Jump to content

tonesenna

Members
  • Content Count

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from bluehash in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    I attached the design files for this initial version of the rocketfuel. You are free to copy, modify or use it any way, although a reference to the original work would be appreciated.
     
    Prototypes mounted and first tests already done. The charger circuit has one flaw: the body diode of the P-channel MOSFET creates a current path that lets current flow from the battery into the state LEDs and even the charge controller's supply pin.
     
    In practice, we see both leds dimmly lit when the USB supply is removed. This can be somehow circumvented by removind one of the LEDs - the DONE LED, leaving only the indicator of CHARGE in progress.
     
    With this little fix in place, the battery drain is 170uA, well above the expected figure that I estimated, but understandable, due to the current path that isn't currently blocked on the pass transistor.
     
    Here are a few pics of the current prototypes:



     
    I put a post in my blog with some testing I did with only the TPS78233 and the NCP301LSN30T1G.
    You can check it out here: http://wp.me/p2T8F2-11
    I am impressed with the quiescent current of these devices.
     
     
     
     
     
    rocketfuel.sch
    rocketfuel.brd
  2. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from Philipp in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    I attached the design files for this initial version of the rocketfuel. You are free to copy, modify or use it any way, although a reference to the original work would be appreciated.
     
    Prototypes mounted and first tests already done. The charger circuit has one flaw: the body diode of the P-channel MOSFET creates a current path that lets current flow from the battery into the state LEDs and even the charge controller's supply pin.
     
    In practice, we see both leds dimmly lit when the USB supply is removed. This can be somehow circumvented by removind one of the LEDs - the DONE LED, leaving only the indicator of CHARGE in progress.
     
    With this little fix in place, the battery drain is 170uA, well above the expected figure that I estimated, but understandable, due to the current path that isn't currently blocked on the pass transistor.
     
    Here are a few pics of the current prototypes:



     
    I put a post in my blog with some testing I did with only the TPS78233 and the NCP301LSN30T1G.
    You can check it out here: http://wp.me/p2T8F2-11
    I am impressed with the quiescent current of these devices.
     
     
     
     
     
    rocketfuel.sch
    rocketfuel.brd
  3. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from GeekDoc in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Good news! :mrgreen:
    Remaining parts arrived today. I have 3 boards assembled, except for the stacking headers, which I'm still waiting to arrive by normal mail.
    Since the sparkfun batteries are also still on transit, I am using an old BL-5B Nokia battery, soldered and soldered wires on it for a quick test.
     
    So far everything looks good. Both the battery and the pass transistor are running very cool (although I'm not sure if the charger is already in CC phase) :thumbup:
     
    It's kinda late so no pictures or test results right now. On the weekend I'll grab a few photos and do some testing.
    Stay tuned.
  4. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from Philipp in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Good news! :mrgreen:
    Remaining parts arrived today. I have 3 boards assembled, except for the stacking headers, which I'm still waiting to arrive by normal mail.
    Since the sparkfun batteries are also still on transit, I am using an old BL-5B Nokia battery, soldered and soldered wires on it for a quick test.
     
    So far everything looks good. Both the battery and the pass transistor are running very cool (although I'm not sure if the charger is already in CC phase) :thumbup:
     
    It's kinda late so no pictures or test results right now. On the weekend I'll grab a few photos and do some testing.
    Stay tuned.
  5. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from thanhtran in About the MSP430 clocks.   
    VLO , DCO and External crystal are all clock generatores. Which one to use depends on your needs in terms of clock speed, accuracy and power consumption.
     
    VLO is a very low power clock that runs in the 10s kHz. While speed is very limited, it provides you a means of having a clock driving some system logic with minimal power consumption. This clock generator isn't accurate at all IIRC.
     
    DCO is a high speed clock generator that runs in MHz range. Is requires more power but allows clock speeds magnitudes higher than VLO. Accuracy is tipical in the range of 1 ~2% so it should be ok for applications that don't rely heavilly on clock accuracy.
     
