Re: [psas-avionics] FC review: one more issue

2008-12-24 Thread Bdale Garbee
On Wed, 2008-12-24 at 13:14 -0800, Andrew Greenberg wrote: > # Back solder mask > > 1. Why aren't there keepouts on the solder mask for the vias on U9? > that's sort of strange. In the gEDA PCB tool, vias are covered with mask by default, and you have to explicitly uncover them. I've been doing

[psas-avionics] FC review: one more issue

2008-12-24 Thread Andrew Greenberg
# Back solder mask 1. Why aren't there keepouts on the solder mask for the vias on U9? that's sort of strange. OK, I need to get real work done now :) If you do a design rev, let me know, and I'll re-look at the board. OH: to be explicit, I haven't looked at the schematic very hard. We reviewed

[psas-avionics] FC feedback

2008-12-24 Thread Andrew Greenberg
It looks pretty darn good. I mostly have nitpicky details that I think you should not change until the next board rev. There are a few details I think you do need to change, they're marked with **WARNING**. # In General 1. You put all your components on one side. This is usually a very good thing

Re: [psas-avionics] Final review of cc1111-based flight computer.

2008-12-24 Thread Erik Walthinsen
Keith Packard wrote: > Bdale cleaned up the edges to get everything at least 10mils away. Did > you take a look at the files in the URL? Or just those I sent along > before? I checked the first batch of files sent out under this subject, didn't see an update. Found it now, looks better but whateve

Re: [psas-avionics] Final review of cc1111-based flight computer.

2008-12-24 Thread Keith Packard
On Wed, 2008-12-24 at 10:48 -0800, Erik Walthinsen wrote: > I took a quick look at the postscript dump of the boards, and I'm seeing > a lot of things that make really nervous about the layout, specifically > regarding design rules. There are a lot of things jammed right up > against the edge of

Re: [psas-avionics] Final review of cc1111-based flight computer.

2008-12-24 Thread Erik Walthinsen
Keith Packard wrote: > Bdale and I are about ready to get some boards made and try our hand at > reflowing SMT components. The plan is to order boards on Monday, but > we'd love to have others with hw experience take a look and make sure > our design doesn't have some obvious and fatal flaw. Again:

Re: [psas-avionics] Final review of cc1111-based flight computer.

2008-12-24 Thread I
Quoting Bdale Garbee : ARGH! Yes. Thank you for spotting that. No problem... About 2.2 nC at our operating point. ... I don't think it's necessary. But after talking to Keith, we'll add the footprints. We've got the space and I've got to rework that part of the board to fix the D/S swa