At 05:30 PM 6/17/01 +0100, Terry Harris wrote:
>On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 00:40:17 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >No oscilloscope is as expensive as is my time, and this would be true for
> >most PC designers.
>
>Damn you must be expensive, a 2G bandwidth scope with probes comes in at
>around (guessing) $30k, what is a week's rental on that?
First of all, they probably own the scope if they are designing in a region
where what they are asking for is of concern. But if not, I'd think that an
HP 54111D 2GS 500 MHZ scope might be sufficient. I found one available
on-line for $3500 purchase, $350 rental (per month, I think). But a better
scope might be, tops, $2000 per month. That's $500 per week. The scope
usage could be scheduled for a time when the scope was already needed for
something else (i.e., it could be rented for a little longer, or it might
fill out a rental period, which means that it would add no cost at all.)
Experimental work like I suggested does not have to be done on the kind of
schedule needed for most design.
The study could also be contracted out. I'd suggest that the time of a
consultant in the field, who would have his or her own equipment,
sufficient to give a report comparing two PCBs, might be less than $1000.
And that is less than two days of my time.
> But you forget the
>time of the engineer to drive it, to know where and what he was looking at
>- or are you more expensive than him also ?
Yes, if he is an employee and I am a contractor. And his time might even be
free, under some conditions. Anyway, I did not forget, I merely did not
comment on that part of what Mr. Harris wrote. It was, of course, the most
valid point he made.
>I still suggest the time spent testing the proposition is not worth the
>time of the layout guy carrying on the same way (unless the findings carry
>over to many new designs) - there needs to be some production cost saving
>also.
The stated conditions were that the practice was routine for this company.
That means to me "many new designs." As to production cost savings, I
mentioned some possible significant savings, but that question gets more
complex.
However, I think that there are many of us who would like to know the
results of experiments like what was suggested. I expect that we might be
able to arrange donations of equipment and services if the results were to
become public. It's even possible that a fabricator would donate the
additional board, but if not, getting together the few hundred dollars
necessary should not be difficult. (If the board is large, it will be more
expensive, of course, and there is also the cost of stuffing the boards;
but the company will end up with at least one functioning board and maybe two.)
Hey, it's just an idea....
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Abdulrahman Lomax
P.O. Box 690
El Verano, CA 95433
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html
* - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
