are 

> talking

> > about timing.

> > 

> > Next move was to use a PIC: wait for some data from the RS232 port,

> > and then write them into the target PIC using different timings,

> > shapes and patterns for the signal. Of course you need an agreement

> > between PIC and RS232 to avoid overflow.

> > 

> > Thanks to some people here, I had the oportunity to read some

> papers

> > from Microchip about PIC programming. I saw that data patterns 

> (erase,

> > write, etc) are different if we talk about different families or 

> even

> > models. I can't figure out if there are other differences for the

> > signals when you transmit the real data, after the write init 

> sequences. 

> > 

> > I think it is a nice idea to have a PIC with EEPROM data, togheter

> > with a PC software. The user can choose the PIC model, the 

> application

> > may transmit this model to the PIC ( a few encoded bytes) using 

> RS232.

> > The helper PIC can then read from EEPROM the proper timings and

> data

> > patterns for the target PIC model and start programming, using

> again

> > the RS232 port to gather the data.

> > 

> > I just want to talk about this idea, maybe it is something wrong 

> from

> > the start. I'm still reading about PIC programming and I say it is 

> not

> > an easy task.

> > 

> > many thanks




=====

My software has no bugs. Only undocumented features.



__________________________________





	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Don Hackler - Apr 8 15:33:00 2004







>>For one, I would like to see a USB device. self powered and a simple

>>connection.

>>

>>ICSP

>> 

>>

>

> This is easy enough. Any serial programmer topology (ie the infamous

>JDM, which is a very clever ideea (if the user understood

>completely how it works) can be ported on USB with a minimal hardware

>requirements. I don't know if already made software programs can drive the

>USB ( ie ICprog which can be considered a standard for a free software

>with such a large number of supported devices)


I've got three PIC programmers sitting in front of me... the two that 

use USB are using the FTDI

USB-serial chip with the drivers downloaded directly from FTDI...

This seems to be the easiest way to get a USB interface running...

Otherwise there are high fees to register for official USB certifcation 

and ID numbers.

One of them (kitsrus.com #150) uses an external power supply, and the 

other (fored.co.uk PICKEY) expects

runs off of the USB, but points out that the power supplies are very 

limited, so it can't drive much

except the actual PIC during programming. It suggests either a diode on 

the PIC VDD line to isolate the PIC

from the rest of the circuit during programming or to run the PIC VDD 

off the target power supply during

programming .

Two nine-volt batteries in series makes a particularly convienent power 

supply for any of the programmers

that need external power....



- Don




	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - mikerey35475 - Apr 8 20:47:00 2004






ydexter,



I have read all the posts in this thread and at the risk of

sounding rude, I have some questions to ask.



1) What exactly are you looking for in a PIC programmer ?



2) What type of interface do you want to use ? (Serial, parallel, USB)



3) At what level are you working with PICs ? (Hobby, professional, 

etc)



4) Have you tried any of the free PIC programmer designs and their 

variations ?



I ask these questions because I am a hobbiest and when I first 

started playing with PICs I built a classis Tait programmer that runs 

off the parallel port. I used it on a 80486 sx25 based laptop under 

DOS/Windows 3.1. I purchased Myke Predko's book :Programming and 

Customizing the PIC Microcontroller. It came with a circuit board and

diagram to build his "El Cheapo" programmer. I built this programmer, 

but had a lot of trouble getting it to work. I finally succeeded in 

getting it to work on my main computer (a P1 266 mHz machine) then I 

built a shop computer out of other peoples' discards ( a P1 150 mHz) 

and that programmer would not work with that computer. The Tait 

programmer worked with all 3 computers. I then read about the JDM 

programmer and built one, I never got it to work with any computer. I 

have updated computers since I built the Tait programmer several 

times, and except for when I stepped up to a 500 mHz Celeron(from the 

266 mHz P1) the Tait programmer never failed me. I added a couple of 

capacitors to my programmer and it worked fine after that. I have not 

had my Tait style programmer fail to program a PIC unless there was 

an operator error. (Forgetting to connect the power supply mostly, 

occasionally forgetting to select the correct PIC).



Many people make fun of the parallel port based programmers (mainly 

because they are slower than serial port based ones), but without 

spending major money they are usually more reliable. I haven't 

programmed any of the 18F series devices with my programmer but I 

don't think it would be a problem. I have programmed 12C508/509s, 

16F84, 16F628, 12F629, 16F877, even 24LC08 EEPROMs. Not counting the 

wall-wart, I may have $10 USD invested in my programmer. I use a 

universal wall-wart, adjustable from 4.5v to 12v, you can pick those 

up here in the US for about $6 USD, so altogther I have about 16 - 18 

dollars invested.



Mike


	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - ydexter - Apr 9 4:05:00 2004






OK, I started a storm with this thread, even I didn't intended to do

this. I even specified my requests , by I will repeat them. I asked to

see if it is possible to get them all.

I inserted the answers ->



--- In , "mikerey35475" <mwrey@b...> wrote:

> ydexter,

> 

> I have read all the posts in this thread and at the risk of

> sounding rude, I have some questions to ask.

> 

> 1) What exactly are you looking for in a PIC programmer ?



True power supply, not using a RS232 or any other port's voltage.

RS232 is not able to supply a high current, and especially is not

stable. This is a cheap trick used by some designers. I think it is OK

to use this for some low current sinkers.



> 2) What type of interface do you want to use ? (Serial, parallel, USB)



Serial would be nice. USB is on the market for more years, but it

didn't replaced the RS232 port. Why? RS232 is simple and well spreaded.

So I'm ok with the serial RS232 port.



> 3) At what level are you working with PICs ? (Hobby, professional, 

> etc)



Hobby for now, maybe proffesional low series later.



> 4) Have you tried any of the free PIC programmer designs and their 

> variations ?



I tried JDM, the schematics are on the 

http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/newpic.htm

It was ok, I had some problems for serial cables longer that 1m, but

now it is OK - I use it togheter with ICPROG.

I tried to analize the long cable problem , especially it was only 2m

long, so I was troubled because of the signals problem. 2m is not a

long cable , I don't think we are working with microwaves here.

So I started with the idea to find some programmer with no compromise.

Wouter suggested that there are some unavoidable spikes on PIC

programmers. What to say then about Ethernet with 100m at 100Mbs, what

about 1-wire with almost 600m cable. And still they are working fine,

especially Ethernet. I asked just to see if I can make some

programmers with no compromise, I'm not interested in price as long as

it is not so high - $200 for a programmer is far too much - it is

almost the price for a powerfull hardware for my PC. I know the

programmers are low series, but come on, they are too expensive for

me. I like to have a $1000 ossciloscope to see the spikes, because I'm

not so good at DSP.




	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - mikerey35475 - Apr 9 6:38:00 2004






Ok, now we have a baseline to start with.
--- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote:

> I inserted the answers ->

> 

> > 

> > 1) What exactly are you looking for in a PIC programmer ?

> 

> True power supply, not using a RS232 or any other port's voltage.

> RS232 is not able to supply a high current, and especially is not

> stable. This is a cheap trick used by some designers. I think it is 

OK

> to use this for some low current sinkers.



I agree that this is needed, it allows more flexablilty ?spelling
> > 2) What type of interface do you want to use ? (Serial, parallel, 

USB)

> 

> Serial would be nice. USB is on the market for more years, but it

> didn't replaced the RS232 port. Why? RS232 is simple and well 

spreaded.

> So I'm ok with the serial RS232 port.



A design based on RS232 can be converted to USB so let's start with 

RS232 and work from there.
> > 3) At what level are you working with PICs ? (Hobby, 

professional, 

> > etc)

> 

> Hobby for now, maybe proffesional low series later.



Let's shoot for a high quality (reliable) hobby grade programmer. This

means no adjustable voltages used for low voltage operation 

verification that the production class of programmers have.
> 

> > 4) Have you tried any of the free PIC programmer designs and 

their 

> > variations ?

> 

> I tried JDM, the schematics are on the 

> http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/newpic.htm

> It was ok, I had some problems for serial cables longer that 1m, but

> now it is OK - I use it togheter with ICPROG.

> I tried to analize the long cable problem , especially it was only 

2m

> long, so I was troubled because of the signals problem. 2m is not a

> long cable , I don't think we are working with microwaves here.

> So I started with the idea to find some programmer with no 

compromise.

> Wouter suggested that there are some unavoidable spikes on PIC

> programmers. I asked just to see if I can make some

> programmers with no compromise, I'm not interested in price as long 

as

> it is not so high - $200 for a programmer is far too much - it is

> almost the price for a powerfull hardware for my PC. I know the

> programmers are low series, but come on, they are too expensive for

> me. I like to have a $1000 ossciloscope to see the spikes, because 

I'm

> not so good at DSP.



