Custom Search
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:59:58 -0500, "Sink0" <sink00@n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com> wrote: >I am designing myself a FPGA board to interact with a PCI Bus and i have >couple questions. > >First, Is it mandatory to have 2 power layers (GND + VCC)? > >Second, i just got a quote from a PCB manufactury and it should cost me >$250 to make a board. Is it possible to find a cheaper board? The cheapest >i found was Dragon Board from Knjn with a price of $300. Once i heared >about a Insight Eletronics Board but i could not find it ... > >Any sugestions? Enterpoint have ready made boards, with lots of expansion I/O, and example PCI driver software (not trivial!) within your price range. The most likely candidate: http://www.enterpoint.co.uk/moelbryn/raggedstone1.html Also, PCIe boards are worth considering as an alternative. - BrianArticle: 148726
rupertlssmith@googlemail.com <rupertlssmith@googlemail.com> wrote: > What about books? Can anyone recommend a good book to get started > with? I like books that are not too dry and start simple then build up > the complexity of the subject in a hands on tutorial way. There are > lots of books on Amazon, but not many of them have reviews, which > makes it hard to choose. I guess the readership of these books is not > so huge that lots of reviews get written. In learning to use FPGAs, you need to learn both logic design and (usually) either verilog or VHDL. They are often described in different books, but you need both. If you already know logic design (maybe from the 74xx TTL days) then you need a good book on either verilog or VHDL. Unfortunately I don't know any logic design books to recommend, but maybe others do. -- glenArticle: 148727
<fredxx@spam.com> wrote: > >I have a small electronic unit which needs some CE compliance testing. > >Cost is a major issue and was wondering if anyone here can offer advice on >an affordable solution. If you are located within Europe CE conformation is just a matter of putting a CE sticker on your product. It really is simple as that. The sticker says you take responsibility for the product. If you really want compliance testing then it is advisable to find a company with an EMC test setup to do some pre-compliance testing. This will tell you where the problem areas are. Next you'll need a spectrum analyzer to find the problem areas in your product. This is a very cheap one but it does the job: http://www.door2doorshop.com/wholesale/Atten-Spectrum-Analyzer-AT6011-213.html If you shop on Ebay you can get these for half the price (new ofcourse). The last step is shopping around for a cheap EMC lab. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) --------------------------------------------------------------Article: 148728
Insight Electronics was a Memec company, and Memec was acquired by Avnet in 2005. The board to which you are referring is a Spartan-2 PCI board, which you can find here: www.em.avnet.com/spartan2pci for $295. Spartan-2 was the last Xilinx device to be 5V tolerant, so this board is 100% PCI compliant. Avnet also has a Spartan-3 based PCI board as well, but it uses level shifters and is not 100% compliant -- www.em.avnet.com/spartan3-evl. When I just looked, I don't see any stock for the Spartan-3 Eval boards. Both these boards require a PCI license from Xilinx to do development -- www.xilinx.com/pci. I agree with Brian that you should definitely consider PCIe. Xilinx Spartan-6 LXT has embedded transceivers and PCIe block, so you can do PCIe development without consuming logic resources in your FPGA and with no extra licensing cost. You could consider the SP605 -- www.xilinx.com/sp605, $495, or upgrade to the Avnet S6LX150T board -- www.em.avnet.com/spartan6lx150t-dev, $995. Bryan On Aug 18, 7:59=A0am, "Sink0" <sink00@n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com> wrote: > I am designing myself a FPGA board to interact with a PCI Bus and i have > couple questions. > > First, Is it mandatory to have 2 power layers (GND + VCC)? > > Second, i just got a quote from a PCB manufactury and it should cost me > $250 to make a board. Is it possible to find a cheaper board? The cheapes= t > i found was Dragon Board from Knjn with a price of $300. Once i heared > about a Insight Eletronics Board but i could not find it ... > > Any sugestions? > > Thats all for now!! > > Thank you! > > --------------------------------------- =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 > Posted throughhttp://www.FPGARelated.comArticle: 148729
