• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 80 subscribers
  • Views 954 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Simple DAC LaunchPad Project - Op Amp Recommendation

Zec
Prodigy 40 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: OPA376, MSP430F5438, MSP430FR5969, DIP-ADAPTER-EVM

Hey E2E,

I am working through the Simple DAC LaunchPad Project and would like to breadboard the following low pass filter cascade listed on the project page:

Can the OPA376 be prototyped on a solderless breadboard? If not, will someone please recommend a substitute IC Op Amp that can be prototyped on a solderless breadboard?

Once I get this project rolling, I intend to use it to design waveforms that can output to another MC(the MSP430FR5969 launchpad or the MSP430F5438 experimenter board) which has a VCC range of 1.8- 3.6 V. 

I have converted this project code to use driverlib functionality. Are there any glaring drawbacks of using driverlib when initially learning to work with MCs?

Best regards,

Z

  • 0
    Guru 23000 points

    Zec said:
    Can the OPA376 be prototyped on a solderless breadboard?

    Yes if you add one of the parts from 'DIP-ADAPTER-EVM'.

    Zec said:
    Once I get this project rolling, I intend to use it to design waveforms that can output to another MC(the MSP430FR5969 launchpad or the MSP430F5438 experimenter board) which has a VCC range of 1.8- 3.6 V. 

    While the gain of both Op-Amps is 1 you get Vsin=Vpwm and when both MCU have the same Vcc level you have to do nothing, but to be save I would add a series resistor of at least 1K. Otherwise you have to attenuate Vsin.

    Zec said:
    I have converted this project code to use driverlib functionality. Are there any glaring drawbacks of using driverlib when initially learning to work with MCs?

    The 'driverlib' can make it easier for you.

  • 0 in reply to Leo Bosch
    Prodigy 40 points

    Thanks Leo!

    There is no doubt that 'driverlib' streamlines the learning process for beginners. I am wondering, would learning to program MCs using 'driverlib' cause limitations down the road? For instance, it seems I would have to stick to TI products and may not completely understand some MC functionality. Any recommendations would be appreciated :)

    This is definitely a case of putting the cart before the horse, but I would like to hear what those with more experience have to say
  • 0 in reply to Zec
    Prodigy 40 points
    This is definitely a case of putting the cart before the horse, but I would like to hear what those with more experience have to say
  • 0 in reply to Zec
    Guru 23000 points
    If you really want to learn programming the MCU in dept and wants to take control over everything your self, forget these libraries, I'm not using them but it takes some extra time to setup.
  • 0 in reply to Leo Bosch
    Guru 227245 points
    Yes, using driverlib makes things easier, btu at a cost. (or rather three costs): you don't have full flexibility, and you have some overhead. If you have tight timing requirements, the driverlib functions are less desirable. And you don't learn anything from using predefined code. :)
  • 0 in reply to Jens-Michael Gross
    Guru 74080 points
    The last one is the worst :)

**Attention** This is a public forum