Searching \ for '[PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: massmind.org/techref/microchip/devprogs.htm?key=icsp
Search entire site for: 'CCS Tag Connect ICSP'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP'
2009\04\26@155707 by Forrest W Christian

flavicon
face
Was wandering around the CCS site within the past few days and came
across this:

http://www.ccsinfo.com/content.php?page=tagConnect

Is anyone using these?   Right now I leave an empty 6 pin header place
on board (I pre-program the pics before they go on the board), and will
either use one of those DIP test connector things or solder the header
in place if I need to program a chip after the fact.

This looks like it might be simpler... assuming it works.

-forrest

2009\04\26@172849 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Was wandering around the CCS site within the past few days
>and came across this:
>
> http://www.ccsinfo.com/content.php?page=tagConnect

Looks like it is a proprietary connector. Does the other end of the cable
have a 'standard RJ12' ICD connector?

I have been considering having fingers on the edge of the PCB that will go
into an RJ12 socket, and using one of those telephone cable joining double
sockets on the end of a standard ICD cable for this purpose.

2009\04\26@180040 by Funny NYPD

picon face
We have a similar product released for quite some time, and cost less than half of its price. On our design, each pin can carry up to 3A continuous current.

Here is a picture
www.auelectronics.com/images/CBL_0703_POGO.jpg
It can be used with our BB0703/BB0703+ family, ICD2, ICD3, RealICE, etc.
www.auelectronics.com/System-PICkit2.htm
Users manual:
www.auelectronics.com/pdfs/CBL_0703_POGO_UserManual.pdf
More info is available at our blog link:
http://augroups.blogspot.com/2009/01/cbl-0703-pogo.html

Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: Forrest W Christian <spam_OUTforrestcTakeThisOuTspamimach.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <.....piclistKILLspamspam@spam@mit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 3:59:04 PM
Subject: [PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP

Was wandering around the CCS site within the past few days and came
across this:

http://www.ccsinfo.com/content.php?page=tagConnect

Is anyone using these?   Right now I leave an empty 6 pin header place
on board (I pre-program the pics before they go on the board), and will
either use one of those DIP test connector things or solder the header
in place if I need to program a chip after the fact.

This looks like it might be simpler... assuming it works.

-forrest

2009\04\26@180512 by VICENTE COLOMAR PRATS

picon face
I think, at $29,95 each, it's a expensive one. The space needed for a
standard 5/6 pins ICSP connector is not much more, but this one is costless.

2009/4/26 Alan B. Pearce <Alan.B.PearcespamKILLspamstfc.ac.uk>

> >Was wandering around the CCS site within the past few days
> >and came across this:
> >
> > http://www.ccsinfo.com/content.php?page=tagConnect
>
>

2009\04\26@181838 by VICENTE COLOMAR PRATS

picon face
Hi, those connectors look nice and they are much cheaper. But in the video
you need a big special connector to attach it, that seems a drawback. May be
a similar system (very simple) as the other cable could make yours better.

2009/4/27 Funny NYPD <.....funnynypdKILLspamspam.....yahoo.com>

{Quote hidden}

2009\04\26@202242 by Funny NYPD

picon face
No, you don't need anything special between the pogo-pin cable and the PCB.

The video is for BB0703(PICkit 2) Programmer-to-go demonstration, and it used a different pigtail connector like this (Item #: CBL-RJ12-Program  ):
http://www.auelectronics.com/images/RJ11_Cable_To_Board.jpg

one end of the Item #: CBL-RJ12-Program  is a RJ12 connector (female), the other end is simple raw wire (soldered on the demo PCB on the video).

The one we are talking about (CBL-0703-POGO) has: a male RJ12 Connector and a Pogo-pin header on each end. The RJ12 (male) connector can connect directly with ICD2, ICD3, RealICE, BB0703,BB0703+ etc. The Pogo-pin header can connect directly with programming-pads on PCB. So, no middle-device is required.

