Jump to content

nanoPad - MSP430G target board

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Finally, boards are here, assembly time (note to self: never order boards right before Chinese New Year.)       And the power supply board  

43oh Store link 43oh Wiki link   For my next project, I need a small control board. Since LaunchPad is too big and F2013 target board is not powerful enough, I decided to make own target board. Her

I will put together another board for the store, one that will have 4 nanoPads on it. If you need one right away, I have few that I can spare, just PM me.   Here's the completed power daughter board

Posted Images

Autorouted... But that's what I was thinking, sorta.

Reminds me of Piccolo :)


TI last year rolled out some really cool, extremely tiny DC/DC stepdowns. I think they might do the trick. TI also rolled out the simple switcher nano modules just a few months ago. The down side to the simple switcher is that it requires 5 basic components (3 Capacitors, 2 resistors)

I am thinking of using TPS62056, TPS62172, or the popular MC33063A.

I may have to make all parts 0603 to accommodate DC/DC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To make the final version, I need your opinion on few things.


1. All parts will be 0603. SA suggested 0402, but I want this board to be sort of friendly with non-SMD folks since there will be options.

2. I will remove RST switch. If a manual reset is required without shutting down the power, pins 1 and 2 of J2 can be shorted.

3. Should I keep the crystal? I think yes.

4. Should I keep xtal capacitors or are the internal ones enough?


5. Regulator. I am thinking one is needed, but trying to determine which one.

a) LDO - for things like 5V systems and 6V toys with enough juice to spare. Vin < 6V

B) Small DC/DC - like above and things that are powered by 9V batteries. Vin < 10V

c) Better DC/DC - like above plus 14V automotive applications. Vin < 16V

6. Should the regulator be

a) <300mA, MCU

B) 800mA-1A, MCU + LED displays for example. This will however require another pin on J1 or dedicated power header

Link to post
Share on other sites

Internal are fine as long as you aim for 12pf or lower which is a piece of cake.


Can you make this one board and the regulator another since you are looking at 3 inputs? (A close stacking effect?) Then both would be useable together or separately... Both would be AWESOME by themselves if done right and you're doing it right :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

sketch? of what?... 2 boards? I was thinking separate the power so you had 3 inputs (only 1 used at a time... jumper selection?) on one board and it would have 2 2pin headers, 1vcc 1gnd on one end and 1 vcc 1 gnd on the other end, this would attach to your board which you could remove the power stuff from and just take straight vcc/gnd connection from the power board... get it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, the design is finished, ready for Seeed.


The nanoPad is on the bottom left. There are 3 LEDs with jumpers on the board, optional TPS77xxx LDO (up to 5.5V input, 250mA) and headers for the daughter board. P2.4 and P2.5 can be connected to the daughter board using jumpers.

Little bit higher is the power board. It is TPS6205x based DC/DC step-down (up to 10V input, 800mA) fixed or adjustable, and low battery condition output.

On the right side is the battery board, which should accommodate 12mm and 20mm battery holders.

Daughter boards are 0.9" x 0.3"


Updated 1/12


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did you completely ignore the design rules? TPS6205x based board needs to be revised. Path between TPS6205x and blocking capacitors must be the shortest as possible. C10 is necessary to move the left edge. C11 is a need to move under the coil (between coil and NanoBoard, not at the opposite layer). And between the boards is not gap to cutting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say I have ignored them (considering available space and package sizes,) they "should be" as close as possible. The only offender is C10 on the input side and yes, now it's obvious it can be moved (this is why I post this stuff, so people can help with improvements.)

My initial goal was to make low profile board with all parts on the top layer, then I have decided to add parts for LBO and FB so bottom layer can now be used too.

That said, I will take another stab at it so that everybody... or nobody is happy :)


Posted updated image above.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...