Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Hi everyone, after being absent from the forums (this one, 43oh and C2kCentral) for a few months I thought I might share something that may be of interest to this community. As some of you may have noticed, the Stellaris controllers have all but vanished from TI's lineup. If you try a parametric search on TI's website (if you can get it running...) there are only two types of LM4s showing up. The LM3s are completely gone, and there isn't a single Cortex-M3/4 with ethernet (if you don't count the Concertos). I was at the Embedded World trade show in Nuremberg this week and asked a r
  2. This project just showed up on the official TI MCU NewsFlash for August. Congratulations!
  3. Okay, this is a really old thread, but the cut-off LP programmer is just too cool to not try it... However, I was wondering: where did you get the GND from? It looks like you drilled another hole for the sixth pin shown in the picture, am I right? Thanks TomKraut
  4. Trey is right of course. I saw 6K in the datasheet and didn't realize that the unit was "16-bit word", not "byte".
  5. F28027 only has 6kb of RAM. Looking at those numbers, it's really hard to explain why anyone would want a C2000. I guess you would need to know what the advantages of a DSP over a classic MCU are. For almost everything the usual LaunchPad audience does, the Stellaris LP seems much more suited than the C2000 one. Cheers TomKraut
  6. I'm not 100% sure, but I think that the C2000 realtime debug interface is not supported as an RTA channel. You could use UART but it's more suited for C6000 and the like where you have an ethernet port. Then again, I could get my SYS/BIOS reporting agents confused... wasn't RTA the one that is considered legacy and should no longer be used?
  7. Isn't the purpose of the minimal configuration that it doesn't have fancy stuff like RTA built into it...? That said, I was never able to get something useful like the realtime profiling etc. options of SYS/BIOS to work on a C2000. All the docs I find are for C6000 and don't seem applicable for the much smaller C2000. Or maybe I'm just not smart enough... Cheers TomKraut
  8. Before you reinstall everything, try the MProg utility from FTDI. It should see the XDS100 and display the correct id strings etc. If it doesn't, you have either a hardware or a driver problem. If it does, than CCS seems to be the culprit... Cheers TomKraut
  9. Man, that code is a mess! I don't think I like the new driver library... like, at all! With the old one you could see where something went wrong just from reading the code. Now you have to read through dozens of headers and source files just to see what's going on... My suggestion would be to try running the adc examples from v1.29. You get a much better understanding of the Piccolo that way. Cheers TomKraut
  10. Best source for them would probably be a PC from the early 90's. They had hundreds, maybe thousands in them!
  11. That's true, if you are building hardware with TI components, the EVMs are always your best bet. However, sometimes you need more information because of the simple fact that you are not just copying an EVM but also building your own custom hardware. A specific example would be the formulas necessary to find the values for the external components for the buck converter integrated into the DRV830x. They are not in the datasheet! You have to search e2e to find out that it's practically a TPS54160 and than have to use that datasheet as a reference. It's unlikely that we would benefit from a new
  12. All XDS100 are fully capable. If you want, you can build your own from scratch, as TI has made all the schematics public. There are three different versions of XDS100 (v1 - v3). If you want it for C2000 development with CCS4 or newer, it doesn't matter which one you get (go for the v2). If you need a stand-alone XDS100 for C2000, chances are you have some skills in soldering etc... because you have build some hardware with at least one TQFP or smaller IC (the C2000... ). So why not modify a $17 LaunchPad instead of buying a $79 emulator? Don't get me wrong, if I were in your position
  13. I don't think you could cram more than one driver + fets on a BoosterPack. I have a board next to me that is approximately the size of a BoosterPack and there is no way to fit another driver + fets on it, because they don't allow parts directly under them on the bottom side. Besides, cooling them would be a nightmare! @Nick: You don't know by any chance if there is an update for the DRV8301/2 datasheet planned? The current one is a year old and missing A LOT of information which is available through threads on e2e... Cheers TomKraut
  14. I think you can't beat TI's own XDS100v2 (made by Spectrum Digital...). $79 incl. shipping at the eStore, if I remember correctly. Or, if you don't need adaptive clocking (meaning, if you plan to only use it with C2000), you could try to repurpose a C2000 LaunchPad. Shouldn't be too hard to either desolder the ISO chips, or to cut the wires leading to the Piccolo. That way, you can get an isolated XDS100v1 for $17! Cheers TomKraut
  15. DRV8312 sounds great. Q3/Q4 not so much... But if you want to make a multi-purpose board with different kinds of FETs, DRV8312 sounds not so great either... As for BLDC control software, I can say that the motor control library is excellent. The examples, however, should only be used as just that: a way to learn the basics, then implement your own application. Cheers TomKraut
  • Create New...