Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[wxsig] Connecting T238+, X1W-1. X1W-2 and AAG, Second Attempt

Leon Bruner leon at ljjf.net
Sun Jul 8 17:43:33 UTC 2007


Thanks for sorting out the table for me- I was ready to go for round 3 
but needed to complete a Sunday morning mission before I could get back 
to it and you got the job done.  I've double checked your corrected 
version and the interpretation is similar to that which I intended to 

With regard to your question about pin numbering I used the following 
sources of information:

AAG schematic:  

AAG also has some information on pin-outs on their weather station, some 
of their modules and Dallas modules in a pdf file found in their FAQ # 
11.  AAGs FAQs are found at:   

The schematic for the T238+ is found in the how to build section at:  

The schematics for the X1W- units are found at:  
http://www.tapr.org/~n4xi/x1w-1/ and http://www.tapr.org/~n4xi/x1w-2v2/

I've cross checked all the schematics and think I have it right.  I also 
BELIEVE the pins correspond across all units - but as noted before I'm a 
hobbiest so what I've given should be considered a forecast :)

I certainly appreciate everyone's help with this.  For those reading the 
mail who might be considering building the T238+ and the X1W- kits I'd 
say go for it.  Despite my lack of experience with kit building I found 
that the instructions were very clear.  Between these good instructions 
and  help from wxsig I find, to my pleasant surprise, that all three 
units seem to be working fine.  The last step is to get all the parts 
work together! 



John Koster wrote:

>Well, I still had problems, so I made this attempt to restore to original 
>Situation 1
>                Pin Number		 Device
>*6 Pin RJ 11*   *4 Pin RJ 11*   *T-238+*   *X1W-1*   *X1W-2*  *AAG*
> 1               
> 2               1               gnd        +5V       +5V      Vcc
> 3               2               Bus        Bus       Bus      Bus
> 4               3               gnd        gnd       gnd      gnd
> 5               4               +5V                           gnd
> 6
>X1W-1 P17 jumper connect pins P and 2
>X1W-2 JMP3 jumper connect pins P and 2
>Situation 2
>                Pin Numbe                Device
>*6 Pin RJ 11*   *4 Pin RJ 11*   *T-238+*   *X1W-1*   *X1W-2*  *AAG*
> 1                
> 2               1               gnd                            Vcc
> 3               2               Bus        Bus       Bus       Bus
> 4               3               gnd        gnd       gnd       gnd
> 5               4               +5V        +5V       +5V       gnd
> 6
>X1W-1 P17 jumper connect pins  P and 1
>X1W-2 P JMP3 jumper connect pins P and 1
>A little history, as I remember it,   Seems like the 3rd rev of the AAG WX 
>STN came out while the T238+ was in the final stages of going into kit 
>production, so there wasn't much chance of modifying it.  John was still 
>working with alpha versions of his two boards, so he hedged his bet and 
>put the jumper options.  No one has ever come up with an explantion as to 
>why AAG decided to be different.  
>What can be done?  Seems I remember some doing a trace cut on either the 
>T238 or the AAG.  I'm not excited about that option.  
>How many of the devices listed need power from the cable?  I guess that 
>might depend on your configuration.  My original Dallas WX STN did not 
>require anything but the 1-wire bus and ground.  Same with the rain gauge.
>Are there any other 1-wire devices that might enter into the picture?  
>What is there +5 situation?
>If all we need to consider are the devices Leon has listed, then here's my 
>take.  Either a trace cut on the T238+, or a 'twist' in the cable leaving 
>the T238+, where the 'wrong' connector is on the T238 end.  Everything 
>thing else downstream is then just a loop through and is configured to be 
>compatible with the AAG.  
>Another question.  As far as everyone knows, has the pin numbering been 
>consistant throughout all this discussion.  I mean, do TAPR, AAG and any 
>others all number the pins the same?  I should know this since I did the 
>PCB layout for the original T238, but I was concerned with the pin 
>numbering at the PCB interface and really took no note of how it looked 
>from the mating connector side.
>I'd like to be able to post the concensus and/or recommendation on TAPR
>web pages, so the question doesn't keep comming up.
> -- 
>John, W9DDD
>wxsig mailing list
>wxsig at lists.tapr.org

More information about the wxsig mailing list