Forum Rule: Always post complete source code & details to reproduce any issue!
Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 10 18 19 20 21 LastLast
Results 476 to 500 of 525

Thread: Future Teensy features & pinout

  1. #476
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    65
    @kdharbert, what voltage range, speed, and resolution do you need?

  2. #477
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    160
    voltage range: 0-3.3v
    Speed\res: Low end: 16bit 44.1khz high end: 16bit 500khz

  3. #478
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by kdharbert View Post
    voltage range: 0-3.3v
    Speed\res: Low end: 16bit 44.1khz high end: 16bit 500khz
    Analog Devices, TI, Maxim, Microchip and others make multi-channel ADCs that can be easily managed over SPI or I2S. These are available in 2-8 channel versions at 1+ msps per converter. A search on Mouser, Digikey, or LCSC will show options.

    Design & layout of a 3.3V 16 bit converter is not trivial. At 50uV/bit it requires knowledge of analog PCB design practices for good noise performance. If you can reduce the bit depth or increase the voltage range it will make the design process much easier.

  4. #479
    One question:
    It would be interesting make possible to solder as SMD?. The problem with trough hole is the it drills not only te top side but also internal ones so is more difficult to design PCBs. Also more difficult for production. The solution is easy: to expand a little to make SMD pads at the border close to pins so it would be possible solder as SMD and also pins using the same PCB

  5. #480
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    3,245
    Quote Originally Posted by jlopez2022 View Post
    It would be interesting make possible to solder as SMD?.
    Only if there are no bottom mounted components, or you must use cut-outs and then it does not matter much if there are through holes.

  6. #481
    Senior Member Blackaddr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    321
    Quote Originally Posted by jlopez2022 View Post
    One question:
    It would be interesting make possible to solder as SMD?. The problem with trough hole is the it drills not only te top side but also internal ones so is more difficult to design PCBs. Also more difficult for production. The solution is easy: to expand a little to make SMD pads at the border close to pins so it would be possible solder as SMD and also pins using the same PCB
    Normally castellated holes are used for SMD soldering a PCB down to another one, but that only works when there are no components on the bottom side, so that unfortunately isn't an option for Teensy.

    If your concern is having to put through-holes through your carrier PCB, and you can afford the height of the female headers, you can also just use 0.1" SMD female headers rather than PTH.

    Otherwise, I think the upcoming MicroMod version will solve some of these issues as the M.2 connector is SMD (presuming the M.2 breaks out all the pins you need).

  7. #482
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by jlopez2022 View Post
    One question:
    It would be interesting make possible to solder as SMD?
    This topic was discussed in some depth earlier in this thread. The only practical ways do this is for the board to have no components on the bottom, or require a cutout on the baseboard. Single side components has been done by at least one manufacturer. Among other things there is an impact on noise performance due to the increased distance between the decoupling caps and the BGA pins. My opinion is that I would rather have a more robust board, as opposed to a single-sided (components) board.

  8. #483
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by mlewus View Post
    This topic was discussed in some depth earlier in this thread. The only practical ways do this is for the board to have no components on the bottom, or require a cutout on the baseboard. Single side components has been done by at least one manufacturer. Among other things there is an impact on noise performance due to the increased distance between the decoupling caps and the BGA pins. My opinion is that I would rather have a more robust board, as opposed to a single-sided (components) board.
    Agreed about the stability.
    The greater distance between capacitors and pins would not likely affect performance at stock (or lower) clock speeds. However, for those of us (and I'm sure there are a large number of us) that overclock the CPU core to accelerate processing of certain time sensitive tasks this would introduce a VERY undesirable instability during these brief over-clocks. Another feature that would be harmed would be the ADC performance since the decoupling on the ADC power inputs is critical to clean conversions.

  9. #484
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackaddr View Post
    Otherwise, I think the upcoming MicroMod version will solve some of these issues as the M.2 connector is SMD (presuming the M.2 breaks out all the pins you need).
    I got a couple of the M.2 connectors and they look to be pretty tricky to hand solder. Lots of solder wick, for sure. I'd go for reflow. Definitely not for your average hobbyist. Costs a lot more than 2 rows of 2.54mm pitch headers, too. Micromod doesn't give me more GPIOs than a T4.1 and no Ethernet so I probably won't be using it. Seems like a step back from the T4.1.

  10. #485
    Senior Member manicksan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    288
    Also the m2 connector is double sided,
    which means it's very hard to solder the top side smd pins.

