|
longview posted:If you swap TX/RX every time, it's still a 50/50 shot if it being right. (vs. 0% if you don't In the spirit of having to deal with managers trying to run software projects like hardware (gently caress you, waterfall), now is my chance to flip the tables! Simply label the pins with a variable name, like X and Y! Then include a piece of paper with the legend and change it if you need to. Bing bong, so simple 
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2021 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 19:42 |
|
|
Dewgy posted:From what I understand about crystal charging, “meditation” is an interesting choice of phrasing for the process. Lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2021 18:17
|
|
|
Has anyone ever sent off a multimeter for calibration? At work the test equipment guys just come and whisk them away. But I got a decent deal on a used Keithley 2000 and my Agilent handheld also needs cal. So I'm considering using one of the mail-in cal labs like https://www.custom-cal.com/Test_Equipment_Calibration.aspx. Any trip reports for something like this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2021 21:05
|
|
|
Rescue Toaster posted:Has anyone ever sent off a multimeter for calibration? At work the test equipment guys just come and whisk them away. But I got a decent deal on a used Keithley 2000 and my Agilent handheld also needs cal. Find a cal lab local to you. Prices come WAY down if you can drop off and pick up in person. Get a price quote up front. I decided to calibrate my meters and they asked if I had any torque wrenches or pressure gauges, because they were running a special: three meters, get another tool free! So I now have a calibration report for my harbor freight torque wrench.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2021 15:21
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:So I now have a calibration report for my harbor freight torque wrench. So how is it? Does it stay consistent across the range? Beam type or digital?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:Find a cal lab local to you. Prices come WAY down if you can drop off and pick up in person. Get a price quote up front. I decided to calibrate my meters and they asked if I had any torque wrenches or pressure gauges, because they were running a special: three meters, get another tool free! So I now have a calibration report for my harbor freight torque wrench. Unfortunately there is nobody local. Our company has the only cal lab in town and they're not setup for anything except the specific meters they support and they're not allowed to do personal equipment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2021 17:06
|
|
|
Forseti posted:So how is it? Does it stay consistent across the range? Beam type or digital? Beam type. It's hilariously off below 15% of range, within 5% for the rest. Within 1% at the setting I bought it for. I think the cal guys got a kick out of running the test on what I have to assume is an unusual tool for them. The shop snap-on torque wrenches we typically sent them were 1% across the entire range, and had been for up to a dozen years for some of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2021 13:09
|
|
|
I want to use some through hole sockets on a PCB so I can put something expensive on the board and still take it off without having to solder it. For example, an Arduino that has male pin header (uh, standard size? 0.65mm?) on it that I'm going to take off later and re-use anyway. 1. Is this going to do what I think it does? 2. Do I need to worry about the thickness/shape of my pin header vs the socket? It feels like everything is standardized to one size. 3. Also, is this something I can break to size like the other pin header stuff?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 06:58
|
|
|
Those are round-pinned machine headers, and I'd avoid them all the time. More common headers, including what comes on Arduinos, have square pins and won't fit. Just searching 0.1" headers on aliexpress/ebay/amazon will get you excellent deals on things that are good enough. And you can just cut them to size. Male headers break away easily, but female ones are usually solid, I just use snips to cut them to length. Something like this: https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/chip-quik-inc/HDR100IMP40F-G-RA-TH/5978223
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 07:28
|
|
|
ante posted:Those are round-pinned machine headers, and I'd avoid them all the time. More common headers, including what comes on Arduinos, have square pins and won't fit.  I have a lot of that. Perfect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 07:30
|
|
|
Cory Parsnipson posted:
Out of curiosity, and with no judgment, what did you think they were for? Or was it just a case of not seeing your nose right in front of your face until someone reminded you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 14:46
|
|
|
