• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

PLA - PLS100N vs PLS100F

N

NoPizzaTonite

Experienced Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
192
Location
Grants Pass, OR USA
Not sure where the best place to post my question but here goes

I've been burning my own PLA's using PLS100N chips. A supplier has some PLS100F chips.

Is there any difference between PLS100N and PLS100F?

They seem to share the same datasheets. The F is ceramic and the N is epoxy/plastic
Is that the only difference?

If so, I would assume they are interchangeable and can be programmed with the same JEDEC file?

Thanks for any guidance here!
 
Hi. As you correctly noted, the PLS100F is the same as the PLS100N but in a ceramic packaging. So, what is the difference between the two? Let's put it like this:

  • Ceramic has better thermal conductivity than plastic, which allows for better heat dissipation;
  • Ceramic packages can provide a hermetic seal, which protects the IC from moisture and other environmental contaminants;
  • Ceramic has a coefficient of thermal expansion closer to that of silicon, reducing mechanical stress on the silicon during thermal cycling;
  • Ceramic packages are generally more durable and can have a longer shelf life.
On the other hand, the plastic chips bear advantages that are worthy only for the manufacturer: cheaper, faster to produce in large quantities, lighter. So, if you have a choice, go for PLS100F. They are of course interchangeable and of course the JEDEC file to use is exactly the same. If the price is good, I wouldn't mind buying a couple of PLS100F's as well.
 
Riccardo said:
Hi. As you correctly noted, the PLS100F is the same as the PLS100N but in a ceramic packaging. So, what is the difference between the two? Let's put it like this:

  • Ceramic has better thermal conductivity than plastic, which allows for better heat dissipation;
  • Ceramic packages can provide a hermetic seal, which protects the IC from moisture and other environmental contaminants;
  • Ceramic has a coefficient of thermal expansion closer to that of silicon, reducing mechanical stress on the silicon during thermal cycling;
  • Ceramic packages are generally more durable and can have a longer shelf life.
On the other hand, the plastic chips bear advantages that are worthy only for the manufacturer: cheaper, faster to produce in large quantities, lighter. So, if you have a choice, go for PLS100F. They are of course interchangeable and of course the JEDEC file to use is exactly the same. If the price is good, I wouldn't mind buying a couple of PLS100F's as well.
Click to expand...

Thank you Riccardo - I am having them send me a sample. I also want to make sure they are empty. It's always hit and miss with that. I'll let you know.

-Alex
 
Hi Alex. If you're buying from China, I strongly suggest you to do that. I bought some PLS100 from Aliexpress, sometime ago, and they were all written - thus a pile of useless scrap electronics.
 
Riccardo said:
Hi Alex. If you're buying from China, I strongly suggest you to do that. I bought some PLS100 from Aliexpress, sometime ago, and they were all written - thus a pile of useless scrap electronics.
Click to expand...
AliExpress can be interesting to deal with. In this case I'm purchasing what's left of someone's inventory which is NOS so I'm not worried about it.

I've had mixed results on AliExpress and Alibaba but have always received full refunds when necessary. Only twice have I ever had to initiate a chargeback. But I also buy large quantities.
The last time I was in Asia I made a side trip to Shenzhen where I met a few vendors. They are just flippers, really. They all get their supplies from pretty much the same sources.
They deal with so much volume though that they don't test their chips - and even then, if one order was good, it doesn't mean the next order will be if it comes from a bad batch.

Also interesting thing about AliExpress itself is that when you use their returns process, the vendors don't get the merchandise back. They are out the transaction costs, including shipping, as well as the merchandise.
I had a vendor offer me a full refund via PayPal just so I could send the chips back to them directly so they can return them to the manufacturer and get their money back. It was 100 chips so it would have been quite a loss for them.
 
NoPizzaTonite said:
If so, I would assume they are interchangeable and can be programmed with the same JEDEC file?
Click to expand...
It's good to find a person who can still program the PLS100/82S100 part. This was the first Programmable Logic Device on the market back in the mid 1970's.

I have a Data I/O 29B Programmer with the 303A-001 Signetics Programming Adapter. I also have the 303A-101 Signetics H & L Design Adapter. But the High and Low format is tedious to use.
I usually use an old version of Wincupl to create the JEDEC file. What equipment and software tool do you use?
-dave_m
 
dave_m said:
It's good to find a person who can still program the PLS100/82S100 part. This was the first Programmable Logic Device on the market back in the mid 1970's.

I have a Data I/O 29B Programmer with the 303A-001 Signetics Programming Adapter. I also have the 303A-101 Signetics H & L Design Adapter. But the High and Low format is tedious to use.
I usually use an old version of Wincupl to create the JEDEC file. What equipment and software tool do you use?
-dave_m
Click to expand...

Hi Dave - I use a TopMax for legacy chips. It can be inconvenient to pull out the laptop running XP and use of the parallel port though, so I also use a TL866ii Plus.
I also built a HVEprom programmer for fun which I use for higher voltage chips like 270X/TMS2716/MCM6876X (https://www.mattmillman.com/projects/hveprom-project)

There's just something about burning your own chips, right? :)
 
dave_m said:
It's good to find a person who can still program the PLS100/82S100 part. This was the first Programmable Logic Device on the market back in the mid 1970's.

I have a Data I/O 29B Programmer with the 303A-001 Signetics Programming Adapter. I also have the 303A-101 Signetics H & L Design Adapter. But the High and Low format is tedious to use.
I usually use an old version of Wincupl to create the JEDEC file. What equipment and software tool do you use?
-dave_m
Click to expand...
Hi Dave. I was looking for a WinCUPL able to create 82S100 JEDECs, my versions don't have this part anymore. Generally I use the old DOS-based EZ-ABEL for this purpose. Can you eventually share it?

As a programmer I personally use a Xeltek SuperPro 3000U, which works fine with Windows 7 (x64 too) and above.
 
NoPizzaTonite said:
Hi Dave - I use a TopMax for legacy chips. It can be inconvenient to pull out the laptop running XP and use of the parallel port though, so I also use a TL866ii Plus.
I also built a HVEprom programmer for fun which I use for higher voltage chips like 270X/TMS2716/MCM6876X (https://www.mattmillman.com/projects/hveprom-project)

There's just something about burning your own chips, right? :)
Click to expand...
for the TopMax, or ChipMax, if your desktop has a parallel port (I added one on mine, you can get it for cheap from Amazon), you can use DOSBox, VMWare or VirtualBox, map the parallel port and use either TopMax for DOS or for Windows. I tried both and I was able to run them without any issues. Remember that the JEDECs for the TopMax and Data I/O are incompatible, you may end up wasting chips (been there).
 
I had similar concerns with the Signetics equivalent 82S100 ceramic chips when I bought them with a mild certainty that they would work but I wouldn't know for sure until I programmed one. They are exactly the same. They also fry the same if accidentally put in upside down :( I use a TopMax II which is the USB version and pretty much use that for everything. I have two other Martin Eberhard programmers (ME1702A, ME2700) for really old chips.

Signetics 82S100 tube.JPG
 
Riccardo said:
.Remember that the JEDECs for the TopMax and Data I/O are incompatible, you may end up wasting chips (been there).
Click to expand...
I did not know this. Thanks for the info.

My version of WinCUPL only runs on very old Windows like W98 or 32 bit versions of XP and use RS 232. Is this OK for you?
 
Riccardo said:
for the TopMax, or ChipMax, if your desktop has a parallel port (I added one on mine, you can get it for cheap from Amazon), you can use DOSBox, VMWare or VirtualBox, map the parallel port and use either TopMax for DOS or for Windows. I tried both and I was able to run them without any issues. Remember that the JEDECs for the TopMax and Data I/O are incompatible, you may end up wasting chips (been there).
Click to expand...
I don't mind having a dedicated laptop for the TopMax since I use the same O/S and parallel port for other legacy systems such as my Alps ribbon printers. I take advantage of its portability :)
I don't mix and match JEDECs and burners so fortunately I've never encountered an issue with incompatibility :)
 
dave_m said:
I did not know this. Thanks for the info.

My version of WinCUPL only runs on very old Windows like W98 or 32 bit versions of XP and use RS 232. Is this OK for you?
Click to expand...
Hi Dave.

Yes, the TopMax swaps a couple of bits in the JEDEC, which makes it incompatible with, say, EZ-Abel or CUPL's outputs. But this affects only this programmer, as far as I know. If you're not using the TopMax (e.g. Advin, Xeltek, DataIO, BeeProg, etc.), you should be absolutely fine.

Your version of WinCUPL would be perfectly fine for me. I have several old computers to play with it. Would you mind sharing it? Thanks!
 
Riccardo said:
Yes, the TopMax swaps a couple of bits in the JEDEC, which makes it incompatible with, say, EZ-Abel or CUPL's outputs.
Click to expand...

Would you happen to know what bits or is there a document that describes the difference? I've tried a couple of JEDEC files that didn't work and I would be curious to see if I can modify them and re-try them the next time I have that computer on the bench.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top