krw@attt.bizz wrote:> 0402s are a big win for QFP terminators and pull-downs. They also > make great differential pads and filters. Two 0402 resistors and a > 0603 cap lay out very nicely on QFP spacing. Of course, 0402s are our > standard. They're cheaper, too.My old P&P machine probably can't do 0402 well at all. I think it can do 0603, but haven't tried it. The stuff I do is VERY pedestrian stuff, as long as I can get these parts, there's no need to push to smaller parts. Jon
MicroZED
Started by ●October 19, 2013
Reply by ●October 23, 20132013-10-23
Reply by ●October 23, 20132013-10-23
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:56:31 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:>On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen ><langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote: > >>Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 15.54.05 UTC+2 skrev Joerg: >>> Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >>> >>> > Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 15.04.46 UTC+2 skrev Joerg: >>> >>> >> John Larkin wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:21:45 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> >>> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> John Larkin wrote: >>> >>> >>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:38:58 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> [...] >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>>>>> As I get older and SMT becomes smaller I have found that even the >>> >>> >>>>>> Donegan 5x visor is sometimes not enough. >>> >>> >>>>> As the parts get smaller, everybody needs optics. >>> >>> >>>>> Reconsider a Mantis. If you set the IPD knob to match your anatomy, they are >>> >>> >>>>> comfortable and the view is stunning. And you don't have to hunch over like you >>> >>> >>>>> do with a visor. >>> >>> >>>> I don't have space for a Mantis here, mostly because I sometimes have >>> >>> >>>> very large prototypes on the lab bench. There can't be anything big and >>> >>> >>>> heavy in the way. When I want to avoid the hunch I use a Veho 20x USB >>> >>> >>>> microscope. A Supereyes 500x if it gets really small but that one >>> >>> >>>> doesn't allow several inches of vertical work space. Those are cheap >>> >>> >>>> "toy scopes" but they work quite well. As I said before, the good old >>> >>> >>>> days are today. >>> >>> >>> My bench isn't very big either. My Mantis doesn't take much room. It >>> >>> >>> tucks away when I'm not using it. And it can swing over/into pretty >>> >>> >>> big rackmount boxes. >>> >>> >>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Mantis/Mantis_Box.JPG >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> That's too big for me. My main lab bench is a large angled bench where >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> one wing has a big equipment rack and the other needs to remain free >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> from three side. It is a very heavy duty bench that can (and sometimes >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> has to) take loads where the one in your picture would probably get bent >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> in the frame or where it would snap the wood. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > something like this? >>> >>> > >>> >>> > http://www.inline.com.au/images/1252551884_Ceiling-Mount_3142.jpg >>> >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> That would work. A bit wobbly during a storm though because buildings >>> are wood frame out here. >> >>a storm big enough to wobble the house and you would be thinking about a microscope? >> >>> But in Denmark it should perform nicely. >> >>yeh you are right here we build houses of bricks, wood is for sheds >>and garages :P >> >>-Lasse > >We have lots of wood here. In the 1989 earthquake, it was brick buildings that >collapsed and killed people (well, the Oakland elevated freeway, too.) Right >next to our business, all the bricks on the face of a 6-story apartment building >peeled off and hit the sidewalk. Miraculously, nobody was hit. One brick would >have killed you. > >I can't imagine what would happen if an earthquake hit a big pile-o-rocks city >like Boston or London or Paris.Small buildings (and everything inside) would be gone. The skyscrapers (over 20ish stories) would likely survive quite well. IOW, it wouldn't be pretty.
Reply by ●October 23, 20132013-10-23
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:48:55 -0500, Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> wrote:>krw@attt.bizz wrote: > > >> 0402s are a big win for QFP terminators and pull-downs. They also >> make great differential pads and filters. Two 0402 resistors and a >> 0603 cap lay out very nicely on QFP spacing. Of course, 0402s are our >> standard. They're cheaper, too. >My old P&P machine probably can't do 0402 well at all. I think it >can do 0603, but haven't tried it. The stuff I do is VERY >pedestrian stuff, as long as I can get these parts, there's no need >to push to smaller parts.At the PPoE, the SMT techs didn't believe they could do 0402s or .4mm BGAs (small ones), either, but once they tried they found they were no trouble at all. 0603 was the "standard", there, though. We've found some (small value) caps difficult to find in the larger sizes. Murata told us that they were obsoleting them and the prices were going way up. I've gotten used to dealing with 0402s so they aren't much of a problem. 0802s are *huge*. ;-) ...though I use a bunch of 1206s and 1210s, too (rarely anything bigger).
Reply by ●October 23, 20132013-10-23
> Murata > told us that they were obsoleting them and the prices were going way > up. I've gotten used to dealing with 0402s so they aren't much of a > problem. 0802s are *huge*. ;-) ...though I use a bunch of 1206s > and 1210s, too (rarely anything bigger).0802s are rare, ;-( I only use one 0805, a 47uF cap. It is cheaper for this cap; otherwise, 0603 or 0402.