I've been trying to salvage connectors and other bits from a pair of old, dead Amiga 500 boards to use in my A500++ project and let me tell you what I've learned: Unsoldering connectors is the bane of my existence. If I could readily source board mount DB23 connectors I wouldn't even bother. So I guess I'm asking for any tips you guys may have on desoldering board mount connectors. The high heat sinking is a problem. I have one of those cheap desoldering guns which works fairly well I'll admit, to free the individual electrical pins out, but getting the mechanical connection pins desoldered is a pain because they're usually around much larger holes and sink the heat much more. It'll be a labor of love I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 19:46
|
|
|
KnifeWrench posted:Out of curiosity, and with no judgment, what did you think they were for? Or was it just a case of not seeing your nose right in front of your face until someone reminded you? I have them packed away in boxes within boxes cause I've never had to use them. I got a whole bunch of both a really long time ago but I only used the male headers. I was also looking online and came across the idea of a DIP socket so I searched "removable pin header socket" and got to the part I linked in the previous post. e. Maybe experience level is relevant too. I'm mostly used to programming, some breadboarding, and other equally technical pursuits such as watching TV and eating hot chip. It might be more self explanatory if you found me trying to remove a nail with my bare hands while having a hammer in my pocket, which would be more baffling if it happened to an expert like, say, if Adam Savage suddenly forgot how to use a wrench in the middle of his show. *queue concerned looks from his colleagues* Cory Parsnipson fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Apr 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 19:54
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I've been trying to salvage connectors and other bits from a pair of old, dead Amiga 500 boards to use in my A500++ project and let me tell you what I've learned: I say this every time it comes up but get a temperature controlled iron like a Weller or a Hakko or something. The closed-loop control means you get an effectively very high thermal conductivity to wherever the temperature sensor is even though the actual iron can be very small. The temperature just won't drop as much and will recover much faster than a non-controlled iron when you stick it onto some sort of heat sink, so it will just melt solder more effectively. Blowing/sucking the solder out of the holes will still be a pain in the rear end but if the board is already a write-off feel free to tug your connectors out with a little extra force. It'll maybe pull out the plated through holes from the board along with its pins but you can clean those off. Also if you carefully cut the board into pieces with a dremel or similar (just try not to grind up any solder into inhalable dust!) you can pop the pins out one at a time while the solder is melted which is a million times easier than getting the whole thing free enough to pull out cold. Speaking of pulling components while the solder is melted, a thing I have done in the past is warming the solder joints with a propane torch or heat gun (paint dryer type, not solder rework type) and tugging on the component with pliers. This completely destroys the board but the parts are usually salvageable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
Thankfully I ended up buying both a TS-80P and a TS-12 ksger station so I am awash in temperature controlled gear. It sounds like this is just going to be a pain in the rear end and that's just part and parcel of what I'm trying to do. Both of these boards are trash so I'm OK damaging them, it's mainly the components I want to salvage without too much harm 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
Yeah I'm by no means a through-hole soldering expert but every time I try to de-solder something it seems to take some combination of a lot of effort, destroying the board, or destroying the parts I'm removing. This is kind of what lead to my conversion to hot air and surface mount for prototyping, since it's easier to get all of the solder to melt at once and lift parts off the board.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 22:42
|
|
|
Preheat the board and use good solder wick Heat flux is proportional to the difference in temperatures. Soaking the entire board to 75-100C will make it a lot easier to get heat into the pins without other stuff sucking it away. Modern connector plastics would generally be fine at those temperature indefinitely, I would expect older Amiga-era ones would also be fine. You can build an okayish cheap uncontrolled preheater with a hotplate and a piece of aluminum to spread heat out, then adjusting till it's hot but water doesn't boil off immediately.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2021 23:51
|
|
|
I like to lock vice grips onto connectors to give them some weight, and then hit the pins with a hot air gun with heat and airflow turned way up. They'll soften and the connector will just fall off. Make sure they're covered in lead solder, too, not tin
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 00:39
|
|
|
ante posted:I like to lock vice grips onto connectors to give them some weight, and then hit the pins with a hot air gun with heat and airflow turned way up. They'll soften and the connector will just fall off. I do this too but in much dumber ways that generally involve burning my fingers
