Received: from PCH.mit.edu (18.7.21.50) by mail.efplus.com (192.168.0.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.485.1; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 09:42:39 -0700 Received: from PCH.MIT.EDU (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 09KGZKVp025751; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:35:27 -0400 Received: from outgoing-exchange-1.mit.edu (OUTGOING-EXCHANGE-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.15]) by PCH.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.8) with ESMTP id 09KGZIdq025740 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:35:18 -0400 Received: from oc11exedge1.exchange.mit.edu (OC11EXEDGE1.EXCHANGE.MIT.EDU [18.9.3.17]) by outgoing-exchange-1.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 09KGZBcI018159 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:35:18 -0400 Received: from w92extsm1.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.52) by oc11exedge1.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.3.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1293.2; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:34:47 -0400 Received: from oc11exhyb5.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.110) by w92extsm1.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:34:57 -0400 Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.57.170) by oc11exhyb5.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.1.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:34:57 -0400 Received: from MWHPR22CA0041.namprd22.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:300:69::27) by BN6PR01MB2658.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:404:cf::22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3477.28; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:34:56 +0000 Received: from CO1NAM03FT050.eop-NAM03.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:300:69:cafe::62) by MWHPR22CA0041.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:300:69::27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.18 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:34:55 +0000 Received: from premium47-1.web-hosting.com (68.65.123.241) by CO1NAM03FT050.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.81.76) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3477.23 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:34:54 +0000 Received: from 107-145-246-199.res.spectrum.com ([107.145.246.199]:56430 helo=[192.168.10.107]) by premium47.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1kUub1-0029lu-Cv; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:34:52 -0400 From: Neil To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Sender: "piclist-bounces@mit.edu" Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 09:34:46 -0700 Subject: Re: [PIC] Crystal frequency selection Thread-Topic: [PIC] Crystal frequency selection Thread-Index: AdanAAaBSSo4b8ozQQObeYBMo+YlJQ== Message-ID: <5F8F11A6.9040500@narwani.org> References: <5F8EF750.1010301@narwani.org> <0480a0b2-d285-10da-1349-b6b688d850b6@nicolaperotto.it> <5F8F0FE8.2010908@narwani.org> List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , In-Reply-To: <5F8F0FE8.2010908@narwani.org> Reply-To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: TS500.efplus4.local X-MS-Has-Attach: X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SenderIdResult: Pass X-MS-Exchange-Organization-PRD: mit.edu X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: narwani.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=narwani.org ; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:To: References:Subject:Reply-To:Sender:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=LvnyV2TwTdxQha8npBGhFhDA3hWaisL91NePFAvpERM=; b=GlNajy43SEwO5/3WM9oqOeqRTo oOTu4xE7O2EftRwiQBMF4GnroPBSTsanqiLs5ZLEYzaOwv+DGTuTOKu+jTMRpddCfXDPDKKT5FrR9 LBH43wIYcv23UL/H3XPRgmLVT/HNaJP3BbRgIilhf9kxDrG6z49jtGsv7dgPyE97RnckjFmRZdgte Q5OYZaeztlAI8nOhI+jqZBDwsMuj1xyTFNKAosPZv8MKbF/bC9Ix1BU27Q3JgLJOW42MPGE4PulLk HK3W69O/hlZDrYmPUUjvYB1DBzOoOJZS7817i++9oO9EPpSLOpeyDp9oaAFAIhSHMqJ++GLjhplpO T7Jk+4Yg==; authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is 68.65.123.241) smtp.mailfrom=narwani.org; mit.edu; dkim=fail (body hash did not verify) header.d=narwani.org; mit.edu; dmarc=none action=none header.from=narwani.org; user-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 errors-to: piclist-bounces@mit.edu list-id: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." list-post: x-beenthere: piclist@mit.edu x-mailman-version: 2.1.6 x-source-args: x-source-dir: x-antiabuse: Sender Address Domain - narwani.org x-source: x-authenticated-sender: premium47.web-hosting.com: ca4@narwani.org x-topics: [PIC] x-content-filtered-by: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Okay, I found one... 14.7456Mhz crystal --> 59.9824Mhz Fosc, which is=20 close enough to 64Mhz. Using SPBRG =3D 127 with that gives me spot-on 115,200 baud (so 0% error). And there are 10+ suppliers for 3.2 x 2.5mm SMD crystals with that=20 frequency so that's common enough to be low-cost and not have to worry=20 about being discontinued in the near future. Wish I didn't have to trial and error this though. Cheers, -Neil. On 10/20/2020 12:27 PM, Neil wrote: > I had also created my own, but it's been trial-and-error (xtal freq=20 > and SPBRG value) to find a spot-on crystal. > Now, if your spreadsheet runs through DIgikey's crystal frequency=20 > selections and picks the spot-on option for me, then you have my=20 > attention :) > > Cheers, > -Neil. > > > > On 10/20/2020 12:08 PM, Nicola Perotto wrote: >> Hi Neil & all, >> I use the attached spreadsheet to calculate baud and errors. >> Enter values in yellow cells. >> N >> >> >> On 20/10/2020 16:42, Neil wrote: >>> A bit academic, but this is bugging me... I was trying to get as close >>> to 115,200 baud on a PIC18F running at 64Mhz (or thereabouts). >>> At 64Mhz, best I can get is 0.8% error using SPBRG=3D34. >>> Calculating backwards, to get exactly 115,200, I can't find an "exact" >>> crystal. >>> Shouldn't I be able to find one of those "odd" values to get exactly >>> 115,200 baud at around 64Mhz? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Neil. >>> >> >> >> > --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .