http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736 A place to share, learn, and grow... en-US Fri, 22 Jan 2016 00:07:24 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://forums.leaflabs.com/search.php http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5662 Fri, 15 Jul 2011 07:11:33 +0000 mabl 5662@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>True. But they are not yet planing for a header board of the f207. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5658 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 03:45:35 +0000 dreamcat4 5658@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>I also think Olimex boards are great. But their 2-wide headers won't sit onto a breadboard neatly, the way Maple Mini does. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5657 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 02:12:55 +0000 mabl 5657@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>Olimex is going to bring a new F207 board in September. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5623 Tue, 12 Jul 2011 07:04:22 +0000 dreamcat4 5623@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>Heh - the F207 is also getting available now (small quantities). There are a variety of different chips and suppliers to choose from:</p> <p><a href="http://octopart.com/partsearch/#search/requestData&amp;q=STM32F207" rel="nofollow">http://octopart.com/partsearch/#search/requestData&amp;q=STM32F207</a> </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5535 Tue, 05 Jul 2011 14:37:46 +0000 ThomasB 5535@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>Hi gbulmer,</p> <p>I got a multipilot 32 with STM32F103 fully assembled from Roberto(some weeks ago)<br /> so I think when he is offering a board with the new F205 it will be ready to run too.<br /> It seems that he got his first board ready today:<br /> <a href="http://api.ning.com/files/-0TBj9ZHxeXNBRMOnqMI66" rel="nofollow">http://api.ning.com/files/-0TBj9ZHxeXNBRMOnqMI66</a>*oUSjjhOuLOicEZ-ypxEAG-wrsy8molH4juXT2zN6fequ*aQ6SYrbNHvRs1PKlVJd2R-1bUNco/IMG_0708.JPG </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5492 Fri, 01 Jul 2011 17:35:32 +0000 gbulmer 5492@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>redfox74 - your board looks like it contains 0402 components. </p> <p>I don't think I could make that. </p> <p>So I look forward to seeing your project progress (I would like to make a quadcopter or maybe even an octocopter), but I think I would struggle to build that board. So I don't think I can help.</p> <p>I would like to know when the STM32F3 comes, and when the Cortex-M4 comes too.<br /> The Cortex-M4 should allow me to do several more projects. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5491 Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:17:26 +0000 redfox74 5491@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>Hi gbulmer,<br /> i develop a new release of my bard that have some patch on pcb so can support a 32f205<br /> This is the post <a href="http://www.virtualrobotix.com/profiles/blogs/multipilot32-build-your-dreams" rel="nofollow">http://www.virtualrobotix.com/profiles/blogs/multipilot32-build-your-dreams</a><br /> , my board is developed for Autopilot application and use a revision of native version of your lib. I think that i can help to port patch your lib for this micro . Do you think that is better wait new revision of micro 32f3 ?<br /> When will be available ? That revision use M4 ?<br /> Best<br /> Roberto </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5475 Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:41:25 +0000 gbulmer 5475@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>redfox74 - are you offering a STM32F205 board?</p> <p>I might be willing to help test libmaple on that.<br /> What terms are you thinking of?</p> <p>poslathian - How certain are you they will be sampling the STM32F3 in the fall? If that is the case, then STM32F2 is barely worth bothering with, or are there some other differences? </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5474 Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:19:48 +0000 redfox74 5474@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>Dear Friends,<br /> in my last revision of mp32 i supported F205 with all the update need for that micro. So now that is available on Digikey i can buy same sample and start to try to port the maple lib on that micro . I have 50 pcs available ... if some one are interest to support this task is welcome ..<br /> Best<br /> Roberto </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736&page=2#post-5469 Thu, 30 Jun 2011 14:49:11 +0000 poslathian 5469@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>Yea, minor changes tend to run away from you into giant projects. I hate that. Anyway, they are making an STM32F3 chip in the fall to solve this problem - its an F2 chip that is drop in 100% compatible with the F103, you might find that handy. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736#post-5467 Thu, 30 Jun 2011 14:17:44 +0000 becker 5467@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>I'll second that, there are few but very difficult modifications.</p> <p>I looked at our board design. compared it to the new power layout, and decided that it would be very difficult to modify with a knife and wire. And further, that any board not designed to support both chips would be similar to ours, and similarly difficult to modify.</p> <p>It's only a matter of a few minutes to modify the board layout in Eagle. Except that will lead to a few hours of other changes I've wanted to make. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736#post-5466 Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:37:23 +0000 gbulmer 5466@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>dreamcat4 -</p> <blockquote><p>Its true that an F2 chip could work on a RET6 board, with only a slight modification.</p> </blockquote> <p>Thanks for the clarification about modifying the board. I interpreted your previous comments as using an unmodified board. This is clearer.</p> <blockquote><p>According to the next page in the ST Manual it shows the 64 LQFP package has only one decoupling capacitor.</p> </blockquote> <p>The datasheet for the STM32F205xx STM32F207xx:<br /> <a href="http://www.st.com/internet/com/TECHNICAL_RESOURCES/TECHNICAL_LITERATURE/DATASHEET/CD00237391.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.st.com/internet/com/TECHNICAL_RESOURCES/TECHNICAL_LITERATURE/DATASHEET/CD00237391.pdf</a><br /> in section 2.1 "Full compatibility throughout the family", Figure 3. "Compatible board design: LQFP64", shows <em>TWO</em> decoupling capacitors added to the 64pin LQFP STM32F20xxx, and two breaks in the Vss tracks.</p> <p>The two pins, 31 and 47, change from Vss_1 and Vss_2 to Vcap_1 and Vcap_2 respectively.</p> <p>The decoupling capacitors are inserted by breaking the direct connection from pin 31 and pin 47 to Vss, which is ground, not as becker says to +3V.<br /> Most PCBs for processors which run at 20MHz+ have a 'copper pour' ground plane which is more difficult to modify than signal tracks. </p> <p>On a 64 pin LQFP STM32F103, the neighbouring Vdd pins 32 and 48, are normally connected to pin 31 and 47 via a decoupling capacitor which are (recommended to be) very near to both Vdd &amp; Vss pins.<br /> My interpretation of section 5.1.6 "Power supply scheme" is those Vdd pins will still need to remain connected to their decoupling capacitors</p> <p>So the modification needs to leave the existing (STM32F103) decouping capacitor connected to Vdd and the ground connection, so there isn't much room to manoeuvre.</p> <p>On Maple Rev 5, pin 31 is connected to Vss (ground) using a via UNDER the chip, so the chip would need to be removed from the PCB to sever the track, or the via might be removed by very carefully drilling out (it isn't a blind via) but this can be tricky as a 'wisp' of copper may be left to short between layers. Pin 47 is a bit easier as the connection to Vss is a short visible track to a via.</p> <p>Once the tracks are broken two new, extra, decoupling capacitors need to be connected to the pins and Vss (ground).</p> <p>Having said all this, I am willing to believe that you are sufficiently skilled to be able to make the modifications. I don't count those as slight modifications on an assembled board, but maybe you do. I'll be interested to see how you do it.</p> <p>I am posting this to ensure that other folks realise it is NOT likely to be straightforward on a PCB which is not designed to support the modification.</p> <p>It would be relatively straightforward to design a PCB to take an STM32F20xxx, and make it backwardly compatible with an STM32F103xx. I might do that. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736#post-5460 Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:04:04 +0000 dreamcat4 5460@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>Its true that an F2 chip could work on a RET6 board, with only a slight modification. So I believe I'm absolutely correct in saying that it COULD WORK. According to the next page in the ST Manual it shows the 64 LQFP package has only one decoupling capacitor. I'm not claiming that you wouldn't need to modify the board slightly - you would. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736#post-5450 Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:07:42 +0000 gbulmer 5450@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>dreamcat4 - I apologise if I was unclear.</p> <p>You wrote</p> <blockquote><p>The good news is that an F2 RGT6 chip could work on a Maple RET6. And similarly, Maple Native.</p> </blockquote> <p>according to the section of the STM32F205xx/STM32F207xx datasheet THAT IS NOT TRUE</p> <p>As becker has explained, several power pins are connected to the internal power system, and need extra decoupling capacitors, which are not on the PCB for Maple rev5. </p> http://forums.leaflabs.com/topic.php?id=736#post-5448 Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:26:19 +0000 becker 5448@http://forums.leaflabs.com/ <p>They changed a few of the +3V power pins to instead be capacitor connections to the internal power layers. It's pretty easy to change an existing circuit board layout to work with the new chips.</p> <p>I was hoping to take a knife to one of the boards we designed and modify the power connections so that we could try out one of the new chips. But the power and ground planes are very well connected to the pads with a "copper pour". There is enough area that any cut would likely bridge with solder. My guess is that most other boards are similar and will need a re-spin.</p> <p>I'm looking forward to CAN bus being simultaneously usable with USB. I'm not expecting that Ethernet will be generally useful. The memory is just too small to do more than simple UDP reporting. </p>