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 05:24
|
|
|
So I know you already have a temperature-controlled iron, but I know I've said this a few times about temperature-controlled irons:Stack Machine posted:The closed-loop control means you get an effectively very high thermal conductivity to wherever the temperature sensor is even though the actual iron can be very small. and I want to belabor the point because I think it's a neat thing at the intersection of circuit and thermal design. Heat flow can be and usually is (at least by EEs and HVAC people) modeled with a circuit analogy. It turns out the equations are the same if you substitute temperatures for voltages, heat flux (as in the amount of thermal energy flowing from one place to another per unit time, measured in watts) for currents, heat capacity (joules of heat energy added to an object per one degree temperature rise) for capacitance, and thermal conductance/resistance (watts of heat transfer per degree temperature difference between two objects) for electrical conductance/resistance. So something like a flame or a 25W resistive heating element with no feedback that just dumps a constant amount of energy as heat is the thermal equivalent of a current source. Looking at the specific example of a 25W radio shack special, it dumps that 25W into the body of the iron, which has some thermal conductivity. That body is entirely metal and has some convection/radiation to the ambient environment. We can draw that as a circuit diagram with the ambient temperature as ground (so temperatures are all in degrees above ambient):  I didn't draw any capacitors here because I'm only talking about the steady-state behavior right now. We can take the Thevenin equivalent and imagine the iron as a "temperature source" at the temperature the iron goes to when it's left just dangling in the air, with a series thermal resistance Riron||Rambient + Rtip. On the other hand, the temperature-controlled iron has a controller to adjust the amount of power being dissipated in the heating element to be (at steady-state, in some sense) proportional to the difference between that temperature and a set point. It's a thermal transconductance! (This remains true for hysteretic-style thermostats too if we conveniently ignore the behavior at the range of temperatures between the turn-on temperature and the turn-off temperature.)  The entire transconductance, Riron, and Rambient could just be redrawn as a unity gain op-amp buffer between the virtual Tset source and Rtip. The output resistance of this op-amp is Riron||Rambient, but we get to divide that by the open-loop temperature gain Gm(Riron+Rambient) to get our closed-loop output resistance at the sensor, which we can assume to be very large by design, so effectively we have an ideal temperature source at the temperature sensor location and Teff is the set temperature and Reff is just Rtip. I bring this up because this kind of control theory application is just everywhere in basically every human endeavor and this whole "low impedance to the sensor location" thing just comes up again and again, where "impedance" can be anything from resistance to reactance (including ones you don't want like the Miller effect) to thermal resistance to spring constant (I bet the arms on a hard drive are pretty springy but the "sensor" is the servo track on the disk read by the head itself so the whole actuator system is effectively very stiff at that point).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 08:24
|
|
|
Stack Machine posted:So I know you already have a temperature-controlled iron, but I know I've said this a few times about temperature-controlled irons: This is a great post and really helped tie together a bunch of concepts in my head (for now, at least). Thank you! Shame Boy posted:I do this too but in much dumber ways that generally involve burning my fingers I recently bought a bunch of silicone thimbles/finger protectors (I think they're primarily aimed at chefs). I can't believe my fingers have survived so long without them! Definitely a must-have for me, now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 12:17
|
|
|
I'm trying to make footprints in KiCAD and I'm confused as to how people can make such complex footprints in the given editor... 1. I read in the docs that a 50 mil or 25 mil grid is recommended. Someone on the KiCAD forums said if you don't have a grid that conforms to this, you might get "tearing" in the footprint. This sounds fine but when I actually go to make the footprint, I find that there's a lot of cases where I need to draw something that isn't aligned to the grid. For instance, in the picture above, the body of the switch (big blue rectangle) is supposed to be 3 mm x 6 mm and the button sticking out the side is 3.5 mm and needs to be centered. So basically, I just pressed Alt and put it wherever I wanted. The same applies for the footprint courtyard too. The pins, however, are aligned to the grid. I'm not sure which layers need to be aligned to the grid? 2. When making polygons and shapes, the footprint editor is basically one step above MS paint. Does everyone seriously use this to make stuff? I've found something called KiCAD Stepup which supposedly lets you make footprints using the FreeCAD sketcher, which is what I thought making footprints would be like. Is drawing shapes using parametric sketching something that people do in this industry?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 21:27
