| Author |
Message |
|
|
 Posted: Nov 09, 2005 - 10:55 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
This is the old thread: go to http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=36591 for the latest information (or go to http://www.aplomb.nl/TechStuff/PPPD/PPPD%20English.html)
EDITED March 4th 2006: additional info furtheron in this thread; please check it out; there are necessary modifications to the schematics
EDITED May 11th 2006: An abstract of this topic has been placed in the Tutorial Section: http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=36591
Solutions to problems with STK200/300-programming dongles and alikes.
This time not a Question, just Answers
In the past there have been quite some articles about programming-problems with these dongles and other dongles with a simular design. I am talking about the AVR-programmers with a 74HC244 buffer, on the printer- (or parallel) port of the PC.
Two types of problems:
1 from: "does not recognize chip", ID="some rubbish",
to: it does not work, pls help ....
2 from: It damaged the printerport on my PC
to: it works on one printerport but not on an another
Good suggestions so far:
- Increase the programming-delay
- In BIOS: set printerport to EPP or ECP
- Use a shielded printercable
and other suggestions:
- Buy yourself a better programmer ... it is unreliable
- and some confusing suggestions ... that really do not help.
The story:
A few months ago, I purchased a STK200 with Kanda (UK). The board came with this programming dongle and it worked fine. Until the parallel port on the motherboard of my PC was damaged by the dongle.... Luckily I could fall back on a PCI-card which gave me another parallel port. But I was worried ..., and not pleased ...
For a new project with two Atmel uC's, I needed a second programmer. So I built one. The famous design with the 74HC244. And to suit my needs, I made it with another type of connector for the target-board. IT DID NOT WORK ! Why? Did I make a mistake? No, I did not ...
Hmmm.
In order to program the new targetboard (with the new connector), I made an adapter for the existing and working STK200-programming dongle. And with the new connector it DID NOT WORK EITHER !! Can a connector make the difference?
I was confused .... for a moment. I started searching on the Forums and discovered that I was not the only one ... But suggestions for a solution did not do the trick so far ... I do use a shielded cable, the BIOS-settings are OK, I increased the programming-dalay, etc
I decided to sort this out. And dig it out, .... to the bottom !
To start: I like the design with the HC244. It looks good. Well done, designer! The 74HC244 buffers the signals between PC and targetboard, and isolates the two when the programming is done.
Many people use this interface as it is cheap and easy to build. And is comfortable to use in combination with Bascom AVR.
Note: although some Forum-members claim that it is not supported in AVR-Studio-4 (the beautiful programming-environment from Atmel): sorry guys, that is not true! Kanda supplies a plug-in for AVR-Studio with the STK200 and it works fine! And comfortable.
Back to business:
Q. What makes this dongle unreliable?
A. LONG LINES, my friends!
Fourier, La Place, thank you for the insight. And thanks to my teachers! Although that's some time ago ...
The combination of short rise- and falltimes (high slewrate) on the signals and the (relative) long lines for these frequency-domains (using Fourier and La Place), that is what's making these dongles unreliable.
What I did:
I hooked up an oscilloscope to the SCK-line on the targetboard and it was obvious: RINGING, i.e. oscillations right after a fast transition of the SCK-line.
Q. What happens during programming in the original design?
A. The uC on the targetboard looses synchronization with the programmer. It sees more than one SCK-edge due to the ringing. And that's what I read some time before ... an Application Note from Atmel. AHA. Now things fall in place. The puzzle is complete, and the picture well visible.
I needed to get rid of the high-frequency-components generated by the edges. The trick: a small RC-filter of 0.1 us, made up with a resistor of 1 Kohm and 100 pF capacitor. That's all it takes: one small filter in the SCK-line. I built it into the STK200-dongle and ran some tests: problem solved. No longer dependant of connector/cable.
Built it into the second programming-dongle: works.
Hooked them up to another PC: works.
Let's go to the second problem:
Q. Why did the dongle blow the printerport on the motherboard?
A. I was not carefull enough.
Some explanation is needed here. The dongle is connected to targetboard and PC. Suppose both are powered down. When the targetboard is switched on, and the PC is not, the dongle will force current into the printerport's /Ack-line.
Q. Can that do any harm?
A. Yes!
To understand this, some historical facts about the printerport.
In the original IBM-design, the printerport was made up with a 74LS374 and a 74LS244. To blow that port you really needed to use brute-force. Hook it up to 24 VDC f.i.  It was a very rugged design.
Nowadays, the printerport on a motherboard is built-in an ASIC, which has far more functions, but is not as rugged as the original design. The 74HC244 in the dongle can supply 25 mA (guaranteed) on an output-pin, and I am afraid that was too much for the ASIC. The good news is that the rest of the printerport still works OK. But it can no longer be used for this dongle.
So: limit the current in the /Ack-line by inserting a 1 kOhm resistor. The other lines are all inputs on the 74HC244 and therefor , basically, need no limiters. However, I do think it's better to insert current-limiters there as well. Why?
Of course we all know that the parallel port and RS232-port are not hot-pluggable .... , but most of the time I treat them as such. I know, ... bad habbit.
By taking some extra measures, the dongle can be made such, that it will not do any harm to plug it in while the PC and/or the target-board are powered.
Some FAQ's
Q. Is it necessary to add the filter to MISO and MOSI as well?
A. No. The data on these lines are set-up before the SCK-edge occurs. So even if there is ringing on these lines (and there is !!), it has no effect on the transmission. But: it's a good idea to filter these lines as well.
Q. Is this the ultimate solution?
A. Depends how you look at it. Adding a filter (an analog circuit) to a digital clock-line is something I preferably do not do, .... usually.
But in this case it's the best I could think of, ... in getting a simple solution.
The good thing is that it is not acting as a delay for the clock-pulse: that's a designer's nightmare. All it does is reducing the slewrate of the clock-signal. The best solution .... I'll give it some thought
Q. Could this apply to other programmers as well?
A. I think it does.
- Looking at the design of f.i. the AVR-ISP: the 90S1200 connects to the targetboard with no slewrate limiters at all. And if the cable between programmer and target is short, that will work fine. But Atmel's uC's are PDQ-things and have very short rise- and fall-times on their I/O-pins. So if you're using a longer cable, the same problem might occur.
- Looking at the serial programmer (SI-PROG) from PonyProg: here the problem will NOT occur as in the RS232-specification provisions were made for slewrate-limiting. Clever guys at that time, huh?
- The programmer ZL2PRG on the MCS-site: it looks like it is lacking this filter as well.
Quite some text huh?
As attachments you'll find an ImprovedVersion and an EvenBetter version, in case you're gonna build a new one.
I hope this solves many problems ... in my case it did. Have fun and happy computing .... eh, programming.
Plons |
Last edited by Plons on Jun 20, 2008 - 10:18 PM; edited 3 times in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 16, 2005 - 10:04 AM |
|
Joined: Aug 09, 2005
Posts: 52
|
|
Hi Plons,
I'm just getting started with AVR with the STK200 so thanks for the suggestions. I've seen similar problems in the past where lengths of cables, shielding etc can alter the ringing and yes I hate adding analog circuitry to the digital lines. Sometimes series R and/or termination helps too, but you're probably right that the R/C filter is the more robust solution.
I've been having problems with another parallel port PROM/PAL programmer - only works on an old laptop so I think I'll investigate any ringing. I must admit I hadn't thought of ringing on the lines - getting old I guess!
Thanks again for sharing the solution!
--Nick-- |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 16, 2005 - 11:13 AM |
|
Joined: Jun 18, 2001
Posts: 1085
Location: Brisbane Queensland Australia
|
|
Hi
Well done, very intensive coverage on solving the problem & thanks for sharing it.
I have read somewhere about a month ago that someone suggested connecting 2 x 100K resistors to inputs of pin1(GA) to +5V & pin 19(GB) to +5V.
