| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| shadders |
Posted - 31 Jan 2010 : 17:20:35
Hi,
I have created a design which i originally was going to implement with a single board.
I have changed the approach and i am no thinking that i will implement a 3 board design, 1 Audio DAC board, and 2 power supply boards - digital and analogue.
What is the optimal approach using Easy-PC. Two distinct methods seem to be :
1. Create a single board in the PCB design tool, use connectors to establish the power pcb connections, which will remove the Net connections, and place the Audio DAC, and two power supply circuits on a single board. This can then be used to fabricate 3 boards from a single board.
Will the PCB manufacturer allow this ?. (the cutting of a PCB into the relevant 3 designs for me ?)
2. The second option is to create 3 projects/designs, and submit 3 PCB fabrication requests to the manufacturer. Allows more control for changes to each of the three designs
I am not too concerned about the cost, but more concerned about which approach is easiest to maintain and progress for the future.
Thanks.
Regards,
Richard. |
| 6 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| shadders |
Posted - 03 Feb 2010 : 19:03:18
Hi Benno,
Thanks. I am still a novice in this area - so i have used the 3 projects approach. Any changes to one board can be easily controlled.
This is a personal project - Audio DAC - so not sure the boards are generic. Next project will be DSP based Audio DAC with my own programming of filters etc., so i think the design will change quite a bit. Thanks.
Regards,
Richard. |
| Benno |
Posted - 02 Feb 2010 : 20:48:23
quote:
It's also harder to compile a project wide parts list.
It depends how you look at it. Basically the project part list is just 3 lines, assy-1, assy-2 and assy-3 ;).
If Richard is capable of making his boards more or less generic, e.g. the powersupply boards going for a 3 project approach can be a big benefit. He only has to stock his generic boards for a lot of derived products (not sure if that is the case here though).
|
| shadders |
Posted - 02 Feb 2010 : 09:44:58
Hi Peter,
Thanks.
I can always move from one approach to the other, and cut and paste the components as required. I am not too concerned about component name duplication, and the number of components for the power boards is minimal with respect to the main board. So will go the multiple project route. Thanks again.
Regards,
Richard. |
| Peter Johnson |
Posted - 01 Feb 2010 : 11:21:17
Both approaches have benefits.
As you can add 3 separate board outlines, the single approach allows for easier version control, and avoids any risk of duplicate component references across the project. On the downside, you need to maintain a sensible board separation for the manufacturer (which as it can vary, might involve moving boards if you switch).
The separate project approach is obviously more versatile, but it does force you to take responsibility for avoiding component reference duplication if that's relevant. It's also harder to compile a project wide parts list. |
| shadders |
Posted - 01 Feb 2010 : 01:22:02
Hi Iain,
Thanks for that.
Regards,
Richard. |
| Iain Wilkie |
Posted - 31 Jan 2010 : 18:09:14
Go for three seperate boards .... don't over complicate things !
Iain |
|
|
