some breadboards
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 8 Apr 2010 20:10 ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards.jpg ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards2.JPG John
From: brent on 8 Apr 2010 20:12 On Apr 8, 8:10 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards.jpg > > ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards2.JPG > > John Are these your first pass board designs that you plan to put into production?
From: John Larkin on 8 Apr 2010 20:45 On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:12:33 -0700 (PDT), brent <bulegoge(a)columbus.rr.com> wrote: >On Apr 8, 8:10�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards.jpg >> >> ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards2.JPG >> >> John > >Are these your first pass board designs that you plan to put into >production? I usually breadboard to evaluate parts that are underspecified (or whose specs I don't trust) or to try tricky circuits. This is usually nanosecond/picosecond stuff and occasionally things like the power inverter. I never breadboard or prototype entire products. Testing parts is not the same thing as prototyping products. If we really understand the parts and design carefully, a product *will* work first etch, without prototype spins. IC manufacturers do their best to hid defects and weirdnesses, making us discover them over and over all around the world [1]. I especially like to test parts to destruction, to see what sorts of margins I'm going to have in real life. Earlier this week I blew up a bunch of 1206 resistors and SSRs to see how a product might behave if arbitrarily over-voltaged, to estimate which parts would fail, and when, so I could put some limits on a datasheet. I now have, essentially, SOAR curves for these parts. And one of my guys just finished testing a bunch of high-ohm resistors for shot and excess noise. That is a surprisingly difficult thing to do, but crucial to a product we're working on. If we'd just dropped some standard 100M surface-mount cermet resistors into the gadget, it wouldn't have worked. John [1] somebody with time should start an ICs Bug web site.
From: krw on 8 Apr 2010 20:46 On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:12:33 -0700 (PDT), brent <bulegoge(a)columbus.rr.com> wrote: >On Apr 8, 8:10�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards.jpg >> >> ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards2.JPG >> >> John > >Are these your first pass board designs that you plan to put into >production? Nice! ;-)
From: John Larkin on 8 Apr 2010 20:57
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 19:46:29 -0500, "krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:12:33 -0700 (PDT), brent <bulegoge(a)columbus.rr.com> >wrote: > >>On Apr 8, 8:10�pm, John Larkin >><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards.jpg >>> >>> ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/BreadBoards2.JPG >>> >>> John >> >>Are these your first pass board designs that you plan to put into >>production? > >Nice! ;-) If I test the parts I don't fully understand, the products will work first pass. *That* is nice. A breadboard is not a prototype. It's a way to better understand a part. The "circuit" of such a breadboard is unlikely to appear in any deliverable product. John |