> Amazing...
>
> ...so no one with an ICD will be able to program the chip on the bot board
> and single step code while running the bot?
>
> ...and you can't use a bootloader?
>
> ...so, pretty much, you program the chip off the bot, insert it in the bot,
> and hope it works?
>
> ...and that's NOT a ZIF socket, and it doesn't look like there's room for
> one...
>
> wow...
>
> ---
> James Newton (PICList Admin #3)
> jamesnewtonspam_OUTpiclist.com 1-619-652-0593
> PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org
>

> Umm, yeah, it DOES sound like almost every other prototype or projct board
> out there.  Other than all that extra hardware and all, that is...  8-)
> ICSP would be nice, but personally I'd never expect to see a ZIF socket or
> ICD support.  Not with that kind of density and cost.  It looks awfully
> good to me for a few projects.
>
> Dale
>
> On Thu, 3 May 2001, James Newton wrote:
>
> > Amazing...
> >
> > ...so no one with an ICD will be able to program the chip on the bot

> Sorry,
>
> ICD/ICSP takes just so little to do and is so valuable.
>
> I for one would probably use this board for several projects, iff it has
> ICD/ICSP.
>
> There are already what seems like hundreds of .1x.1 header pins on this
> thing. Would a few more be impossible?
>
> How 'bout this:
>
> 2x5 header.
>
> RB6    x
> RB7    x
> RB3    x
> Vdd    z
> Vss     z
>
> The named pins on the left are connected directly to the corresponding PIC
> pins. The 'x's on the right are connected to whatever those PIC pins are

> driving. The 'z's are N/C (or come up with some other function for them).
>
> To disable ICDing and support all current functionality just install 3
> jumpers between the RBn and x's.
>
> To do ICD remove the jumpers and connect a cable to the left side of the
> header.
>
> Bob Ammerman
> RAm Systems
> (contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
> software)
>
>
> Bob Ammerman
> RAm Systems
> (contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
> software)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dale Botkin" <RemoveMEdaleTakeThisOuTMADMAX.BOTKIN.ORG>
> To: <PICLISTEraseME.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 6:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [OT]: Pic-O-Botboard
>
>
> > Umm, yeah, it DOES sound like almost every other prototype or projct

> > ICD support.  Not with that kind of density and cost.  It looks awfully
> > good to me for a few projects.
> >
> > Dale
> >
> > On Thu, 3 May 2001, James Newton wrote:
> >
> > > Amazing...
> > >
> > > ...so no one with an ICD will be able to program the chip on the bot
> board
> > > and single step code while running the bot?
> > >
> > > ...and you can't use a bootloader?
> > >
> > > ...so, pretty much, you program the chip off the bot, insert it in the
> bot,
> > > and hope it works?
> > >
> > > ...and that's NOT a ZIF socket, and it doesn't look like there's room
> for
> > > one...
> > >
> > > wow...
> > >
> > > ---
> > > James Newton (PICList Admin #3)
> > > EraseMEjamesnewtonpiclist.com 1-619-652-0593
> > > PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org
> > >