  11. #486
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidWH1968 View Post
    Agreed about the stability.
    Another feature that would be harmed would be the ADC performance since the decoupling on the ADC power inputs is critical to clean conversions.
    Which is why I have been using I2C ADCs - you can get a lot cleaner signal into (and out of) one of those. An ADC in a microcontroller is subject to a lot of compromises. I like it when the conversions happens far from the EMI factory. Makes my paltry analog skills look positively brilliant.

  12. #487
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    35
    You are right. ADC's in MCU's are in VERY close proximity to many other peripherals which can introduce their own noise and compromise the integrity of an analog signal. Discrete ADC's are still made for that very reason.

  13. #488
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    1,101
    Also not that the silicon process for low-power high speed CMOS is not necessarily ideal for a high performance
    sigma-delta modulator which is essentially a precision analog piece of circuitry. Laser trimming is sometimes used
    for the highest-performing analog chips, which requires feature sizes far larger than modern high-speed CMOS, often
    taking up significant die area.

    If you do have an ADC on an MCU, it will perform best if you halt the processor during acquisitions.

  14. #489
    Sorry, the M2 connector will allow inserting teensy as a DDR memory in a PCB?

    About using 0.1' SMD connectors, it is a good idea, but I should use male ones, so I will not have troubles with heigh, also some components could be inserted under the teensy

  15. #490
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    24,454
    Quote Originally Posted by manicksan View Post
    Also the m2 connector is double sided,
    which means it's very hard to solder the top side smd pins.
    Just last weekend I hand soldered a few M.2 connectors on those MicroMod breakout boards. The rows of pins on each side were about the same.

  16. #491
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Location
    West London, UK
    Posts
    9
    i.MX RT1170 - Arrow Hands-On Training
    https://register.gotowebinar.com/reg...87000132060173

  17. #492
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    35
    @ PaulStoffregen: Have there been any new developments regarding the RT1170 based Teensy? (Like any decisive decisions about board layout, optional memory footprints, ...)

  18. #493
    The new teensy have diodes to allow power from external PCB with the usb port connected?

  19. #494
    Senior Member+ manitou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,631
    MIMXRT1170-EVK

    Just received my MIMXRT1170-EVK board from mouser ($208). Using NXP MCUXpresso and NXP SDK, I have run a few of the examples on both cores, cm7 (M7@1 GHz) and cm4 (M4@400MHz). Peripheral IO and timers look a lot like T4. I haven't figured out multicore usage yet.
    Code:
    coremark gcc 9.3.1 -O3
    cm7 4073 iterations/sec   275 ma
    cm4  728 iterations/sec
    Other MCU coremark results at end of perf.txt.

    mbedtls SDK benchmarks -O3
    Code:
    cm7
    mbedTLS version 2.16.6
    fsys=996000000
    Using following implementations:
      SHA: CAAM HW accelerated
      AES: CAAM HW accelerated
      AES GCM: CAAM HW accelerated
      DES: CAAM HW accelerated
      Asymmetric cryptography: CAAM HW accelerated
    
      MD5                      :  5834.39 KB/s,  145.64 cycles/byte
      SHA-1                    :  24142.75 KB/s,   29.24 cycles/byte
      SHA-256                  :  22746.25 KB/s,   27.73 cycles/byte
      SHA-512                  :  813.76 KB/s,  1188.33 cycles/byte
      3DES                     :  11885.05 KB/s,   19.72 cycles/byte
      DES                      :  43668.04 KB/s,   11.38 cycles/byte
      AES-CBC-128              :  34505.66 KB/s,   17.85 cycles/byte
      AES-CBC-192              :  32308.14 KB/s,   19.94 cycles/byte
      AES-CBC-256              :  30238.82 KB/s,   22.00 cycles/byte
      AES-GCM-128              :  32428.12 KB/s,   19.85 cycles/byte
      AES-GCM-192              :  30358.25 KB/s,   21.82 cycles/byte
      AES-GCM-256              :  27575.46 KB/s,   24.01 cycles/byte
      AES-CCM-128              :  22045.39 KB/s,   33.92 cycles/byte
      AES-CCM-192              :  20150.00 KB/s,   38.10 cycles/byte
      AES-CCM-256              :  18526.98 KB/s,   42.31 cycles/byte
      CTR_DRBG (NOPR)          :  1956.96 KB/s,  486.43 cycles/byte
      CTR_DRBG (PR)            :  1349.88 KB/s,  722.21 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-1 (NOPR)   :  570.32 KB/s,  1697.48 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-1 (PR)     :  527.95 KB/s,  1835.51 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-256 (NOPR) :  797.10 KB/s,  1210.97 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-256 (PR)   :  797.12 KB/s,  1211.01 cycles/byte
      RSA-1024                 :  4545.33  public/s
      RSA-1024                 :  240.00 private/s
      DHE-2048                 :   26.00 handshake/s
      DH-2048                  :   48.00 handshake/s
      ECDSA-secp256r1          :  236.33 sign/s
      ECDSA-secp256r1          :  165.00 verify/s
      ECDHE-secp256r1          :  187.00 handshake/s
      ECDH-secp256r1           :  351.00 handshake/s
    
