Production Programming...

[mke_et]

I just turned out over 50 boards.  Since this is 'early production', I just hooked them up to the BDM via the 2x3 header and then brought up CodeWarrior and hit <F5>

Obviously I don't want to do that for 2000 boards on a regular basis.

On a previous project, I put a 'section' of 0.156" cardedge on the board and made an adapter with a card cage and just have the board a 'drop in'.  That wasn't an option on this case.

What I'm looking for is some kind of 'clip' that I can 'plug in' to a PCB if I leave the 2x3 header pins off the boards.  Sorta of like a 'nail board' used to do for PCB testing years ago.

If I can't find one already made, I was thinking of taking 2 pieces of 1x3 header pin strips and putting a piece of foam in between them.  I could squeeze the foam, insert it into the 2x3 hole pattern, and when I left go, the foam would hold the pins in place as it expanded. 

Ok, that's the mechanical issue.  Now for the computer side.  I obviously don't want to have to do this by using CW, hitting F5 and bringing up the debugger for each board.  Is there any simple way to 'automate' the programming through the USB-BDM pod?  I'm sure there's got to be some kind of 'batch' language I can write a script for.

Mike

[alex_spotw]

Hi Mike:

For those volumes, I would suggest to get the parts preprogrammed in a programming shop. There are many places that would take the reels, preprogram the parts and then pack them back for soldering in the production line, for a small fee per unit.

If you don't want to go that way, you can get a Cyclone PRO unit from P&E Micro, that has stand-alone programming capabilities, and you can write scripts to it for automating programming.

Check their website :
www.pemicro.com

Regards,

Alex

[mke_et]

That's fine, and I'll probably end up with a cyclone or a variant.

But for now I was just hoping to find something that would let me use one of the USB-BDM pods we have laying around without having to have a 'shop tech' bring up the source, hit F5...  and so on.  I see the potential for INCREDIBLE problems developing real fast with that scheme.

[jrpav]

Yeah, same problem here. You can run the debugger itself as a stand alone app. but you still need to make sure that whoever is running it knows what they're doing. It would be NICE if the programmer came with some dedicated programming software rather than having to do this with the debugger.