Pogo-pin technology is commonly used to establish a (usually temporary) connection between two printed circuit boards. And they are used for mass-production manufacturing. More info are available from the following Wiki link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogo_pin

More PCB-related design info is available at our blog:
http://augroups.blogspot.com/2009/01/cbl-0703-pogo.html


Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: VICENTE COLOMAR PRATS <EraseMEvicentecolomarspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTgmail.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <piclistspamspam_OUTmit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 6:18:37 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP

Hi, those connectors look nice and they are much cheaper. But in the video
you need a big special connector to attach it, that seems a drawback. May be
a similar system (very simple) as the other cable could make yours better.

2009/4/27 Funny NYPD <@spam@funnynypdKILLspamspamyahoo.com>

{Quote hidden}

2009\04\26@203051 by Forrest W Christian

flavicon
face
How is mechanical stability achieved with the pogo pins?  That's always
been my problem.

-forrest

Funny NYPD wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2009\04\26@203209 by Forrest W Christian

flavicon
face
$29.95 per "programmer" isn't that bad..   I'm talking production here,
where I'm sending out literally hundreds of boards without any ICSP on
them at all right now.   Generally they end up with a 6 pin 0.1pitch
header on them somewhere which is never populated other than on
prototype/test boards.

-forrest

VICENTE COLOMAR PRATS wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2009\04\26@215037 by Forrest W Christian

flavicon
face
Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> Looks like it is a proprietary connector. Does the other end of the cable
> have a 'standard RJ12' ICD connector?
>  
From what I cant tell.. you buy the $30 cable... and then put the pcb
footprint on the board - basically 7 holes and 6 surface mount pads.  
Then the cable connects from the standard 6p6c connector to the
footprint.  No connector needed.

I've often thought about doing some edge thing though... not knowing
what I was going to use to connect to it always stopped me.

-forrest

2009\04\26@220200 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Forrest W Christian <TakeThisOuTforrestcEraseMEspamspam_OUTimach.com> wrote:
> How is mechanical stability achieved with the pogo pins?
> That's always been my problem.

Normal ICSP programming should be okay. Actually Pogo pins are very
widely used.

But if the quantity is high, ICSP is not recommended. Pre-programming
is faster for mass production for many factories, at least this is what
I learned from the past experiences.

--
Xiaofan http://mcuee.blogspot.com

2009\04\26@230231 by Funny NYPD

picon face
actually it works pretty good.
On the PCB pads, the center hole is 1 mm in diameter, the pogo-pin round header is about 1.3 mm in diameter, so the pogo pin won't pass through the via on PCB, and the spring force inside of the pogo-pin will secure a good contact between the gold-plated pogo-pin header and the pads.

This design (round head) also provides very good self-alignment when via style Pads are used on PCB .

Every single pogo-pin consists of a socket and a pin-header, the later is replaceable (after 500K~1M times of usage) for very high volume production usage.

Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: Forrest W Christian <RemoveMEforrestcspamTakeThisOuTimach.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <piclistEraseMEspam.....mit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 8:32:47 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP

How is mechanical stability achieved with the pogo pins?  That's always
been my problem.

-forrest

Funny NYPD wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2009\04\26@230737 by Funny NYPD

picon face
I believe Microchip/major distributors provide some pre-programming service for US$0.05~0.07/chip, starting from 1K volume?
The price is not too bad.

Even on that case, It is always good to have some in-house capability for service, repair and product update purpose.

Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: Xiaofan Chen <RemoveMExiaofancspam_OUTspamKILLspamgmail.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <RemoveMEpiclistTakeThisOuTspamspammit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 10:01:59 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Forrest W Christian <EraseMEforrestcspamspamspamBeGoneimach.com> wrote:
> How is mechanical stability achieved with the pogo pins?
> That's always been my problem.

Normal ICSP programming should be okay. Actually Pogo pins are very
widely used.

But if the quantity is high, ICSP is not recommended. Pre-programming
is faster for mass production for many factories, at least this is what
I learned from the past experiences.

--
Xiaofan http://mcuee.blogspot.com

2009\04\26@231237 by Funny NYPD

picon face
For our product, you only need place 5 or 6 ICSP via on PCB, and that's it.
Actually, some of our product use 5 via ICSP, and some use 6 via ICSP. Both work fine.
Here is one with 5 via ICSP:
www.auelectronics.com/images/CB0703_Top.JPG
Here is one with 6 via ICSP:
http://images.elektroda.net/72_1227286060.jpg

Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: Forrest W Christian <RemoveMEforrestcKILLspamspamimach.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <piclistSTOPspamspamspam_OUTmit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 9:52:31 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP

Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> Looks like it is a proprietary connector. Does the other end of the cable
> have a 'standard RJ12' ICD connector?
>  
>From what I cant tell.. you buy the $30 cable... and then put the pcb
footprint on the board - basically 7 holes and 6 surface mount pads.  
Then the cable connects from the standard 6p6c connector to the
footprint.  No connector needed.