Reply by ●October 24, 20132013-10-24
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 17:58:22 -0700 (PDT), edward.ming.lee@gmail.com wrote:>> Murata >> told us that they were obsoleting them and the prices were going way >> up. I've gotten used to dealing with 0402s so they aren't much of a >> problem. 0802s are *huge*. ;-) ...though I use a bunch of 1206s >> and 1210s, too (rarely anything bigger). > >0802s are rare, ;-(0208s aren't, though (arrays). ;-) Of course I meant 0805s.>I only use one 0805, a 47uF cap. It is cheaper for this cap; otherwise, 0603 or 0402.I use a lot of 10uF and 22uf, up to 35V, X7Rs, so 1210s aren't so unusual. ;-)
Reply by ●October 24, 20132013-10-24
Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 18.56.31 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:> On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen > > <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote: > > > > >Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 15.54.05 UTC+2 skrev Joerg: > > >> Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > >> > > >> > Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 15.04.46 UTC+2 skrev Joerg: > > >> > > >> >> John Larkin wrote: > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:21:45 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> > > >> > > >> >>> wrote: > > >> > > >> >>>> John Larkin wrote: > > >> > > >> >>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:38:58 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> [...] > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >>>>>> As I get older and SMT becomes smaller I have found that even the > > >> > > >> >>>>>> Donegan 5x visor is sometimes not enough. > > >> > > >> >>>>> As the parts get smaller, everybody needs optics. > > >> > > >> >>>>> Reconsider a Mantis. If you set the IPD knob to match your anatomy, they are > > >> > > >> >>>>> comfortable and the view is stunning. And you don't have to hunch over like you > > >> > > >> >>>>> do with a visor. > > >> > > >> >>>> I don't have space for a Mantis here, mostly because I sometimes have > > >> > > >> >>>> very large prototypes on the lab bench. There can't be anything big and > > >> > > >> >>>> heavy in the way. When I want to avoid the hunch I use a Veho 20x USB > > >> > > >> >>>> microscope. A Supereyes 500x if it gets really small but that one > > >> > > >> >>>> doesn't allow several inches of vertical work space. Those are cheap > > >> > > >> >>>> "toy scopes" but they work quite well. As I said before, the good old > > >> > > >> >>>> days are today. > > >> > > >> >>> My bench isn't very big either. My Mantis doesn't take much room. It > > >> > > >> >>> tucks away when I'm not using it. And it can swing over/into pretty > > >> > > >> >>> big rackmount boxes. > > >> > > >> >>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Mantis/Mantis_Box.JPG > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> That's too big for me. My main lab bench is a large angled bench where > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> one wing has a big equipment rack and the other needs to remain free > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> from three side. It is a very heavy duty bench that can (and sometimes > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> has to) take loads where the one in your picture would probably get bent > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> >> in the frame or where it would snap the wood. > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > something like this? > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > http://www.inline.com.au/images/1252551884_Ceiling-Mount_3142.jpg > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> That would work. A bit wobbly during a storm though because buildings > > >> are wood frame out here. > > > > > >a storm big enough to wobble the house and you would be thinking about a microscope? > > > > > >> But in Denmark it should perform nicely. > > > > > >yeh you are right here we build houses of bricks, wood is for sheds > > >and garages :P > > > > > >-Lasse > > > > We have lots of wood here. In the 1989 earthquake, it was brick buildings that > > collapsed and killed people (well, the Oakland elevated freeway, too.) Right > > next to our business, all the bricks on the face of a 6-story apartment building > > peeled off and hit the sidewalk. Miraculously, nobody was hit. One brick would > > have killed you. > > > > I can't imagine what would happen if an earthquake hit a big pile-o-rocks city > > like Boston or London or Paris. >They aren't build right on top of an active fault line so the risk isn't great London is all bricks, after the wooden one burned down in 1666 -Lasse
Reply by ●October 24, 20132013-10-24
Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 18.35.11 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs:> On 10/23/2013 12:20 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > > Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 17.55.46 UTC+2 skrev Joerg: > > >> Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > >> > > >>> Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 15.54.05 UTC+2 skrev Joerg: > > >> > > >>>> Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>>> Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 15.04.46 UTC+2 skrev Joerg: > > >> > > >>>>>> John Larkin wrote: > > >> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:21:45 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> > > >> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >> > > >>>>>>>> John Larkin wrote: > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:38:58 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > >>>>>> [...] > > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> As I get older and SMT becomes smaller I have found that even the > > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Donegan 5x visor is sometimes not enough. > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> As the parts get smaller, everybody needs optics. > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Reconsider a Mantis. If you set the IPD knob to match your