You're welcome, JP. I didn't find many things about downhole electronics
on the web, mainly some products requesting patent, but it's an
interesting subject. Anyway, you have opened my eyes about the datasheet
specifications.

Best regards,
Adriano.

jplagasse wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks Adriano for comments !!
>
> I certainly share your inclination towards trusting mnf's data specs,
> however there is commercial politics & marketing sometimes involved
> with the specifications we get.
>
> In my present understanding, it depends on the fab processes &
> materials etc. involved... on the actual specifications devices will
> withstand.
> My original choice of words "almost a cult following"
> regarding "downhole electronics" was carefully chosen !!
>
> Do a web-search on "downhole electronics" for a small insight into
> this !! :)
>
> In my experience, guys with absolutely no appreciation nor knowledge
> of mnf's data have produced successful lines of equipment using chips
> & devices which did not measure up, spec wise, to the environment
> they were used in. Despite my first thoughts or advice on this...
> However, i could also quote this both ways, in that sometimes these
> types of designed crashed & burned big time. So to speak.
>
> The "downhole guys" seem to be a different breed though, as some have
> done & published the types of statistical testing on particular
> devices, which a decent engineer or tech might accept.
>
> Thanks Joseph for your original heads up on this... seems to warrant
> further testing and so on.
>
> Kindest regards,
> JP
>
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your experience, JP. I think that you should
> > have a very well structured testing scheme to guarantee that a
> > device supercedes the manufacturer's specifications. For example,
> > repetitive testing, duration of testing, operating temperature and
> > expected time-life. I'm used to trust the datasheet specs, even
> > because we do not use MSPs in their operating limits.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Adriano.
> >
> > jplagasse wrote:
> >
> > > Fascinating discussion...
> > >
> > > In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
> > > motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their
> own
> > > datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.
> > >
> > > As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
> > > almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
> > > devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
> > > specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at
> least
> > > some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
> > > temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks
> and
> > > so on??
> > >
> > > Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature.
> We
> > > used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications.
> In
> > > many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
> > > and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.
> > >
> > > Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices
> were
> > > extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to
> other
> > > mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story...
> these
> > > made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> > > trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> > > code !! :) (Another story here...)
> > >
> > > Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
> > > family might have some very interesting qualities not
> documented...
> > > however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
> > > exist, from other mnf's.
> > > These would need to be tested also etc.
> > >
> > > Later,
> > > JP
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> > > > temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of
> the
> > > > datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> > > > doesn't work all the time...
> > > >
> > > > And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules
> to
> > > > diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> > > > EMI?
> > > > Just curious about it.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Adriano.
> > > >
> > > > Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> > > > >
> > > > > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used
> is
> > > > > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > > > > years.
> > > > > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased
> memory
> > > > > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just
> completed
> > > > > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > > > > field trials.
> > > > > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> > > > >
> > > > > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't
> typically
> > > > > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > > > > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal
> testing
> > > > > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and
> vibration
> > > > > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
> acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
--
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
acredita-se estar livre de perigo.

Beginning Microcontrollers with the MSP430

Hi all,

Thanks Adriano for comments !!

I certainly share your inclination towards trusting mnf's data specs,
however there is commercial politics & marketing sometimes involved
with the specifications we get.

In my present understanding, it depends on the fab processes &
materials etc. involved... on the actual specifications devices will
withstand.
My original choice of words "almost a cult following"
regarding "downhole electronics" was carefully chosen !!

Do a web-search on "downhole electronics" for a small insight into
this !! :)

In my experience, guys with absolutely no appreciation nor knowledge
of mnf's data have produced successful lines of equipment using chips
& devices which did not measure up, spec wise, to the environment
they were used in. Despite my first thoughts or advice on this...
However, i could also quote this both ways, in that sometimes these
types of designed crashed & burned big time. So to speak.

The "downhole guys" seem to be a different breed though, as some have
done & published the types of statistical testing on particular
devices, which a decent engineer or tech might accept.

Thanks Joseph for your original heads up on this... seems to warrant
further testing and so on.

Kindest regards,
JP

>
> Thanks for sharing your experience, JP. I think that you should
> have a very well structured testing scheme to guarantee that a
> device supercedes the manufacturer's specifications. For example,
> repetitive testing, duration of testing, operating temperature and
> expected time-life. I'm used to trust the datasheet specs, even
> because we do not use MSPs in their operating limits.
>
> Regards,
> Adriano.
>
> jplagasse wrote:
>
> > Fascinating discussion...
> >
> > In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
> > motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their
own
> > datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.
> >
> > As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
> > almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
> > devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
> > specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at
least
> > some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
> > temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks
and
> > so on??
> >
> > Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature.
We
> > used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications.
In
> > many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
> > and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.
> >
> > Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices
were
> > extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to
other
> > mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story...
these
> > made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> > trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> > code !! :) (Another story here...)
> >
> > Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
> > family might have some very interesting qualities not
documented...
> > however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
> > exist, from other mnf's.
> > These would need to be tested also etc.
> >
> > Later,
> > JP
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> > > temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of
the
> > > datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> > > doesn't work all the time...
> > >
> > > And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules
to
> > > diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> > > EMI?
> > > Just curious about it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Adriano.
> > >
> > > Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
> > >
> > > > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> > > >
> > > > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used
is
> > > > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > > > years.
> > > > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased
memory
> > > > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just
completed
> > > > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > > > field trials.
> > > > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> > > >
> > > > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't
typically
> > > > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > > > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal
testing
> > > > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and
vibration
> > > > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------
> >
> >

JP wrote :

> made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> code !! :) (Another story here...)

Well why not ? First Terminator had - what looked like - 6502 ASM listings
in the view of the Arnie T1... :-)

Best Regards,
Kris

Thanks for sharing your experience, JP. I think that you should have a
very well structured testing scheme to guarantee that a device
supercedes the manufacturer's specifications. For example, repetitive
testing, duration of testing, operating temperature and expected
time-life. I'm used to trust the datasheet specs, even because we do not
use MSPs in their operating limits.

Regards,
Adriano.

jplagasse wrote:

> Fascinating discussion...
>
> In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
> motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their own
> datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.
>
> As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
> almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
> devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
> specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at least
> some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
> temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks and
> so on??
>
> Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature. We
> used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications. In
> many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
> and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.
>
> Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices were
> extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to other
> mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story... these
> made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
> trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
> code !! :) (Another story here...)
>
> Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
> family might have some very interesting qualities not documented...
> however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
> exist, from other mnf's.
> These would need to be tested also etc.
>
> Later,
> JP
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> > temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of the
> > datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> > doesn't work all the time...
> >
> > And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules to
> > diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> > EMI?
> > Just curious about it.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Adriano.
> >
> > Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
> >
> > > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> > >
> > > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used is
> > > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > > years.
> > > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased memory
> > > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just completed
> > > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > > field trials.
> > > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> > >
> > > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't typically
> > > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal testing
> > > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and vibration
> > > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
> acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
--
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
acredita-se estar livre de perigo.

Fascinating discussion...

In the last 2 decades, I've seen certain mnf devices, for example
motorola's zener diodes, far exceed the specifications from their own
datasheets. National semi's cmos eproms are another example.

As far as downhole temperature devices are concerned, there is a
almost a "cult following" in this regard, including a listing of
devices which also, in some cases, far exceed their original
specifications in actual testing. I find it fascinating that at least
some members of the msp430 families, can endure downhole
temperatures... perhaps these can be used next to engine blocks and
so on??

Up here in canada, one of the important specs is low temperature. We
used to test devices, rather than rely on the mnf specifications. In
many cases, we found that the mnf specs were what was tested only,
and NOT what these devices would withstand in reality.

Oh yes... way back in time, we found that RCA Cmos 4000 devices were
extremely noise resistant across their power rails, compared to other
mnf's. The 1802 silicon on saphyre chips were another story... these
made it into the voyager space probes even. I still joke that star
trek's VGer movie tekkie side would have included 1802 assembly
code !! :) (Another story here...)

Back to the topic at hand, it doesn't surprise me that the msp430
family might have some very interesting qualities not documented...
however i'd be very wary of other "second sources", if/where these
exist, from other mnf's.
These would need to be tested also etc.

Later,
JP
> Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating
> temperature in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of the
> datasheet, for being working all this time. Or maybe your board
> doesn't work all the time...
>
> And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules to
> diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid
> EMI?
> Just curious about it.
>
> Regards,
> Adriano.
>
> Joseph A. Vrba wrote:
>
> > I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
> >
> > In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used is
> > successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two
> > years.
> > Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased memory
> > capacity (and chip availability). That board has just completed
> > all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in
> > field trials.
> > (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
> >
> > There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't typically
> > see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150
> > degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal testing
> > for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and vibration
> > is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.
> >
> > ---------------------------------

Thanks for sharing the info, Joseph. I guess the operating temperature
in the field shouldn't exceed the 85 degress C of the datasheet, for
being working all this time. Or maybe your board doesn't work all the
time...

And what about the mechanical vibration? Are there layout rules to
diminish its effects? Are they the same recommendations to avoid EMI?
Just curious about it.

Regards,
Adriano.

Joseph A. Vrba wrote:

> I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...
>
> In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used is
> successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two years.
> Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased memory
> capacity (and chip availability). That board has just completed all of
> its formal stress testing as is currently being used in field trials.
> (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)
>
> There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't typically see
> temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150 degree C
> requirement comes from our customer. The formal testing for both high
> temp operation, temperature cycling and vibration is performed by an
> independent subsidiary of our customer.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get
> listings, and more!
>
>
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
> acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
--
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
acredita-se estar livre de perigo.

I thought I'd continue this thread to answer everyone else...

In this application, we started with the MSP430F149 and used is successfully in around 100 units spanning a period of over two years. Recently we've switched to the MSP430FG4617 for increased memory capacity (and chip availability). That board has just completed all of its formal stress testing as is currently being used in field trials. (We added quite a few more sensors as part of the new design.)

There's no extra cooling on the chip. Although we don't typically see temperatures that high in normal downhole runs, the 150 degree C requirement comes from our customer. The formal testing for both high temp operation, temperature cycling and vibration is performed by an independent subsidiary of our customer.

---------------------------------
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more!

Wow, thank you Joseph! That was exactly the answer that I was looking
for. What packaging/model of MSP 430 did your company use for the
drilling application?

Also thank you for the awesome ideas about reprogramming the flash
memory after high temperature operation to ensure that bit flipping is
less likely. This is a great idea for improving the reliability of
the micro controller if you have some extra memory available or have a
copy of the program stored in more reliable external memory. Using a
flash micro has some big advantages!

Thank you again for the great help. This message board is really
incredible! It is awesome to get help from so many knowledgeable
members!

Thank you again,

Chris

--- In m..., "Joseph A. Vrba" wrote:
>
> I just thought a somewhat less theoretical response to this thread
might be called for. For the last few years, we have been using
MSP430 chips within oil drilling bits. Our systems are rigorously
tested at high vibration levels and at temperatures of 150 degrees C
for extended periods (hundreds of hours per run) by the bit
manufacturer. They've come through the testing and hundreds of field
runs just fine.
>
> Obviously, when designing boards for such applications, you need
to make sure that all components are rated for high temperature
operation. Also, for our high vibration requirements, we also have to
be careful with layout and fabrication.
>
> The simple answer is that if you get the right chip, MSP430
processors work quite well at high temperatures.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s
user panel and lay it on us.
>
>
>

Interesting. Does the MSP430 you use in this application support 150
degrees C? Or did you have to cool down the MSP to a more suitable
temperature by using a cooler and/or heat dissipator?

Adriano.

Joseph A. Vrba wrote:

> I just thought a somewhat less theoretical response to this thread
> might be called for. For the last few years, we have been using MSP430
> chips within oil drilling bits. Our systems are rigorously tested at
> high vibration levels and at temperatures of 150 degrees C for
> extended periods (hundreds of hours per run) by the bit manufacturer.
> They've come through the testing and hundreds of field runs just fine.
>
> Obviously, when designing boards for such applications, you need to
> make sure that all components are rated for high temperature
> operation. Also, for our high vibration requirements, we also have to
> be careful with layout and fabrication.
>
> The simple answer is that if you get the right chip, MSP430 processors
> work quite well at high temperatures.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user
> panel and lay it on us.
>
>
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
> acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
--
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivus e
acredita-se estar livre de perigo.