252 or 2520


Closed Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: 252 or 2520

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    98

    Default 252 or 2520

    Hi
    trying to pick a PIC
    i need 28 pins and low power as in 'L'
    so far i have narrowed to
    PIC18LF252
    or
    PIC18LF2520
    what are the advantages of the 2520 over the 252 ?
    pkg to be SO28
    need 4 A/D
    any other candidates out there ?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    36


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Have you checked Microchip's site? There is a parametric search that you can use that will list all of the different features that each micro has to offer.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah USA
    Posts
    517


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Smile

    From Microchip website

    18F252
    Not Recommended for new design
    Please consider using device PIC18F2520
    If you are not planning to make your device in the future, then either option will work. If you are going to make them in the future, the 18F252 might not be around and you will have to migrate to the 18F2520.

    Paul Borgmeier
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    USA

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,405


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    I've used the 252 for a long time, and it's nice. The 2520 has a boat-load of problems. You might want to take a look at the latest errata sheet for the 2520 before committing to that one.

    If you can live with the problems/work arounds shown in the errata sheet, then go with the 2520. If not, you might want to shop around for a similar 18F series without a 16 page errata sheet..;o}
    Regards,

    -Bruce
    tech at rentron.com
    http://www.rentron.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    98


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Yikes !
    bruce
    this is pretty scary (errata)
    have they respun the chip yet ?
    any major issues to note?

    the MEL parametic PIC picker is pretty nice

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,405


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    I'm not sure what silicon revision they're up to yet on this part, but it's worth looking into if you plan on using one. That is indeed a hefty bug list for the 2520.
    Regards,

    -Bruce
    tech at rentron.com
    http://www.rentron.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,358


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    I use the smaller RAM 2420 extensively without any issues. Admittedly, I'm not using anything over the ADC's and PWM modules (and all the other pins as Digital I/O) but they all work flawlessly. And I've almost maxed out the Program Codespace and PBP handles it all just perfect.

    The big advantage of the 2420 over the 242 (2520 over 252) is on-board handling of MCLR and Internal Oscillator. This means you have 25 usable I/O pins on the 28-pin package...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    98


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    thanks melanie for the encouragement
    some of the errata applies to the I2C
    have you used that ?

    a quick scan of the errata sheet shows that the bugs
    seem to apply equally to the 2420 and 2520

    considering that the price is pretty close i always wondered why
    they bothered with both sizes of memory

    have you had or heard of any reports of strange field falures?
    i have heard one, not sure how trustworthy or relevant it is
    ds

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montreal, canada
    Posts
    6,898


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    pretty close price or not is not revealant on a single of few device. But when you do a project and create 100 000 or million of them... few cents of difference made enough difference to be considered.

    Uneless you use the PBP I2CREAD/I2CWRITE, you shouldn't experiment any problem because it doesn't use the PIC MSSP... it's a simple software solution who handle everything for you on the i/o you want to use for your I2C bus.

    Now wich one trust? I can't say, but before, be sure of they do all you need, be sure that a lower model wouldn't fit, and so on. If it was me to decide, i would check to some other wich have less errata. But it's just me, i prefer to leave possible problem to other. I have those in stock now in case of, but i've never messed with them.

    I admit that i'm kinda addictive to those pinned black box
    Steve

    It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
    There's no problem, only learning opportunities.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,358


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Yes, I use I2C, but PBP's I2CREAD and I2CWRITE and not the chips hardware module. Everything is fine as mister_e suggested. I also use internal EEPROM READ/WRITE also from PBP on this chip, again no problems with that either. The Timers work too and so do the ADC's and the pwm modules as I mentioned earlier. But on the negative side, I can't vouch for any hardware components I've not listed. The Labour and Parts saving in not having to add a Resonator or Xtal is worth the the few cents extra. I have about 100/day of the 18F2420 (and the LF version when earlier we couldn't get stock of the straight one) going into the field, with the first units being shipped at the start of the year - nothing's bounced back. This is a major product badged for a blue-chip company that earns me big-bucks in royalties, I wouldn't risk that on a suspect PIC.

  11. #11
    icaotyr's Avatar
    icaotyr Guest


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default problems with i2c

    Im trying to communicate with i2c two Picīs a master and a slave of course. I attemp to do a communication with 3 slaves later but at first i have to do it with a single one. Im having problems initiating the i2c protocol.
    Im using MPLAB to create the master and slave code. Using MPSIM and checking the ssp registers i see that the code is right in theory but once i try it on the chip it doesnt work. I cant initiate the Start condition i activate the SSPEN flag in SSPCON2 in the simulation it works pefectly but in the chip polling the register i can see that the flag have never been set i dont know which problem i have but please i need some help
    Attached Files Attached Files

Members who have read this thread : 0

You do not have permission to view the list of names.

Posting Permissions

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