|
|
|
Cory Parsnipson posted:I'm trying to make footprints in KiCAD and I'm confused as to how people can make such complex footprints in the given editor... Ignore that, build the footprint to whatever actual numbers you want, the modern editor displays it fine now. I usually just double-click on the thing (line, pad, whatever) and specify the values exactly. Nothing in the footprint editor needs to be "aligned to the grid" (everything in the symbol editor does though), especially because you can just specify your own grid when you're laying out the board. Just make sure the origin is in a sensible place (on one of the pads, usually) and you're fine. Cory Parsnipson posted:2. When making polygons and shapes, the footprint editor is basically one step above MS paint. Does everyone seriously use this to make stuff? I do, it sucks rear end, you get used to it. For anything even remotely complex though I just make an SVG and import it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
Seconded on all counts. ie ignore the advice on only using certain grids, and the footprint editor is lacking. Perhaps the 50 mil guidance was for schematics. These tend to be built around that. You can treat it as arbitrary, since schematics are abstracted from physical dimensions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 21:47
|
|
|
Thanks!Shame Boy posted:I do, it sucks rear end, you get used to it. For anything even remotely complex though I just make an SVG and import it. What do you use to make the SVG?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
Inkscape is nice. But also, yeah, manually doing footprints is easy enough that the footprint editor is fine - If you're wanting to import logos and stuff, then do it through SVG. Usually I just copy similar footprints and modify to suit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2021 22:02
|
|
|
Has anyone ever seen a soic8 socket/carrier that can go back into a soic 8 footprint? Basic idea is I have a board with an old SOIC 8 24LC16 eeprom. It's possible to read/write it by removing the processor's flash (pulling two PLCC-32 chips) and powering up the board, which causes the CPU to go into reset and hi-z the I2C lines, so an external reader can get at the eeprom. But it's annoying because of pulling & inserting the PLCC chips, as well as a SOIC8 clip doesn't fit especially well due to a nearby electrolytic, so you have to use micro grabbers. Basically it's a pain in the rear end. Due to some experimentation/debugging/reverse engineering I want to do I want to routinely backup/compare/restore the eeprom, so I need a better way. I was thinking some kind of specialized SOIC 8 socket that could attach to the same SOIC 8 footprint on the board... maybe using a 1.27mm pin header and then mounting the chip 'vertically' on a tiny PCB possibly with a right angle header. Basically, desolder the chip and replace it with one of these on the PCB: https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/855-M50-3100445 And then make some tiny carrier board that maybe sandwiches vertically in between the pins on something like this (or just use a right-angle) https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Wurth-Elektronik/62200821121?qs=PhR8RmCirEaK31c80Nr2Vw%3D%3D It might even be possible to 'dead bug' the chip onto a male header meant to go SMT onto a board like this: https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Samtec/FTSH-104-01-L-DV?qs=0lQeLiL1qyZrsShkAoDVcA%3D%3D Basically, I'm sure such a thing could be built. But I'm curious if there is an existing product like this I could just order without waiting for jlcpcb or seeed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 20:52
|
|
|
Could you override the RESET line? Active-low resets are usually driven with open collector outputs and a pullup for that exact reason (very useful for automated testing). Some designers buffer the reset line, but there's usually some circuit node you can ground to reset the device. I think this socket does what you want as long as there's a reasonable amount of room around it? https://www.adafruit.com/product/4726 E: also not sure if anyone's selling it at a reasonable price but an I2C flash emulator would probably be perfect for your case, emulating the flash would let you log changes and easily revert them. Sounds like the sort of thing you could hack up with an Arduino Due or faster without a crazy amount of work compared to pulling chips from sockets all day. longview fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 21:12
|
|
|
I run into weird problems on each board iteration that invariably are due to my bad hand-soldering of the MCU. Switching footprint and variant just to get the 1 STM32L4 JLC has in stock. (L5 would be cool too, but no go on that either). On the plus side, STM32s are pretty consistent on which pin label can be used with which internal peripherals, but changing footprints and pin count still means some redesign. Tangent: How do you handle ground pads on QFN packages? On ones I've used before, the pins were lined up so ground pins could be connected to the center pad without hitting clearance issues, but on this one, I can't get the routing through without changing KiCad tolerances. (Haven't checked if w/in manufacturer tolerances yet). It seems like this leaves 2 options: VIA in the pad (I've heard this is sub-optimal due to heatsinking issues, or solder flowing through the via?) - Lower tolerances so you can connect the pins. Thoughts?  For example, I can't connect pin 32 to the pad due to clearance with pin 1. On other packages, the edge ground pins are aligned within the center pad's boundary, so you don't have that issue. Where here, they stick out, so the corner-pin-to-corner-pins are close together. Dominoes fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 21:13
|
|
|
Via in pad is preferred for thermal properties, otherwise you're not really heatsinking. Some packages (Max V CPLDs) are actually built with only a thermal pad in the middle for ground. For reflow and standard PCBs you lose solder into the hole, so the manufacturer will e.g. need to increase the solder paste mask opening to compensate. This is something professional fabs handle for you (especially if you let them know) but JLC may or may not care? Adding a few vias in the pad is probably not the end of the world, especially if it's only a few small ones to reduce the amount of solder that can go down them. High end you'd get capped and plated vias, which fill the entire via up and plate copper over the top, making this issue irrelevant. Price goes up a fair bit. For hand soldering, the trick to dealing with these is to just put the biggest plated hole you can in the middle. Afterwards, you can solder it from the bottom very easily, I've done that on packages as small as MSOP-10 with no issues. It works even better on 0.8 mm PCBs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 21:27
|
|
|
longview posted:Could you override the RESET line? Active-low resets are usually driven with open collector outputs and a pullup for that exact reason (very useful for automated testing). Those are all good ideas actually. Anecdotally around the old test equipment repair forums, just trying to drive the reset line doesn't work to hi-z the i2c lines for some reason. (I agree that seems unlikely... I'm not sure if the CPU has an internal reset circuit or what.) That socket almost works, but this is a normal narrow-body SOIC-8 because it's just a little eeprom, not the monster wide flash chips that a lot of PC motherboards use nowadays. Would be nearly perfect otherwise. The idea of emulating is cool. I'd still have to remove the chip and replace it with a socket, but depending on how many read/modify/write cycles I end up needing to do that could be worth looking at. Eventually I'd probably want a carrier for the chip to reinstall it semi-permanently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 21:32
|
|
|
Rescue Toaster posted:Those are all good ideas actually. That chip is probably available in DIP-8 as well, could make a little carrier board for a DIP ZIF socket and wire it in, maybe find somewhere to screw the socket-PCB down so it stays in place. Ultimate flex would be to use a flex PCB that could be soldered right to the old PCB footprint and goes off to a socket somewhere convenient. E: and if you're worried about write cycles (can't imagine how you'd reach 100k+ cycles but ok), Cypress makes F-RAM I2C chips (FM24 series) that are compatible and have infinite write cycles for all practical purposes. The real benefit for most applications is that they're a fair bit faster to erase and program, and IIRC they can do 3 MHz+ speeds if you want them to. longview fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 21:44
|
|
|
longview posted:Via in pad is preferred for thermal properties, otherwise you're not really heatsinking. Some packages (Max V CPLDs) are actually built with only a thermal pad in the middle for ground.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 21:53
|
|
|
Dominoes posted:I run into weird problems on each board iteration that invariably are due to my bad hand-soldering of the MCU. Switching footprint and variant just to get the 1 STM32L4 JLC has in stock. (L5 would be cool too, but no go on that either). Via in pad is fine for big QFNs like that. It's a problem for things like 0603, where it'll wick away solder and heat, causing that side to reflow slower than the other side, and therefore tombstoning. For that package, you're not going to be wicking away enough solder to cause issues, and tombstoning ain't happening, obviously. For the tolerances, there's no reason to pay attention to KiCad defaults. I have no idea what they are because changing DRC rules to match my MFG's is the first thing I did. I'd imagine KiCad's defaults are targeted towards the Arduino dev board crowd, and you're already way beyond that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:19
|
|
|
Sweet. Going to roll with this. Appreciate the wisdom. I'm trying to be flexible with these MCU shortages etc. Wrote a HAL that covers most STM32 families and variants, with this in mind, but that doesn't help when you need to change footprints. Both the domestic vendors (Digikey etc) and foreign fab houses like JLC have significantly reduced inventory, the latter much more so. The former charges more and I have to hand solder, so it's worth switching in this case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:30
|
|
|
I made another footprint for a small SMD switch. Could I get a critique? I don't really know specifically what I'm asking to focus on. From looking at the documentation, making footprints seems a lot more open to interpretation than making symbols is and I'm generally unsure of a lot of stuff. This is a footprint for the TL3312NF160Q metal dome SMD switch. There's a datasheet with the dimensions here 1. Generally, what are the layers I need and layers I don't need? It sounds like a lot of it depends on the design and the manufacturer's preference. So far, I'm gathering that the common ones are copper, silkscreens, and courtyards? I heard the fab layers are for documentation and may be optional but all the default footprints have them so I included it in mine (and also, basically the fab layer roughly copies the silkscreen layer?). 2. What's the level of detail I need for everything? This is probably more of an art and experience based. At the bare minimum I guess I could get away with just a square encompassing the perimeter of the part and 4 pads right? On the other hand, I think the two fins on the sides will help me orient the switch when it's time to solder it on. I dunno, just wondering if there are rules of thumb or some poo poo. 3. How do I know if it's right?? I mean I followed the dimensions in the datasheet, but if I get it back and it just doesn't fit, I need to make a change, pay the money again, and wait for shipping? Are there any life hacks to make this less of a money and time sink? 4. Tangentially related FreeCAD question:  I'm looking for the button that lets me make the "yellow tag" labels pictured in the object tree above. What is this called? I found stuff in the drafting workbench, but those aren't it and searching online isn't turning anything up... Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 00:43
|
|
|
Cory Parsnipson posted:1. Generally, what are the layers I need and layers I don't need? It sounds like a lot of it depends on the design and the manufacturer's preference. So far, I'm gathering that the common ones are copper, silkscreens, and courtyards? I heard the fab layers are for documentation and may be optional but all the default footprints have them so I included it in mine (and also, basically the fab layer roughly copies the silkscreen layer?). 1. If you're assembling it yourself, copper & silkscreen. Courtyard if you want your CAD to yell at you when you place things too close together. 2. Again, if you're assembling it yourself, you are the end-user of the silkscreen. I would recommend including RefDes & some symbols if you need an orientation. For things that have standard symbols, drawing those will get you better results than just a dot by a pin or making up your own convention (i.e. draw a diode in silkscreen instead of a bar/dot and an assembler is less likely to mess it up) 3. Print the board out on paper at 1:1 scale and physically put the parts on top of it to see that everything fits.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 00:57
|
|
|
Ah man. Seriously just grab a different switch's footprint and modify the dimensions to fit your part. You're also going to need the mask layer. If you're manufacturing, you're going to need the paste layer, and also the fab layer. Basically every layer is important, and you're going to mess something up in extremely subtle ways if you're trying to do it from the ground up. Modifying an existing part will teach you how to put them together, so you'll be able to do it from the ground up in the future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 01:17
|
|
|
ante posted:Ah man. Seriously just grab a different switch's footprint and modify the dimensions to fit your part. You're also going to need the mask layer. If you're manufacturing, you're going to need the paste layer, and also the fab layer.  I'm gonna have to disagree here. If I take an existing switch and move some lines around it's still going to be as inscrutable as it was when I started. I'm looking at a lot of these pre-existing footprints and I'm not really figuring out why the creators did what they did just by looking at things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 01:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 19:42 |
|
|
Cory Parsnipson posted:
The point of starting with an existing footprint, figuring out what you need to modify (by asking if necessary), and then doing it is so you don’t have to know everything about why footprints are designed the way they are on Day One. It’s the difference between getting something actually fabbed and in your hands versus being a one-person wheel reinvention station and not getting a physical result until much later (and it’s still going to have something wrong, happens to everyone).
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 02:16
|
|
