The 1284P runs at 5v, and I use a CD4504 level shifter. Someone here suggested that, and even though none of the commercial clocks I'm familiar with use one they are cheap and easy to include. That will also make it easy to go to a 3.3v chip in the future, with only some adjusted resistor values. I think every other solid state component on this design is 3.3v compatible.
I'm not sure if there is any advantage to connecting the HV5530s in parallel to the processor, maybe faster updating. That's why I asked. The current design works fine as is, with three connected in series. I'm not sure if it will work for a fifteen digit clock with five HV5530s, though. I like the IN-18, too. It is certainly the best large tube for the money, nothing else comes close price wise. I use acrylic disks under the IN-14 and Z570M series tubes, and I'll do the same for the IN-18. Check the picture. They are 5mm think, but I went to 3mm for the reorder. Illustrator files are included for them in the zip. I'll have an IN-18 version soon, too. The Spectrum 18 also uses acrylic disks under each tube, and individual pins. If the component layout for the IN-18 is done carefully and the pins are soldered while on the tubes, there should not be any stress on them. I run most clocks from 6pm-11pm, which is when I'm around. This clock has three override periods that are weekday and weekend aware, so I run it 6-11 during the week, and all day weekends. I don't use the PIR now, but after I build a few I'll set one up that way. Do you plan to share your design? On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 6:43:41 PM UTC-4, gregebert wrote: > > You can certainly connect the HV5530's "in-parallel" to the CPU. I would > be more concerned about signal-levels, because the HV5530 is intended to > run with 12V logic levels and your CPU is probably 3.3V. I'm using a > level-shifter IC in my design, along with an FPGA. > > BTW, I'm putting the finishing touches on my first IN-18 clock PCB; It's > definitely worth the extra expense of IN-18's to get large and > properly-formed digits (no funky upside-down 2's and 5's). > > I decided to use socket pins soldered to the pcb, rather than actual > IN-18 sockets, because of space constraints. I hope I'm not going to > regret this decision, and I'm definitely going to be very careful to form > the pins to minimize stress. I also will not be swapping tubes around to > even-out their usage (using de-poisoning algorithm instead). > > Do you plan to run your IN-18's 24/7, or will you use a motion-sensor, etc > ? > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "neonixie-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/71f1a635-7dec-4219-9273-51fc24524aae%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
