Re: stripboard program

That would certainly work. We mustn't loose sight of the temporary nature of
this - long-term this is a process we're hoping to supplant, not to employ. I
think that circuit design for Mendel is going to present some interesting CAD
issues...

Yours

Adrian

[staff.bath.ac.uk]
[reprap.org]


Zach Hoeken wrote:
> nice.
>
> heres a crazy idea that i had a while back but may have gotten lost in
> the list traffic.
>
> what if instead of using kicad for circuit board layout, we used that
> SVG program and printed PCBs that were essentially the same board
> layout as stripboard, except with all 'track cuts' done already. then
> all you'd have to do is etch them. the board is already one sided, so
> it would be super easy to etch. no components need to be soldered to
> the component side. its really not that hard to solder in those
> jumpers... there are probably the equivalent of all the via's you have
> to solder with the double sided pcb anyway.
>
> i dunno... i just get frustrated by kicad sometimes. how the heck do
> you undo? as a novice, i find it impossible to use. i at least
> understand how to use a drawing program like svg.
>
> we should definitely still use kicad for the diagrams and automated
> parts lists though.
>
> good or bad idea?
>
> On 2/22/07, Vik Olliver wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 20:58 -0500, Zach Hoeken wrote:
>> > i posted this in the forums, but didnt get a response. what program
>> > did you use to create those stripboard illustrations on the site.
>> > those are so great. i'd like to take a look at the program and see
>> > what it can do.
>>
>> It's just done with SVG. I used Inkscape, and put the components,
>> stripboard, cuts etc. on different layers. By unlocking one layer at a
>> time, you can neatly stack stuff.
>>
>> The SVG files are in the subversion repository, e.g.
>> trunk/reprap/miscellaneous/Electronics/StepperStripboardTop_UDN2559.svg
>>
>> Vik :v)
>> -------8<---------8<---------8<---------8<---------8<---------8<-----
>> "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired,
>> signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not
>> fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
>>
>> - President Dwight D. Eisenhower
>>
>>
>>
>>

_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

ah, i see... you are quite correct.

that being said... would you mind then tweaking the current PCB designs?

1. adding via's for the power connectors on the comms board.
2. spacing out the traces on that board a bit more
3. adding via's for the power/signal connectors on the universal board.

other than that, the boards themselves are pretty straightforward. i
think that combined with more pictures and good instructions should be
easy for your average person to construct.

~Zach

On 2/23/07, Adrian Bowyer wrote:
> That would certainly work. We mustn't loose sight of the temporary nature of
> this - long-term this is a process we're hoping to supplant, not to employ. I
> think that circuit design for Mendel is going to present some interesting CAD
> issues...
>
> Yours
>
> Adrian
>
> [staff.bath.ac.uk]
> [reprap.org]
>
>
> Zach Hoeken wrote:
> > nice.
> >
> > heres a crazy idea that i had a while back but may have gotten lost in
> > the list traffic.
> >
> > what if instead of using kicad for circuit board layout, we used that
> > SVG program and printed PCBs that were essentially the same board
> > layout as stripboard, except with all 'track cuts' done already. then
> > all you'd have to do is etch them. the board is already one sided, so
> > it would be super easy to etch. no components need to be soldered to
> > the component side. its really not that hard to solder in those
> > jumpers... there are probably the equivalent of all the via's you have
> > to solder with the double sided pcb anyway.
> >
> > i dunno... i just get frustrated by kicad sometimes. how the heck do
> > you undo? as a novice, i find it impossible to use. i at least
> > understand how to use a drawing program like svg.
> >
> > we should definitely still use kicad for the diagrams and automated
> > parts lists though.
> >
> > good or bad idea?
> >
> > On 2/22/07, Vik Olliver wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 20:58 -0500, Zach Hoeken wrote:
> >> > i posted this in the forums, but didnt get a response. what program
> >> > did you use to create those stripboard illustrations on the site.
> >> > those are so great. i'd like to take a look at the program and see
> >> > what it can do.
> >>
> >> It's just done with SVG. I used Inkscape, and put the components,
> >> stripboard, cuts etc. on different layers. By unlocking one layer at a
> >> time, you can neatly stack stuff.
> >>
> >> The SVG files are in the subversion repository, e.g.
> >> trunk/reprap/miscellaneous/Electronics/StepperStripboardTop_UDN2559.svg
> >>
> >> Vik :v)
> >> -------8<---------8<---------8<---------8<---------8<---------8<-----
> >> "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired,
> >> signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not
> >> fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
> >>
> >> - President Dwight D. Eisenhower
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> Developers@reprap.org
> [reprap.org]
>
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

I am assuming from this that it is not worth proceeding with the single
sided universal board because the tracks are two narrow (?)

Zach Hoeken wrote:
> other than that, the boards themselves are pretty straightforward. i
> think that combined with more pictures and good instructions should be
> easy for your average person to construct.
>

_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

Quoting Simon McAuliffe :

> I am assuming from this that it is not worth proceeding with the single
> sided universal board because the tracks are two narrow (?)

Perhaps not. Presumably if you increase the jumper count you quickly
get to the point where there are no tracks running between pins, and
suddenly they can be fat again.

Yours

Adrian

[staff.bath.ac.uk]
[reprap.org]
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

i think it would be worth pursuing at some point in the future... as
single sided boards would be much easier to produce. but for now i
think the double sided boards work just fine. there are some
improvments i listed that i would love to see (and would do if i could
handle kicad)

i know that i made the big deal about one sided boards... sorry i just
didnt know enough back then =)

~Zach

On 2/23/07, Adrian Bowyer wrote:
> Quoting Simon McAuliffe :
>
> > I am assuming from this that it is not worth proceeding with the single
> > sided universal board because the tracks are two narrow (?)
>
> Perhaps not. Presumably if you increase the jumper count you quickly
> get to the point where there are no tracks running between pins, and
> suddenly they can be fat again.
>
> Yours
>
> Adrian
>
> [staff.bath.ac.uk]
> [reprap.org]
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> Developers@reprap.org
> [reprap.org]
>
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

Adrian Bowyer wrote:
> Perhaps not. Presumably if you increase the jumper count you quickly
> get to the point where there are no tracks running between pins, and
> suddenly they can be fat again.
>

If you go to about 20-30 jumpers, it alleviates the problem sufficiently
to go to a single layer PCB with fat tracks. So its entirely doable,
but I just think when you get to that number, you're just about as well
off using stripboard, so there's little point in making a PCB in the
first place.

Incidentally, a single layer comms board is much more straightforward.
See attached. However if everybody is now happy to make double sided
boards, that should do the trick just fine.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/23/2007 11:01PM by Simon McAuliffe.

Quoting Simon McAuliffe :

> If you go to about 20-30 jumpers, it alleviates the problem sufficiently
> to go to a single layer PCB with fat tracks. So its entirely doable,
> but I just think when you get to that number, you're just about as well
> off using stripboard, so there's little point in making a PCB in the
> first place.

Oh, that many. OK - I agree.

> Incidentally, a single layer comms board is much more straightforward.
> See attached. However if everybody is now happy to make double sided
> boards, that should do the trick just fine.

Now that is nice, and well worth having I think, for one over-riding
reason: it's the first board you make, so newbies get an SS board to do
first, then graduate to DS for the rest. Can we fatten up (a lot) the
+12v tracks to the distribution connectors?

Yours

Adrian

[staff.bath.ac.uk]
[reprap.org]
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

Adrian Bowyer wrote:
> Now that is nice, and well worth having I think, for one over-riding
> reason: it's the first board you make, so newbies get an SS board to do
> first, then graduate to DS for the rest. Can we fatten up (a lot) the
> +12v tracks to the distribution connectors?
>

Ooops. I had forgotten to label those connectors 12V, so they were
connected to vcc.

Fixed and further fattened. I also moved the power input closer to the
distribution connectors.

The way it creates the copper pours in the PDF file is bizarre to say
the least. It could probably be redrawn better in another package, but
it seems to print just fine for me.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/24/2007 03:21PM by Simon McAuliffe.

On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:49 +0000, Adrian Bowyer wrote:
> That would certainly work. We mustn't loose sight of the temporary
> nature of
> this - long-term this is a process we're hoping to supplant, not to
> employ. I
> think that circuit design for Mendel is going to present some
> interesting CAD
> issues...

Yup. I'd like to think that the idea of printing polymer resist on a
copper PCB is a step in that direction. After all, that's what we're
going to try and do with Field's metal isn't it?

Vik ;v)

_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 20:30 +0000, Adrian Bowyer wrote:
> Quoting Simon McAuliffe :
>
> > I am assuming from this that it is not worth proceeding with the
> single
> > sided universal board because the tracks are two narrow (?)
>
> Perhaps not. Presumably if you increase the jumper count you quickly
> get to the point where there are no tracks running between pins, and
> suddenly they can be fat again.

I think it's still worth pursuing. I'd favour a larger format board with
thick tracks, because this is going to be closer to what we'll be able
to get Mendel to produce.

Vik :v)

_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

Quoting Vik Olliver :

> Yup. I'd like to think that the idea of printing polymer resist on a
> copper PCB is a step in that direction. After all, that's what we're
> going to try and do with Field's metal isn't it?

I've had a bit of a success in the woods/fields metal area. Will try
to blog it later.

Yours

Adrian

[staff.bath.ac.uk]
[reprap.org]
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

Vik Olliver wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 16:33 +0000, Adrian Bowyer wrote:
>
>>I've had a bit of a success in the woods/fields metal area. Will try
>>to blog it later.
>
>
> You have, rather. That looks like it's turning into a great idea. I
> wondered about how to precision-feed the metal, but then I realised we
> could pour it into a mould with teeth (line with drive belt?) and use
> the engagement with the teeth to drive the finished feedstock precisely.
>
> I presume we're OK with manually loading feedstock for the moment?

Yes - especially for stuff like wood's metal as it's not a bulk construction
material, so the volume requirement per build should be quite low.

Yours

Adrian

[staff.bath.ac.uk]
[reprap.org]
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

Simon McAuliffe wrote:

> Ooops. I had forgotten to label those connectors 12V, so they were
> connected to vcc.
>
> Fixed and further fattened. I also moved the power input closer to the
> distribution connectors.
>
> The way it creates the copper pours in the PDF file is bizarre to say
> the least. It could probably be redrawn better in another package, but
> it seems to print just fine for me.

That looks pretty darned good - I'm off to print one and make it. Can you
replace my rubbish design in the repository with this?

Zach - sorry; this means some more wiki updating and pic addition, I fear...

Yours

Adrian

[staff.bath.ac.uk]
[reprap.org]

_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]

no problems. is the new design for powercomms in svn?

honestly though, it shouldn't be that much of a change in the wiki.
it just means we have to take more pictures and put them in the right
places. all the components are the same... just a different layout.

On 2/26/07, Adrian Bowyer wrote:
> Simon McAuliffe wrote:
>
> > Ooops. I had forgotten to label those connectors 12V, so they were
> > connected to vcc.
> >
> > Fixed and further fattened. I also moved the power input closer to the
> > distribution connectors.
> >
> > The way it creates the copper pours in the PDF file is bizarre to say
> > the least. It could probably be redrawn better in another package, but
> > it seems to print just fine for me.
>
> That looks pretty darned good - I'm off to print one and make it. Can you
> replace my rubbish design in the repository with this?
>
> Zach - sorry; this means some more wiki updating and pic addition, I fear...
>
> Yours
>
> Adrian
>
> [staff.bath.ac.uk]
> [reprap.org]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> Developers@reprap.org
> [reprap.org]
>
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers@reprap.org
[reprap.org]