Jump to content

kenyee

Members
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The MSP430-JTAG-ISO-MK2 works fine for me. Average power utilization displayed on it isn't that useful because the serial port stays powered up to transfer debug data over. Buttons are a bit cheapy feeling, but it's nice being able to program the device w/ it standalone. One big caveat if you decide to use the tag-connect cables in SWD mode is Olimex stupidly didn't make it pin compatible w/ the FET430UIF. I blogged about it: http://www.keysolutions.com/blogs/kenyee.nsf/d6plinks/KKYE-96ULEL They do update their device support fairly frequently so I'm not sure why you say new chips aren't supported...
  2. Damn...they figured it out...I get the you are no longer allowed to use this coupon msg too, and I've never ordered anything :-P The new STM32F4 discovery board looks a lot better though it's $24.
  3. Gotta wonder why TI cripples the memory on these :-P 256K ROM, 32K RAM on both and no external memory controller for expansion :-( decent TCP/IP stackis 200KB :-(
  4. Thanks. Decided to just desolder the part and swap a new one in. I think it got corrupted when I tried to program it w/ the standard 2.2nf capacitor...got an error about not being able to write block zero, but I think it did in some corrupted way that took out the DCO calibration values. I swapped the cap w/ a 1nf one and it downloads code cleanly now but the DCO is broken :-P
  5. There's an example in the codevault on restoring the DCO calibration data, but it seems to require that the external crystal be hooked up. I have a semi-bricked surface mount MSP430...the calibration values are apparently 0xff, so it goes into the fault routine immediately on startup...
  6. Dum question, but does this require the external crystal to be installed? I'm having this issue (lost calibration info) on a board that has a surface mount MSP430. Trying to repair the data on the MSP430 enough to get it running, but this doesn't seem to work (clock cal info still reads out as 0xff after it's done).
  7. Grrr...would have been happy to pay another $10-15 to have one w/ expandable memory :-P That's definitely something the Stellaris never had and I griped to them about that...
  8. The RM42 and TMS570 launchpads seem about the same except the RM42 has a bit faster clock speed. But only 32K of RAM? Stellaris looks more interesting... :-P
  9. It's also important to note that if you want your MSP430 to be power efficient, you *have* to implement it this way. The MSP430 isn't that power efficient when running at full speed...the PIC controllers use less power at full speed IIRC. But it sleeps well and wakes up/responds to interrupts quickly and that is its main strength...
  10. Do you even have enough code space for what you need (not sure how complicated an ESC controller gets but the quadcopter pilot code was fairly big IIRC, though it's done in Arduino which might be less efficient)? I found the MSP430 code somewhat inefficient. On my first project, I have almost 1K of code and it's maybe two pages of C code? :-(
  11. I think it depends on load and what you do w/ the MSP430. If you use the ADC's, I don't think they'd be that stable when you drop voltage that low either...
  12. What in the world does this mean? MSP430: Trouble Writing Memory Block at 0xfc00 on Page 0 of Length 0x3a0: No error I've google searched a bit and there are mentions of this, but there's usually a normal error message at the end instead of "No error" :-P This is on a new board (not the launchpad). I've checked continuity on all the parts and everything seems ok. Puzzled by this though...seems like it can't write memory, but the Olimex programmer knows that it's a valueline chip (it displays it on the LCD).
  13. Not just C code, but to use the MSP430 properly, you have to change what is probably a linear programming model in Arduino to an interrupt based one so the MSP430 can sleep to save power. It'd be more than a 36hr learning project :-P
  14. Ahh...I'm using the value line stuff which has no SVM. You might want to try this workaround if your battery voltage is high enough...basically turn off SVM if your voltage is high enough to keep power low and wakeup response speed high: http://e2e.ti.com/support/microcontrollers/msp430/f/166/t/19047.aspx 150usec is snail slow...if the Atmel or NXP Cortex chips don't need a SVM, they're obvious choices :-P
  15. Wait, so is this paper flawed? http://www.ti.com/lit/wp/slay015/slay015.pdf From what's described, I thought it mean 1us to start running because the clock stabilizes quicker than the PIC equivalent? No comparison w/ the Cortex chips, but they probably don't think it's their main competition (at least not until now when the Cortex M0+ are so low power :-)
×
×
  • Create New...