This will put the 74HC244 output to become tri-state mode (high impedance).
If memory serve me correct, then if STK200 is power up before you plug it into the printer port then your AVR chip will not be affected.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Having a hard time reading tonight as I somehow got soap or hair shampoo in one of my eye.
Pretty painfull, manage to flush it out with plenty of water.
Ken |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 16, 2005 - 11:28 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
Nick, good luck with your PromProg ... I hope you can sort it out
Ken, thanks for the advice: indeed it's an idea to consider adding the 100k pull-up-resistors on pin 1 and 19. Although I never blew an AVR .... But I must say: I always put in the 1k resistors in SCK, MOSI, MISO and Reset (on the targetboard). So there is not much chance
Plons |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 28, 2006 - 07:04 AM |
|
Joined: Sep 20, 2004
Posts: 1
|
|
Hi
I wonder why did you put the RC network after the HC244 buffer and not before, in his inputs?
Is the 1K resistor not too big?
thanks
Ori |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 02, 2006 - 06:45 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 17, 2006
Posts: 2
|
|
Hi,
Plons, excellent analysis of the problem!
I've got a question about the /ACK line and the 1K resistor used to limit the current on this line
as used in the improvement above.
I've found that on my parallel port, there seems to be an internal pullup to +5V on this line. Using the
indicated 1k resistor to pull this line low results in the pin only going to +2.4V. This seems to indicate that
on this motherboard (its a Pentium 100-level board), there is roughly a 1k internal pullup on this line. This
means I'll need an 180R resistor in order to pull the line low enough to meet the Vil specification. Interestingly
enough, I repeated this experiment on another motherboard (Pentium 533 this time) and found that it too
has an internal pullup; in this case it looks to be about a 1k8 pullup resister.
Is it usual for the status lines of the printer port to have internal pullups? I've seen no references to the
status inputs definitively having pullups on them. Can someone comment if ALL parallel ports generally
have some sort of internal pullup? If so, are the internal pullups typically this low in value (1k to 2k).
And while we are no the topic of parallel ports, are there actually parallel ports that are run at 3.3v rather than
5v?
I've got a couple of other questions on the usage of the HC244 in the improved circuit above. Firstly, if
the programmer is connected to the target board but is not plugged into the computer parallel port, the
HC244 inputs will be left floating. Wouldn't it be a better idea to add pullup resisters to all of the HC244
inputs rather than just the 2 enable pins?
Secondly, aren't the 6 additional 1k series resistors connected to the HC244 inputs (used in 'Even Better
PPPD' but not in 'Improved PPPD') still mandatory? If the AVR target board is working at 3v (meaning the
HC244 will be running at about 2.3v due to the diode drop) and the parallel port is working at 5v, this would
forward bias the HC244 input protection diodes with no current limit.
Or, I could be missing something fundamental.... (if so, don't be shy to let me know).
Regards,
Harvey |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 03, 2006 - 12:16 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
Quote:
I wonder why did you put the RC network after the HC244 buffer and not before, in his inputs?
one half of the 244 is used as input, the other as output (seen from one side).
I added a filter to the SCK-line which goes from the 244 to the AVR-targetboard: for the simple reason that "ringing" on that line was causing the trouble.
Quote:
Is the 1K resistor not too big?
I think not. The SCK-line is an input of the AVR. So 1k is OK. If you prefer to use a lower value, you can give it a try.
These were Ori's questions
Over to Harvey
I blew the motherboard-parallel-port with the original programmer. My own fault, because "we" are not supposed to plug-and unplug the parallel port when the PC is on. As I wrote earlier.
I tried to come up with a solution to prevent another blow-out (of my plug-in xtra parallel port). I had no other reference than this board.
So .....
Apparently there are pull-ups on the statuslines.
Hmmm, that makes sense AND a difference.