>
> >> To Roman, TomH, Jinx, RichO, and others:
> >>
> >> After dawdling for months on this project, I finally got around to
> >> designing my PIC botboard - which we talked about some time ago.
> >> Basically, a PIC-based replacement for the 68HC11-based botboards.
> >........
>
> >Preliminary info at:   http://www.oricomtech.com/bot40.htm
> >
> Roman wrote:
> >Looks good Dan! Lots of hobby robot people will
> >like those. Hard to give you actual feedback re the
> >peripherals wihtout some basic circuits, like for
> >the opamps etc, like how many parts you could add.
> >It's nice to be able to add a RC network with cap
> >to ground and or diode, at the opamp input for
> >unusual signal types.
>
> Thanks for the feedback, guys, both onlist and offlist.
>
> No room on the present board for ICSP. Also, the opamp ckts are
> verstaile designs and allow various changes by leaving out & jumpering
> components, etc. Also, separate pullups are provided, and the 2
> inverter ckts have additional output parts:
>
>          pullup
> O----------R7---------| +5v
>
>              +5v
>               |       LM358 or
>               R2      LMC6032
>               |        |  \
>               +--------|+  \             D1/R5
>               |        |    >----+--------|>|-----+---+--->to A/D
> O----C1---R1-------+---|-  /     |       diode    |   |
>               |    |   |  /      |        or      R6  C4
> O----C2-------+    |             |     resistor   |   |
>               |    +-----R4------+                +-+-+
>               R3   |             |                  |
>               |    +-----C3------+                 gnd
>               |
>              gnd
>
> This shows the basic ckt for all 4 amps. Two are inverters, where
> input is to C1 and C2 is grounded. Two are non-inverters, where C1
> is grounded, and the input is to C2 -[the two non-inv do not have
> the output parts - D1/etc].
>
> Note that you can play games with C1/R1 and C2 to make them dc-coupled,
> and fiddle with D1/R5 on the output side to make different ckts, peak
> detect, or low-pass, etc. Gains are adjustable via R1/R4, and BW via
> C1/C3/C4.
>
> The inverters are better for high ac-gain, where you want to limit the
> possibility for oscillation, and the non-inverters can be configured for
> low-gain dc-coupling of sensors. 2 pullups [R7] are available for biasing
> external electret mikes/sensors/etc.
> =================
>
> >
> >Extra 2803 is cool, that gives 8x darlington output
> >drivers.
> >
>
> I did some more fiddling with this area of the pcb, so you can now
> mix and match port B pins "simultaneously" for: direct I/O, ULN2803
> driver control, direct servo control.
>
> So you could could control say 2 servos with their own external power,
> 4 darlington drivers to LEDs/relays/motors/etc with hi-V power, and
> also use 2 port B pins as direct I/O. OR any other combination of 8.
> ===========
>
> >How does LCD connect? Just use a dedicated digital
> >IO port??
>
> Ummm - there aren't enough pins on a PIC40 to add an LCD and still
> have all the other stuff that I have here. However, I "could"
> leave out the ULN2803 and put in an LCD, but .........
>
> Unfortunately, you can only push 40 pins and a small pcb and
> not-smt and still cheap just so far. There's lots of other things
> I wish I could put on there, but ...........
>
> Actually, the idea is to have a basic standalone controller board,
> and also the possibility to stack another SBC on top for additional
> things, and talk between the two via RS-232 - using subsumption
> architecture techniques:
>
> http://www.oricomtech.com/emerge6.htm#Teli2
> =================
>
> >
> >I always find a dipsw or some 0.1 inch jumpers are
> >handy.
> >
>
> On-board dipsw was added in the latest go around. Can also add
> a number of external dipsw and bumper sw - up to 9.
> ============
>
> >Anyway, it looks great! Is it size legal for
> >minisumo (10cm cube) or micromouse (150mm square)??
> >-Roman
>
> Ummmm, don't know. This thing has grown and grown as I have added
> features - started as 2.5"x3.5", now 2.5"x4.1" [6.3cm x 10.4cm].
>
> best regards,
> - Dan Michaels
> http://www.oricomtech.com
> =======================
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
> (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

