On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:>On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote: >> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> >> wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>> The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. >>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a >>> thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because >>> you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation) >>> >> So, use the "thinnest" assy. >> >> "Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them? > >If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only >solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional" >components (they were called BAG phones). > >> My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large >> filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that >> was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an >> exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling >> budget might have financed world XXXing peace. >> >> They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign. >> >> If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself >> to blame. > >Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve! >That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator on their edges? I don't. RL
right angle RGB leds
Started by ●October 8, 2023
Reply by ●October 10, 20232023-10-10
Reply by ●October 10, 20232023-10-10
On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote:> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y > <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: > >> On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote: >>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>> <snip> >>> >>>> The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. >>>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a >>>> thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because >>>> you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation) >>>> >>> So, use the "thinnest" assy. >>> >>> "Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them? >> >> If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only >> solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional" >> components (they were called BAG phones). >> >>> My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large >>> filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that >>> was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an >>> exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling >>> budget might have financed world XXXing peace. >>> >>> They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign. >>> >>> If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself >>> to blame. >> >> Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve! > > That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator > on their edges? I don't.But *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints that it imposes on the design.
Reply by ●October 11, 20232023-10-11
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:> On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y > > <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: > > > >> On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote: > >>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> <snip> > >>> > >>>> The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. > >>>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a > >>>> thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because > >>>> you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation) > >>>> > >>> So, use the "thinnest" assy. > >>> > >>> "Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them? > >> > >> If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only > >> solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional" > >> components (they were called BAG phones). > >> > >>> My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large > >>> filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that > >>> was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an > >>> exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling > >>> budget might have financed world XXXing peace. > >>> > >>> They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign. > >>> > >>> If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself > >>> to blame. > >> > >> Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve! > > > > That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator > > on their edges? I don't. > But *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions > that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints > that it imposes on the design.Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market. But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum.
Reply by ●October 12, 20232023-10-12
On 10/11/2023 7:56 PM, John Smiht wrote:> On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote: >> On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote: >>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y >>> <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> <snip> >>>>> >>>>>> The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. >>>>>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a >>>>>> thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because >>>>>> you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation) >>>>>> >>>>> So, use the "thinnest" assy. >>>>> >>>>> "Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them? >>>> >>>> If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only >>>> solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional" >>>> components (they were called BAG phones). >>>> >>>>> My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large >>>>> filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that >>>>> was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an >>>>> exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling >>>>> budget might have financed world XXXing peace. >>>>> >>>>> They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign. >>>>> >>>>> If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself >>>>> to blame. >>>> >>>> Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve! >>> >>> That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator >>> on their edges? I don't. >> But *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions >> that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints >> that it imposes on the design. > > Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market. > But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum.Which is exactly why I have folks who do my board layouts, glass designs, packaging, market surveys, board fabrication, etc. I use THIS forum for experiences folks have POSSIBLY had meeting similar ELECTRONIC design challenges. "If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself to blame" naively ignores the fact that markets constrain designs.
Reply by ●October 12, 20232023-10-12
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 21:29:52 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:>On 10/11/2023 7:56 PM, John Smiht wrote: >> On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02?PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote: >>> On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote: >>>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y >>>> <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> <snip> >>>>>> >>>>>>> The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. >>>>>>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a >>>>>>> thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because >>>>>>> you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation) >>>>>>> >>>>>> So, use the "thinnest" assy. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them? >>>>> >>>>> If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only >>>>> solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional" >>>>> components (they were called BAG phones). >>>>> >>>>>> My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large >>>>>> filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that >>>>>> was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an >>>>>> exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling >>>>>> budget might have financed world XXXing peace. >>>>>> >>>>>> They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself >>>>>> to blame. >>>>> >>>>> Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve! >>>> >>>> That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator >>>> on their edges? I don't. >>> But *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions >>> that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints >>> that it imposes on the design. >> >> Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market. >> But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum. > >Which is exactly why I have folks who do my board layouts, glass designs, >packaging, market surveys, board fabrication, etc. > >I use THIS forum for experiences folks have POSSIBLY had meeting similar >ELECTRONIC design challenges. > >"If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself to blame" >naively ignores the fact that markets constrain designs.Once you've mounted your emitter, maybe give light 'pipe' issue over to mech case designer. Electronics guys don't know nothin'. (I've met some pretty dim and intractible mech guys too.) Me, I'm a 'make it go on schedule' guy. I have no shame. RL RL
Reply by ●October 12, 20232023-10-12
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 19:56:36 -0700 (PDT), John Smiht <utube.jocjo@xoxy.net> wrote:>On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02?PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote: >> On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote: >> > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y >> > <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: >> > >> >> On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> <snip> >> >>> >> >>>> The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. >> >>>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a >> >>>> thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because >> >>>> you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation) >> >>>> >> >>> So, use the "thinnest" assy. >> >>> >> >>> "Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them? >> >> >> >> If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only >> >> solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional" >> >> components (they were called BAG phones). >> >> >> >>> My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large >> >>> filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that >> >>> was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an >> >>> exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling >> >>> budget might have financed world XXXing peace. >> >>> >> >>> They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign. >> >>> >> >>> If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself >> >>> to blame. >> >> >> >> Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve! >> > >> > That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator >> > on their edges? I don't. >> But *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions >> that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints >> that it imposes on the design. > >Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market. >But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum.Don't wear out your "shift" key!