You are right: if there is a 1k - 1k8 pull-up, the 1k series-resistor will cause a level-problem. Your choice for 180ohm, is a good value. In my case the (on the extra PCI-board) 1k worked fine.
About Vcc=3.3V (AVR).
Yes, you're right. Again
That is the "price" for the use of this low-cost programmer.
The ParallelPortProgrammingDongle is not the right programming-tool for low-voltage applications.
The way I solve that: during development I run the AVR on 5V.
About ParallelPorts in general: although IBM specified the original very well, current design's are no longer meeting these spec's. And in fact we are not using the ParPort as it was supposed to be used ..... agree?
I strongly recommend not to plug or unplug the PPPD when it's powered. Unless you have plenty motherboards, of course 
As you can read in this forum, many members prefer another programmer. And me? I recently ordered another programmer as well (USB)
But if you are a student, or simply do not wish to spend a lot of money for other reasons, this is an easy to build and low-cost tool. Another possibility is to build the serial programmer of PonyProg.
Happy programming
Nard |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 04, 2006 - 05:30 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
Hello folks
An update on the PPPD: the ParallelPortProgrammingDongle
Thanks to: hlee (Harvey) for discovering the /Ack-pullup and his suggestion to reduce the resistor between pin 10 of the 25 pole subD-connector and the 74HC244 from 1k to 180 Ohms
and pykedgew (Ken) for his suggestion to add 2 100kOhm on G2A and G2B of the 74HC244
I have implemented the modifications in the schematics, and you'll find these as attachments.
When you use this programmer, do not plug it in or unplug it when PC and/or your targetboard is powered on !!
Dinner is being served, I'll get back later
Nard |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 04, 2006 - 08:59 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
Some suggestions and/or recommendations
0 Do not plug-in or unplug the PPPD from the PC when either PC or targetAVR are powered-on
1 For PPPD to work properly, Vcc of your targetAVR must be 5V
2 If you use the STK200 as target, 3.3V for the AVR is OK as the STK200 has some additionally circuitry to take care of the different levels
3 If you need to disconnect the programmer from your targetAVR, first turn AVR's power down
4 Leave the PPPD connected to the PC; there is no need to unplug it
5 If you're using a ParallelPort extension cable, make sure it's a shielded one, not longer than 1.8 mtr
6 Check your PC-BIOS for ParallelPort setting: EPP or ECP
If there are more, .... feel free to add.
Nard |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 06, 2006 - 11:16 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 17, 2006
Posts: 2
|
|
Hi Nard,
Actually, I'm a bit uncomfortable with using just a 100R resistor on the
parallel port pin 10 /ACk input. Under the wrong conditions it can still
cause damage to the parallel port.
I know that PPPD and other programmers like it were meant to be simple in
design, so what I have to say may sound burdensome. Please bear with me...
I was hoping that someone more knowledgeable about parallel ports could
provide some input on the internal pullups on the status lines of the
parallel port. Since there hasn't been any new information, I'm going to
assume below that there are parallel ports with status lines that do not
have internal pullups.
I would suggest adding a schottky diode in series with the MISO output
towards the DB25 pin 10 as shown below. The 15k resistor is used as a
pullup for the /Ack input in case pin 10 does not have an internal
pullup. If the port already has an internal pullup, this resistor is
not needed. I chose a lower value resistor to use here to minimize any
time delay impacts on the AC characteristics (probably minimal at parallel
port data speeds). The 22R resistor is used mainly for ESD protection of
the PPPD - especially if the PPPD is out-of-circuit and is being handled.
It would be better to have a larger value here (for better ESD protection),
but then it still needs to be low enough to sink the approximately 6 mA
of internal pullup and pin 10 base current.
With this configuration, the HC244 output only sinks current from the /Ack
line when MISO is low. When MISO is high, it is decoupled from the
/Ack line and the pullup resistor (internal and/or external) is used to
pull /Ack high.
The worst-case noise margin is decreased by about .4V by this design,
though.
