microcontrollers in DIP or "breadboardable" form-factor

On 3/24/2016 3:02 PM, kristoff wrote:
> Hi John,
>
>
>
> On 24-03-16 12:58, John Devereux wrote:
>>>>> I'm compiling a list of DIP or "breadboard-form-factor" options for
>>>>> hobbyists.
>>>>> Any other options?
>
>>>> Why DIP? Most hobbyists who move on from purchased modules
>>>> just use PCB design software and learn to solder the easier
>>>> SMD devices themselves, on boards made at cheap prototyping
>>>> prices.
>>>> I don't get this obsession with through-hole. It's so much
>>>> harder than SMD.
>
>>> I guess you are probably right. I just try not to scare them to much :-)
>
>> There are lots of cheap QFP adapters on ebay etc, but someone still
>> have to solder them on in the first place.
>
>
> That's indeed also an option.
>
> I have just been looking for adapters with the chip already soldered on
> it. There seams to be some out there (I found a couple with a STM32s and
> also one with a PIC32, ss Simon also mentioned). but not that much.

Why wouldn't you buy a board with the MCU and basic support already on 
board, like the Teensy.  There are literally hundreds of boards like these.

http://www.pjrc.com/store/teensy31_pins.html

Heck, here's one specifically designed to fit a DIP socket board.  It 
even has bluetooth built in.

http://oshchip.org/


>> You could make a carrier for one with all this, with some pins brought
>> out etc, I am sure there are "arduino" type things like that.
>
> Well, what would be nice is a mapple-mini type of device with either a
> STM32F1 with a DAC or a STM32F4.
> Most of the devices out there use a STM32F103C8T6, the chip on the
> original mapple. That chip does not have a DAC.  :-(

Here you go!

http://eleccelerator.com/stm32f4stamp-breakout-board/

-- 

Rick

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> kristoff <kristoff@skypro.be> writes:
> > I'm compiling a list of DIP or "breadboard-form-factor" options for
> > hobbyists.  Any other options that connect a SMD-size MPU on a "DIP"
> > socket?

> Do you mean just the cpu, or a whole system?

> No one seems to have mentioned the popular Teensy series:

>   http://www.pjrc.com/teensy/index.html

> The OSHChip is even smaller (DIP-16 size) and has an ARM cpu with BLE:

STM32 Nucleo32 will also fit in a breadboard.
-- 
Uwe Bonnes                bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik  Schlossgartenstrasse 9  64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 1623569 ------- Fax. 06151 1623305 ---------

kristoff <kristoff@skypro.be> wrote:
> 
> I'm compiling a list of DIP or "breadboard-form-factor" options for 
> hobbyists.
> 
> Sofar I have  are
> - AVR and PICs in DIP
> - MSP430
> - LPC1114 and LPC802 in DIP
> - arduino mini and pro-mini  + cheap Chinese clones
> - mapple mini + cheap Chinese clones
> 
> 
> Any other options?
> Any other options that connect a SMD-size MPU on a "DIP" socket?

- there are in fact two kinds of cheap STM32 boards:
   Maple mini clones (with STM32F103CBT6) and few kinds
   of "minimal" boards with STM32F103C8T6
- minimal STM8 boards - at $0.90 they are probably the
  cheapest ready board that one can get.

There are also cheap SMD to DIP adapters, putting SO20 chips
on adapter does not look too hard.

-- 
                              Waldek Hebisch

On 3/24/2016 4:38 PM, Uwe Bonnes wrote:
> Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> kristoff <kristoff@skypro.be> writes:
>>> I'm compiling a list of DIP or "breadboard-form-factor" options for
>>> hobbyists.  Any other options that connect a SMD-size MPU on a "DIP"
>>> socket?
>
>> Do you mean just the cpu, or a whole system?
>
>> No one seems to have mentioned the popular Teensy series:
>
>>    http://www.pjrc.com/teensy/index.html
>
>> The OSHChip is even smaller (DIP-16 size) and has an ARM cpu with BLE:
>
> STM32 Nucleo32 will also fit in a breadboard.

Yes, technically it will fit, but I meant as a 0.3 inch wide unit that 
leaves all the remaining pins uncovered.  Not many modules do that and 
the OSHChip was specifically designed for that.  They had to design 
special pins to not require the board to be too wide.

There are any number of modules with MCUs on them that can be used. 
They don't really need to sit on a wireless breadboard socket.  I use 
jumper wires to connect them to a breadboard.  Works fine.  In fact, the 
bluetooth modules I have plug directly into the breadboard sockets and 
don't really work.  I think it is because the power routing is poor.

-- 

Rick

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> There are any number of modules with MCUs on them that can be
> used. They don't really need to sit on a wireless breadboard socket.
> I use jumper wires to connect them to a breadboard.  Works fine.

Yes it's often possible to connect an MCU board to a breadboard through
a ribbon cable that connects to the breadboard with header pins.  Here
is an adapter for the Raspberry Pi:

https://www.adafruit.com/products/2029

On 3/24/2016 10:20 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> There are any number of modules with MCUs on them that can be
>> used. They don't really need to sit on a wireless breadboard socket.
>> I use jumper wires to connect them to a breadboard.  Works fine.
>
> Yes it's often possible to connect an MCU board to a breadboard through
> a ribbon cable that connects to the breadboard with header pins.  Here
> is an adapter for the Raspberry Pi:
>
> https://www.adafruit.com/products/2029

You don't have to be so fancy.  I use single row cables like this,

http://ebayitem.com/121737270472

male to male, male to female, female to female.  I strip them to the 
size I need and so don't have to run all bazillion rPi/MCU pins into the 
socket board.  I can also jump between different boards without the 
socket board.

Once in awhile I find the pins on the MCU board aren't the full 25 mil 
size that works with these cables.  They barely hang on the TI kickstart 
boards.  Not sure what those pins are intended to be for.

-- 

Rick

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-earth.ufp> wrote:
> It's a _lot_ easier to create something on a breadboard than it is
> to go through all the turnaround time issues having a PCB created
> from an external shop.
> 
> It also means you don't have to store chemicals around the home if
> you can't wait for the external supplier. Design mistakes also have
> a zero cost element to them when you are breadboarding.

When I need a circuit like that, I use SOIC parts on a square-pad board,
sometimes 0.05" but usually 0.1" with the pads around the SOIC scribed in
half.

It's easier to design - just lay out the circuit like the schematic, no
need to bend it around stripboard tracks.  No tracks to cut, no need to keep
flipping the board over.  Surface mount components are easy to place and can
often be butted against each other.  The circuits you make are much more
compact.

> When you are doing smaller and low speed circuits, DIP is most
> certainly easier and has a far quicker turnaround.

DIP does not have a monopoly on prototyping boards, it only does in the
mindset of those who grew up with it.

Its main benefit is solderless breadboard, which is fine for short-term
experimentation.  But if you want to keep it you'll have to transfer it to
soldered board anyway.  If you do that on a 'breadboard equivalent'
protoboard, you end up with a large and clumsy layout.  Unless you're
worried about reusing the components (which have got much cheaper in real
terms over the last few decades) it's quicker just to solder something up
from the beginning.

Theo

In article <871t70gk9n.fsf@devereux.me.uk>, john@devereux.me.uk says...
> 
> kristoff <kristoff@skypro.be> writes:
> 
> > Clifford,
> >
> >
> > On 24-03-16 07:14, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >>> I'm compiling a list of DIP or "breadboard-form-factor" options for
> >>> hobbyists.
> >>> Any other options?
> >
> >> Why DIP? Most hobbyists who move on from purchased modules
> >> just use PCB design software and learn to solder the easier
> >> SMD devices themselves, on boards made at cheap prototyping
> >> prices.
> >> I don't get this obsession with through-hole. It's so much
> >> harder than SMD.
> >
> > I guess you are probably right. I just try not to scare them to much :-)
> 
> 
> There are lots of cheap QFP adapters on ebay etc, but someone still
> have to solder them on in the first place.
> 
> 
> >
> > If I say they need to solder a 64-pin STM32F4, most of them will
> > probably get a heart attack. :-)
> 
> Well a 64-pin dip must be nearly as big as some of those
> discovery/embed/arduino things.
> 
> >
> > Any case, if you are doing just one project, DIP does have the
> > advantage you can do it on a perfboard.
> 
> I would not trust a 64pin DIP with a STM32F4 on a breadboard. These are
> high-speed chips, like 168MHz. You need a proper PCB with a groundplace
> and decoupling capacitors.
> 
> You could make a carrier for one with all this, with some pins brought
> out etc, I am sure there are "arduino" type things like that.

Well if you must have breadboards or perf strip, and are worried about
QFP type packages alse for adapters easy to solder and take pins out
for perf strip at least look at Schmartboards

http://schmartboard.com/

All sorts of adapters

-- 
Paul Carpenter          | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/>    PC Services
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/pi/>  Raspberry Pi Add-ons
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/fonts/> Timing Diagram Font
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> You don't have to be so fancy.  I use single row cables like this,
> http://ebayitem.com/121737270472

Oh, those are nice.  Cheap and flexible, I might order some, thanks for
the link.  The thing with the Rpi ready-made cable is you just plug it
once at both ends, instead of 40 separate wires to plug and tangle.

Back to DIP form-factor boards, I should have listed the Adafruit
Feather series, which is growing rather rapidly:

  https://www.adafruit.com/feather

They are available with DIP pins though they're 0.9 inches wide, which
means there are only a few plugboard holes reachable outside them (it
might also be possible to use some of the ones underneath.  I remember
way back, those plugboard were also available with a 0.6" channel in the
middle instead of 0.3", for the wide 40 pin DIP microprocessors of the
era.  I don't know if many of those packages are used any more.

On 3/26/2016 1:26 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> You don't have to be so fancy.  I use single row cables like this,
>> http://ebayitem.com/121737270472
>
> Oh, those are nice.  Cheap and flexible, I might order some, thanks for
> the link.  The thing with the Rpi ready-made cable is you just plug it
> once at both ends, instead of 40 separate wires to plug and tangle.

Hardly.  On the socket board you have to then wire each and every one of 
the pins you use to another point on the board unless you can somehow 
get the circuit to map to your I/O pins.

That's what I like about the single row cables.  They can be split up 
and tied directly to the points in your circuit where you need them.


> Back to DIP form-factor boards, I should have listed the Adafruit
> Feather series, which is growing rather rapidly:
>
>    https://www.adafruit.com/feather
>
> They are available with DIP pins though they're 0.9 inches wide, which
> means there are only a few plugboard holes reachable outside them (it
> might also be possible to use some of the ones underneath.  I remember
> way back, those plugboard were also available with a 0.6" channel in the
> middle instead of 0.3", for the wide 40 pin DIP microprocessors of the
> era.  I don't know if many of those packages are used any more.

At 0.9 inches wide that only leaves one row of pins accessible on each 
side.  That is why I don't plug MCU boards into the socket board.  It 
gets to be rather pointless.

I still have a single board computer that uses the TMS9900 CPU chip in a 
64 pin, 0.9 inch wide package.  A bear to prototype on a socket board, 
but this is a large PCB, some 18 inches across.  I got it second hand 
along with a switching power supply from who knows what equipment that 
weighed 10 pounds if it weighed an ounce.  It did work although I never 
did much with it.  Programming EPROMs is such a PITA.  It was mostly a 
learning tool... I learned not to play with 64 pin, 0.9 inch wide DIPs. 
  I rolled my own board with the more conventional 40 pin TMS9995.

-- 

Rick