[time-nuts] Controlling FEI 5680A
paul swed
paulswedb at gmail.com
Sun Jan 15 16:27:27 UTC 2012
I have been watching for a bit now. Its more interesting now that my
FE5680s working quite well. I have noticed on numbers of threads the
conversation dramatically shifts from reasonably implemented low cost
solutions to the ultimate FPGA.
FPGAs are generally intended for the mass market with a steep learning
curve. Though they can be pressed into whats of interest to time-nuts it
simply seems like a overly complicated technology and method for a non-mass
market solution.
The tools that are available in any of the $2 micros these days are very
good and you have a wide choice of tools and languages to develop in. I
have several FPGA dev kits and have to say have never turned anything much
out with them.
On the flip side I have several of the dev kits for PIC and I get pretty
much everything I want to done in those. Just simple, stupid, dumb stuff at
a cost of a few dollars.
Though it may have been lost in the thread. I think it started as a how do
you control the 5680 with a GPS engine to lock it. It had hovered around
filters and evolved to long counters and D/A converters. Still all
reasonable approaches.
If I build anything it would be along those lines. FPGA simply won't happen.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 11:07 AM, <EWKehren at aol.com> wrote:
> Magnus I agree,
> I can not se how any one can simplify this approach. A $2 gate array in a
> 0.5 $ socket that is solderable, a $ 2 14 pin DIP uP what ever brand, a
> clock generator, a RS232 interface, a 3.3 V regulator and two single gate
> 14's
> what more do you want. If communication is limited to the 5680 a 74AC14
> could be used eliminating the RS232 chip and any SMD.
> The counter on the G/A has been increased to 21 bits.
> With all this working, some group may want to tackle it on a FPGA.
> Bert Kehren
>
>
> In a message dated 1/15/2012 10:46:42 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> magnus at rubidium.dyndns.org writes:
>
> On 01/15/2012 05:48 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 4:32 AM,<EWKehren at aol.com> wrote:
> >> I have no expertise when it comes to filter design or programming PIC's
> or
> >> other micro controllers. But I know what works for me. For 11 years I
> have
> >> been using Shera controllers with very good results. (I still have
> some new
> >> assembled extra A&A boards, if any one is interested, please contact
> me
> >> off list) Over the years I have made hardware work around's and made
> my own
> >> boards ending up with 120 and 240 samples and 100 MHz clock in stead
> of 24
> >> MHz. Over time chips are harder to get. The solution is an Altera MAX
> 3000
> >> gate array and that input circuit can be implemented on a $ 2 100 MHz
> >> version or $ 5 200 MHz version using either a 100 MHz or 200 MHz
> clock. That
> >> circuit works with the present Shera PIC but that is a 28 pin $ 4
> device.
> >> Since in this application the controller does not have to be all
> things
> >> for all devices it would make sense to use a PIC16F688 or any other
> 14 pin
> >> device.
> >
> > Have you thought about putting the PIC _INSIDE_ the Altera FPGA?
> >
> > It's a common trick to implement a microcontroller in the FPGA and you
> > can get the code for just about any CPU core online. Here is an
> > example of "virtual PIC":
> > http://www.embeddedtronics.com/pic_core.html
> > If the PIC fits inside then that is one less chip on the PCB. The
> > example above found that could run the virtual PIC a little faster
> > than a real pic so you don't give up any performance
>
> A short notice on embedded CPU/MPUs into FPGAs. Using PIC or AVR might
> be tempting, but I consider any clone "dirty" from a rights perspective,
> MIPS for instance have been very protective on their side, so has ARM.
> So far has the SPARC been the only big one being accepted in their
> LEON-x variants that I know of. We be sad to see the cotton industry
> level being smashed by the big firm lawyers.
>
> So, either using the OpenRISC variants or similar. There is loads of
> CPUs on the OpenCores website, but just because they are there do not
> think they are free to use if they are clones of commercial stuff.
>
> I would either use one of the FPGA vendors CPUs and then write the core
> in C, or use a free CPU.
>
> I could also roll my own CPU, as I have already done before, but
> building a tool-chain including GCC is a bit of home-work. For my
> application I haven't bothered, but it is tempting to get C capabilities.
>
> Then again, if someone could show that the PIC and/or AVR is free to
> clone in FGPA, by showing a clear statement from the respective
> technology holders, then that would be a way forward.
>
> I've done this analysis before, and so far I have not seen any
> comprehensive open analysis covering these aspects.
>
> I fear that this is way off topic for this list, so I propose that this
> aspects is continued on another list, such as the FPGA-Synth list, which
> faces essentially the same problems.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
More information about the time-nuts
mailing list