I agree that I have better things to do with $200 than buy a PIC 

programmer. Let's set say $50 as a target cost. 



What type of software are you planning on using (I like IC-Prog 

myself) ? 



Now all we need to do is analyze the JDM and other RS232 based 

designs and find ways to use an external power supply and ways to 

address the pulse attenuation problems. By using a scope to monitor 

the output from the serial port during programming I believe a 

solution can be found. I honestly believe that the solution could be 

as simple as using a MAX232 to solve the pulse problems and an 

external power supply for programming voltage.



Let's decide on which serial port based programmer to use as a 

reference and go from there.



Mike


	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
RE:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Wouter van Ooijen - Apr 9 7:34:00 2004






> I agree that I have better things to do with $200 than buy a PIC 

> programmer. Let's set say $50 as a target cost. 



I sell the Wisp628 (RS232) and the DIY-150 (USB) programmer for much

less. If you want to do better than what is already available you should

set a (much) lower price target.



Also keep in mind that a RS-232 bit fiddeling programmer will likely be

(much) slower at programming the modern PICs than a programmer that uses

RS-232 for communication.



Wouter van Ooijen



-- -------------------------------------------

Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

consultancy, development, PICmicro products




	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Dave Mucha - Apr 9 10:51:00 2004






--- In , "mikerey35475" <mwrey@b...> wrote:

> Ok, now we have a baseline to start with.
> --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote:

> > I inserted the answers ->

> > 

> > > 

> > > 1) What exactly are you looking for in a PIC programmer ?

> > 

> > True power supply, not using a RS232 or any other port's voltage.

> > RS232 is not able to supply a high current, and especially is not

> > stable. This is a cheap trick used by some designers. I think it 

is 

> OK

> > to use this for some low current sinkers.

> 

> I agree that this is needed, it allows more flexablilty ?spelling

> 

> > 

> > > 2) What type of interface do you want to use ? (Serial, 

parallel, 

> USB)

> > 

> > Serial would be nice. USB is on the market for more years, but it

> > didn't replaced the RS232 port. Why? RS232 is simple and well 

> spreaded.

> > So I'm ok with the serial RS232 port.

> 

> A design based on RS232 can be converted to USB so let's start with 

> RS232 and work from there.

> 

> > 

> > > 3) At what level are you working with PICs ? (Hobby, 

> professional, 

> > > etc)

> > 

> > Hobby for now, maybe proffesional low series later.

> 

> Let's shoot for a high quality (reliable) hobby grade programmer. 

This

> means no adjustable voltages used for low voltage operation 

> verification that the production class of programmers have.
> > 

> > > 4) Have you tried any of the free PIC programmer designs and 

> their 

> > > variations ?

> > 

> > I tried JDM, the schematics are on the 

> > http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/newpic.htm

> > It was ok, I had some problems for serial cables longer that 1m, 

but

> > now it is OK - I use it togheter with ICPROG.

> > I tried to analize the long cable problem , especially it was 

only 

> 2m

> > long, so I was troubled because of the signals problem. 2m is not 

a

> > long cable , I don't think we are working with microwaves here.

> > So I started with the idea to find some programmer with no 

> compromise.

> > Wouter suggested that there are some unavoidable spikes on PIC

> > programmers. I asked just to see if I can make some

> > programmers with no compromise, I'm not interested in price as 

long 

> as

> > it is not so high - $200 for a programmer is far too much - it is

> > almost the price for a powerfull hardware for my PC. I know the

> > programmers are low series, but come on, they are too expensive 

for

> > me. I like to have a $1000 ossciloscope to see the spikes, 

because 

> I'm

> > not so good at DSP.

> 

> I agree that I have better things to do with $200 than buy a PIC 

> programmer. Let's set say $50 as a target cost. 

> 

> What type of software are you planning on using (I like IC-Prog 

> myself) ? 

> 

> Now all we need to do is analyze the JDM and other RS232 based 

> designs and find ways to use an external power supply and ways to 

> address the pulse attenuation problems. By using a scope to monitor 

> the output from the serial port during programming I believe a 

> solution can be found. I honestly believe that the solution could 

be 

> as simple as using a MAX232 to solve the pulse problems and an 

> external power supply for programming voltage.

> 

> Let's decide on which serial port based programmer to use as a 

> reference and go from there.

> 

> Mike
My opinion is that there is no need to program a device more than 1 

meter away. 



If it is an existing project that is fixed to a wall, swap chips.



If it is a protable device, 1 meter.



If you want to program something over the internet, then considder 

bootloader or something completely different than a programmer.



Also, with USB speeds being faster than the RS-232 speeds why shoot 

for the low tech port and the high tech application ?
I am glad to see some actual parameters being discussed.



One goal in my opnion might be to make a dedicated programmer for a 

chip. The 12F675 is a different chip as regards the programmer as a 

16F877. Not huge, but if you program an 8 pin, you cannot plug and 

play to a 28 pin.



Also, I noticed that the parallel port is not currently being 

considdered.



Dave




	















______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
RE:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Wouter van Ooijen - Apr 9 11:09:00 2004






> My opinion is that there is no need to program a device more than 1 

> meter away. 



Ever done a project that was larger than 1 meter in size and contained

multiple PICs? Or worked from your PC, which is more than 1 meter from

your test circuit?



> If it is an existing project that is fixed to a wall, swap chips.



After swapping the chip for the 100'th time and taking the 5'th chip

from your tube because the others either failed from ESD or you broke

the pins (your progger might have a ZIF, but does your target circuit

have one too?) you will prefer ICSP!



> One goal in my opnion might be to make a dedicated programmer for a 

> chip. The 12F675 is a different chip as regards the programmer as a 

> 16F877. Not huge, but if you program an 8 pin, you cannot plug and 

> play to a 28 pin.



I do that all the time. My protoboards have the same IC SP header

whether they are for 8, 14, 18, 28, 40 or 64 pin chips (no 80 pin yet,

but coming soon).



Also note that - once you have tackled all differences between the

various chips, and you have restricted yourself to flash chips, which I

think is reasonable - there is not much gain in restricting further.



Wouter van Ooijen



-- -------------------------------------------

Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

consultancy, development, PICmicro products




	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Dave Mucha - Apr 9 11:10:00 2004










> Wouter suggested that there are some unavoidable spikes on PIC

> programmers. What to say then about Ethernet with 100m at 100Mbs, 

what

> about 1-wire with almost 600m cable. And still they are working 

fine,

> especially Ethernet. I asked just to see if I can make some

> programmers with no compromise, I'm not interested in price as long 

as

> it is not so high - $200 for a programmer is far too much - it is

> almost the price for a powerfull hardware for my PC. I know the

> programmers are low series, but come on, they are too expensive for

> me. I like to have a $1000 ossciloscope to see the spikes, because 

I'm

> not so good at DSP.
This goes right back to identifying the TRUE objective and the REAL 

solutions.



A FREE scope on your sound card will reveal most of the problems.



I really like Wouters design and the only thing it lacks for me is a 

raw chip capability. I solved that with an add-on board that powers 

the PIC in a simple programming mode and not in my full circuit.



That also eleminated any influences with my circuit and the 

programmer.



I have a very suspusous feeling that after one project failure, and 

with little test equipment to reveal the problem, an entire new 

design is being chosen instead of figuring out the existing problems 

or choosing a proven and workable design.



I would however be very interested in knowing how many people program 

pics that are more than 2 meters away (in cable length)



Dave




	















______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Stef Mientki - Apr 9 11:29:00 2004













Also, with USB speeds being faster than the RS-232 speeds why shoot for the low tech port
and the high tech application ?
Also, I noticed that the parallel port is not currently being considdered.




By the time your design is ready, you cann't find any computer with a
parallel port ;-)



Stef
	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Dave Mucha - Apr 9 13:03:00 2004






--- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...> 

wrote:

> > My opinion is that there is no need to program a device more than 

1 

> > meter away. 

> 

> Ever done a project that was larger than 1 meter in size and 

contained

> multiple PICs? Or worked from your PC, which is more than 1 meter 

from

> your test circuit?



Fair question, and one I would be interested in an answer to from the 

origional thread poster. : )



I have not done a board nearly that large.



But, to be fair. if a hobbiest is doing a very large project and is 

using multiple PIC's it should be assumed that they would be capable 

of reviewing the various available programmers and also trouble shoot 

problems with a high degree of knoledge.



For those of us with less experiance should expect to learn the range 

of the tools.



Dave






	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Chad Russel - Apr 9 21:09:00 2004






I'm not a fan of USB for some technical reasons. I have one USB

device, a webcam.



But Power-over-ethernet is here, 802.3af. That I have no problem with.



Chad



--- Don Hackler <> wrote:
> 

> >>For one, I would like to see a USB device. self powered and a

> simple

> >>connection.

> >>

> >>ICSP

> >> 

> >>

> >

> > This is easy enough. Any serial programmer topology (ie the

> infamous

> >JDM, which is a very clever ideea (if the user understood

> >completely how it works) can be ported on USB with a minimal

> hardware

> >requirements. I don't know if already made software programs can

> drive the

> >USB ( ie ICprog which can be considered a standard for a free

> software

> >with such a large number of supported devices)

> > 

> >

> 

> I've got three PIC programmers sitting in front of me... the two that

> 

> use USB are using the FTDI

> USB-serial chip with the drivers downloaded directly from FTDI...

> This seems to be the easiest way to get a USB interface running...

> Otherwise there are high fees to register for official USB

> certifcation 

> and ID numbers.

> One of them (kitsrus.com #150) uses an external power supply, and the

> 

> other (fored.co.uk PICKEY) expects

> runs off of the USB, but points out that the power supplies are very 

> limited, so it can't drive much

> except the actual PIC during programming. It suggests either a diode

> on 

> the PIC VDD line to isolate the PIC

> from the rest of the circuit during programming or to run the PIC VDD

> 

> off the target power supply during

> programming .

> Two nine-volt batteries in series makes a particularly convienent

> power 

> supply for any of the programmers

> that need external power....

> 

> - Don

=====

My software has no bugs. Only undocumented features.



__________________________________





	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Chad Russel - Apr 11 15:27:00 2004








--- Dave Mucha <> wrote:
> I would however be very interested in knowing how many people program

> pics that are more than 2 meters away (in cable length)

> 

> Dave



I for one. Because what it is hooked up to weighs 200 pounds and has

and will kill people. So it stays in a different room.



Chad



=====

My software has no bugs. Only undocumented features.



__________________________________





	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Dave Mucha - Apr 11 22:22:00 2004






--- In , Chad Russel <chadrussel@y...> wrote:

> 

> --- Dave Mucha <davemucha@j...> wrote:

> > 

> > 

> > I would however be very interested in knowing how many people 

program

> > pics that are more than 2 meters away (in cable length)

> > 

> > Dave

> 

> I for one. Because what it is hooked up to weighs 200 pounds and 

has

> and will kill people. So it stays in a different room.

> 

> Chad
I didn't say no one ever had a long cable, but if you have a 200 

pound Gorilla on the end of your leash, I really, really hope you 

aren't uisng a free programmer design that you don't know how it 

works !



Dave






	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Chad Russel - Apr 11 23:35:00 2004






H-E-double-hockey-sticks NO. And some bad code has caused alot of

noise and smoke, and repair. :( Which reminds me I have to get my fire

extinguisher refilled this week. :-D



Chad



--- Dave Mucha <> wrote:

> --- In , Chad Russel <chadrussel@y...> wrote:

> > 

> > --- Dave Mucha <davemucha@j...> wrote:

> > > 

> > > 

> > > I would however be very interested in knowing how many people 

> program

> > > pics that are more than 2 meters away (in cable length)

> > > 

> > > Dave

> > 

> > I for one. Because what it is hooked up to weighs 200 pounds and 

> has

> > and will kill people. So it stays in a different room.

> > 

> > Chad
> I didn't say no one ever had a long cable, but if you have a 200 

> pound Gorilla on the end of your leash, I really, really hope you 

> aren't uisng a free programmer design that you don't know how it 

> works !

> 

> Dave



=====

My software has no bugs. Only undocumented features.



__________________________________





	



______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
RE:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Wouter van Ooijen - Apr 12 0:02:00 2004






> I didn't say no one ever had a long cable, but if you have a 200 

> pound Gorilla on the end of your leash, I really, really hope you 

> aren't uisng a free programmer design that you don't know how it 

> works !



Tha makes little sense. The details of most high-end programmers (PS+,

ICD2, Promate, etc) are *not* available, so you don't know how they

work. The details of some low-end proggers are fully available, so you

do know perferctly how they work. 



And besides: when designing something that is dangerous it is not very

wise to rely on just the correct working of one microcontroller to keep

things safe.



Wouter van Ooijen



-- -------------------------------------------

Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

consultancy, development, PICmicro products




	

















(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
RE:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Chad Russel - Apr 12 0:43:00 2004






You make a very good point, Wouter. But I will not get into the

high-end/low-end debate.



I would not depend on one micro to protect people, I only use one micro

to protect the machine. The machine is dangerous when operating and if

you are stupid enough to be in front of it, then the rules of natural

selection take over. :)



Chad



--- Wouter van Ooijen <> wrote:

> > I didn't say no one ever had a long cable, but if you have a 200 

> > pound Gorilla on the end of your leash, I really, really hope you 

> > aren't uisng a free programmer design that you don't know how it 

> > works !

> 

> Tha makes little sense. The details of most high-end programmers

> (PS+,

> ICD2, Promate, etc) are *not* available, so you don't know how they

> work. The details of some low-end proggers are fully available, so

> you

> do know perferctly how they work. 

> 

> And besides: when designing something that is dangerous it is not

> very

> wise to rely on just the correct working of one microcontroller to

> keep

> things safe.

> 

> Wouter van Ooijen

> 

> -- -------------------------------------------

> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

> consultancy, development, PICmicro products

=====

My software has no bugs. Only undocumented features.



__________________________________





	



______________________________

Stellaris® MCU Family:  New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Dave Mucha - Apr 12 12:09:00 2004






--- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...> 

wrote:

> > I didn't say no one ever had a long cable, but if you have a 200 

> > pound Gorilla on the end of your leash, I really, really hope you 

> > aren't uisng a free programmer design that you don't know how it 

> > works !

> 

> Tha makes little sense. The details of most high-end programmers 

(PS+,

> ICD2, Promate, etc) are *not* available, so you don't know how they

> work. The details of some low-end proggers are fully available, so 

you

> do know perferctly how they work.
I would agree to a large extent, but here is a quote from a recent 

thread....



"I use JDM programmer. I tried to fully understand the JDM's

schematics, but I can't see all the details. I got the idea that the

builder tried to generate some power to feed the PIC and to program

it, then he uses some of the control lines of the RS232 to generate

the clock and the data signals. "
on another thread, the same poster mentioned he does not have a 

scope, but did want to use long cables in excess of 2 meters.



What I am saying is that if you are having problems, and are working 

with something that is dangerous enough that, like Chad stated, and I 

quote "has and will kill people " I hope you KNOW what you are 

doing ! 



I can assume that since Chad is on here and posting he KNOWS what he 

is doing. : ) AFAIK, only survivors can keep posting.



btw, Chad was not the person without scope and didn't know how the 

jdr worked.



Hope that clears up some of the confusion.
> 

> And besides: when designing something that is dangerous it is not 

very

> wise to rely on just the correct working of one microcontroller to 

keep

> things safe.



I imagine that if it is really dangerous, one does not rely on the 

first or second safety system too heavily either.



Dave


> 

> Wouter van Ooijen

> 

> -- -------------------------------------------

> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl

> consultancy, development, PICmicro products


	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - jrem - Apr 13 7:38:00 2004






<snip>



> One goal in my opnion might be to make a dedicated programmer for a 

> chip. The 12F675 is a different chip as regards the programmer as a 

> 16F877. Not huge, but if you program an 8 pin, you cannot plug and 

> play to a 28 pin.
Sure you can. My cheap Olimex PG2 does both. Just switch the chip

setting in IC-Prog. Won't do ICSP, though.



http://www.olimex.com/dev/pic-pg2c.html



__________________________________





	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Vasile Surducan - Apr 26 1:47:00 2004







On Fri, 9 Apr 2004, Dave Mucha wrote:



> I would however be very interested in knowing how many people program

> pics that are more than 2 meters away (in cable length)
My bootloader cable lenght have 2.5 meters, it's not an usart based

bootloader but one wire derived from Wloader. At 19200 there are

no problems, and yes, I need at least 1m for ICSP cable, which is a simple

and already solved problem for any free programmer on the web (I don't

need a new one). How ? With a correct signal-ground interlacing.



best regards,

Vasile

http://surducan.netfirms.com


	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re:  Re: PIC universal programmer - spec and design - Vasile Surducan - Apr 26 1:49:00 2004







On Fri, 9 Apr 2004, Stef Mientki wrote:



> By the time your design is ready, you cann't find any computer with a

> parallel port ;-)


Stef, according to you, the end of the world is here !



:) :) :)



Will be nasty because with a parallel port, programming any LVP-PIC

needs just some wires...



best regards,

Vasile


	





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )