¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Date

Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

On 11/7/21 7:56 PM, Matt Huszagh wrote:
I understand many people like to re-engineer things their way but, HP, Agilent and Keysight must have already put a lot of thought and effort into the instrument racks they and other T&M companies sell. I find these racks very cheap at ham swap meets or the local junk yard.

Is there a problem with them for your application?
Probably not. I'm just not familiar with these; I don't even know what
they look like. If you have a picture or something else that would be
great to see.
You're not familiar with 19" racks, which have been ubiquitous in many industries for about a century?

- test equipment
- computing
- telephony
- sound reinforcement
- pro music gear (synthesizers, audio processing)
- industrial automation
- [probably more that I can't think of offhand]

I'm not trying to talk down to you, man, but I can't see how anyone who has lived on Earth for awhile couldn't know about these. Heck, my grandmother suggested to me that I should get one when I was about 14, in the 80s.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA


Re: HP200CD oscillator

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Richard,

The voltage at the R40/31/30 junction should be in the order of -180VDC with respect to the chassis. Note that this is the negative bias voltage generated across R40.

If your voltage is +132V at R40/31/30 you have big troubles ¨C maybe check again to see if it is in fact negative.

Next check the voltages at the cathodes of V2 and V4 these should be in the vicinity of -3.6VDC ¨C mine are -3.2 and -2.8 and the generator works OK. This is pin 3 on V2 and 4.

Also check the grids of V2 and 4. Pin 2, ?and these should be around -19.5 or some such. Again mine are different at -16.5 and -16.7.

Another check is to monitor the voltage at the junction of R40/31/30 whilst changing the Range switch from x100 to x 10K. there should be very little if any change. This checks to see if there are any issues with the two output transformers.

One more thing ¨C on almost every 200CD that I have see C12 100uF NON POLARISED has gone bad. As we are only looking at the DV characteristics at present disconnect C12 9accross C30/31) and see if there are any changes to the DC bias voltages.

?

Good luck

Mark

?

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Richard Merifield via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, 7 November 2021 8:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] HP200CD oscillator

?

I repaired L2 as best I could and it measured ok so thought I would give it a try. I suspect on 6AU6 may be part of my problem. I swapped them around and I now have a perfectly functional unit as far as I can tell, except R30 gets scolding hot still. I have 4 more 6AU6 coming.

I measured the voltage at the R40/R31/R30 junction at 132V DC and -5.8V and -5.3V on the other side of R30 and R31 respectively with respect to chassis ground. Why would R30 get twice as hot as R31 given those measurements? Don't they effectively have almost the same current flowing across them ? I desoldered R30 and it measure 3.1kOhm but perhaps something else is wrong with it ?

I think I am getting closer

Regards

Richard


Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

"mark hawk" <mvhawk@...> writes:

I understand many people like to re-engineer things their way but, HP, Agilent and Keysight must have already put a lot of thought and effort into the instrument racks they and other T&M companies sell. I find these racks very cheap at ham swap meets or the local junk yard.

Is there a problem with them for your application?
Probably not. I'm just not familiar with these; I don't even know what
they look like. If you have a picture or something else that would be
great to see.

Matt


Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

I understand many people like to re-engineer things their way but, HP, Agilent and Keysight must have already put a lot of thought and effort into the instrument racks they and other T&M companies sell. I find these racks very cheap at ham swap meets or the local junk yard.

Is there a problem with them for your application?

Mark Hawk


HP 401 c VTVM

 

Hello one and all,
I have recently acquired a HP 410 C meter from a friend.
It works great measuring resistance. I do not have the AC probe that may have come with it, so I cannot attest to its AC measuring accuracy. However when I try to measure something as simple as a AAA or 9-volt battery the meter does something I am unable to explain.
The meter movement will not land or stay on zero when I turn the function switch to DC+ or DC-. I find that when I handle the DC probe it is when the meter goes crazy. (also technical term used in describing human behavior).
If I run my hand along the probe wire I get the same reaction.?
If I conduct the test with out letting the meter settle at zero I get a very accurate reading.
I have checked the internals of the probe and find that the center core of the coax is connected to the resistor which is connected to the tip.
The shield is cut back and covered with shrink tubing eliminating any possible "short"
I have checked the continuity of both the shield and the inner wire of the coax and there is nothing unusual to report.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated

Respectfully

Mark


Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

I use a restaurant style wire rack, adapted large 5 inch castors designed for really heavy stuff,? moves easily with lots of weight. I keep the real heavy stuff ( power supplies) on the bottom....If needed 3mm hardboard cut to fit on the shelf.?
¸é±ð²Ô¨¦±ð

On 11/7/21 3:37 PM, Paul Amaranth wrote:

The biggest problem is to be sure the that COG never can get forward
of the wheels.  An 800 pound rack tipping is lethal.  A 2 inch caster
seems to be a bit small for the load, unless it's rated for 300 pounds.
If one of those fails you might have a problem.