+V
|
|
|
\
/
\ 15K
/
\
|
|
22R | Schottky
|
input to /Ack -----/\/\/\----------------!>|------------ output from MISO
DB25 pin 10 HC244 pin 9
In the other direction, I still feel uncomfortable about not having
any ESD protection, current protection nor pullups on the 6 inputs to
the HC244. If anyone is still with me, I'd like suggest the circuit
below. On output high, the DB25 outputs are decoupled from the PPPD
which gets its pull-up power not from the DB25 but from its own
supply.
+V
|
|
|
\
/
\ 15K
/
\
|
|
220R Schottky |
|
DB25 outputs -----/\/\/\------|<!--------------------- HC244 inputs
Please note that I haven't built this circuit yet; I'll need to start
looking for an appropriate small-signal schottky diode. This circuit
(as far as I can tell from some quick calculations) meets the
worst-case input/output voltage requirements at a target voltage of
5V and 3.3V. My aim is to get this to run at 2.4V for an application
I'm working on. BTW, I was intending on changing D1 (the 1N4148) to
a schottky as well.
The changes above will allow the computer power and the target power
to be totally independent of each other, so there will be no need
to worry about power on/off sequences.
Comments welcome.
Regards,
Harvey |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 07, 2006 - 12:14 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
Hi Harvey
You gave it quite some thought 
It might work fine, but it could also introduce unintented effects.
About specifications of parallel ports on PC's in general: IMO it doesn't help ..... there are so many different Parallel Ports out there, or .... at least many with different behaviour. Until now I have seen three variants: notebook PP, standard PC-motherboard PP, and the extra PCI-plug-in board PP. All with different pull-up's on statuslines
So I am afraid there is no universal recipe 
But: if you are interested in spec's: I googled once on that subject and the spec's are available on the net.
Your analysis : I agree. There are many things that could be improved on this programmer. But then it will no longer be a simple programmer.....
If your goal is to make the best of this programmer: go ahead
But if your goal is to have a reliable programmer to do some nice AVR-programming: buy an AVR ISP or build one. Program the 90S1200 with the PPPD. This breaks you out of the chicken-egg problem (nice metaphore, )
The 90S1200 in that design could be replaced with a Tiny2313 (easier to get), but you need to do some more searching on the (modified) code. This Forum is a good place to start.
 Does the software you're gonna use support the PPPD ?
Just asking .... I would feel sorry for you if you have to find out later that you actually need an other programmer
regards
Nard |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 07, 2006 - 12:28 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 07, 2006 - 05:43 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2002
Posts: 203
|
|
| I have been having a lot of trouble with mega64 and mega323 ISP lately. AVRISP and STK500 say (via AVR STudio) failed to enter the programming mode. But that never worked for the mega323 device. I tried the STK200 dongle with Kanda software and it would not verify (about 5% correct). I read Plons' post and shortened the mega64 ribbon cable from 40 cm to 15 cm and the mega323 cable from 50cm to 5cm. It still didn't work. I added a ferrite ring arround the cable an it didn't work. I tried the STK200 and Ponyprog on the mega64 and it worked on the first try! The verify found discrepancies between 0x10000 and 0x10800, but there is not path to that code. It is also beyond the 64K code space. Ponyprog said the mega323 device was not responding, but the verify said everything below 32K was correct. On the minus side, the mega323 does not seem to be working. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 07, 2006 - 07:49 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
rneil, did you add the 1k - 100 pF slewrate-limiter to SCK ? because similar problems made me start digging in the PPPD-misery
with Kanda's PPPD (modified) I have1. quick programming and 2. no errors
Nard |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2006 - 09:21 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
| A simple and neat mod to the STK200 PPPD |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 11, 2006 - 10:44 AM |
|
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 9816
Location: Trondheim, Norway
|
|
|
Plons wrote:
Another alternative:
http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=35048
abcminiuser made a programmer from a Butterfly: he's a magician ...
Nard
Thankyou, that for some reason strikes me as one of the nicest comments so far  . Not a magician, just a teenager with too much spare time...