I've often thought about doing some edge thing though... not knowing
what I was going to use to connect to it always stopped me.

-forrest

2009\04\26@232447 by Funny NYPD

picon face
Actually Microchip PICkit 2 still keep the ICSP pads (J1) for in-field update purpose:
http://mobots.solarbotics.net/images/pickit2_inside.jpg


J2 on this PICkit 3 photo:
www.ne.jp/asahi/air/variable/picmel/integration/write/pickit3/P10405351.JPG
www.ne.jp/asahi/air/variable/picmel/integration/write/pickit3/P1040540large.JPG
Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com




________________________________
From: Forrest W Christian <spamBeGoneforrestcSTOPspamspamEraseMEimach.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <KILLspampiclistspamBeGonespammit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2009 8:34:05 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP

$29.95 per "programmer" isn't that bad..   I'm talking production here,
where I'm sending out literally hundreds of boards without any ICSP on
them at all right now.   Generally they end up with a 6 pin 0.1pitch
header on them somewhere which is never populated other than on
prototype/test boards.

-forrest

VICENTE COLOMAR PRATS wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2009\04\27@031151 by VICENTE COLOMAR PRATS

picon face
It is not $29.95 for a programmer, it is just the cable!

2009/4/27, Forrest W Christian <@spam@forrestc@spam@spamspam_OUTimach.com>:
>
> $29.95 per "programmer" isn't that bad..   I'm talking production here,
> where I'm sending out literally hundreds of boards without any ICSP on
> them at all right now.   Generally they end up with a 6 pin 0.1pitch
> header on them somewhere which is never populated other than on
> prototype/test boards.
>
> -forrest
>

2009\04\27@040711 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>I think, at $29,95 each, it's a expensive one.

That was my feeling too.

>The space needed for a standard 5/6 pins ICSP
>connector is not much more, but this one is costless.

Well, a couple of one off costs for the cable and laying out the footprint,
and the recurring cost of the board area (although the latter will probably
exist anyway, so zero cost).

2009\04\27@075620 by olin piclist

face picon face
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> But if the quantity is high, ICSP is not recommended.

This is bad advice whithout more particulars.  ICSP has its advantages and
disadvantages, but is often a good choice for volume production.  If the
unit requires some test and calibration anyway, then the extra cost of
programming the parts during this process is usually very low.  Especially
for high volume devices where the cheapest possible PIC was used to just
barely implement the function, it can be useful to load the PIC with special
test firmware during production.  Another advantage is quick and cheap
deployment of new firmware versions.  If you buy preprogrammed parts you're
stuck with the old versions if you find a bug or add a feature, plus there's
a lead time on every firmware change.

> Pre-programming is faster for mass production for many factories,
> at least this is what I learned from the past experiences.

Again, this depends on the nature of the device and how much manufacturing
testing and calibration needs to be done anyway.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

2009\04\27@082452 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Olin Lathrop <spamBeGoneolin_piclistspamKILLspamembedinc.com> wrote:
> Another advantage is quick and cheap
> deployment of new firmware versions.  If you buy preprogrammed parts you're
> stuck with the old versions if you find a bug or add a feature, plus there's
> a lead time on every firmware change.

Many companies doing mass production will have gang programmers
and the investment is there already. But even then if higher quantity
is necessary, pre-programming is better. In my previous job, one of the
device designed by me was running at 100K-200K per year since year
2001 and we converted it to pre-programming from factory programming
in late 2002 after the program was deemed to be stable in the field.

>> Pre-programming is faster for mass production for many factories,
>> at least this is what I learned from the past experiences.
>
> Again, this depends on the nature of the device and how much manufacturing
> testing and calibration needs to be done anyway.
>

In my previous job, we tried to use Promate II and III for mass production
and still used it for some lower quantity production. Promate II and III
are not good enough for production in our experiences even though
Microchip's service is not bad (free replacement). That is top of the
line ICSP programmers you can get for Microchip PICs. The production
teams also tried some other programmers and the conclusion is that
ICSP is not as fast.

