Nigel Goodwin said:
I would suggest you try looking on the Texas website, but they seem a fairly obscure item - I've not heard of hobbiest use of them, and I've only ever seen a few Texas micro's in domestic electronics.
Yes, it is part of a nearly 10 year old device. From what I have been able to learn, the micro was chosen based on the original design criteria being far more complicated than what the end result became.
As you say, the requirements are very basic, a PIC would do the job easily.
My thoughts/hopes, exactly. I have built a circuit based around hex inverters and a dozen or so components that does everything needed, but changing frequencies, duty cycle, etc requires either part changes, or sometimes minor redesigns. I would rather avoid making any more units this way. My thinking was, if I was to make it PIC based, the PCB and supporting circuits could remain the same, just variations of the code could be applied. This would
greatly simplify things.
As you admit to being unfamiliar with micro-controllers, so are starting from scratch, I would suggest using a more popular device.
I had a quick look around your website, impressive... , but have yet to decide which device to proceed with for developement.
What sort of developement hardware would be required for the more popular chips? The programming setup and hardware for the TI micro was big money.
Any suggestions? ( your software looks very good BTW , but I wont infringe on you since I am expecting to get paid to do this work if they decide to go ahead )
However, I'm assuming this is a commercial product?, and it's been dumped on you? - what are you been asked to do with it? - merely to produce some more, or to modify the existing design?.
It is more of an industrial product, used in custom applications. The "custom" aspect is one reason for wanting an easily altered design.
Yes I have been dumped on...LOL I am now the one who gets to repair the current units, and build what can be made from remaining part inventories.
The request so far is to see if it can be done in a more flexible way with "simpler" technology.
I don't really need to modify the design goal, the same functionality is required, just arrived at differently.
Thanks alot for your input!