homebrewing on perfboard, how to connect components

[James W]

When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
seems a bit ugly.

- jim

[W3JDR]

Unclad perf-board is generally used for wire-wrap applications only. To do
wire-wrap work you need a wire-wrap tool and a roll of wire-wrap wire. Both
are available at Radio Shack. You buy the type of IC sockets that have long
wire-wrap pins. For leaded components, you either wrap directly to the leads
or you put them in wire-wrap sockets.

Wire-wrap works OK for digital and low-freq analog work, but it doesn't work
at all for SMT parts. You generally need a good copper ground plane for RF
work.

Joe
W3JDR

"James W" > wrote in message
...
> When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
> the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
> using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
> seems a bit ugly.
>
> - jim
>

[James W]

Thanks... but one more question.. The boards I've seen have individual
copper pads that surround each hole. The pads do NOT interconnect holes.

If these are for wirewrap, why the copper pads at each hole?

- jim

p.s. I'm familiar with many fabrication techniques, I'm just trying to
figure out how one works with these particular boards.. i.e. why are
these boards so common and electronics stores.

W3JDR wrote:
> Unclad perf-board is generally used for wire-wrap applications only. To do
> wire-wrap work you need a wire-wrap tool and a roll of wire-wrap wire. Both
> are available at Radio Shack. You buy the type of IC sockets that have long
> wire-wrap pins. For leaded components, you either wrap directly to the leads
> or you put them in wire-wrap sockets.
>
> Wire-wrap works OK for digital and low-freq analog work, but it doesn't work
> at all for SMT parts. You generally need a good copper ground plane for RF
> work.
>
> Joe
> W3JDR
>
> "James W" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
>>the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
>>using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
>>seems a bit ugly.
>>
>> - jim
>>
>
>
>

[Tim Wescott]

I don't know what the manufacturer is thinking when they do that, but I find
the solder pads very convenient for mechanically holding the componants to
the board. With just wire wrap things slide around (and it didn't occur to
me until _just now_ that I could have used glue).

I generally prefer dead-bug on a ground plane, or paying a few bucks to a
quick-turn PCB house.

"James W" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks... but one more question.. The boards I've seen have individual
> copper pads that surround each hole. The pads do NOT interconnect holes.
>
> If these are for wirewrap, why the copper pads at each hole?
>
> - jim
>
> p.s. I'm familiar with many fabrication techniques, I'm just trying to
> figure out how one works with these particular boards.. i.e. why are
> these boards so common and electronics stores.
>
> W3JDR wrote:
> > Unclad perf-board is generally used for wire-wrap applications only. To
do
> > wire-wrap work you need a wire-wrap tool and a roll of wire-wrap wire.
Both
> > are available at Radio Shack. You buy the type of IC sockets that have
long
> > wire-wrap pins. For leaded components, you either wrap directly to the
leads
> > or you put them in wire-wrap sockets.
> >
> > Wire-wrap works OK for digital and low-freq analog work, but it doesn't
work
> > at all for SMT parts. You generally need a good copper ground plane for
RF
> > work.
> >
> > Joe
> > W3JDR
> >
> > "James W" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
> >>the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
> >>using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
> >>seems a bit ugly.
> >>
> >> - jim
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

[Leon Heller]

James W wrote:

> When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
> the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
> using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
> seems a bit ugly.

That's the usual way. If you just show people the front of the board it
doesn't matter if the back is untidy.

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
Email:
My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

[MR NO SPAM]

I've seen people "solder" the leads on the backs of perf board too! While it
works, it sure has a tendency to look sloppy! MNS

"Leon Heller" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>
> James W wrote:
>
> > When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
> > the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
> > using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
> > seems a bit ugly.
>
> That's the usual way. If you just show people the front of the board it
> doesn't matter if the back is untidy.
>
> Leon
> --
> Leon Heller, G1HSM
> Email:
> My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
> http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html
>

[Roger Gt]

"James W"
> wrote in
message ...
> When working with simple perfboard (just holes,
no 'traces' connecting
> the holes) how does one connect the components
together? I'm guessing by
> using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on
the backside, but that
> seems a bit ugly.
>
> - jim

It is often done with wire on the backside of the
board.
Sometimes the perforated ground and power strips
from vector are used.
If there are a lot of connections, wiring is done
on the top, fed through and soldered on the back.
Wire can be grouped into routing channels and tied
to the board. (I use 4 pound Monofilament as a
tie.)

Vector board is not suitable for RF except for
very simple circuits.

[Michael Black]

"MR NO SPAM" ) writes:
> I've seen people "solder" the leads on the backs of perf board too! While it
> works, it sure has a tendency to look sloppy! MNS
>
Perfboard was around long before most hobbyists had heard of wire wrap.

Once transistors came along, perfboard tended to be the method of
construction, unless you were planning to do it point to point on
a chassis like you would with tubes. "Messy" has no relevance since
the wiring was under the board. You'd use component leads to connect
the parts, and if they weren't long enough, bits of wire. And the ones
with bits of copper at each hole had the advantage, as someone pointed
out, that you could solder the components to the board before adding
the wires.