>
> Sorry,
>
> ICD/ICSP takes just so little to do and is so valuable.
>
> I for one would probably use this board for several projects, iff it has
> ICD/ICSP.
>
> There are already what seems like hundreds of .1x.1 header pins on this
> thing. Would a few more be impossible?
>
> How 'bout this:
>
> 2x5 header.
>
> RB6    x
> RB7    x
> RB3    x
> Vdd    z
> Vss     z
>
> The named pins on the left are connected directly to the corresponding PIC
> pins. The 'x's on the right are connected to whatever those PIC pins are now
> driving. The 'z's are N/C (or come up with some other function for them).
>
> To disable ICDing and support all current functionality just install 3
> jumpers between the RBn and x's.
>
> To do ICD remove the jumpers and connect a cable to the left side of the
> header.
>
> Bob Ammerman
> RAm Systems
> (contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
> software)
>
> Bob Ammerman
> RAm Systems
> (contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
> software)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dale Botkin" <RemoveMEdaleEraseMEEraseMEMADMAX.BOTKIN.ORG>
> To: <RemoveMEPICLISTspam_OUTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 6:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [OT]: Pic-O-Botboard
>
> > Umm, yeah, it DOES sound like almost every other prototype or projct board
> > out there.  Other than all that extra hardware and all, that is...  8-)
> > ICSP would be nice, but personally I'd never expect to see a ZIF socket or
> > ICD support.  Not with that kind of density and cost.  It looks awfully
> > good to me for a few projects.
> >
> > Dale
> >
> > On Thu, 3 May 2001, James Newton wrote:
> >
> > > Amazing...
> > >
> > > ...so no one with an ICD will be able to program the chip on the bot
> board
> > > and single step code while running the bot?
> > >
> > > ...and you can't use a bootloader?
> > >
> > > ...so, pretty much, you program the chip off the bot, insert it in the
> bot,
> > > and hope it works?
> > >
> > > ...and that's NOT a ZIF socket, and it doesn't look like there's room
> for
> > > one...
> > >
> > > wow...
> > >
> > > ---
> > > James Newton (PICList Admin #3)
> > > RemoveMEjamesnewtonTakeThisOuTspampiclist.com 1-619-652-0593
> > > PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org
> > >

>>How does LCD connect? Just use a dedicated digital
>>IO port??
>
>Ummm - there aren't enough pins on a PIC40 to add an LCD and still
>have all the other stuff that I have here. However, I "could"
>leave out the ULN2803 and put in an LCD, but .........
>
>Unfortunately, you can only push 40 pins and a small pcb and
>not-smt and still cheap just so far. There's lots of other things
>I wish I could put on there, but ...........
>
>Actually, the idea is to have a basic standalone controller board,
>and also the possibility to stack another SBC on top for additional
>things, and talk between the two via RS-232 - using subsumption
>architecture techniques:
>
>best regards,
>- Dan Michaels
>http://www.oricomtech.com

>
>My personal I/O list for a bot will be something like:
>
>2 H bridges ( Got em on the botboard) for wheel motors
>1 driver for a high current switch (could just be a single port pin) for
>mowing head motor
>RS232  for serial LCD
>10-12 switch inputs  (mostly bump switches and a keyswitch, tiltswitch)
>Possible  2 A/D for charger
>1 D.O. for charger
>ICSP
>
>I'll not bother with the botboard's 12C and the ULN2803 diver chip, opening
>up enough I/O for ICSP and all those inputs.   Other than that it looks like
>it will meet my needs pretty well.
>

>
>On Thu, 3 May 2001, James Newton wrote:
>
>> Amazing...
>>
>> ...so no one with an ICD will be able to program the chip on the bot board
>> and single step code while running the bot?
>>
>> ...and you can't use a bootloader?
>>
>> ...so, pretty much, you program the chip off the bot, insert it in the bot,
>> and hope it works?
>>
>> ...and that's NOT a ZIF socket, and it doesn't look like there's room for
>> one...
>>
>> wow...
>>
>> ---
>> James Newton (PICList Admin #3)
>> EraseMEjamesnewtonspamspamBeGonepiclist.com 1-619-652-0593
>> PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org
>>

>Sorry,
>
>ICD/ICSP takes just so little to do and is so valuable.
>
>I for one would probably use this board for several projects, iff it has
>ICD/ICSP.
>
>There are already what seems like hundreds of .1x.1 header pins on this
>thing. Would a few more be impossible?
>
>How 'bout this:
>
>2x5 header.
>
>RB6    x
>RB7    x
>RB3    x
>Vdd    z
>Vss     z
>

>   While I've been focusing on testing sensors and have not finished the
>overall architecture, the 16F877 core interface looks like this:
>
>   PortA = 4 A/D channels, +Vref, and Right Tach Input (TMR0).
>   PortB = Interrupt expansion. Uses an external 74HC30 and RB0/INT to
>           provide 7 interrupts; 2 bumper switches, 3 IR, and 2 spares
>           reserved for Rangefinder and Speech Input PICs.
>   PortC = RS232, 5 SPI chip selects, Left Tach Input (TMR1).
>   PortD = Dual Motor control for the H-Bridge PIC, 4 spares.
>   PortE = SPI
>
>   This makes it easy to add custom `smart modules' and frees the main CPU
>to concentrate on higher functions. If I wired directly to the 16F877, I
>wouldn't have enough pins and CPU resources.
>

>
> At 01:54 PM 5/3/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >Amazing...
> >
> >...so no one with an ICD will be able to program the chip on the bot board
> >and single step code while running the bot?
> >
> >...and you can't use a bootloader?
> >
> >...so, pretty much, you program the chip off the bot, insert it in the bot,
> >and hope it works?
> >
> >...and that's NOT a ZIF socket, and it doesn't look like there's room for
> >one...
> >
> >wow...
> >
>
> Gosh, how soon we get locked into relying upon these new-fangled inventions.
>
> But, as it turns out, I needed to add another 0.1" in height to the
> PICoBotboard - now 2.6" x 4.1" - and is be room to add a std ICSP header,
> which would normally be:  Mclr-Vdd-Gnd-RB7-RB6
>
> 1- Will this be adequate for using new-fnagled ICDs and bootloader?
>
> 2 - Do you need RB3?
>
> 3 - The RB lines normally go straight into the ULN2803, which is about 5K
>     input resistance. Will the ICD handle this loading ok?

>Also, I like the idea of maybe splitting it up into
>two boards stackable. Maybe the PIC, eeprom and 2803
>chip with all digital and analogue pin headers on
>one board, this alone would be pretty impressive.
>Then maybe an accessories board with the opamps
>and power h-bridge chips, this could mount on top
>and keep the heat away from the PIC and eeprom.
>
>Just suggestions. :o)

>
> Roman wrote:

> >consider keeping them less than 100mm square, to comply
> >with minisumo rules, which is becoming a very popular
> >competition, especially with schools and tech colleges.
> >I think you said 4 1/4 " ?? That would be JUST too big.
> >Your botboard would not be considered. :o)
> >
>
> Shoot, Roman, trick question. It finally occurred to me
> [slow, slow, slow]:
>
> +-------------------+
> | .                 |
> |   .               |
> |     .             |
> |       .           |
> |         .         |
> |           .       |
> |             .     |
> |               .   |
> +-------------------+
>

>>
>> +-------------------+
>> | .                 |
>> |   .               |
>> |     .             |
>> |       .           |
>> |         .         |
>> |           .       |
>> |             .     |
>> |               .   |
>> +-------------------+
>>
>
>Actually this won't work either. The minisumo
>rules state 10cm CUBE, and from what i've seen
>the bottom 90% is jam packed full of motors,
>batteries and wheels. I have actually seen
>comments on hobby robot pages like "that board
>is too big, get the brand-x board that will fit".
>:o)

>Tom Handley wrote:
>>   While I've been focusing on testing sensors and have not finished the
>>overall architecture, the 16F877 core interface looks like this:
>>
>>   PortA = 4 A/D channels, +Vref, and Right Tach Input (TMR0).
>>   PortB = Interrupt expansion. Uses an external 74HC30 and RB0/INT to
>>           provide 7 interrupts; 2 bumper switches, 3 IR, and 2 spares
>>           reserved for Rangefinder and Speech Input PICs.
>>   PortC = RS232, 5 SPI chip selects, Left Tach Input (TMR1).
>>   PortD = Dual Motor control for the H-Bridge PIC, 4 spares.
>>   PortE = SPI
>>
>>   This makes it easy to add custom `smart modules' and frees the main CPU
>>to concentrate on higher functions. If I wired directly to the 16F877, I
>>wouldn't have enough pins and CPU resources.
>>
>
>Looks like we have slightly different approaches - [so what else is new? :)].
>I'm going for a slightly more general approach with fewer specific
>subsystems built in - to make the board more "general" like the Handyboard.
>If the app really needs a lot of "higher functions", then another board can
>piggy-back -[such as a high-powered Stamp :)].
>
>Got any idea how "large" your board is gonna be? More than 2.6"x4.1"?
>
>best regards,
>- dan michaels
>http://www.oricomtech.com/bot40.htm