Reply by ●October 12, 20232023-10-12
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 12:35:13 PM UTC-5, john larkin wrote:> On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 19:56:36 -0700 (PDT), John Smiht > <utube...@xoxy.net> wrote: > >On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02?PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote: > >> On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote: > >> > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y > >> > <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote: > >> >>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> <snip> > >> >>> > >> >>>> The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. > >> >>>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a > >> >>>> thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because > >> >>>> you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation) > >> >>>> > >> >>> So, use the "thinnest" assy. > >> >>> > >> >>> "Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them? > >> >> > >> >> If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only > >> >> solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional" > >> >> components (they were called BAG phones). > >> >> > >> >>> My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large > >> >>> filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that > >> >>> was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an > >> >>> exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling > >> >>> budget might have financed world XXXing peace. > >> >>> > >> >>> They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign. > >> >>> > >> >>> If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself > >> >>> to blame. > >> >> > >> >> Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve! > >> > > >> > That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator > >> > on their edges? I don't. > >> But *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions > >> that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints > >> that it imposes on the design. > > > >Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market. > >But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum. > Don't wear out your "shift" key!Good advice. I will use mine no more than Don Y does.
Reply by ●October 12, 20232023-10-12
On 10/12/2023 8:48 AM, legg wrote:> Once you've mounted your emitter, maybe give light 'pipe' issue > over to mech case designer. Electronics guys don't know nothin'. > (I've met some pretty dim and intractible mech guys too.)The initial design was 8mm thick. Arm-twisting brought it down to 6mm and then 5. When your entire product is *25* mm thick, "wasting" 5mm of the volume as a result of a requirement for an indicator is foolhardy. [The volume "behind" such a thick indicator doesn't have any value when the components that will use that board space are ~1mm thick. The individual board in the stack are about 3.5mm thick -- ~mm for components on top, bottom and board -- with the exception of the back board (punchdown block for network cable, heat sink for PD power supply) and the front board (which is application dependant)] EEs know the sorts of ELECTRONIC components that are available so can pose alternatives. "Does it need to be an RGB emitter? Can discrete R, G and B emitters be used?" Others often fall short in understanding other constraints on the design. E.g., there is NO other means of conveying information to the user. A "power LED" is pretty useless (does your network switch rely on a single "power" indicator to convey information to you? How often do you access its management interface to see what's going on vs. watching the idiot lights?) They also continually underestimate the constraints of the user base -- folks with special needs. How does someone who is red-green colorblind (or, green-blue?) distinguish between the red and green indications on a *single* emitter? if you use multiple emitters -- red + green -- then you need more space. And, how do you create yellow, cyan, violet, etc. (do you require the user to remember that violet is red + blue? AND, that this signifies the "running diagnostics" vs. "fault detected" indication?) How do you convey that information to someone who is *blind*? How do these people locate and press the "signal" button? What if mobility impaired -- can they press it from a wheelchair using a long pointed stick? If paralyzed, can they use a mouthstick and reliably target it? Are the indicator/button in the same place on each module? Or, do they have to play "find the wumpus" each time they encounter a new module? Ever notice the variations in where and how the different connectors are placed on bits of kit? Does the power cord plug in with earth pin up, down, left or right? What orientation for the network cable? USB cables? [The backs of my machines are all largely inaccessible. So, whenever I have to plug/unplug something, I do so with my arm fully extended (to reach the back of the device) and without being able to see my target. I keep photos of the backs of each machine handy so I can *find* the connector(s) of interest -- and, arrange to use them in a consistent/repeatable manner so I don't have to wonder which connector is where. (blind people rely on memory for these sorts of things; I let a photograph be my "memory")]> Me, I'm a 'make it go on schedule' guy. I have no shame.I have no particular time schedule besides my own. There's nothing like what I'm making on the market and nothing likely to be so for many years (because companies want to be able to monetize such kit with perpetual "services" -- why does your doorbell/thermostat/security light need to talk to google in order to perform its function?) [If such a product -- product LINE -- does become available, then my goal has been met! :> ] So, I am more concerned with coming up with a consistent solution (does your Nest doorbell play well with your Honeywell thermostat? Do either of them know how to close the blinds in your west-facing rooms in the afternoon? Do they have consistently designed interfaces? Can you effectively use them if you are blind, deaf, paralyzed, mobility impaired, pre-dementia?) that addresses this market (npt the market of yuppies with too much money on their hands and a hankering for toys)
Reply by ●November 3, 20232023-11-03
On 2023-10-08, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:> I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle > to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the > plane of the PCB) > > The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin. > > Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use > lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal > to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly > (board thickness + component + pipe)Side emitting RGB leds can be had.> A better approach might be to use leaded components > mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and > selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as > this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the > assembly's thickness).diameter? why not use rectangular? -- Jasen. 🇺🇦 Слава Україні
Reply by ●November 3, 20232023-11-03
On 2023-10-08, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:> On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote: >> On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote: >>> I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle >>> to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the >>> plane of the PCB) >>> >>> The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin. >>> >>> Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use >>> lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal >>> to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly >>> (board thickness + component + pipe) >> >> <snip> >> >> Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found... >> >> https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087 > > I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears > that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying > on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when > one would think it should be "Top"?) > > So, I'm wondering what the height of the device is (given that > it has to sit *on* a PCB so the thickness of the board adds > to the assembly's thickness -- that's the problem with anything > mounted *on* the board hoping to cast light off to the side)Often these types of parts are the same parts you would place standing up on the board just loaded into the carrier strip on their sides. so you'll get some "cross-talk" from the data sheet for the top emitting leds. -- Jasen. 🇺🇦 Слава Україні