We do some in-circuit testing for the boards, but for some device
with very high yield, PCBA testing can even be skipped or down
to the minimum. In that case, the ICSP becomes the bottleneck.

I agree with you that ICSP has its place and indeed in my current
company (typically low quantity), many firmwares are loaded
in testing stage through the tester.

--
Xiaofan http://mcuee.blogspot.com

2009\04\27@095049 by Marcel Duchamp

picon face
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>
> I agree with you that ICSP has its place and indeed in my current
> company (typically low quantity), many firmwares are loaded
> in testing stage through the tester.
>

Of course, this is not a case of having to choose only one or the other;
both  can be used.  Preprogrammed chips can be assembled onto a board
that also has ICSP provision.  Then the ICSP can be used if needed later.

2009\04\27@110252 by William \Chops\ Westfield
face picon face

On Apr 27, 2009, at 5:24 AM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:

> pre-programming is better

Perhaps, but it would be foolish (IMO) not to allow for ICSP as well,  
so that you CAN fix that huge stock of old-rev pre-programmed PICs.  
So you need some sort of ICSP connector anyway...

BillW

2009\04\27@135642 by Jon Chandler

picon face
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:51:07 -0700, Marcel Duchamp wrote
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> >
> > I agree with you that ICSP has its place and indeed in my current
> > company (typically low quantity), many firmwares are loaded
> > in testing stage through the tester.
> >
>
> Of course, this is not a case of having to choose only one or the
> other; both  can be used.  Preprogrammed chips can be assembled onto
> a board that also has ICSP provision.  Then the ICSP can be used if
> needed later.
> --

2009\04\27@231829 by Forrest W Christian

flavicon
face
Jon Chandler wrote:
> ICSP is a good option too when you find out after the boards are assembled
> that somebody supplied non-programmed parts to the assembler - not that that
> EVER happens.
>  
Which is pretty much why I was looking at the tag connect thing.  Looks
like something which I might be able to get the teenagers who do my
insertion work trained to do if needed.

-forrest

'[PIC] CCS Tag Connect ICSP'
2009\05\17@012507 by Neil S
flavicon
face

ICSP is actually widely used, and of course ICD (In Circuit Debugging) is
pretty welll universal these days when developing PIC software.

The Tag-Connect website is at http://www.Tag-Connect.com and has more explanation
and photographs of the Tag-Connect programming and debugging cable.

Often times in production one version of firmware is used for testing (which
can if deired be purchased pre-programmed into the MCU) and right at the end
of testing the latest firmware is flashed. The main reason for doing it that
way is it saves changing all the various Manufacturing and Test Proceedures
every time a new vesrion of the firmware is released (which as many of you
know can be a big deal).

ICSP is also a very useful means for downloading configuration and
calibration data and serial numbers into a board.

Putting the Tag-Connect footprint on a board and buying an off the shelf
cable sure beats having to order parts to make yet another custom
programming cable or fixture and also saves the significant cost and
overhead of having to stock and put a connector on every PCB, plus the
footprint is really tiny, especially for the "legless" version.

Before Tag-Connect we were using 1.25mm Molex connectors that cost over
$0.50 each even in reasonable volumes and required a $600 crimp tool just to
make the cables! Now we simply put a tiny footprint on the PCB right next to
the MCU which takes about the same space of a couple of 0805 resistors! The
legged version of Tag-Connect is great for the debugging ICD connection
required during development but it needs a little bit more board space (but
far less than a modular jack or even the 1.23mm molex) and the legless cable
works fine with the legged footprint for production programming.

Microchip's ICD3 only takes about 1 second to program a PIC24J10 so using
Tag-Connect is a very fast and efficient way to program up a bunch of
boards. We simply hold the Tag-Connect cable to the board (it has three
locating pins that ensure it goes in the right place and it can't be
inserted the wrong way around) and then press "program" and 1 second later
its done!



Marcel Duchamp wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> --

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2009 , 2010 only
- Today
- New search...