    cm4
      MD5                      :  1850.37 KB/s,  205.67 cycles/byte
      SHA-1                    :  5603.39 KB/s,   66.75 cycles/byte
      SHA-256                  :  5618.67 KB/s,   66.55 cycles/byte
      SHA-512                  :  162.21 KB/s,  2377.27 cycles/byte
      3DES                     :  23137.90 KB/s,   14.78 cycles/byte
      DES                      :  31683.35 KB/s,   10.36 cycles/byte
      AES-CBC-128              :  26819.54 KB/s,   12.55 cycles/byte
      AES-CBC-192              :  25331.83 KB/s,   13.39 cycles/byte
      AES-CBC-256              :  23907.89 KB/s,   14.29 cycles/byte
      AES-GCM-128              :  22565.69 KB/s,   15.15 cycles/byte
      AES-GCM-192              :  21500.71 KB/s,   15.99 cycles/byte
      AES-GCM-256              :  20493.28 KB/s,   16.87 cycles/byte
      AES-CCM-128              :  13030.69 KB/s,   27.51 cycles/byte
      AES-CCM-192              :  12365.10 KB/s,   29.10 cycles/byte
      AES-CCM-256              :  11697.15 KB/s,   30.87 cycles/byte
      CTR_DRBG (NOPR)          :  731.82 KB/s,  522.87 cycles/byte
      CTR_DRBG (PR)            :  483.29 KB/s,  793.33 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-1 (NOPR)   :  126.43 KB/s,  3055.65 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-1 (PR)     :  116.22 KB/s,  3326.44 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-256 (NOPR) :  171.17 KB/s,  2251.73 cycles/byte
      HMAC_DRBG SHA-256 (PR)   :  171.18 KB/s,  2251.73 cycles/byte
      RSA-1024                 :  1037.33  public/s
      RSA-1024                 :   48.33 private/s
      DHE-2048                 :   23.00 handshake/s
      DH-2048                  :   37.00 handshake/s
      ECDSA-secp256r1          :   59.00 sign/s
      ECDSA-secp256r1          :   43.67 verify/s
      ECDHE-secp256r1          :   49.67 handshake/s
      ECDH-secp256r1           :  120.33 handshake/s
    Code:
    DSP FFT benchmark  1024  radix4 REVERSEBITS 0  (microseconds)
                    q15     q31      f32       opt         arm_math.h
    NXP 1170 1GHz   44.3     89.4     66.9    gcc -O3      v1.6.0
      T4@600mhz     77.4    147.0     87.0    gcc -O2      v1.5.1
      M7@600mhz     77.4    147.8     88.0    gcc -O3      v1.5.1 SDK
      M7@600mhz     74.5    126.9     95.6    ARM GCC -O3  v1.5.1
    T3.6@256mhz    291.7    720.4    424.7    Faster       v1.5.3
    T3.6@240mhz    311.2    768.8    453.0    Faster       v1.5.3
    T3.6@180mhz    463.1   1215.2    703.7    Faster       v1.1.0
    T3.6@180mhz    414.7   1010.7    598.2    Faster       v1.5.3
    T3.5@120mhz    784.7   1947.9   1079.8    Faster       v1.1.0
    T3.5@120mhz    658.5   1577.9    919.5    Faster       v1.5.3
    K64F@120mhz    635.7   1273.8    827.2    ARM GCC -O3  v1.4.5
    T3.2@120mhz    869.8   2498.5  18182.5    Faster       v1.1.0
    adaM4F@120mhz  701.3   1756.1    781.0    Faster       v1.1.0   SAMD51
    STM32L4@80mhz  917.3   1953.8   1150.4    Faster       v1.4.5
    STM32F405@168  466.5   1135.1    556.1    gcc -O2      v1.6.0
    Notes
    • In the NXP SDK, GPT timer clock sources are only 24 MHz, and probably RC based -- drift of 980 ppm from GPS PPS. Tested drift with quad timer PWM and measured 34 ppm. Quad timer and PIT timer use 240 MHz bus clock. Also tested 24 MHz crystal using 64-bit PIT timer (34.67 ppm). GPT FIX: one can configure GPTx clocks with IDE's clock tool or hack clock_config.c to make GPT2 use kCLOCK_GPT2_ClockRoot_MuxOsc24MOut, then 24MHz crystal drift is 34.67 ppm. GPT 32khz clock source OK, -47 ppm.
    • Still not clear how memory banks are shared/protected between the cm4 and cm7 for a multicore app.
    • 12-bit DAC (1.8v, 1 ma, 4 us settle time) is available on test pad (TP18) on EVK board. DAC can be routed internally to ADC or comparator.
    • max ADC voltage is 1.8v on EVK board
    • EVK power running cm7 coremark: 275 ma (meter J38 1-2), Compare: T4 106 ma, 1060 EVK 184 ma


    References
    1060 to 1170 migration guide

    I'll add other results of 1170 experiments to this post ....
    Last edited by manitou; 06-13-2021 at 07:54 PM.

  20. #495
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by jlopez2022 View Post
    Sorry, the M2 connector will allow inserting teensy as a DDR memory in a PCB?
    No, the Teensy is not and never will be used as DDR memory. Nor will it ever be compatible with a PC computer motherboard socket. Forum members have been discussing the possibility of co-opting the M.2 connector as a means of breaking out large numbers of IO pins. M.2 is dense, ubiquitous, cheap, and relatively easy to solder. So it makes a good choice.

  21. #496
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    On the subject of high-density connectors...

    Have you designed any base boards for other products using the high density connectors.
    I'm not normally on this forum and I actually created an account just now so don't stress too much this post .

    I just want to share my experience as I lately designed both the module and the motherboard using an E Key M.2 connector with a custom 48mm length. I did it mostly because it looks nice and also because the assembled module+motherboard is lower profile.

    PCB wise it is for sure harder to design in my opinion as the side 0.1" header pins are nicely spread out compared to the M.2 connector which makes all traces bottle neck to one side. I haven't characterize yet my board in this regard but I'm sure I have a decent amount of cross-talk on my module as all traces need to travel the board up to the edge. Also it limits the thickness of the board to 0.8mm if this is a concern for you. I did the module on the oshpark 2 layers board and this was not comfortable but as you are on 6 layers, this should already be a lot better.

    So in conclusion, I would vote in favor of the M.2 connector for the next teensy

  22. #497
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Posts
    5
    Oh I forgot to add, I'm with you with the no debugger thing, as this is a controversial topic I will just put that blind vote against the motion out here without justification.

  23. #498
    Senior Member blackketter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by fgervais001 View Post
    I'm not normally on this forum and I actually created an account just now so don't stress too much this post .

    I just want to share my experience as I lately designed both the module and the motherboard using an E Key M.2 connector with a custom 48mm length. I did it mostly because it looks nice and also because the assembled module+motherboard is lower profile.

    PCB wise it is for sure harder to design in my opinion as the side 0.1" header pins are nicely spread out compared to the M.2 connector which makes all traces bottle neck to one side. I haven't characterize yet my board in this regard but I'm sure I have a decent amount of cross-talk on my module as all traces need to travel the board up to the edge. Also it limits the thickness of the board to 0.8mm if this is a concern for you. I did the module on the oshpark 2 layers board and this was not comfortable but as you are on 6 layers, this should already be a lot better.

    So in conclusion, I would vote in favor of the M.2 connector for the next teensy
    Those boards look great! I am curious, though, why did you decide to use the M.2 daughterboard arrangement rather than just soldering the module on to the host board?

  24. #499
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by blackketter View Post
    Those boards look great! I am curious, though, why did you decide to use the M.2 daughterboard arrangement rather than just soldering the module on to the host board?
    Thank you, there is actually a couple things I like with this design.

    Mostly it gives me the easy swapping to ease the debug. I keep a batch of the processing module handy and sometimes during the motherboard bring-up I'm not sure if I blew up something (or I'm sure I did ) so I can swap the module and try with a know good one quickly.

    Also I can do the firmware development before the motherboard is designed and so when I receive the motherboard I can just install the same module I did the prototyping with without unsoldering/resoldering.

    Lastly it makes a clear responsibility interface, the motherboard just need to provide something in the range of 6v-3v so it can be usb 5v or 3x lithium AA (5.4v full charge) and then the module is in charge of the rest.

  25. #500
    Senior Member+ Frank B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,574
    Hm, you have easy swapping with any kind of connector.
    M2 does not have enough pins.

    PLEASE tell us you don't have this in a child's room:

    Edit : [Picture removed] - it is here.

    Oh my.. there is so much that is dangerous. Mains cable without strain relief, easy to pull out. A thin plastic over the screws. A housing which is an inivation for children to put things in... etc etc etc. NO!!!
    Last edited by Frank B; 05-26-2021 at 08:31 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •