PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty...

21
PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson Stichka, Nick Veys

Transcript of PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty...

Page 1: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

PIC Evaluation/Development Board

Dec02-12December 10, 2002Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson Stichka, Nick Veys

Page 2: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Presentation Outline Problem Statement Design Objectives End-Product Description Assumptions/Limitations Project Risks/Concerns Technical Approach Evaluation of Project Success Recommendations for Future Work Human/Financial Budgets Lessons Learned Closing Summary

Page 3: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Problem Statement

Many project implementations require the use of a microcontroller

However, the development of a Peripheral Interface Controller (PIC) solution is often beyond the expertise and available time of the design team

Page 4: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Design Objectives

Design and implement a board to enable future senior design teams to quickly and easily use a PIC solution in their projectsFlexibleEasy to UseCost EfficientSoftware Libraries

Page 5: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

End-Product Description

Microchip 16F876 Based SolutionCAN InterfaceCharacter LCD Display7 Segment DisplaysSerial (RS232) InterfaceTemperature SensorSpeaker

Software Libraries for All Components

Page 6: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Assumptions/Limitations

Assumptions: Users have an electrical/computer engineering

background Users have access to a personal computer with a free

parallel port Users have C programming skills

Limitations: Budget of $100 Size Constraints Environmental Constraints

Page 7: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Project Risks/Concerns

Design ErrorOver 100 traces and 200 pinsSoftware depends on working hardware

Device FailureSocket interfaces were used for crucial

components Loss of a Team Member

Page 8: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Technical Approach

The requirements for this project were relatively open-ended

The 16F876 was chosen for versatility CAN interface provides interoperability

with industrial/automotive equipment Other devices were chosen for their uses

in practical applications

Page 9: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Technical Approach

C was chosen for rapid development The following libraries were implemented

Character LCD RS232 Seven segment displays CAN

Initialization and diagnostic routine was also created

Page 10: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Technical Approach

Programmer P16Pro compatible hardware Parallel port interface Cheap, reliable Lots of software support

Page 11: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Technical Approach

Eagle was used for schematic and PCBWidely used, supportedSimple, powerful interfaceLinux/Windows supportProvides schematic capture and PCB layout

Page 12: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Technical Approach

Schematic Capture using custom-made parts Form logical connections for use in PCB layout

Page 13: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Technical Approach

Page 14: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Technical Approach

Page 15: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Project Success

Milestone Percent Completed

Project Definition 100

Subsystems Designed 100

Board Layout Completed & Simulated 100

Peripheral Subsystems Prototyped and Tested 100

Prototype Board Assembled 100

Programming Environment Developed 100

Supported PIC Tested Successfully 100

C Libraries Developed 100

Full Documentation Written & User Tested 100

Sample Code for Every Module Written 100

Final Board Operational 100

Project Total 100

Page 16: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Further Work

Use the design provided to create even better senior design projects

Additional pins available on the PIC for future expansion

Design is flexible enough to be customized for a particular project

Page 17: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Human Budget

Team Member Original Estimated Effort Revised Estimated Effort

Actual Final Effort

Chad Berg 65 Hours 129 Hours 105 Hours

Luke Bishop 60 Hours 140 Hours 107 Hours

Tyson Stichka 62 Hours 126 Hours 98 Hours

Nicholas Veys 70 Hours 134 Hours 119 Hours

Totals 257 Hours 529 Hours 429 Hours

Page 18: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Financial Budget

Item Original Estimated Cost

Revised Estimated Cost

Actual Final Cost

Electronic Components $30 $30 $20.44

Character LCD Display $30 $30 $0

Dual-Layer PCB $70 $70 $34

Power Supply $6 $6 $9.95

PIC Microcontroller $20 $20 $8.19

Poster $15 $80 $80

P16PRO40 Programmer $0 $20 $18.95

Hi-Tech C Compiler $0 $1000 $0

Total $171 $1256 $171.53

Page 19: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Lessons Learned

Being a team doesn’t mean doing everything together!

Tasks must be divided between team members to finish on time

Each member must take responsibility for delivering

Communication

Page 20: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Summary

A flexible PIC development solution is important for future senior design students

This design costs half of comparable commercial products

The software libraries provide significant additional value

Page 21: PIC Evaluation/ Development Board Dec02-12 December 10, 2002 Client: ECpE Department Faculty Advisors: Dr. Rover, Dr. Weber Chad Berg, Luke Bishop, Tyson.

Q&A