MSP430 Nixie Clock

[abecedarian 330]

Lower TA0CCR0 value (32767 default,) 32761 or 32762 should work for you.

You could also change XCAP, but adjusting CCR0 should work for you (since the clock is slow.)

In all likelihood, it's the crystal running slower due to changes in temperature- when I assembled it, it was around 55F low / 80F high here, and now it's going from 40F to 70F.

 

That might be something to look into, i.e. using the 430's temp sensor to introduce a temp-related offset to CCR0.

[RobG 1,892]

Post #43 was suppose to say:

"For those who want to customize/contribute."

[zeke 693]

@RobG: FYI, the kit arrived safely.

 

Thanks!

[pwillard 2]

Just for the record... I love mine.  

[timotet 44]

I bought one of @@RobG's clock kits and I am very happy with the results.

I have kids and didn't want to have any wandering fingers getting zapped, so I designed and printed an enclosure for it.

Here are some photos of it. I couldn't resist adding the colon.

 

I uploaded the .stl files if anyone wants to print it.

 

Thanks to Rob for the awesome kit!

 

RobG_Clock_Case.zip

[RobG 1,892]

Dave's clock

 

[RobG 1,892]

I want to do another version of the board, one that uses IN-8 tubes, but the question is, should the tubes face in or out.

As a geek, my choice is in, so that I can see all components in front of the tubes.

Tubes facing out would be better if you want to use enclosure.

 

SMD version of the IN-8 based clock is also an option (1" shorter PCB.)

 

[cubeberg 540]

Is in the middle an option?  I'd be worried about it tipping otherwise.

[zeke 693]

@@RobG,

 

I just got around to assembling my Nixie clock this afternoon.

 

There's one digit out. 

 

I know it's not the Nixie tube because I swapped them around and they all work.

 

Got any troubleshooting tips?

 

[zeke 693]

@RobG,

 

I found the problem.  It was a board flaw.  There is a track with a missing piece.

 

I jumpered the track and the digit started working.

 

 

[abecedarian 330]

@@zeke - that is surprising. Mine worked out of the box.

[greeeg 460]

@@zeke - that is surprising. Mine worked out of the box.

Probably a case of an individual board flaw.

 

Its a flaw of the cheap board houses. I've had about 2 boards out of 20 batches or so (~1%) that I can see they've done a ERC check by scratches on the pads, but there has been no visible mark, (sharpie)  telling me it was defective. I actually have had boards that were sharpied, but after close inspection they work fine. I suppose more reputable PCB fabs have better testing equipment.

[zeke 693]

If you look carefully, the board flaw is just to the left of center in the last photo I posted.

[RobG 1,892]

Oh wow, good to know.

Are you talking about that thin vertical line going through the track?

Those are suppose to be 100% tested.

 

BTW, why red? why not black wire?

[zeke 693]

Yup. The thin vertical line is an absence of copper.

 

I used red because I was just doing a quick fix.  

 

The plan is to scrap off the solder mask and solder down a bridge across the gap and then cover it with something.