anatomy, they are > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> comfortable and the view is stunning. And you don't have to hunch over like you > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> do with a visor. > > >> > > >>>>>>>> I don't have space for a Mantis here, mostly because I sometimes have > > >> > > >>>>>>>> very large prototypes on the lab bench. There can't be anything big and > > >> > > >>>>>>>> heavy in the way. When I want to avoid the hunch I use a Veho 20x USB > > >> > > >>>>>>>> microscope. A Supereyes 500x if it gets really small but that one > > >> > > >>>>>>>> doesn't allow several inches of vertical work space. Those are cheap > > >> > > >>>>>>>> "toy scopes" but they work quite well. As I said before, the good old > > >> > > >>>>>>>> days are today. > > >> > > >>>>>>> My bench isn't very big either. My Mantis doesn't take much room. It > > >> > > >>>>>>> tucks away when I'm not using it. And it can swing over/into pretty > > >> > > >>>>>>> big rackmount boxes. > > >> > > >>>>>>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Mantis/Mantis_Box.JPG > > >> > > >>>>>> That's too big for me. My main lab bench is a large angled bench where > > >> > > >>>>>> one wing has a big equipment rack and the other needs to remain free > > >> > > >>>>>> from three side. It is a very heavy duty bench that can (and sometimes > > >> > > >>>>>> has to) take loads where the one in your picture would probably get bent > > >> > > >>>>>> in the frame or where it would snap the wood. > > >> > > >>>>> something like this? > > >> > > >>>>> http://www.inline.com.au/images/1252551884_Ceiling-Mount_3142.jpg > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> That would work. A bit wobbly during a storm though because buildings > > >> > > >>>> are wood frame out here. > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> a storm big enough to wobble the house and you would be thinking about a microscope? > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Oh, we work through that out here. Just like I do not give up on plans > > >> > > >> for a barbecue session because it hails or when there are gale force > > >> > > >> winds. Then I just tie down the barbie and secure the lid with wire. > > >> > > >> When the wind howls things cook really fast in there. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>>> But in Denmark it should perform nicely. > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> yeh you are right here we build houses of bricks, wood is for sheds > > >> > > >>> and garages :P > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Brick houses tend to crack or collapse in earthquakes and we have a lot > > >> > > >> of those. > > >> > > > > > > Strange with all the space Americans build where there is regular earthquakes, hurricanes, flooding or a bit of everything > > > > > > > Parsing error. It's earthquakes they have a lot of in CA, not brick > houses. The prevalence of the one is one reason for the scarcity of the > other.I know, it was a comment of how you build big cities where the risk of earth quakes or hurricanes are high ;)> We have a lot of trees, you guys have a lot of mud. ;)around here it is mostly chalk -Lasse
Reply by ●October 24, 20132013-10-24
Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:> Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 18.35.11 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs: > > On 10/23/2013 12:20 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > > > > Strange with all the space Americans build where there is regular > > > earthquakes, hurricanes, flooding or a bit of everything > > > > Parsing error. It's earthquakes they have a lot of in CA, not brick > > houses. The prevalence of the one is one reason for the scarcity > > of the other. > > I know, it was a comment of how you build big cities where > the risk of earth quakes or hurricanes are high ;)We build them where the natural ports are. There has to be a city where there is a port, and there has to be a port at the mouth of the Mississippi River. New York, LA and San Francisco are natural ports too. But NY has never had a natural disaster like the hurricane of 2012. Normally they blow out to sea. It was a very unusual confluence of multiple fronts, low pressure areas, and high tide. -- Reply in group, but if emailing remove the last word.
Reply by ●October 25, 20132013-10-25
On 10/24/2013 10:29 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:> Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >> Den onsdag den 23. oktober 2013 18.35.11 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs: >>> On 10/23/2013 12:20 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >>> >>>> Strange with all the space Americans build where there is regular >>>> earthquakes, hurricanes, flooding or a bit of everything >>> >>> Parsing error. It's earthquakes they have a lot of in CA, not brick >>> houses. The prevalence of the one is one reason for the scarcity >>> of the other. >> >> I know, it was a comment of how you build big cities where >> the risk of earth quakes or hurricanes are high ;) > > We build them where the natural ports are. There has to be a city where > there is a port, and there has to be a port at the mouth of the Mississippi > River. > > New York, LA and San Francisco are natural ports too. But NY has never had > a natural disaster like the hurricane of 2012. Normally they blow out to > sea. It was a very unusual confluence of multiple fronts, low pressure > areas, and high tide. > >What I wonder is why the Dutch and Danes and so on build their houses so close to the Germans. ;) Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 160 North State Road #203 Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 USA +1 845 480 2058 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net
Reply by ●October 25, 20132013-10-25
On a sunny day (Fri, 25 Oct 2013 09:30:16 -0400) it happened Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in <l4drou$itf$1@dont-email.me>:>What I wonder is why the Dutch and Danes and so on build their houses so >close to the Germans. ;)because it is further away from the americans. ;-)