"Sink0" <sink00@n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com> wrote: >I am designing myself a FPGA board to interact with a PCI Bus and i have >couple questions. > >First, Is it mandatory to have 2 power layers (GND + VCC)? No. Just look at cheap network cards; they are two layer boards. >Second, i just got a quote from a PCB manufactury and it should cost me >$250 to make a board. Is it possible to find a cheaper board? The cheapest If you go for 2 layers then it should cost much less (depending on the board size). -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) --------------------------------------------------------------Article: 148730
>On Aug 18, 12:32=A0pm, "hvo" <hai.vo@n_o_s_p_a_m.n_o_s_p_a_m.synrad.com> >wrote: > >> >I find default values some-what useful because I can leave a signal open= >, >> >i.e. >> >> mysignal(0) =3D> someothersignal, >> mysignal(3 downto 1) =3D> open, >> > >Actually that example is illegal. You can't have a vector that is >partially assigned and partially opened. I opened a feature >suggestion to the VHDL standards group several years back to have that >changed. > >KJ > Wouldn't the open port vectors just take on their default value? The "open" just tells that I am not connecting anything to it. I am using Xilinx ISE 10.1 and I was able to implement my design with something similar to above. --------------------------------------- Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.comArticle: 148731
You don't need to spend a lot of money to start with. Take your choice of 4 FPGA vendors on our Polmaddie series http://www.enterpoint.co.uk/polmaddie/polmaddie_family.html which are supported by either free or low cost tools from the relevant vendor. You can do some practical playing before you move on to something more advanced. John Adair Enterpoint Ltd. On 17 Aug, 18:07, "rupertlssm...@googlemail.com" <rupertlssm...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm interested in learning more about FPGAs in a hands on way. Can > anyone recommend an inexpensive set of tools to get started with? My > wishlist is: I'd like to develop on Linux, I'd like to spend no more > than a few hundred $ on a starter kit, I'd like to learn using the > tools and up-to-date skills that are relevant to the more high end set > ups available. Which is better to start with, Xilinx or Altera or > something else? Is there a choice between Verilog and VHDL to be made, > or can both be tried out just as easily? > > At the moment I am not too bothered about specific applications, just > if I can get some hands on experience, whatever i/o ports are > available on whatever board I use, I will think of some little project > to try out using them. > > Thanks for your recommendations. > > RupertArticle: 148732
Bryan <bryan.fletcher@avnet.com> wrote: > Insight Electronics was a Memec company, and Memec was acquired by > Avnet in 2005. The board to which you are referring is a Spartan-2 > PCI board, which you can find here: www.em.avnet.com/spartan2pci for > $295. Spartan-2 was the last Xilinx device to be 5V tolerant, so this > board is 100% PCI compliant. Avnet also has a Spartan-3 based PCI > board as well, but it uses level shifters and is not 100% compliant -- > www.em.avnet.com/spartan3-evl. When I just looked, I don't see any > stock for the Spartan-3 Eval boards. Both these boards require a PCI > license from Xilinx to do development -- www.xilinx.com/pci. I thought if you had the right notches a PCI board wouldn't fit in a 5V slot. That would seem easier than adding level shifters. -- glenArticle: 148733
Hmmm i agree that if that board was intended to be used on a normal computer PCIe would be a much better option, but it is just a intermediate board becouse the final one is going to be used on a PC/104+ board that does not have PCIe. But so for i do not have the PC/104 processor board. The cheappest board they sell at Enterpoint got a good price, $225 + VAT but they are out of stock. They sell a PCI/104 board too.. that is a very useful information. I am going to develop myself a PCI bridge to FPGA so i wont have to pay for any IP. I am taking as reference a IP core that i found at OpenCores. And finaly i am using quickswiths myself to make the board universal. To have a only 3.3V board would be a problem as many computers have 5V only PCI bus. Thank you for all the sugestions and answers guys. If some one else knows any available board with that price i am still accepting sugestions. I will put all my efforts on making my board double layers, but at the final board it is going to be 4 layers anyway. Cya --------------------------------------- Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.comArticle: 148734