This thread could be of use to many people, and I think it would be a shame to see if fall of into the depths of one of the pages and forgotten. I appreciate there is a search function, but I still think it deserves to be put in the spotlight. Would you mind re-posting a collated version of this (with any nessesary formatting) into the new Tutorials subforum which I moderate? That way it would remain visible for quite some time (not many posts yet  ) as well as be in a more appropriate and searchable place.
Cheers!
- Dean  |
_________________
Atmel Studio 6.1 is now released, grab it here.
Report AS6/ASF bugs here.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2006 - 11:37 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
Quote:
This thread could be of use to many people, and I think it would be a shame to see if fall of into the depths of one of the pages and forgotten. I appreciate there is a search function, but I still think it deserves to be put in the spotlight. Would you mind re-posting a collated version of this (with any nessesary formatting) into the new Tutorials subforum which I moderate? That way it would remain visible for quite some time (not many posts yet Rolling Eyes) as well as be in a more appropriate and searchable place.
I agree. And will start doing some work on it this week.
regards
Nard |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 - 05:28 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2002
Posts: 203
|
|
|
Quote:
rneil, did you add the 1k - 100 pF slewrate-limiter to SCK ?
Plons, I am sorry to take so long to respond. No I did not yet add the slew rate limiter. I was hoping that the shorter cable and the ferite would take care of it. Thanks for the picture. It will help. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mar 23, 2006 - 12:00 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 21, 2006 - 10:39 PM |
|
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Posts: 2
|
|
Thanks for the "LONG WIRES" hint!
I had to remove an additional cable I had plugged between parallel port and the programming dongle. Now it works! 
-aleks |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 23, 2006 - 10:22 PM |
|
Joined: Oct 26, 2004
Posts: 1
Location: Sweden
|
|
Thanks for all good information about the dongle.
Plons wrote:
although some Forum-members claim that it is not supported in AVR-Studio-4 (the beautiful programming-environment from Atmel): sorry guys, that is not true! Kanda supplies a plug-in for AVR-Studio with the STK200 and it works fine! And comfortable.
Where can I get this plug in, I can't find it. :-/ |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 23, 2006 - 10:29 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 16, 2005
Posts: 341
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
|
I have been using Kanda'a ISP and their JTAG ICE quite successfully. (I did Wreck an LCD though trying to use it in memory mapped mode with the ICE attached. Confound these shared pins!!)
http://www.kanda.com |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 24, 2006 - 09:35 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
Posts: 95
|
|
|
Plons wrote:
Note: although some Forum-members claim that it is not supported in AVR-Studio-4 (the beautiful programming-environment from Atmel): sorry guys, that is not true! Kanda supplies a plug-in for AVR-Studio with the STK200 and it works fine! And comfortable.
Plons
Unfortunately, it is available only to the registered users, not for the users of homemade devices.
Is there an open source version of this useful plug-in?
Thanks, Pop |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: May 10, 2006 - 12:24 PM |
|
Joined: May 10, 2006
Posts: 2
|
|
Tanks all, but i'm a little confused.
i need to program the at89s4051 the "Even Better PPPD.jpg" can program it ?! with the at89isp software from atmel?
Thanks very much. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: May 10, 2006 - 07:22 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 19, 2001
Posts: 25880
Location: Wisconsin USA
|
|
|
Quote:
Tanks all, but i'm a little confused.
I am a little confused, as well. This is an Atmel AVR site. The AT89 is not an AVR part, rather it has an 8051 core. So while you might get someone here that knows the answer, you probably will get a better audience for your question at sites like www.8052.com
Lee |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: May 10, 2006 - 09:09 PM |
|
Joined: May 10, 2006
Posts: 2
|
|
Thanks very much Lee.
I apologize !! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: May 25, 2006 - 06:53 PM |
|
Joined: May 25, 2006
Posts: 1
|
|
|
Quote:
Note: although some Forum-members claim that it is not supported in AVR-Studio-4 (the beautiful programming-environment from Atmel): sorry guys, that is not true! Kanda supplies a plug-in for AVR-Studio with the STK200 and it works fine! And comfortable.
Do you have a link, for that plugin? I used google but couldn't find anything.
Thanks!
This
I'm sorry, just had a look abov and found the anwer...that it's only for registered user... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 24, 2007 - 06:13 AM |
|
Joined: Feb 23, 2007
Posts: 1
|
|
| I'm afraid 2.4V is not enough to drive as 74HC244 VIH... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 26, 2007 - 03:54 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 26, 2007
Posts: 4
|
|
i built a dongle using 74ls245. i was able to write a small led blinking program on the ATmega16L using pony prog, and it worked fine. now i'm trying to write a program for a line follower but pony prog is giving a "device not recognised" error. i'm using a 4Mhz crystal, but it seems the mc still runs on 1 MHz.
i checked the voltage levels of the 74ls245 and the pin connected to MOSI is giving 3.5V when supply is switched on.
plz reply soon. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 11, 2007 - 08:02 AM |
|
Joined: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 1
|
|
| hey, atmega16 works with this programmer ? what should i use ? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: May 27, 2007 - 07:43 PM |
|
Joined: May 26, 2007
Posts: 1
|
|
Does anyone has PCB of Improved PPPD?
Peki |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: May 27, 2007 - 08:36 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Dec 24, 2007 - 03:05 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 22, 2007
Posts: 73
Location: Vitória, Brazil
|
|
| stk500 is compatible with stk200/300? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Dec 24, 2007 - 03:38 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
Nope. STK500 is superiour to the STK200 (and maybe the 300 as well)
If you have a STK500, you don't need a PPPD as the STK500 has all of what you need on board. |
_________________
Dragon broken ? Or problems with the Parallel Port Programmer ? Scroll down on my projects-page http://www.aplomb.nl/TechStuff/TechStuff.html for tips
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jun 20, 2008 - 08:54 PM |
|
Joined: Oct 08, 2006
Posts: 1
|
|
Nice schematic, but although everything worked fine... On a certain point I noticed that the system works without VDD or 5 Volt, because I forgot to turn on the power (clumsy me, I know ). So can anyone explain why this also works without power. Does it have something to do with that 74HC244?
Backer |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jun 20, 2008 - 10:13 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jul 12, 2008 - 07:50 AM |
|
Joined: Jul 12, 2008
Posts: 4
|
|
Hello Plons,
I've built the PPPPD, rev 1.2, dated March 18 2008.
Together with AVR Studio 4.14 and the Kanda's plugin,
I was able to flash a simple blink program into an
ATTiny2313.
After a few flashing sessions, the avrisp reported that
"your target device is not responding, check power & connections" and then failed to do anything.
My experience with AVR is about a week, previously, I was into PIC uC.
1)+5V has been checked.
2)External clk inadvertently selected previously?....unlikely, since
previous program still runs.
3)Tried both internal 4.0 & 8.0 mhz before selecting reset button on the avrisp screen....no joy.
4)Removed leds in parallel with MISO, MOSI & SCK to eliminate loading effect.....no joy.
Things I'm unsure:
a)I could have switched the MISO & MOSI lines from the breadboard during one of the flashing sessions
...would it fry the uC or the HC244?
b)Is there an option to test the hardware, like in the WinPic for PIC uC?...my logic probe
confirms pulsing in the MISO, MOSI & sck lines.
I would appreciate any pointers.
Thanks
yanctl |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jul 12, 2008 - 02:23 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
Most likely you either
- disabled ISP-programming
- use the reset-line as IO-pin
- or don't erase the chip before re-programming.
These settings are determined by fuse-settings. I recommend that you study those first.
You will need HighVoltage programming to restore the fuses. |
_________________
Dragon broken ? Or problems with the Parallel Port Programmer ? Scroll down on my projects-page http://www.aplomb.nl/TechStuff/TechStuff.html for tips
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sep 25, 2008 - 04:21 PM |
|
Joined: Aug 29, 2007
Posts: 6
Location: Montevideo - Uruguay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sep 25, 2008 - 04:52 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Oct 13, 2008 - 11:39 AM |
|
Joined: Aug 29, 2007
Posts: 6
Location: Montevideo - Uruguay
|
|
Thank you Nard and friends for your work !!
This is a photo of the working dongle, with the new PCB:
Bye: Alejandro |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 01, 2010 - 04:17 PM |
|
Joined: Aug 29, 2007
Posts: 6
Location: Montevideo - Uruguay
|
|
Hi again.
I have a little question: Is it possible tu use a parallel to USB cable with this circuit? Anybody has tested it? Which software works in this case if the answer to the last question is positive?
Thanks |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 01, 2010 - 04:31 PM |
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 62209
Location: (using avr-gcc in) Finchingfield, Essex, England
|
|
| Nope you cannot use USB-parallel converters as they are only for printers and don' handle all the functionality that parallel programmers require. But given that you'd spend more on a USB-parallel converter than a real USB-ISP programmer why wouldn't you just get the latter? |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 02, 2010 - 11:04 AM |
|
Joined: Aug 29, 2007
Posts: 6
Location: Montevideo - Uruguay
|
|
Thank you for your answer.
I know that an USB programmer is better than any adapter and an old circuit.
I was thinking in the big amount of good solutions to beginners made with a parallel port. For example CNC interfaces trough the parallel port.
See you |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 02, 2010 - 11:10 AM |
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 62209
Location: (using avr-gcc in) Finchingfield, Essex, England
|
|
| Yes, but as I say a USB-parallel costs more than a USB-ISP. So why would you buy a USB-parallel in order to run one of these hopeless, half-baked ISP programmers when you could have an efficient solution for less? |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 03, 2010 - 09:43 AM |
|
Joined: Aug 29, 2007
Posts: 6
Location: Montevideo - Uruguay
|
|
If only the cost is the problem, an USB to parallel port cable cost to me only $12, and any USB-ISP costs more then this
The possibility to have again a parallel port in my PC is what I´m looking.
See you |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 03, 2010 - 01:53 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
| A USB-to-parallel converter will not work with a par port programming dongle |
_________________
Dragon broken ? Or problems with the Parallel Port Programmer ? Scroll down on my projects-page http://www.aplomb.nl/TechStuff/TechStuff.html for tips
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 08, 2010 - 04:18 PM |
|
Joined: Aug 29, 2007
Posts: 6
Location: Montevideo - Uruguay
|
|
0k !
Now I have a SKT200/300 dongle and i want to make an USB dongle. There are more than one in the internet. Could you please give me a hint to choose the right model? I'm planning doing it by myself. Pros and cons of each model are enough to me
Thanx in advance !! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Feb 08, 2010 - 04:30 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Posts: 6323
Location: Hilversum - the Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Aug 26, 2011 - 12:53 PM |
|
Joined: Jun 27, 2011
Posts: 2
|
|
|
Samuraj_ wrote:
Thanks for all good information about the dongle.
Plons wrote:
although some Forum-members claim that it is not supported in AVR-Studio-4 (the beautiful programming-environment from Atmel): sorry guys, that is not true! Kanda supplies a plug-in for AVR-Studio with the STK200 and it works fine! And comfortable.
Where can I get this plug in, I can't find it. :-/
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Aug 26, 2011 - 01:47 PM |
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 62209
Location: (using avr-gcc in) Finchingfield, Essex, England
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Aug 26, 2011 - 02:06 PM |
|
Joined: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 18509
Location: Lund, Sweden
|
|
|
Quote:
EDIT: ah a cross post eh? Seems he answered his own question
Cliff. I believe that sometimes noobs here have a problem distinguishing "new topic" from "new reply". You could perhaps join the two threads? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Maximize
RSS