I like the metro rack solution, I have a bunch of them.  Adjustable
shelves, 800 pounds/rack easy and it's not too hard to find them
used in the $50-75 range.  Every restaraunt has a few.

  Paul


On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 03:27:22PM -0800, Matt Huszagh wrote:
I keep basically all of my large and heavy (mostly HP) equipment on a
heavy-duty shelf I ordered from McMaster-Carr
(). I recently moved and wound up with
less space than I previously had. Before, I left about 2.5' behind the
instrument rack to be able to access the backs of the equipment. But, I
could really use that space in the new spot. So, I thought it might be
nice to put my normally stationary shelf on casters. This way I can roll
the shelf out when I need access to the rear of the instruments and keep
it against the wall for normal use. However, I'd very much like to
ensure my equipment doesn't go toppling over when I move it. I posted
about this on eevblog
()
and received some really great advice, which has gotten me to the
current iteration of the design (more on this momentarily). However, I
wanted to field advice from people on this thread who are probably more
used to large and heavy equipment than most.

I've modeled the shelf + casters in CAD and added pictures to this
post. The leveling+swiveling casters are also from McMaster-Carr
(). Basically, I'll put the shelf on
two C channels. The channel will be bolted to the shelf just below each
vertical column. I've designed the length of the channel to be longer
than the depth of the shelf so that the distance between the center of
the wheels when both wheels are rolled inward is still wider than the
depth of the shelf (24").

Some things to note. I'd estimate the total weight of my equipment
between 500 and 1000 lbs, though I'm guessing. The diameter of the
wheels is only 2". However, I'll be careful to ensure there is nothing
in the path of the wheels when I roll it out or in. Also, this is on
flat, hardwood floor. Most of the weight of the shelf is placed on the
middle two shelves since that's where it's accessible. Obviously from a
stability perspective it would be better if it were on the
bottom. Unfortunately, that's not an option. Though I wouldn't
necessarily be opposed to putting weights on the bottom shelf if people
feel that's a major improvement.

Lastly, a previous thread here
(/g/HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment/topic/racks_for_older_equipment/72918532?p=Created%2C%2C%2C20%2C1%2C0%2C0&prev=1)
contained some good information about this topic. The takeaway seemed to
be that proper NSF metro racks are a good way to achieve what I'm
looking for. And, from Don's comment, it sounds like this is what HP
used for their mobile cal lab, which is obviously a big
endorsement. However, I've already sunk a good chunk of money into this
shelf and would like to use it rather than buying something new. Also,
my uninformed impression is that my shelf looks a bit sturdier than the
metro racks. I could very well be wrong though and would be greatful to
hear why!

Thanks!
Matt




Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

"Paul Amaranth" <paul@...> writes:

Looks good. What are the shelves made of? If you're going to load
them up they'll need some kind of bracing. I've managed to collapse
metal shelves where the edges are bent into a channel shape. They
were probably 20 or 22ga steel though.
It's made of 14ga steel. The complete shelf, at least when it's mounted
on the ground, is actually rated for 6,400lbs. I've attached a proper
picture of what the shelf actually looks like.

Matt


Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

Looks good. What are the shelves made of? If you're going to load
them up they'll need some kind of bracing. I've managed to collapse
metal shelves where the edges are bent into a channel shape. They
were probably 20 or 22ga steel though.

Paul

On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 03:57:47PM -0800, Matt Huszagh wrote:
"Paul Amaranth" <paul@...> writes:

The biggest problem is to be sure the that COG never can get forward
of the wheels. An 800 pound rack tipping is lethal. A 2 inch caster
seems to be a bit small for the load, unless it's rated for 300 pounds.
If one of those fails you might have a problem.
The COG will be roughly halfway into the shelf. And, since I've designed
the wheels to at least be past the edge of the shelf, that should never
be a problem. Each caster is rated for 550lbs. I like these casters
because I can keep the weight off the wheel most of the time and level
the shelf (they're leveling casters).

I like the metro rack solution, I have a bunch of them. Adjustable
shelves, 800 pounds/rack easy and it's not too hard to find them
used in the $50-75 range. Every restaraunt has a few.
Yep, I've got nothing against the metro rack. They look great and when I
need an additional shelf that's probably what I'll go for. But, I'd like
to make this existing shelf work if I can.

Also, I should mention that my CAD rendition of the C channel and
casters are accurate, but the shelf is a rough approximation (in the
interest of time). The McMaster-Carr link shows a good depiction of it
though. In particular, though mounting of the shelf to the vertical
supports is quite robust (not as shown here).

Matt
--
Paul Amaranth, GCIH | Manchester MI, USA
Aurora Group of Michigan, LLC | Security, Systems & Software
paul@... | Unix/Linux - We don't do windows


Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

"Paul Amaranth" <paul@...> writes:

The biggest problem is to be sure the that COG never can get forward
of the wheels. An 800 pound rack tipping is lethal. A 2 inch caster
seems to be a bit small for the load, unless it's rated for 300 pounds.
If one of those fails you might have a problem.
The COG will be roughly halfway into the shelf. And, since I've designed
the wheels to at least be past the edge of the shelf, that should never
be a problem. Each caster is rated for 550lbs. I like these casters
because I can keep the weight off the wheel most of the time and level
the shelf (they're leveling casters).

I like the metro rack solution, I have a bunch of them. Adjustable
shelves, 800 pounds/rack easy and it's not too hard to find them
used in the $50-75 range. Every restaraunt has a few.
Yep, I've got nothing against the metro rack. They look great and when I
need an additional shelf that's probably what I'll go for. But, I'd like
to make this existing shelf work if I can.

Also, I should mention that my CAD rendition of the C channel and
casters are accurate, but the shelf is a rough approximation (in the
interest of time). The McMaster-Carr link shows a good depiction of it
though. In particular, though mounting of the shelf to the vertical
supports is quite robust (not as shown here).

Matt


Re: HP200CD oscillator

 


On Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 01:32 PM, Richard Merifield wrote:
Thanks again Ozan.

When you say ground, do you mean between C14 and R40 ?

---
Yes, that is the correct ground. Unless you are floating the ground of the HP200CD (or the scope) with an isolation transformer, ground lead of the scope probe and the chassis ground of the HP200CD are already connected through the ground terminal of the power plugs. Connecting scope ground to any other node would short circuit that node to chassis ground.?

If you use a two channel scope and look at the following pair of nodes they should have same amplitude but opposite phase signals at the output frequency:?Anodes of V1 and V3 is one pair, cathodes of V2 and V4 is the other pair. This can tell you if one of the valves is bad.

Without C12, R30 and R31 would have signals of same amplitude/opposite polarity across similarly but C12 should short the AC signal so R30/C12 and R31/C12 junctions should have very little signal on them. Mid point of R30/R31 should have very small AC on it too (ideally zero) because of the symmetry and C13B/C+C14 AC shorting it to the chassis ground.?

Ozan



Re: Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

The biggest problem is to be sure the that COG never can get forward
of the wheels. An 800 pound rack tipping is lethal. A 2 inch caster
seems to be a bit small for the load, unless it's rated for 300 pounds.
If one of those fails you might have a problem.

I like the metro rack solution, I have a bunch of them. Adjustable
shelves, 800 pounds/rack easy and it's not too hard to find them
used in the $50-75 range. Every restaraunt has a few.

Paul

On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 03:27:22PM -0800, Matt Huszagh wrote:
I keep basically all of my large and heavy (mostly HP) equipment on a
heavy-duty shelf I ordered from McMaster-Carr
(). I recently moved and wound up with
less space than I previously had. Before, I left about 2.5' behind the
instrument rack to be able to access the backs of the equipment. But, I
could really use that space in the new spot. So, I thought it might be
nice to put my normally stationary shelf on casters. This way I can roll
the shelf out when I need access to the rear of the instruments and keep
it against the wall for normal use. However, I'd very much like to
ensure my equipment doesn't go toppling over when I move it. I posted
about this on eevblog
()
and received some really great advice, which has gotten me to the
current iteration of the design (more on this momentarily). However, I
wanted to field advice from people on this thread who are probably more
used to large and heavy equipment than most.

I've modeled the shelf + casters in CAD and added pictures to this
post. The leveling+swiveling casters are also from McMaster-Carr
(). Basically, I'll put the shelf on
two C channels. The channel will be bolted to the shelf just below each
vertical column. I've designed the length of the channel to be longer
than the depth of the shelf so that the distance between the center of
the wheels when both wheels are rolled inward is still wider than the
depth of the shelf (24").