    Crystal oscilators are the most accurate clock source and probably the most power hungry (except the 32k768 crystal LFXT oscillator). They may provide veri accurate timings and also high clock speeds. On the other hand, crystal oscillators, may require more power than the DCO and probably take longer to wake up from a low power mode than a VLO or DCO oscillator.
     
    MCLK, SMCLK and ACLK ate clocks sourced from each of the above clock generators. The MSP430 may allow you to independently source each clock from each available clock generator and also divide the clock frequency by some desired factor.
     
    By using different clocks you gain flexibility to, for inastance, put the device into a low power mode where MCLK clock source is disabled (power savings yay!!), but VLO may be kept running, driving ACLK which in turn drives a timer that will wake the device some time later.
     
    The MSP430 manual goes into great detail explaining the possible combinations of clock generators and clock signals.
    The datasheed for each device gives you a pretty reasonable figure of power consumption of the chip with each of the clocks running.
     
    --
    to
  6. Like
    tonesenna reacted to bluehash in One month since forum software switch - poll inside.   
    Just a couple poll questions. it's been a month since the switch(Oct 25th, 2012). I think we did well.
     
    How I have benefited as an Admin;
    - Spammers are way easier to handle. Humans do not get caught anymore.
    - Backend is so smooth and quick with tons of features.
    - Visually appealing
    - Good support from ipboard. I get a response in under 24 hours.
    - I do pay $25 for each of the three sites. Google Adsense covers that. So no issues on there.
     
    Do you have any comments?
  7. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from GeekDoc in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    The PCB prototypes arrived today.
    These units come green. However I plan to make them red on the final version.
     
    The PCB quality came quite good in general, although there are some quircks:
    some drills are slightly off-centre. This can be noticed specially in vias, althouth it's effect is mainly cosmetic
    There is no soldermask on vias. I have to check the PCB design to fix this
    silkscreen clearance to copper seems too small apparently. The silkscreen got truncated around some SMD pads, which I wasn't expecting. Need to review my landpattern library.
    Some placement drills are plated, although I didn't expected them to. PCB was manufactured from an eagle BRD file. Maybe I can fix that using gerbers the next time.

    And now for the mandatory picture...

     
    Currently I soldered the BQ2057C and the TPS78233 (Thanks TI, for the samples!!).
     
    The remaining components are on their way and I expect them to arrive next week.
    With some luck I'll be able to make the first test on the following weekend.
     
    --
    to
  8. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from bluehash in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    The PCB prototypes arrived today.
    These units come green. However I plan to make them red on the final version.
     
    The PCB quality came quite good in general, although there are some quircks:
    some drills are slightly off-centre. This can be noticed specially in vias, althouth it's effect is mainly cosmetic
    There is no soldermask on vias. I have to check the PCB design to fix this
    silkscreen clearance to copper seems too small apparently. The silkscreen got truncated around some SMD pads, which I wasn't expecting. Need to review my landpattern library.
    Some placement drills are plated, although I didn't expected them to. PCB was manufactured from an eagle BRD file. Maybe I can fix that using gerbers the next time.

    And now for the mandatory picture...

     
    Currently I soldered the BQ2057C and the TPS78233 (Thanks TI, for the samples!!).
     
    The remaining components are on their way and I expect them to arrive next week.
    With some luck I'll be able to make the first test on the following weekend.
     
    --
    to
  9. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from oPossum in Coding for MSP430 in C++   
    I second pagibot.
    In a way, any language is unsuited for a particular purpuse if used inappropriately. All those items are generally known as coding/design flaws, regardless of using C, C++, java or any other language.
     
    The question at hand is not if there are people that know C++ and if these people have the skills to code for an MSP430 in C++. The question is about the possibility of using the features of C++ (only the ones that make sense in an embedded world) to code for the MSP430 without compromising performance and code size.
     
    I guess oPossum's links above depict that quite well.
     