On Aug 18, 5:14=A0am, stevem1 <steve.martind...@gmail.com> wrote: > The custom 8051 is ~10-15K std 2-input gates. That's what we get > when we put the 8051 RTL into an ASIC. But I want the 8051 > programation > to be ~permanent in the CPLD and then be able to access the > external Flash/EEprom as the code memory for the 8051. > We need many of these to give to customers for 8051 code > development, but I don't want them affecting the 8051 core > programmation. > I just want them to be able to write code for the 8051 and put that > code into > an external Flash/EE, that they can program on a programmer. > > It sounds like I just need to put an EEporm socket on the CPLD board. > I'm having trouble tracking this question. It sounds like you sell 8051 IP, and want a 'working example', but I cannot imagine someone doing ASICs, programming chips to flip into sockets - they will expect a PC-Debug pathway (and usually that pathway, can also pgm the code-storage) - your IP does have Debug, right ? As they are also likely going to be developing peripherals, you could work up a Dual-FPGA platform ? - one FPGA holds your IP and accesses the Memory, and is a stable/ known reference point, and the other holds their peripheral developments. A typical asic-8051 would have Flash+SRAM, and allow code to run from either. Interesting on an asic-8051 would be the ability to run from a combination of SRAM + QuadSPI memory :) -jgArticle: 148735
On 8/17/2010 8:43 PM, Jonathan Bromley wrote: > On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 10:07:45 -0700 (PDT), > rupertlssmith@googlemail.com wrote: > >> I'm interested in learning more about FPGAs > > Wow. I think this thread reminds me why it's still > kinda nice to hang out on comp.arch.fpga (and > comp.lang.vhdl, .verilog). > For every nice reply, it's important to have a dissenting one. The OP post's IP (NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.15.253.202) resolves to something called IBM regus UK. Whatever that is. Seems to be some kind of training. I would suggest that 'Rupert' could be best served by asking his trainers the answer to his query. Especially if the prices listed match the course 'Rupert' is on. Anyway, IBM regus has gotta be better than Doulos, right? Cheers, Syms.Article: 148736
On Aug 18, 4:25=A0pm, "hvo" <hai.vo@n_o_s_p_a_m.n_o_s_p_a_m.synrad.com>
wrote:
> >On Aug 18, 12:32=3DA0pm, "hvo" <hai.vo@n_o_s_p_a_m.n_o_s_p_a_m.synrad.co=
m>
> >wrote:
>
> >> >I find default values some-what useful because I can leave a signal
> open=3D
> >,
> >> >i.e.
>
> >> mysignal(0) =3D3D> someothersignal,
> >> mysignal(3 downto 1) =3D3D> open,
>
> >Actually that example is illegal. =A0You can't have a vector that is
> >partially assigned and partially opened. =A0I opened a feature
> >suggestion to the VHDL standards group several years back to have that
> >changed.
>
> >KJ
>
> Wouldn't the open port vectors just take on their default value? =A0The
> "open" just tells that I am not connecting anything to it. =A0
>
Not if the compiler follows the VHDL language specification. Per the
language specification VHDL-2002, section 1.1.1.2 Ports..."It is an
error if some of the subelements of a composite formal port are
connected and others are either unconnected or unassociated".
Sample code demonstrating this is shown below (1)
> I am using Xilinx ISE 10.1 and I was able to implement my design with
> something similar to above. =A0
>
If true, this would be a bug in ISE 10.1. On the other hand, it might
also be an example of brand X getting ahead of the curve and
implementing something ahead of a requested (and apparently lost)
change to the language standard (2)
Kevin Jennings
(1) Sample code showing usage of opens on vector subelements
--- START OF CODE
entity Widget is port(
Some_Input: in bit_vector(1 to 10) :=3D (others =3D> '0'));
end Widget;
entity Use_A_Widget is port(
Some_Input: in bit_vector(1 to 3));
end Use_A_Widget;
architecture RTL of Use_A_Widget is
begin
The_Widget : entity work.Widget port map(
Some_Input(1 to 3) =3D> Some_Input(1 to 3),
Some_Input(4 to 10) =3D> open);
end RTL;
---END OF CODE
Because the language standard demands it, Modelsim appropriately
produces the following error when compiling the above code
# ** Error: C:/Tools/Quartus.900/quartus/Junk/Junk.vhd(446):
(vcom-1046) Formal "some_input" must not be associated with OPEN when
subelements are associated individually.