Some things to note. I'd estimate the total weight of my equipment
between 500 and 1000 lbs, though I'm guessing. The diameter of the
wheels is only 2". However, I'll be careful to ensure there is nothing
in the path of the wheels when I roll it out or in. Also, this is on
flat, hardwood floor. Most of the weight of the shelf is placed on the
middle two shelves since that's where it's accessible. Obviously from a
stability perspective it would be better if it were on the
bottom. Unfortunately, that's not an option. Though I wouldn't
necessarily be opposed to putting weights on the bottom shelf if people
feel that's a major improvement.

Lastly, a previous thread here
(/g/HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment/topic/racks_for_older_equipment/72918532?p=Created%2C%2C%2C20%2C1%2C0%2C0&prev=1)
contained some good information about this topic. The takeaway seemed to
be that proper NSF metro racks are a good way to achieve what I'm
looking for. And, from Don's comment, it sounds like this is what HP
used for their mobile cal lab, which is obviously a big
endorsement. However, I've already sunk a good chunk of money into this
shelf and would like to use it rather than buying something new. Also,
my uninformed impression is that my shelf looks a bit sturdier than the
metro racks. I could very well be wrong though and would be greatful to
hear why!

Thanks!
Matt
--
Paul Amaranth, GCIH | Manchester MI, USA
Aurora Group of Michigan, LLC | Security, Systems & Software
paul@... | Unix/Linux - We don't do windows


Placing Shelf on Casters for HP Equipment

 

I keep basically all of my large and heavy (mostly HP) equipment on a
heavy-duty shelf I ordered from McMaster-Carr
(). I recently moved and wound up with
less space than I previously had. Before, I left about 2.5' behind the
instrument rack to be able to access the backs of the equipment. But, I
could really use that space in the new spot. So, I thought it might be
nice to put my normally stationary shelf on casters. This way I can roll
the shelf out when I need access to the rear of the instruments and keep
it against the wall for normal use. However, I'd very much like to
ensure my equipment doesn't go toppling over when I move it. I posted
about this on eevblog
()
and received some really great advice, which has gotten me to the
current iteration of the design (more on this momentarily). However, I
wanted to field advice from people on this thread who are probably more
used to large and heavy equipment than most.

I've modeled the shelf + casters in CAD and added pictures to this
post. The leveling+swiveling casters are also from McMaster-Carr
(). Basically, I'll put the shelf on
two C channels. The channel will be bolted to the shelf just below each
vertical column. I've designed the length of the channel to be longer
than the depth of the shelf so that the distance between the center of
the wheels when both wheels are rolled inward is still wider than the
depth of the shelf (24").

Some things to note. I'd estimate the total weight of my equipment
between 500 and 1000 lbs, though I'm guessing. The diameter of the
wheels is only 2". However, I'll be careful to ensure there is nothing
in the path of the wheels when I roll it out or in. Also, this is on
flat, hardwood floor. Most of the weight of the shelf is placed on the
middle two shelves since that's where it's accessible. Obviously from a
stability perspective it would be better if it were on the
bottom. Unfortunately, that's not an option. Though I wouldn't
necessarily be opposed to putting weights on the bottom shelf if people
feel that's a major improvement.

Lastly, a previous thread here
(/g/HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment/topic/racks_for_older_equipment/72918532?p=Created%2C%2C%2C20%2C1%2C0%2C0&prev=1)
contained some good information about this topic. The takeaway seemed to
be that proper NSF metro racks are a good way to achieve what I'm
looking for. And, from Don's comment, it sounds like this is what HP
used for their mobile cal lab, which is obviously a big
endorsement. However, I've already sunk a good chunk of money into this
shelf and would like to use it rather than buying something new. Also,
my uninformed impression is that my shelf looks a bit sturdier than the
metro racks. I could very well be wrong though and would be greatful to
hear why!

Thanks!
Matt


Re: Packaging equipment for transport

 

I just wanted to thank everyone for their advice. Packing the equipment
in my trunk with moving blankets worked perfectly. All items arrived in
the same condition that they left, which is a huge relief. Thanks!

Placing the instruments on their side also was great advice. This made
each instrument just a little shorter than the height of my trunk. I
filled the rest of the vertical space with blankets.

FYI, I ended up renting the moving blankets cheaply from UHaul.

Matt


Re: Question: XY (XYZ or Vector) instrument CRT, replacement with an LCD ?

 

On 11/7/21 5:26 PM, Chuck Harris wrote:
Well, I have been using PIC's since the very beginning,
and I have never used Microchip's toolchain.
As have I, and I've used their toolchain a couple of times.

There are
better compilers and programmers available just about
everywhere.
Yes, improving on their toolchain isn't a very high bar.

My favorite C compiler is CCS. However, there
are open source compilers available for the PIC... I believe
there is something based on GCC.
I did mention CCS a couple of times in this thread. Their compilers are pretty amazing; I've never seen such tight code generation. But good luck ever moving anything out of that environment without a substantial rewrite. That's my only dislike about CCS' products.

There's never been any PIC code generation for GCC, though, as far as I'm aware. GCC isn't very well-suited to "small" architectures. The obvious exception to this is AVR, because it's a more modern architecture that's easier to target with a complex compiler. There are other exceptions, but not many, and I'm nearly certain that PIC was never one of them.

Programmers, well, I have used Microchips, but not with
their IDE, but rather something I got on linux. I also
use universal programmers... and sometimes even a little
3 pin serial programming port.
I've used a couple of their programmers. There has always been software for grownup platforms to drive them. My first PIC projects were programmed into chips on a SPARCstation.

So, I don't get your reference to a "toxic ecosystem".
I explained that reference in my lengthy email which you quoted.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA


Re: Question: XY (XYZ or Vector) instrument CRT, replacement with an LCD ?

 

Well, I have been using PIC's since the very beginning,
and I have never used Microchip's toolchain. There are
better compilers and programmers available just about
everywhere. My favorite C compiler is CCS. However, there
are open source compilers available for the PIC... I believe
there is something based on GCC.

Programmers, well, I have used Microchips, but not with
their IDE, but rather something I got on linux. I also
use universal programmers... and sometimes even a little
3 pin serial programming port.

So, I don't get your reference to a "toxic ecosystem".

-Chuck Harris


On Sun, 7 Nov 2021 12:56:07 -0500 "Dave McGuire"
<mcguire@...> wrote:
On 11/7/21 12:28 PM, Bruce wrote:
I'd like you to expand on the "toxic ecosystem" of PIC.

I use them occasionally and find the IDE reasonably - what is the
complaint ??
Well, you said part of it right there: "the IDE". "THE".
Microcontrollers and toolchains should never be treated as a
single-source unit, Microchip tries hard to force people into their
proprietary tools, and people who don't know any better just "go with
it". "PIC" is a microcontroller architecture...when you choose a
microcontroller architecture, you should be doing just that, choosing
a microcontroller architecture. When you choose PIC, you are
immediately shoe-horned into one set of tools, from the chip vendor,
who supports what they want to support and de-supports what they no
longer want to sell. It is a completely vendor-controlled ecosystem.

Projects and companies have failed due to situations like this.

Yes, there are tools available from other vendors, and there are
some free PIC tools. Some of them are decent...CCS' C compiler comes
to mind; it's very good. But all of these tools force you to write
tool-specific code with almost no reusability if you ever dare step
outside the PIC architecture. That's reusability of either code from
a project or knowledge gained in working with the tools. You end up
starting from scratch for both!

And the tools themselves (with some exceptions, like CCS C) are
generally pretty crappy by modern professional standards. You can
get work done, but it's not easy, not standards-based, and leads
straight to one of the most dangerous kinds of vendor lock-in. It's
ok for hobbyist-level playing around and doing occasional small,
simple projects. But trying to do anything complex, or heaven forbid
trying put dinner on the table with it, is a joke.

Microchip themselves have gotten better with the introduction of
the MIPS-based PIC32 architecture (for which there are great tools)
and their acquisition of Atmel a few years ago, bringing the fairly
nice AVR architecture into the fold, which also has great tools...So
it's a PIC problem, not a Microchip problem.

The only good thing the Microchip IDE itself has going for it is
that it's built on Eclipse, which is widely supported and extensible,
so the user actually has some control over it.

-Dave


Re: HP200CD oscillator

 

Thanks again Ozan.

When you say ground, do you mean between C14 and R40 ?

Cheers


Re: HP200CD oscillator

 

R30 feeds cathode current to V2 and R31 feeds V4. They should be balanced. You measured the voltage across R30 as 132+5.8 = 137.8 volts. That suggests a power dissipation in R30 of 137.8^2/3100 = 6.1 watts. R30 and 31 are described in the parts list as a matched pair of 2.5K resistors but the power rating is not specified. I would expect them to be at least 10 watt units. Is there ant possibility that they were replaced by a previous owner?

You should check balance in the output stages by comparing the voltages across R27 and R28. They should be the same, and about 30 volts.

Morris


Re: Question: XY (XYZ or Vector) instrument CRT, replacement with an LCD ?

 

Thanks John; I have ruled out Python for now but may?learn it some?day.?
20 years using C does not make me a programmer but I have built many successful projects with the tools I have.
Many seem to be missing the point that I am looking for the shortest learning curve. The two missing items are a C compiler with a nice IDE to run on Windows and learning graphics with it.
I understand the following (TurboC)

/* Simple example to draw circle */

#¾±²Ô³¦±ô³Ü»å±ð¡±²µ°ù²¹±è³ó¾±³¦²õ.³ó¡±

#¾±²Ô³¦±ô³Ü»å±ð¡±³¦´Ç²Ô¾±´Ç.³ó¡±

void main()

{

int gd=DETECT,gm;

initgraph(&gd, &gm, ¡°c:/tc/bgi ¡°);

circle(330,180,100);

getch();

closegraph();

}

I just need to get started with software running on a Windows computer to?write programs like that.? I have done similar on a low res LCD with a PIC.

The best advice so far was the free MS Visual C which I will try to load. There is a very nice Tutorial that I partly completed on?the version that was not free.?

I hope the free version is as good.

Is anyone interested in helping with a PC controlling an HP Impedance analyzer?

Peter


On Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 1:38 PM John Griessen <john@...> wrote:

On 11/7/21 09:39, peter bunge wrote:
> I am not a programmer and like to keep things simple.
> The reason I like the PIC over Arduino and RaspberryPi is that I can make custom PCBs and program the pins on the PIC to be
> convenient.

micropython on a STM32F4 or others might interest you.? It's still a learning curve.? STM32's have lots of GPIOs ports and such
that can be remapped? in various alternate ways, but not pin by pin.? The power and grounds and XTAL in/out don't remap, but some
redundant ones can be left off.






Re: Question: XY (XYZ or Vector) instrument CRT, replacement with an LCD ?

 

That community edition by default makes huge executables, even the classic "Hello World" job.? Mainly due to all the unwanted "phone home" embedded code.? (You can disable that, but...)

Also, if your PC is part of a network "Domain", MS-VC will cost you money, especially if you are not in the USA.

I've used "Code::Blocks" for C/C++ coding at work on Windows to great effect, also using NI GPIB libraries.

The executables are small and fast compared to what MS's VC spits out, and is also more easily portable between OS platforms (save for the NI Lib's.)

For hobby work, and much "Work" work too, there are a lot of very good FOS* dev tools out there.? (* Free Open Source.)

No need to "Pay the man" if you don't want to.

Regards to All.

Dave B.


Re: Question: XY (XYZ or Vector) instrument CRT, replacement with an LCD ?

 

Interleaved

On 11/7/2021 2:16 PM, Paul Amaranth wrote:
On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 12:05:23PM -0500, Harvey White wrote:
Interleaved responses.

Both arduino NANO and the Nucleo-32 boards have the same pinouts and form
factors, so you can buy a breakout board made for a NANO and plug the Nucleo
board in.? Be careful of the voltages, as ARM processors are 3.3 volts
rather than 5.0 volts.
The Nucleo-32 could be a good solution, but I think I'd take issue with
the NANO. With only 2K of SRAM for stack and variable space it seems a
bit small for doing any significant graphics. Heck, that's not even enough
for a frame buffer. Maybe a sophisticated programmer could do something
with it, but that's still a stretch.
You'd be surprised what you can do, but that wasn't quite the point.? With the same physical footprint, you have access to a number of inexpensive arduino aids...

Ditto with the Nucleo64 and the arduino board connector.


I have a project using a NANO now and I've had to painfully optimize every
byte of storage to get it to fit in. If you go over 90% SRAM utilization,
you're very likely to overwrite the stack during runtime. And of course
the only way it tells you that is by going into either a reset loop or
OTL. Not really good for starting out.
<grin> Nucleo 32 then?

I'd move to the Nucleo, but NANOs are just too darn cheap. I'd be happy
with a similar form factor for the ATMEGA644p. Still a bit small for
this, I think.
10-12 dollars Mouser? Cross the capability (ROM/RAM and CPU speed) over into an equivalent Arduino board.?? Unless you go Chinese clone, not sure that you'll get that much.

Might want to look at the LK432 board, I think I picked it for the maximum memory.? No EEPROM though, but I think you can set aside an area of Flash for the purpose.

Harvey


Paul