Point to point nixie clock done!!

Georacer

Joined Nov 25, 2009
5,182
I 'd like to mention here that I detest that non-canonical spaghetti wiring. Usually when I make a small to medium boards I spend a bit (a lot) of time in a grid paper to route the wiring. Then I implement that design with one-strand wire, stripped for less diameter and flexibility, only in right angles. It's risky but more pretty, clean and I like it. When bridges are needed. I create a square overhang, like a positive pulse. It's very rigid, it doesn't cave in.

https://www.dropbox.com/gallery/8286935/1/Board wiring?h=9b8867
I have done larger boards than the one shown, but don't have a picture at hand.
 

Thread Starter

magnet18

Joined Dec 22, 2010
1,227
Prototype F-22 20 years ago. It was a competition between Lockheed YF-22 and Northrup YF-23, the YF-22 won, which gave us today's F-22
Oh, makes sense, the Y threw me off
(I think my dad might have worked on designing that plane... I'll have to ask him. I know he worked for lockheed back in the day.)

I 'd like to mention here that I detest that non-canonical spaghetti wiring. Usually when I make a small to medium boards I spend a bit (a lot) of time in a grid paper to route the wiring. Then I implement that design with one-strand wire, stripped for less diameter and flexibility, only in right angles. It's risky but more pretty, clean and I like it. When bridges are needed. I create a square overhang, like a positive pulse. It's very rigid, it doesn't cave in.

https://www.dropbox.com/gallery/8286935/1/Board%20wiring?h=9b8867
I have done larger boards than the one shown, but don't have a picture at hand.
I like the way that looks, and it is indeed a good methid, but this was just too much for me to try something like that.
all the transistors and signals and power lines going everywhere :p

Also, I feel like a simple cad program would be a lot faster and easier than graph paper.
 

Georacer

Joined Nov 25, 2009
5,182
Maybe autorouting is more advanced BUT:
It takes more than one hour to usually design a circuit, even of moderate complexity. You also MUST choose the correct footprints for all your components (very time consuming), no exceptions.
You must tweak your autorouter to have only right angles, spacing of 100 mil (very large) and a grid of the same size step.

I think this procedure is at least as time consuming. But don't take my word for it, I might just be too slow at it, or have the wrong software.
 

Thread Starter

magnet18

Joined Dec 22, 2010
1,227
Maybe autorouting is more advanced BUT:
It takes more than one hour to usually design a circuit, even of moderate complexity. You also MUST choose the correct footprints for all your components (very time consuming), no exceptions.
You must tweak your autorouter to have only right angles, spacing of 100 mil (very large) and a grid of the same size step.

I think this procedure is at least as time consuming. But don't take my word for it, I might just be too slow at it, or have the wrong software.
nono, I don't mean a autrorouter, I meant just using a really simple cad program to draw the lines for your hand made board thingy
a simple grid and snap thing would do

(of course, I am part of this blasted computer generation :p)
 

Georacer

Joined Nov 25, 2009
5,182
@magnet

You are forgetting that I 'm five years older than you. I would prefer a computer software too if:
I could select snap-on components almost as fast as I can draw them in paper
I could easily draw vertical and horizontal traces by hand
It had a reasonably small overhead setup time

@nerdegutta

My main software for serious PCB development is multisim.
 

Thread Starter

magnet18

Joined Dec 22, 2010
1,227
sorry, forgot you weren't one of the elders of the site ;)
You might try express PCB
It's like the notepad of circuitry design
learning curve close to zero, and very free
 

Georacer

Joined Nov 25, 2009
5,182
Used it a bit before going to multisim. Didn't come up to the expectations for a good design, but for a fast design it might do the deal. Thanks.
 
Top