I looked for it in the BOM but it is not listed, anyone know what the part number is?
It is one from this company.
Not sure of the exact model.
What interface are you going to use? Have the one from Ti and the connectors are different and curious to know if it is going to work if an adapter is made for it.
I hate this Tag-Connect and whoever uses it on their boards should be struck by lightning! The use of a Tag-Connect also contradicts the open source idea quite considerably.
Tag-Connect cables provide a simple, secure way to connect debuggers, programmers and test equipment to your PCBs while saving space and cost on every board.
While the board manufacturer saves a few euro cents per board, the costs for the buyer explode. This makes the use of the JTAG unaffordable for private users, such as pupils and students and also for hobbyists!
Including tax, I paid €96.54 for the BeaglePlay at Mouser. For a Tag-Connect adapter cable I pay €43.41 including tax at DigiKey. Segger wants just under €180 for the same adapter, about twice the price of a BeaglePlay!
Plug-Of-Nails™ Adapter Cable 10 Pin - Digi-Key TC2050-IDC
Plug-Of-Nails™ Adapter Cable 6 Pin - Digi-Key TC2030-IDC
The 6 pin version is even a little more expensive.
Did they charge you import tariff, digi charged import fees (I am in USA) on that board and the AI-64’s. At that moment in time I just clicked it any way.
Yes, Mouser does that too, but I would have preferred to order from Digikey because they deliver faster to Europe.
Wonder what is up with that, seems like greedy to me. I would like to see the actual legal ruling on that, something smells with this.
I find that positive. Only as a reseller could I exempt myself with a VAT ID. But since I now only do this as a hobby, I would only have more trouble or double costs if they didn’t deduct the import straight away. When DHL delivers, I have to pick up my package at customs and customs is so inconveniently located for me that whether I go by train, bus or bike, it takes me about an hour and a half one way. UPS delivers home but wants to collect about double the import charges because they had work and had to lay it out for me.
I am really stoked about the board, but NOT a fan of that type of connector:-( What was the reason for not just making those thru holes or SMD like on the BBG?
I have a Segger J-Link.
Just space. For those of us with a number of Beagles, we have these adapters already. On PocketBeagle, we’d gone so far as to just expose JTAG pads such that you had to solder loose wires to the pads. JTAG hasn’t been a majorly used feature.
After Embedded World, we got the feedback we should make an inexpensive debugger of our own that includes these connectors. I’m sure we’d need to pay some kind of fee to TAG-CONNECT and I don’t know that it really addresses the feedback.
All I can say is that carrying the space for JTAG, which is relatively rarely used and typically used by people willing to spend a few extra dollars, can really add a lot to the cost to build these boards. I like it because I already have the tool and I can understand why people don’t because they don’t already have a 10-pin Tag-Connect cable.
@jkridner , please add TAG-CONNECT to the poll. I vote for it to stay.
Seems like these prices have gone up a fair bit.
Make sure you buy the “no legs” version because there is no space for the clips:
That means you’ll also need the retaining clips:
Sorry to make your life difficult. I think the pads are reasonably solderable. I also don’t consider JTAG such a critical element on such a high-level development board, but I could be heading things in the wrong direction.
I do hope you could avoid saying things like I should be struck by lightning. I appreciate you are frustrated, but I think not everyone is as thick skinned as I am.
The few euro cents saved are very much passed on to you in terms of savings on the board price. I appreciate that you are looking for this feature and therefore it costs you quite a bit more to get it. My strategy has been since the inception of Beagle that if there is a standard connection we can get to that will remove cost from the board, then let’s do that.
Then, I think we got very innovative on the original BeagleBone, putting an on-board JTAG debugger. I got more complaints than adulation. It seemed everyone wanted to spend $10,000 on a Lauterbach (sorry, I cannot find the real price) and they were irritated that I’d taken up the JTAG port with a cheap on-board debugger. We cut costs by putting an unpopulated header footprint and people were mostly happy.
That header footprint takes a lot of routing space.
I hope you get the point that you cannot please everyone and that this is a conscious trade-off to the best of your benefit. Feedback is welcome and I’m very happy to explore options that can be routed in a reasonable space.
What would you like to see Beagle do on future boards/revisions?
- Include a full 20-pin cTI JTAG header footprint, including increasing cost and board size
- Include a full ARM JTAG header footprint, including increasing cost and board size
- Add a USB-to-JTAG interface (like original, original BeagleBone), limiting USB OTG port to device-mode only and increasing cost (less size increase)
- Beagle to release debugger worldwide that includes the required Tag-Connect as affordable as possible
- Remove JTAG connection
- Stick with Tag-Connect, it is a reasonable approach
- Other (specify suggestions in replies)
The tag-connect is a resonable choice when space is tight especially if you want JTAG, For SWD you could use a 1.27mm pitch IDE header which isn’t that much bigger. I have a dev SAMV71 dev board which uses one for SWD. The length is pretty much the same taking the holes into account, but it is 30-50% wider. Thats for a 10 pin connector so could do JTAG.
I can see the little clips are going to be an on going expense, Easy to lose !
Rather stupidly I bought a tag-connect from the official website and postage to the UK cost as much, or perhaps a little more than the connector. I should have checked Digi first and saved myself some money.
Agreed, the 1.27mm thru hole 10 pin would be the way to go. I have used this on many boards works great. Will share pinout after work:-)
Yes, that is true.
However, if it was better defined as in exactly what interface will actually work with the board and a specific part number for the cable.
My pile of junk that has accumulated over the years is pretty large, been trying to avoid adding to it.
I find the whole thing with TagConnect particularly baffling. A 2x2 .100" header footprint is actually smaller than TagConnect and a 2x3 .100" header is right about the same size.
2x3 .100 pogo pin connectors are something like $2 max on AliExpress. Even on Digi-Key, they’re rarely above $5. Even AdaFruit are only $2.
6 pins is more than enough for SWD–4 pins is FINE. 6 pins is even enough for JTAG if you don’t need VDD (and, to be honest, do you REALLY want your debug probe loading your target VDD over a long inductance loop?).
Through hole is the best for landing the pogo pins, but I understand if that is too problematic with respect to routing. A 2x3 array of .100 SMT pads would be workable.
Overall, I’m a bit mystified by people who need JTAG but can’t use a soldering iron, but apparently they exist.
I actually despise the Tag-Connect with the retaining clips as they always bust and take far too much force to release and the non-clip versions tend to be fairly unreliable. If I don’t actually solder my debug leads directly to the board (which improves the reliability of my debug connection dramatically), then I 3D print some form of retaining clip that is specific to my board that can hold my debug probe in place.
The real problem, though, is that somebody needs to manufacture, stock, and sell any cables. Tag-Connect solves those particular problems.
@buzmeg regarding your comment about soldering directly to the board. This is a non-ideal solution due to the possibility of tearing pads off the board if mishandled. Every board I worked with, and I have worked on quite a few, have some sort of header. There are reasons for doing this and I am not sure why this particular board needed to stray from the well trodden path.
10pins is the minimum needed for a standard Cortex processor layout used by many manufactures.
SWD is also non-ideal due to its lower speed. Remember this SoC has 5 CPUs and 2 EPUs. This is no toy and SWD is for toys:-)
Their promotional video (Tag-Connect - YouTube) is misleading. They compare a 6pin Tag-Connect with a shrouded 10pin. Fair comparison would be 1.27mm 10pin unshrouded thru-hole with their 10pin. The difference is minimal. According to their data sheet the pin pitch is 1.27mm the SAME as a standard thru-hole header. You could make the argument that their solution takes more space since it requires the securing holes as well.
Please Beagle Play designer reconsider this design:-) This is a great board with a broken JTAG interface.
The following part is $1.49 for single unit.
Thanks for listening to your customers:-) This board is NOT just for high level. What if you want to put an RTOS on it like I have done with other BBs. You will then need JTAG. What if you want to develop on the M4 then you will need JTAG.
Educational versions of the Segger J-Link are $60 and very powerful. The full blown version is $1000ish. Putting the JTAG debugger on the board may be convenient, but I agree that charging everyone for it is not great.
IMHO this would be a waste of time. This problem has already been solved.
I am still unclear on how 10 1.27mm pitch holes adds that much space to the board. Yes, I have done board layout:-) The Wurth connector I mentioned earlier takes 21.59 mm2.
The Tag-Connect 10 pin is 22mm2 in size as used on the BBP. Therefore, it takes MORE space than the Wurth 10pin.
Not only is this approach a much larger footprint, but it impacts all routing layers and requires fairly substantial clearance. If you want me to change it on future revisions, I’m suggesting you look at the layout at BeaglePlay / beagleplay · GitLab and see where you can fit something in. I do not see how to fit this.