>
>       v   chokes(2)
>      -------MMMM---+---+----+
>       .            |   |    |   +-----+
>       .            C   R    +---|     |
>       .            |   |        |motor|
>      -------MMMM---+---+--------|     |
>       ^                         +--+--+
>       |shield                      |case
>       +----------------------------+
>
>Probably best to connect the shield at the motor case end only, but
>can try variations.
>
>I'll have to find some chokes that can handle .5-1A, and probably play
>with the R value.
>
>The one thing I am not too sure about is how this will affect the
>PWM control, as the L293D chips don't actually put dc on the motors
>but rather dc interrupted at 19.3 khz.
>==============
>
>
>>If you ever have doubtes about a DC brush motor making noise in your
>>circuit, disconnect it and reconnect it through a good quality mains line
>>filter (Corcom etc). If the noise goes away or is reduced it was the
>>motor.
>>
>
>There is no doubt that the motor is the source of the noise I
>was referring to. Motor on, noise; motor off, no noise. More speed,
>more noise.
>
>And trying a mains filter as 1st step to determining whether I can
>filter out the noise sounds like an excellent idea too.
>
>thanks a heap,
>- dan michaels
>http://www.oricomtech.com
>========================
>

>
> Peter,
>
> I went out to the local surplus electronics shop and found a nice
> little EMI line filter rated at 1A - std issue, 2x1.86 mH in-line
> inductors, 0.01 uF across the lines, and 2x0.01 uF from lines to
> gnd. This didn't do anything to squelch the noise - I think the
> noise is just too slow for this type of filter.
>
> I did play around some more with snubbers, and turns out a plain
> old 15 to 120 ohm resistor across the motor drops the noise by
> half, and also rounds the edges nicely. 15 ohms increases the
> power drain a "bit" though.
>
> Also, 0.01-0.47uF caps used alone increase the overshoot during PWM
> switching, so they are not a good route, however, a cap + small series
> R seems to be the best - knocks down the noise by 50%, to about 1v
> riding on a 5v signal out of the L293D. Possibly the best I can hope
> for with these particular motors.
>
> Can't think of much else to try ????????/
>
> tonkas,
> - dan michaels
> http://www.oricomtech.com
> ======================
>
> thanks for the suggestions. Sounds like the following type
> of filter is to try:
> >
> >       v   chokes(2)
> >      -------MMMM---+---+----+
> >       .            |   |    |   +-----+
> >       .            C   R    +---|     |
> >       .            |   |        |motor|
> >      -------MMMM---+---+--------|     |
> >       ^                         +--+--+
> >       |shield                      |case
> >       +----------------------------+
> >
> >Probably best to connect the shield at the motor case end only, but
> >can try variations.
> >
> >I'll have to find some chokes that can handle .5-1A, and probably play
> >with the R value.
> >
> >The one thing I am not too sure about is how this will affect the
> >PWM control, as the L293D chips don't actually put dc on the motors
> >but rather dc interrupted at 19.3 khz.
> >==============
> >
> >
> >>If you ever have doubtes about a DC brush motor making noise in your
> >>circuit, disconnect it and reconnect it through a good quality mains line
> >>filter (Corcom etc). If the noise goes away or is reduced it was the
> >>motor.
> >>
> >
> >There is no doubt that the motor is the source of the noise I
> >was referring to. Motor on, noise; motor off, no noise. More speed,
> >more noise.
> >
> >And trying a mains filter as 1st step to determining whether I can
> >filter out the noise sounds like an excellent idea too.
> >
> >thanks a heap,
> >- dan michaels
> >http://www.oricomtech.com
> >========================
> >
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

