Page 4 of 5
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:59 pm
by billylegota
Ahhh, the logic I had only checked to see if A15 was low (/CS and /OE was (A15' & PHI2)') so I need to connect A14 to /OE.
Future note: gating chip selects (e.g., /CS on the ROM) with Ø2 is not a good idea if performance matters. The address bus becomes valid during Ø2 low on all 65xx MPUs, at which time chip selection should occur. The idea is to have the device ready for access as soon as Ø2 goes high. Commensurate with that is that /RD and /WD should be gated by Ø2 so those signals don't go true (low) until Ø2 is high. If using a 65C816, it is essential that no device be allowed to write to the data bus during Ø2 low, as that is when the '816 drives the data bus with the bank bits (A16-A23).
In the case of 65xx peripherals (65C22, etc.), Ø2 from your clock generator should be directly connected to Ø2 on each 65xx peripheral, RWB on the MPU
must be connected directly to RWB on the 65xx peripherals, and chip selection
must occur during Ø2 low and be maintained until the next fall of the clock. A failure to meet those conditions will result in a failure to operate when access to a 65xx peripheral is attempted.
WDC recommends that all timing be relative to the Ø2 clock, and that the Ø1 out and Ø2 out signals (pins 3 and 39, respectively) not be used. Here is their advisory on the matter (page 10 in the data sheet):
- An external oscillator is recommended for driving PHI2 and used for the main system clock. All production test timing is based on PHI2. PHI2O and PHI1O were used in older systems for system timing and internal oscillators when an external crystal was used.
Ø1 out and Ø2 out exist primarily to allow a 65C02 to be fitted to a system that was designed with an NMOS 6502. Both signals slightly lag Ø2 by an unspecified amount, which in a high speed system, may result in difficult-to-resolve timing issues. WDC neither tests or guarantees the timing of those signals.
1. According to Garth's primer:
You must have a way to make sure RAM cannot be written when Φ2 is low! This is one way to do that. Looking at the 6502's timing diagrams in the data sheet, you will see that the address lines are not guaranteed to be valid and stable before the R/W goes low;
2. Ø2 for all chips in my schematic comes directly from the clock generator (PHI1O and PHI2O are NC in my schematic).
3. /RW comes directly from the W65C02 and goes to the VIA, ACIA, RAM, and ROM.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 5:01 am
by billylegota
Finally finished my schematic, did a design review with my parents, and have laid out the board (I have not routed the board, only placed the components. I still am looking at PCB prices and deciding if I need to make some components SMD to make the board smaller / cheaper). BOM comes out to $60 for the components and $33/66 for the board (for 2 and 4 layers respectively).
My board is quite large (by my standards) at 6" x 2.75". As such, if anyone has some tricks / tips for decreasing the board size I would much appreciate hearing them. At the moment I am considering exchanging all the WDC DIPs for PLCCs and possibly substituting the ACIA with a MAX3100 driven by the VIA. *Please* tell me if I am crazy (or not) and if these are bad (or good) ideas.
I can post updated schematics and my PCB layout (in either image or diptrace schematic / board form) if anyone would like to take a look...
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:49 am
by billylegota
Finished my board layout and have submitted it for review by my parents and EE instructor (as well as an online DRC from the PCB manufacturer I am planning to use).
I do hope that those caps and resistors aren't too small to solder by hand
Here are a few pics (well PDFs really):
- Top.pdf
- (31.28 KiB) Downloaded 149 times
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:00 am
by GARTHWILSON
Have you run the DRC yet? Whether you use it or not (I don't), do a good visual on every layer. At first glance: Traces look too close to U5 pads 15-24 on the bottom layer. Even if you use an autorouter (which I don't recommend), do a good manual clean-up when it's done.
It will make it a lot easier for someone else to check it if you have one diagram with all the layers, each one shown in a different color.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:14 am
by billylegota
Have you run the DRC yet? Whether you use it or not (I don't), do a good visual on every layer. At first glance: Traces look too close to U5 pads 15-24 on the bottom layer. Even if you use an autorouter (which I don't recommend), do a good manual clean-up when it's done.
I have run a DRC (both in Diptrace and with the potential board manufacturer) and everything is >= 8 mils apart.
It will make it a lot easier for someone else to check it if you have one diagram with all the layers, each one shown in a different color.
Here is the best I can do within Diptrace:
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:16 am
by billylegota
That being said, there is nothing that GrafX-2 can't fix
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:18 am
by billylegota
I did all the routing for the bypass caps and the ACIA's oscillator circuit. I think I may just have to do the entire circuit by hand as the autorouter looks like it had a few too many drinks...
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:22 pm
by BigDumbDinosaur
That being said, there is nothing that GrafX-2 can't fix
Full (no fills) edited.png
Just an opinion, but you have some traces that are too close to device pins. For example, look at pins 5, 6 and 7 of U6. A sudden slip of the soldering iron could gouge the solder mask on one of those traces and possibly cause a bridge. Passing a DRC is not a guarantee that you won't run into trouble.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:02 pm
by GARTHWILSON
the autorouter looks like it had a few too many drinks...
A sudden slip of the soldering iron could gouge the solder mask on one of those traces and possibly cause a bridge.
Fortunately soldermask these days seems to be awfully tough, at least if it's over bare copper rather than tinned copper. I've never had a problem with it.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:07 am
by billylegota
I have changed *my* DRC to a minimum of 0.015" between traces and a trace width of 0.01" (up from 0.008" for each). I have also tried to do a bit more of the routing by hand (although I must admit, I did eventually give up and let the auto router finish the job).
Here is the current version:
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:09 am
by billylegota
As BDD pointed out, the previous version had quite a few traces that were dangerously close to where I was going to be soldering. As such I have tried to make sure that the traces are at least a *little* further away from the pads.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:49 am
by BigDumbDinosaur
Fortunately soldermask these days seems to be awfully tough, at least if it's over bare copper rather than tinned copper. I've never had a problem with it.
On one board I had made some time ago, I ended up having to do a minor hardware patch to it and needed to connect a wire to a circuit that didn't have a convenient location where I could tap in. So I used my X-Acto knife to scrape the solder mask off the trace that was part of the circuit in question so I could solder some blue wire. The exposed trace had reflow on it, which meant that the reflow was applied before the solder mask.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:22 am
by GARTHWILSON
The exposed trace had reflow on it, which meant that the reflow was applied before the solder mask.
Just specify soldermask over bare copper (SMOBC) when you order, and you'll have a very tough time damaging it.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:59 am
by BigEd
This revision looks much better to me - no places where two tracks on the same layer squeeze between two pins. There are still a few places where the wires are approximately that close, but it's away from the soldering points. Personally, if the tools allow, I'd do a little manual tidying to space close wires a little more - moving towards a 0.05 inch grid, to the degree that's reasonably possible, without being purist about it.
Re: Finally starting the schematic for my first W65C02 SBC
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:42 pm
by billylegota
I have made a few changes to the top layer that should put all of the traces a safe distance from each other (see attached):
I had a few concerns about these regions on the bottom of my board, but I figure that 15 mil spacing is probably fine (and I am pretty good at soldering so I don't think I'll be breaking through the soldermask):