# ** Error: C:/Tools/Quartus.900/quartus/Junk/Junk.vhd(446): VHDL
Compiler exiting
# C:/Tools/modeltech_pe_6.4/win32pe/vcom failed.
(2) This feature to allow opens on subelements has been submitted to
the VHDL language standards people as an enhancement request to the
language. This was done back ~2005 and subsequently lost. It was
resubmitted as bug #275 in August, 2009 and seems to have been lost
yet again....sigh...
Reference to the thread when I created the bug #275 request in August
2009 as a replacement for the lost one from 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.arch.fpga/browse_frm/thread/bb6a2156d4d=
e81ac/fe0fb11716a8baa1?hl=3Den&lnk=3Dgst&q=3DKevin+Jennings+Bugzilla#fe0fb1=
1716a8baa1
Article: 148737"Nico Coesel" <nico@puntnl.niks> wrote in message news:4c6c3aef.2204064734@news.planet.nl... > <fredxx@spam.com> wrote: > >> >>I have a small electronic unit which needs some CE compliance testing. >> >>Cost is a major issue and was wondering if anyone here can offer advice on >>an affordable solution. > > If you are located within Europe CE conformation is just a matter of > putting a CE sticker on your product. It really is simple as that. The > sticker says you take responsibility for the product. > > If you really want compliance testing then it is advisable to find a > company with an EMC test setup to do some pre-compliance testing. This > will tell you where the problem areas are. Next you'll need a spectrum > analyzer to find the problem areas in your product. > > This is a very cheap one but it does the job: > http://www.door2doorshop.com/wholesale/Atten-Spectrum-Analyzer-AT6011-213.html > > If you shop on Ebay you can get these for half the price (new > ofcourse). > > The last step is shopping around for a cheap EMC lab. > > -- > Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply > indicates you are not using the right tools... > nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) > -------------------------------------------------------------- The two replies above do not accurately reflect the practical and legal situation in the UK with regard to CE marking. You can just put a sticker on your product and a declaration (mandatory) in the manual and you may get away with it. If your product is investigated and does not comply with the regulations then when they discover that you have done no testing at all Trading Standards (the UK authority which enforces CE marking of electrical and electronic devices) will throw the book at you. If you have done proper testing and have some evidence (in which case it is unlikely that you will have any problems anyway) they will discuss the issue with you in a sensible way and give you time to fix things. You need to test for radiated RF emmissions, susceptibility, electrostatic discharge susceptibility (8kV sparks to any exposed part), power surges from anins or power supply. If you are connected to the mains you must also test for mains pollution as well. You must also comply with ROHS and WEEE regulations. A lot of small organisations don't bother with some or all of this - for obvious reasons. If you are going to spend money its worth going to a decent lab who will advise you about what you need to do. If you are short of cash then you should understand the rules yourself. My experience is that it is unusual for a device to pass all the tests without some tweaks to the design. I don't know your circumstances but my advice is that you are taking a big risk with customers and enforcers if you are going te sell a lot of stuff and don't test. If you are selling a few parts you have a good chance of getting away with it - but you are screwing your customers by claiming things which you haven't tested and they will never forgive you if they find out. I'ts all horrible - good luck. Michael KellettArticle: 148738
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:54:45 +0100, Michael Kellett wrote: > <rupertlssmith@googlemail.com> wrote in message > news:2557f9e5-e8ed-451a- b716-1e7954f56f39@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > These books seems to get a lot of good reviews: > > http://www.amazon.com/FPGA-Prototyping-VHDL-Examples-Spartan-3/ dp/0470185317/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1282133861&sr=8-1 > http://www.amazon.com/FPGA-Prototyping-Verilog-Examples-Spartan-3/ dp/0470185325/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1282133861&sr=8-8 > I have a copy of Pong Chu's "FPGA Prototyping by VHDL Examples - (Spartan-3 version)" mentioned above (ISBN: 987-0-470-18531-5) and it seems to be a pretty thorough starting point for a newcomer with synthesis aspirations. It's perhaps a little narrow, and focusses on Xilinx examples but it's probably what I'd have started with if I'd spotted it at the time. I started out with the well-known "VHDL Programming by Example" (ISBN: 978-0-07-049944-7) by Douglas Perry which is a more thorough explanation of VHDL (i.e. not limited to the subset of VHDL that may be synthesised as Chu's book tends to be). That said, it is slower going. Its index is rather better than the Chu (which is one page), making it handier for looking up bits of syntax. I have also been reading "Reconfigurable Computing" -- essentially a collection of contributions from many authors on the subject, covering everything from the internal processes of FPGA synthesisers (at length) to application design techniques all the way to advanced topics like genetic design and the future of FPGAs and nanotechnology. It's edited by Scott Huack and André Dehon (ISBN 978-0-12-370522-8). It's a bit of a tome but very, very broad. So IMVHO (YMMV), plump for the Chu (VHDL version ;). Andrew 0xADFArticle: 148739
On Aug 19, 1:17=A0am, Symon <symon_bre...@hotmail.com> wrote: > For every nice reply, it's important to have a dissenting one. The OP > post's IP (NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.15.253.202) resolves to something > called IBM regus UK. Whatever that is. Seems to be some kind of > training. I would suggest that 'Rupert' could be best served by asking > his trainers the answer to his query. Especially if the prices listed > match the course 'Rupert' is on. Anyway, IBM regus has gotta be better > than Doulos, right? > > Cheers, Syms. I work in an office rented in a building owned by Regus (in Manchester in the UK), no idea what IBM has to do with Regus, but there you go. I've nothing to hide. I work as a Java programmer for a company that produces software for stock markets and traders, an area where FPGAs are gaining ground if and when they can provide a speed advantage. Its a bit of an arms race really; why all this need to go faster? to beat the competition. As I said in my OP, I'm not looking into FPGAs with a specific application in mind. Maybe somewhere down the line it might become a work project, if it could be proved to give a speed advantage, if there's the time and funding to do it and so on. In that case, I would likely still be on the software side and someone who knows what they are doing would do the hardware. For now, I just want to take it up as a hobby and learn something about it and have some fun doing it.Article: 148740
On Aug 18, 7:21=A0pm, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote: ... > There are open-source simulators out there, but the FPGA companies are > pretty tight with their synthesis algorithms (and even the mapping > between the bit files and the FPGA functions), so you won't find any > open-source synthesizers. ... > The FPGA is soldered down to the board. =A0During early development you > fire things up and write bit files directly to the chip (at least in the > Xilinx workflow) with a JTAG programmer. =A0FPGA chips (at least those > that don't have on-board PROM) are capable of loading configurations > from EEPROM, and most development boards will have a suitable EEPROM > that you can load your bit file onto so the board will come up by itself. Hi Tim, Thanks for this introductory overview of the process, very helpful indeed. One question about the specifics on programming the synthesized data onto the chip: This is generally achieved through a JTAG port, with a cable that goes from the USB port (serial/parallel ports on older models), through a box of tricks, and out onto a JTAG connector. Is this cable specific to each vendor or is the USB -> JTAG conversion standard accross all? If I buy a cable from Xilinx, will it work on all boards with Xilinx chips, no matter where I buy the board? I notice that some of the sites offering prototyping boards also sell a cable. The cables are a significant cost, so I'd like to make sure I get the right cable with the maximum usability across different boards. RupertArticle: 148741
I asked the office to check as the website stock levels are not totally live and accurate and we have had a run of sales on these lately. We have 2 Hollybush1 HB1-400C and 1 HB1-1500C and we can make more on our assembly line fairly quickly as we have stock for all of the parts for them. John Adair Enterpoint Ltd. On 18 Aug, 23:54, "Sink0" <sink00@n_o_s_p_a_m.n_o_s_p_a_m.gmail.com> wrote: > Hmmm i agree that if that board was intended to be used on a normal > computer PCIe would be a much better option, but it is just a intermediat= e > board becouse the final one is going to be used on a PC/104+ board that > does not have PCIe. But so for i do not have the PC/104 processor board. > > The cheappest board they sell at Enterpoint got a good price, $225 + VAT > but they are out of stock. They sell a PCI/104 board too.. that is a very > useful information. I am going to develop myself a PCI bridge to FPGA so = i > wont have to pay for any IP. I am taking as reference a IP core that i > found at OpenCores. > > And finaly i am using quickswiths myself to make the board universal. To > have a only 3.3V board would be a problem as many computers have 5V only > PCI bus. Thank you for all the sugestions and answers guys. If some one > else knows any available board with that price i am still accepting > sugestions. I will put all my efforts on making my board double layers, b= ut > at the final board it is going to be 4 layers anyway. > > Cya =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 > > --------------------------------------- =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 > Posted throughhttp://www.FPGARelated.comArticle: 148742
> >I am going to develop myself a PCI bridge to FPGA so i >wont have to pay for any IP. I am taking as reference a IP core that i >found at OpenCores. > "Good luck with that!" From personal experience, PCI is a rather tricky standard to design to. --------------------------------------- Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.comArticle: 148743
On 8/19/2010 10:03 AM, rupertlssmith@googlemail.com wrote: > On Aug 19, 1:17 am, Symon<symon_bre...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> For every nice reply, it's important to have a dissenting one. The OP >> post's IP (NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.15.253.202) resolves to something >> called IBM regus UK. Whatever that is. Seems to be some kind of >> training. I would suggest that 'Rupert' could be best served by asking >> his trainers the answer to his query. Especially if the prices listed >> match the course 'Rupert' is on. Anyway, IBM regus has gotta be better >> than Doulos, right? >> >> Cheers, Syms. > > I work in an office rented in a building owned by Regus (in Manchester > in the UK), no idea what IBM has to do with Regus, but there you go. > > I've nothing to hide. I work as a Java programmer for a company that > produces software for stock markets and traders, an area where FPGAs > are gaining ground if and when they can provide a speed advantage. Its > a bit of an arms race really; why all this need to go faster? to beat > the competition. As I said in my OP, I'm not looking into FPGAs with a > specific application in mind. Maybe somewhere down the line it might > become a work project, if it could be proved to give a speed > advantage, if there's the time and funding to do it and so on. In that > case, I would likely still be on the software side and someone who > knows what they are doing would do the hardware. > > For now, I just want to take it up as a hobby and learn something > about it and have some fun doing it. > I take it all back!Article: 148744
>I asked the office to check as the website stock levels are not >totally live and accurate and we have had a run of sales on these >lately. We have 2 Hollybush1 HB1-400C and 1 HB1-1500C and we can make >more on our assembly line fairly quickly as we have stock for all of >the parts for them. > Thank you very much for the information. I am going to talk with my other team members to discuss that. Can you answer me if you can write down on the bill a lower price than the board cost? Thats becouse i live in Brazil and here i would have to pay 88% of taxes to goverment.. My second problem would be that i still need a Xilinx USB download cable (we do not have any paralel potr available). A clone would cost me $80 with my usual chinese eletronic supplier.. thats something i must take in consideration becouse we already have an Altera one. Thank you very much for all the answers!! --------------------------------------- Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.comArticle: 148745
> I take it all back! All of the sarcy comments, ever? :-) Nial.Article: 148746
On Aug 18, 8:07=A0am, "rupertlssm...@googlemail.com" <rupertlssm...@googlemail.com> wrote: > What about books? Can anyone recommend a good book to get started > with? This is not an HDL book but provides an overview of the Xilinx design process. Free to download at: http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/boards_and_kits/ug500.pdf Xilinx also has an in-depth tutorial which is good to start with: http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/dt_ise12-2_tutorials.htm There should also be introductory tutorials for whatever board that you buy. Check out the board documentation first before you buy. My favorite book is HDL Chip Design by Douglas J. Smith. It has both Verilog and VHDL code side-by-side and often shows a circuit representation of how the code synthesizes. It's more of an example book then a reference book, but I like it. BryanArticle: 148747
"General Schvantzkoph" <schvantzkoph@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:8d2mieFco2U4@mid.individual.net... > On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:11:21 +0100, Fredxx wrote: > >> I have a small electronic unit which needs some CE compliance testing. >> >> Cost is a major issue and was wondering if anyone here can offer advice >> on an affordable solution. > > You should contact a certification lab in your area. CE and UL are mostly > a lot of paperwork with a small amount of actual testing. They are > designed to be fee generators, and in CEs case trade barriers, do there > isn't going to be a cheap way to do it. FCC is easier because it's based > on physics not on the whims of bureaucrats, you can do FCC certification > in a few hours because it's just a matter of measuring the emissions of > the system, you are either within bounds or not. > I have, and we're talking about £1,500 just for a pre-test, and £3,000 for final testing and documents. £300 just for a plots is OTT.Article: 148748
"Nico Coesel" <nico@puntnl.niks> wrote in message news:4c6c3aef.2204064734@news.planet.nl... > <fredxx@spam.com> wrote: > >> >>I have a small electronic unit which needs some CE compliance testing. >> >>Cost is a major issue and was wondering if anyone here can offer advice on >>an affordable solution. > > If you are located within Europe CE conformation is just a matter of > putting a CE sticker on your product. It really is simple as that. The > sticker says you take responsibility for the product. > > If you really want compliance testing then it is advisable to find a > company with an EMC test setup to do some pre-compliance testing. This > will tell you where the problem areas are. Next you'll need a spectrum > analyzer to find the problem areas in your product. > > This is a very cheap one but it does the job: > http://www.door2doorshop.com/wholesale/Atten-Spectrum-Analyzer-AT6011-213.html > > If you shop on Ebay you can get these for half the price (new > ofcourse). > > The last step is shopping around for a cheap EMC lab. > I am aware that you can self certify, but I wanted to collate some evidence that it would actually pass the EMC requirements, especially for radiated emissions. I'm very confident about the rest. I can see the cost of a spectrum analyser is a fraction of the cost of any assessment or testing by an EMC lab. Many thanks for the pointer and am looking on eBay for suitable equipment. One thing that does bother me still, is sourcing wideband aerials suitable for measure field strength. Many thanks.Article: 148749
"Michael Kellett" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:VtWdnRCx4Ob0RvHRnZ2dnUVZ8lqdnZ2d@bt.com... > > "Nico Coesel" <nico@puntnl.niks> wrote in message > news:4c6c3aef.2204064734@news.planet.nl... >> <fredxx@spam.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>I have a small electronic unit which needs some CE compliance testing. >>> >>>Cost is a major issue and was wondering if anyone here can offer advice >>>on >>>an affordable solution. >> >> If you are located within Europe CE conformation is just a matter of >> putting a CE sticker on your product. It really is simple as that. The >> sticker says you take responsibility for the product. >> >> If you really want compliance testing then it is advisable to find a >> company with an EMC test setup to do some pre-compliance testing. This >> will tell you where the problem areas are. Next you'll need a spectrum >> analyzer to find the problem areas in your product. >> >> This is a very cheap one but it does the job: >> http://www.door2doorshop.com/wholesale/Atten-Spectrum-Analyzer-AT6011-213.html >> >> If you shop on Ebay you can get these for half the price (new >> ofcourse). >> >> The last step is shopping around for a cheap EMC lab. >> >> -- >> Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply >> indicates you are not using the right tools... >> nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) >> -------------------------------------------------------------- > > The two replies above do not accurately reflect the practical and legal > situation in the UK with regard to CE marking. > You can just put a sticker on your product and a declaration (mandatory) > in the manual and you may get away with it. If your product is > investigated and does not comply with the regulations then when they > discover that you have done no testing at all Trading Standards (the UK > authority which enforces CE marking of electrical and electronic devices) > will throw the book at you. > If you have done proper testing and have some evidence (in which case it > is unlikely that you will have any problems anyway) they will discuss the > issue with you in a sensible way and give you time to fix things. That is perhaps the primary reason I want some evidence of compliance testing. > You need to test for radiated RF emmissions, susceptibility, electrostatic > discharge susceptibility (8kV sparks to any exposed part), power surges > from anins or power supply. If you are connected to the mains you must > also test for mains pollution as well. > You must also comply with ROHS and WEEE regulations. > ROHS is easy to comply with if sourcing known components from reputable companies. > A lot of small organisations don't bother with some or all of this - for > obvious reasons. If you are going to spend money its worth going to a > decent lab who will advise you about what you need to do. If you are short > of cash then you should understand the rules yourself. > > My experience is that it is unusual for a device to pass all the tests > without some tweaks to the design. > That is the concern!! > I don't know your circumstances but my advice is that you are taking a big > risk with customers and enforcers if you are going te sell a lot of stuff > and don't test. > If you are selling a few parts you have a good chance of getting away with > it - but you are screwing your customers by claiming things which you > haven't tested and they will never forgive you if they find out. > > I'ts all horrible - good luck. Many thanks.
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z