>
> Hi Dan! Sorry I was too busy to comment before on
> your noise problem. In all the new VCRs I see a
> small toroid, with the motor wires doing 2 or 3 turns
> around it right at the motor end.
>
> Also, using a capacitor only across an inductive
> load is not a good spike filter. You get all sorts
> of complex tank effects where the inductor and cap
> feed each other energy.
> You need to *waste* the energy, try a cap and series
> resistor, called a snubber network. I am familiar with
> the little motors you are using and suggest about 0.47uF
> poly cap and 15 ohm R.
>
> Also you could try my 5% rule, drop about 5% of the
> motor voltage with a series resistor, then put a cap
> across the supply end from the resistor to ground.
>
> Also remember these small motors take a few hours to
> "seat" the brushes, and will make much worse sparks
> at the comm until the square brushes wear around the
> comm. In the motor shop we used to sand the brushes
> on large motors until they fit the comms exact, you don't
> get proper motor performance until the brushes are
> bedded.
>
> Lastly, check the L293 to make sure it has flyback
> diodes on both high and low bridge sides, I think it
> does, but this is important if you want decent PWM
> without major spike issues. :o)
> -Roman
>
> Dan Michaels wrote:
> >
> > Peter,
> >
> > I went out to the local surplus electronics shop and found a nice
> > little EMI line filter rated at 1A - std issue, 2x1.86 mH in-line
> > inductors, 0.01 uF across the lines, and 2x0.01 uF from lines to
> > gnd. This didn't do anything to squelch the noise - I think the
> > noise is just too slow for this type of filter.
> >
> > I did play around some more with snubbers, and turns out a plain
> > old 15 to 120 ohm resistor across the motor drops the noise by
> > half, and also rounds the edges nicely. 15 ohms increases the
> > power drain a "bit" though.
> >
> > Also, 0.01-0.47uF caps used alone increase the overshoot during PWM
> > switching, so they are not a good route, however, a cap + small series
> > R seems to be the best - knocks down the noise by 50%, to about 1v
> > riding on a 5v signal out of the L293D. Possibly the best I can hope
> > for with these particular motors.
> >
> > Can't think of much else to try ????????/
> >
> > tonkas,
> > - dan michaels
> > http://www.oricomtech.com
> > ======================
> >
> > thanks for the suggestions. Sounds like the following type
> > of filter is to try:
> > >
> > >       v   chokes(2)
> > >      -------MMMM---+---+----+
> > >       .            |   |    |   +-----+
> > >       .            C   R    +---|     |
> > >       .            |   |        |motor|
> > >      -------MMMM---+---+--------|     |
> > >       ^                         +--+--+
> > >       |shield                      |case
> > >       +----------------------------+
> > >
> > >Probably best to connect the shield at the motor case end only, but
> > >can try variations.
> > >
> > >I'll have to find some chokes that can handle .5-1A, and probably play
> > >with the R value.
> > >
> > >The one thing I am not too sure about is how this will affect the
> > >PWM control, as the L293D chips don't actually put dc on the motors
> > >but rather dc interrupted at 19.3 khz.
> > >==============
> > >
> > >
> > >>If you ever have doubtes about a DC brush motor making noise in your
> > >>circuit, disconnect it and reconnect it through a good quality mains line
> > >>filter (Corcom etc). If the noise goes away or is reduced it was the
> > >>motor.
> > >>
> > >
> > >There is no doubt that the motor is the source of the noise I
> > >was referring to. Motor on, noise; motor off, no noise. More speed,
> > >more noise.
> > >
> > >And trying a mains filter as 1st step to determining whether I can
> > >filter out the noise sounds like an excellent idea too.
> > >
> > >thanks a heap,
> > >- dan michaels
> > >http://www.oricomtech.com
> > >========================
> > >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> > [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
> (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics