AVR-Chat

I wanted to use the Attiny85-su soic chip in place of the larger dip version, all specs are the same as size is supposed to be the only dofference. Using Avr studio 5.1 and the Avr dragon to program. Avr studio says "unable to enter programming mode, the read id does not match the selected device or other supported devices. unexpected signature 0X00ffffff (expected 0X001E930b). I understand what is saying, just don't understand why the signature id is different between the two. These are new chips I wanted to use to preserve board space, versus the larger dip chips. Anyone run across this before? Have emailed Atmel support, but haven't received an answer yet.
John

On Mar 13, 2012, at 5:48 PM, jrader30 wrote:

> I wanted to use the Attiny85-su soic chip in place of the larger dip version, all specs are the same as size is supposed to be the only dofference. Using Avr studio 5.1 and the Avr dragon to program. Avr studio says "unable to enter programming mode, the read id does not match the selected device or other supported devices. unexpected signature 0X00ffffff (expected 0X001E930b). I understand what is saying, just don't understand why the signature id is different between the two. These are new chips I wanted to use to preserve board space, versus the larger dip chips. Anyone run across this before? Have emailed Atmel support, but haven't received an answer yet.
> 

0x00FFFFFF sounds like a bad read.  I've encountered responses like that sometimes, possibly due to a mis wire of the ICSP connection, timing issues or too much loading on those lines.
>  
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Mar 13, 2012, at 8:57 PM, Clark Martin wrote:

> 
> On Mar 13, 2012, at 5:48 PM, jrader30 wrote:
> 
> > I wanted to use the Attiny85-su soic chip in place of the larger dip version, all specs are the same as size is supposed to be the only dofference. Using Avr studio 5.1 and the Avr dragon to program. Avr studio says "unable to enter programming mode, the read id does not match the selected device or other supported devices. unexpected signature 0X00ffffff (expected 0X001E930b). I understand what is saying, just don't understand why the signature id is different between the two. These are new chips I wanted to use to preserve board space, versus the larger dip chips. Anyone run across this before? Have emailed Atmel support, but haven't received an answer yet.
> > 
> 
> 0x00FFFFFF sounds like a bad read. I've encountered responses like that sometimes, possibly due to a mis wire of the ICSP connection, timing issues or too much loading on those lines.
> > 
> > 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
Often happens because the ISP clock is too fast. Must  be no higher than 1/4 the CPU clock frequency.

Jim Wagner
Oregon Research Electronics



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thank you, Clark, and Jim. I shortened the leads and moved it closer to the Avr dragon board, and that corrected it. I had just read several of the dips using the zif socket I installed on the dragon board with no problem. Ran the leads from the socket to the new chip installed on the board it would be used on, about 8 inches, but that proved to be the wrong idea. The new avr was not connected to anything, just soldered to unpopulated board. Didn't think the leads were long enough to cause problems origionally. Sat the unpopulated board on top the zif socket and used about 3 inchs on the leads, and read and programmed it with no problems. Thanks again, now to devise an adapter board that I can use to program these chips without soldering them to a board first.
John.

--- In AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com, Jim Wagner <wagnerj@...> wrote:

>
> 
> On Mar 13, 2012, at 8:57 PM, Clark Martin wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Mar 13, 2012, at 5:48 PM, jrader30 wrote:
> > 
> > > I wanted to use the Attiny85-su soic chip in place of the larger dip version, all specs are the same as size is supposed to be the only dofference. Using Avr studio 5.1 and the Avr dragon to program. Avr studio says "unable to enter programming mode, the read id does not match the selected device or other supported devices. unexpected signature 0X00ffffff (expected 0X001E930b). I understand what is saying, just don't understand why the signature id is different between the two. These are new chips I wanted to use to preserve board space, versus the larger dip chips. Anyone run across this before? Have emailed Atmel support, but haven't received an answer yet.
> > > 
> > 
> > 0x00FFFFFF sounds like a bad read. I've encountered responses like that sometimes, possibly due to a mis wire of the ICSP connection, timing issues or too much loading on those lines.
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > 
> Often happens because the ISP clock is too fast. Must  be no higher than 1/4 the CPU clock frequency.
> 
> Jim Wagner
> Oregon Research Electronics
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>