My prototype is uglier than your prototype.

View attachment 108811

Excellent , we ought to go into production together Ha Ha.
In all seriousness though, in case anyone thinks differently, this is how after years of prototyping, testing ideas, we can work to prove the viability of something and iron out the bugs quickly. Stage one in putting the theory into practice!

 

My prototype is uglier than your prototype.

No s**t, Sherlock. I think Les retires the crown.

ak

 

Yep! First place to Les!

 

Excellent , we ought to go into production together Ha Ha.
In all seriousness though, in case anyone thinks differently, this is how after years of prototyping, testing ideas, we can work to prove the viability of something and iron out the bugs quickly. Stage one in putting the theory into practice!

I recall a paragraph, maybe inserted in an AN or datasheet by National Semiconductors(?) telling that a prototype should progress until the intended concept was proved and no further. When I read that, many years ago I was expecting that the author could have recommended a tidy/neat board first.

After all, those examples shown already above, they look like what I usually do. Sole difference: mine usually do not work well...if at all.

 

After all, those examples shown already above, they look like what I usually do. Sole difference: mine usually do not work well...if at all.

Patience, grasshopper...

 

Patience, grasshopper...

Thanks but, at 69 yo+, maybe too late to become a full fledged Kwain Chang Caine...

Insisting anyway.

 

The more abstract the concept, the more flexible the prototype needs to be, and especially your perception of what it should look like. Put the devices on the media they do best with. High energy circuits should be on PCB material with big traces. Low current control circuits should be on a easily changeably media like wire wrap. Don't be afraid to "fly" small groups of components. (Fly = no board, components simply wired together.)

It does not matter what it looks like, but it matters what you learn from it. That is what prototyping is all about.

 

It does not matter what it looks like, but it matters what you learn from it. That is what prototyping is all about.

While I agree with this in theory, there quickly comes a point when how it looks affects what you learn from it. If your prototyping looks like a disaster area, then beyond a fairly small level of complexity the likelihood of making a mistake while constructing it starts to skyrocket and your ability to troubleshoot it -- and, more importantly, play around with it and learn from the modifications you make -- quickly tanks.

 

.............. there quickly comes a point when how it looks affects what you learn from it........................

Really? Visually, there is a lot of information you can learn from your prototype, if you look for it. You will quickly see what signals need a ground plane and those that don't, etc.

If your design "tanks", you are in the perfect environment to find out why.

If you can not make it work in a prototype, you can not expect it to work on a nice PCB.

 

If I have a prototype that looks like a loose ball of yarn with components all jumbled together, then if there is more than a small handful of components it becomes unmanageable.

Consider the following prototype for a combustion bomb controller I built while a grad student:



Here's just the boards themselves:


The place where it is the messiest is where the I/O devices are plugged in and those are almost exclusively in the lower right.

Imagine troubleshooting, modifying, or just even replacing one of the chips if it was put together like any of the ones above (except for jpanhalt's).

So I still maintain that the claim that how the prototype looks doesn't matter doesn't scale well.

 

Some people like Dali and some like Rockwell.

 

Talking Electronics by Colin Mitchell is where I as one started some 40+ years ago. Radio shacks little Engineers notebooks was another source. The cap connected to pin #5 is a ceramic .001mfd and it's purpose is to filter/suppress electrical noise. Along with a vast list of other friendly sites I have found - a lot more that do not have a clue. Whenever I search for an image of a circuit/schematic I find most have been posted by students asking for help and do not work.
When I do find a circuit/schematic image I think I would like to attempt clicking on it opens it up and I have to (on the right hand side) visit the page first to verify if it is a real tested working circuit or I find a lot of "in theory" circuits which do not or as said before someone posting image asking for help.
Come on Guys and think about the stepping stones instructions you started out with and help this new guy.

 

It's hard for me to relate. I had an old tube radio, a voltmeter, schematic, and one borrowed text book. Oh, and some paper and pencil. And no one to call.

With all the information and videos on the the internet, my advice would be to read more.

And Les, as always, most excellent work.