    --
    to
  10. Like
    tonesenna reacted to pabigot in Coding for MSP430 in C++   
    I was going to reply point-by-point to say which of those are in no way best practices for C++, and which are best practices regardless of language (though not regardless of context), but turns out the "numbered item" feature in the forum software persists when quoting and my response paragraphs were getting numbered too. So t'hell with that.
     
    Short version: If your primary goal is optimization, C has some advantages over C++, and macro assembler has the same or more advantages over C. There are several people in the MSP430 community who argue that C is inappropriate for embedded development. C++ can win because it encourages placing simple function implementations in the class definition where they're visible at point-of-use and the compiler can optimize them as inline functions: this feature, and its generalization in templates, are the primary reasons why C++ can be very effective in producing fast code in an embedded system.
     
    Personally, I favor maintainability over optimization, except when a clearly stated requirement is not satisfied; c.f. all the quotes on the Wikipedia "Program Optimization" article warning of the dangers of premature optimization. I find the abstraction and information hiding concepts supported by C++ to be a great enabler to getting a system architecture right and evolving it in response to changing needs, enough so that the C I write is often very much like C++.
  11. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from G0XAR in About the MSP430 clocks.   
    It depends on the device and the supply voltage applied to them.
    Typical maximum frequencies are 8, 16 and 25 MHz.
     
    The best to do is actually check the datasheet for the particular device that you're interested in.
  12. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from Automate in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Things have been advancing slowly but steadily. I made a major review so that I can source all components from the same distributor.
    I also tried to improve power dissipation around the pass transistor so that I can keep operating temperature within reasonable limits.
     
    So, here it is, hopefully the last design iteration of the rocketfuel boosterpack.
     

    Top Layer
     

    Bottom Layer
     

    Silkscreen
     
    --to
  13. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from Philipp in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Last minut changes...
    The original idea was to place the battery beneath the PCB. However, when stacking the RFBP with the LP, the stacking height was too high and forced the use of staching headers that were way too expensive and didn't allow to stack the RFBP with other boards.
     
    So, I'm in thr process of moving all components to the bottom and placing the battery on top. I keep the area of the DIP socket clear so that we can stack boards with only 10mm spacing.
     
    This will allow to keep BOM cost down, make the RFBP stackable and make it more convenient to handle.
     
    --
    to
  14. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from Philipp in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Things have been advancing slowly but steadily. I made a major review so that I can source all components from the same distributor.
    I also tried to improve power dissipation around the pass transistor so that I can keep operating temperature within reasonable limits.
     
    So, here it is, hopefully the last design iteration of the rocketfuel boosterpack.
     

    Top Layer
     

    Bottom Layer
     

    Silkscreen
     
    --to
  15. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from bluehash in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Things have been advancing slowly but steadily. I made a major review so that I can source all components from the same distributor.
    I also tried to improve power dissipation around the pass transistor so that I can keep operating temperature within reasonable limits.
     
    So, here it is, hopefully the last design iteration of the rocketfuel boosterpack.
     

    Top Layer
     

    Bottom Layer
     

    Silkscreen
     
    --to
  16. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from bluehash in Need a challenge question that a visitor may know, to keep off spam   
    Are the bots decoding/guessing captchas?
    A good question would be one that requires some kind of logic from the user which can't be performed by a machine/script.
    In practice, though it's not easy to come up with something, specially something that fits into the tools that ipboard provides.
    One example, would be to select, from a set of objects, the one that doesn't match. The mismatch may be due to colour, number of sides of a polygon, mounting type of a IC package (SMD/TH), type of memory (volatile, non-volatile), prime vs non-prime number, integral power of two vs non integral power, type of object (animal vs fruit), etc etc.
     
    Is this possible to do in ip board? Anything that involves a pool of questions, randomly selected at each test is easilly circumvented by a bot. The ideal would be to have a database of objects that are qualified by a number of properties and on each test, choose a set of objects that would serve such test.
     
