ckt for 8031 using 28c256(ROM) and 6264(RAM)

Remember that the 8031 is sibling to the 805x, so anything for the 8x51 or 2 will do:

There's nothing to it really. Latch the lower address byte on ALE using a 74x373, decode the addresses with a 74x138 or two, and Robert is truly your parent's sibling.

JS

It might help if you explained to the group what it is you are trying to make. Looking at your recent posts you seem to have a project in mind.

The parts you are using are very old (and I think most would describe as obsolete).

If you really want to stay with 8031 type architecture look at Silabs range of processors

They are much faster (than straight 8031) and come with flash and RAM on chip as well as a good coice of peripherals. They have proper on chip debug at a low cost as well.

If you are more open on the processor choice look at STM32 range from ST

where you can have a nice modern 32bit ARM based processor with on chip RAM, FLASH, fast ADC,DMA, DACs and debug. Cheap or free dev tools (or flashy expensive ones if you like).

Michael Kellett

the

Missing a HCT373 ?

As others have mentioned, why bother ? What you describe above, has NO In System programming, and NO In system Debug (but yes, it will run 80C51 code).

So, why not get a system that scores 3/3, not 1/3 ?

Go to

and for under $20, you get a PCB with ADC/DAC, and OnChip debug, and all pre-mounted They now have a couple of dozen variants. You can go for raw MHz, or higher resolutions ADC/DAC, or 5V operation. The C8051F410 series is a good mainstream, 'better ADC' type ' of device.

-jg

There are some useful tutorials and example projects that you could adapt over at

--
Rich Webb     Norfolk, VA

In message , MK writes

[Snipping the shameless product advertising.]....

If you are having trouble with an 8051 circuit of that simplicity you are a long way off from producing anything other than a school project.

The point Mk is making is what are you trying to do?

There are many very good 8051 family parts out there... about 500+ the one that is right for you depends on what you want to do. It may or may not be a silabs part. There are certainly many equally good or better (depending on what you want to do ) parts out there

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Hi Chris,

It wasn't 'shameless product advertising' but unbiased pearls of wisdom gleaned during my long experience of embedded systems development.

I have no connection with Silabs or ST (or Phaedrus !-) other than as a customer.

Michael Kellett

In message , MK writes

Hi Mike,

I should have put a :-) on that line.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/