    --
    to
  17. Like
    tonesenna reacted to chibiace in msp430g2230 - 8 Pins   
    just received a couple of msp430g2230 samples for testing, sadly wouldnt work with my older firmwared launchpad with the zif socket but i had one of the newer ones around. pretty similar to the msp430g2231
     

  18. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from cde in Forum Changes - Please read   
    My post is kinda late but I'd like to thank you for the awesome work done with the change to the new forum engine.
    If I had to suggest something I'd go for the colour theme. Personally I'd like it to have a little more contrast, but its just my taste anyway.
     
    Thanks for all your effort!!
     
    --
    to
  19. Like
    tonesenna reacted to bluehash in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    If they are quick at sending boards eurocircuits are good.
    We use SeeedStudio here in the forums. 10 boards for 5x5.. but I see your one side is 5.7cm. It takes around 3 weeks for the boards to reach you.
     
    Also,... like I mentioned to traxman for his motor boosterpack.. feel free to request a sponsor(RFS-http://www.43oh.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1825&p=12719#p12719). I'd love to put this on the Store if you want.
     
    Looking forward to this.
  20. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from LariSan in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    So, here's a quick update.
     
    The shunt monitor was dropped because the dynamic range wasn't good enough to cover the range of possible discharge current.
    I made a search for an LDO with very low Iq and UVLO to avoid relying on the battery's own protection circuit and stay on the safe side.
    I couldn't find a suitable part, so I decided to add a voltage supervisor.
    In terms of low power operation I expect the rocketfuel to behave quite well:
    LDO's Iq is 8uA@150mA and 0.5uA@0mA
    Supervisor Iq is 0.5uA @ Vbat=5V
    BQ2057 BAT pin leakage is 1uA typical
     
    Summing all up, the battery drain with no load is expected to be around 2uA, which seems pretty good to me.
     
    I'm also changing the design to use these batteries (eiher 400mAh or 850mAh)
    http://www.tinkersoup.de/product_info.p ... 1576b2246a
    Where can I get the pinout for the connector? Is it standard? I can't find the information anywhere.
     
    Rgds,
    --to
     
     
    Once I update the design I'll post pics here.
  21. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from bluehash in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    After moving the battery to the bottom I changed the whole layout.
     
    The battery charger was placed primary battery holder, so that in case I want to build a non-rechargeable version, the non-mounted components stay hidden, for a better visual effect.
     

     
    The PCB still needs test points and artwork. After some review It'll be send for prototyping.
     
    I was considering producing the board at eurocircuits. Do you guys have any other suggestions?
     
    --
    to
  22. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from bluehash in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Yup, I know the connector's P/N and landpattern. My doubt was related with the pinout itself, Which doen't seem to be documented anywhere.
     
    For instance, the 400mAh shows the datasheet here: http://dlnmh9ip6v2uc.cloudfront.net/dat ... 400mAh.pdf
    On page 10 you'll see depicted a 3 pin JST connector that includes the NTC terminal. However, the product page shows a battery with a 2 terminal connector.
     
    I managed to figure out the pinout looking at the pictures on this tutorial: http://www.sparkfun.com/tutorials/241
     
    I don't know if anyone from sparkun reads this forum, but It'd be nice if these folks fixed the documentation for these battery packs.
     
    Currently I'm reviewing the board layout. I hope I can share it soon.
     
    --
    to
  23. Like
    tonesenna reacted to Philipp in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    leaving the buttons available is recommended by the booster design guide, too.
    I can only give some links to stores located in germany, but farnell or rs online cover most parts of europe.
     
    Berlin based Sparkfun Reseller: http://www.tinkersoup.de/product_info.p ... 1576b2246a
     
    Farnell / element14: http://de.farnell.com/bak/lp-523450p-is ... dp/2077888
     
    Pollin.de, cellphone battery, no leads but darn cheap: http://www.pollin.de/shop/dt/MzMwOTI3OT ... BC80S.html
     
    Ebay has plenty, but all reasonable priced ones are from hongkong.
     
    I'm really surprised how hard they are to source in large quantities, they are definetly not that accessible than I thought.
    I'm an quite active model pilot and i usually salvage good cells out of bad battery packs, so I#m never short on Lipo's..
  24. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from bluehash in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Hi everyone.
     
    I've been working on a battery powered boosterpack, hence the "RocketFuel" name.
     
    The features are pretty standard:
    Li-Ion charger: BQ2057
    LDO regulator: TPS78233 (150mA Iq=500nA VDO=130mV)
    Current shunt monitor: INA219
     
    Before starting prototyping this board I have a couple doubts for which I'd like to have some feedback:
     
    1- Is is usefull to have the possibility of mounting a Lithium primary cell (Eg: Lithium Thyonil Chloride - 3.6V) for "standby" applications that require extremely low idle currents and also low battery self-discharge?
    The PCB allows one to use one such cell in 1/2 AA format, leaving the charger unmounted
     
    2- Is a shunt monitor useful at all?
    I understand that for most applications current consumption is very bursty and an I2C shunt monitor isn't all that useful. O the other hand, designs using the ARM launchpad or the C2000 might benefit of having a way to monitor supply current, voltage and calculated power. So what do you guys think?
     
    3- What would be a "confortable" format for a Li-Ion / Li-Po battery? Would an RCR123A be suited or are there better alternatives?
    I found it extremely difficult to find a small sized Li-Ion battery with a standard form factor. The closest that I got was an RCR123A, which is basicaly a CR123A shaped Li-Ionbattery that includes the protection circuitry. The 18650 and even 14500 are too bulky and don't fit well in the boosterpack format. I'd like to keep the board as small as possible.
     
    4- Are150mA enough for most applications of the LaunchPad? My objective here is to keep Iq to a minimum, for cases where one would decide to use a primary battery.
     
    Here's a draft version of the PCB. Once I have these details Ironed out I hope to mount a couple units and try then out.

    Regards,
    --to
  25. Like
    tonesenna got a reaction from Automate in RocketFuel boosterpack   
    Hi everyone.
     
    I've been working on a battery powered boosterpack, hence the "RocketFuel" name.
     
    The features are pretty standard:
    Li-Ion charger: BQ2057
    LDO regulator: TPS78233 (150mA Iq=500nA VDO=130mV)
    Current shunt monitor: INA219
     
    Before starting prototyping this board I have a couple doubts for which I'd like to have some feedback:
     
    1- Is is usefull to have the possibility of mounting a Lithium primary cell (Eg: Lithium Thyonil Chloride - 3.6V) for "standby" applications that require extremely low idle currents and also low battery self-discharge?
    The PCB allows one to use one such cell in 1/2 AA format, leaving the charger unmounted
     
    2- Is a shunt monitor useful at all?
    I understand that for most applications current consumption is very bursty and an I2C shunt monitor isn't all that useful. O the other hand, designs using the ARM launchpad or the C2000 might benefit of having a way to monitor supply current, voltage and calculated power. So what do you guys think?
     
    3- What would be a "confortable" format for a Li-Ion / Li-Po battery? Would an RCR123A be suited or are there better alternatives?
    I found it extremely difficult to find a small sized Li-Ion battery with a standard form factor. The closest that I got was an RCR123A, which is basicaly a CR123A shaped Li-Ionbattery that includes the protection circuitry. The 18650 and even 14500 are too bulky and don't fit well in the boosterpack format. I'd like to keep the board as small as possible.
     
    4- Are150mA enough for most applications of the LaunchPad? My objective here is to keep Iq to a minimum, for cases where one would decide to use a primary battery.
     
    Here's a draft version of the PCB. Once I have these details Ironed out I hope to mount a couple units and try then out.

    Regards,
    --to
×
×
  • Create New...