People were hesitant to make their own etched circuit boards, and even
after they became fairly common in hobby circles, many would say "I don't
want to bother" and they'd stick with perfboard.

If perfboard faded from view in recent years, it's likely because
etched circuit boards have tended to take over, if not made by the hands
of the hobbyist then because people were buying premade circuit boards.

As someone pointed out, perfboard is not so great for RF. Better
to use a blank piece of copper circuit board, and build on top of
that, so you have the copper as a good ground point. But that's
likely "messier" than using perfboard with the wiring on the bottom.
But how something looks is irrelevant. You can stick it in a box
out of view. Building over circuit board actually works better than
perfboard, because it's easier to run wires in a three dimensional
space.

Of course, from time to time I've used copper circuit board
as "perfboard", drilling holes where needed and reaming out the copper
from around the holes so the components go in without shorting. Wire
up on the non-copper side of the board, like perfboard, but all
ground connections go to the copper on the top side.

Michael VE2BVW

> "Leon Heller" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>>
>> James W wrote:
>>
>> > When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
>> > the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
>> > using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
>> > seems a bit ugly.
>>
>> That's the usual way. If you just show people the front of the board it
>> doesn't matter if the back is untidy.
>>
>> Leon
>> --
>> Leon Heller, G1HSM
>> Email:
>> My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
>> http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html
>>
>
>

[MR NO SPAM]

Yes I agree. I suppose I should have said.. I've seen SOME sloppy work. IF
one takes their time, they could do a neater job (trimming leads and
touching with solder, not globs and such) and even then enclose it to make
it look a bit more attractive. MNS

"Michael Black" > wrote in message
...
> "MR NO SPAM" ) writes:
> > I've seen people "solder" the leads on the backs of perf board too!
While it
> > works, it sure has a tendency to look sloppy! MNS
> >
> Perfboard was around long before most hobbyists had heard of wire wrap.
>
> Once transistors came along, perfboard tended to be the method of
> construction, unless you were planning to do it point to point on
> a chassis like you would with tubes. "Messy" has no relevance since
> the wiring was under the board. You'd use component leads to connect
> the parts, and if they weren't long enough, bits of wire. And the ones
> with bits of copper at each hole had the advantage, as someone pointed
> out, that you could solder the components to the board before adding
> the wires.
>
> People were hesitant to make their own etched circuit boards, and even
> after they became fairly common in hobby circles, many would say "I don't
> want to bother" and they'd stick with perfboard.
>
> If perfboard faded from view in recent years, it's likely because
> etched circuit boards have tended to take over, if not made by the hands
> of the hobbyist then because people were buying premade circuit boards.
>
> As someone pointed out, perfboard is not so great for RF. Better
> to use a blank piece of copper circuit board, and build on top of
> that, so you have the copper as a good ground point. But that's
> likely "messier" than using perfboard with the wiring on the bottom.
> But how something looks is irrelevant. You can stick it in a box
> out of view. Building over circuit board actually works better than
> perfboard, because it's easier to run wires in a three dimensional
> space.
>
> Of course, from time to time I've used copper circuit board
> as "perfboard", drilling holes where needed and reaming out the copper
> from around the holes so the components go in without shorting. Wire
> up on the non-copper side of the board, like perfboard, but all
> ground connections go to the copper on the top side.
>
> Michael VE2BVW
>
> > "Leon Heller" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> >>
> >>
> >> James W wrote:
> >>
> >> > When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces'
connecting
> >> > the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing
by
> >> > using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but
that
> >> > seems a bit ugly.
> >>
> >> That's the usual way. If you just show people the front of the board it
> >> doesn't matter if the back is untidy.
> >>
> >> Leon
> >> --
> >> Leon Heller, G1HSM
> >> Email:
> >> My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
> >> http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Roy Lewallen]

A good way to connect the components is to simply bend the component
leads over. Often, they're long enough to reach between connected
components. If not, short bare wires can be added. It can be done quite
neatly, and the result is very durable. But if beauty is important to
you, you should probably go to the trouble of making a PCB.

This method shares a problem with conventional one- or two-sided
non-ground plane PCBs in that proper bypassing and "grounding" requires
some skill and knowledge. It's easy to end up with "ground" currents
from multiple circuits sharing a common conductor, which can often lead
to crosstalk and oscillation. This becomes more of a problem with
increasing frequency, but because virtually all modern semiconductors
have substantial gain at very high frequencies, it can still be a
problem even when the operating frequency is low. I personally favor
"ugly" construction, in which components are mounted over a solid ground
plane. This reduces the impedance of inter-circuit ground connections so
is considerably more forgiving of less-than-optimum layout.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

James W wrote:
> When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
> the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
> using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
> seems a bit ugly.
>
> - jim
>

[Ian White, G3SEK]

Michael Black wrote:

>Perfboard was around long before most hobbyists had heard of wire wrap.
>
>Once transistors came along, perfboard tended to be the method of
>construction, unless you were planning to do it point to point on a
>chassis like you would with tubes. "Messy" has no relevance since the
>wiring was under the board. You'd use component leads to connect the
>parts, and if they weren't long enough, bits of wire.

That's right...

Maybe it would help to give an example where plain perfboard was the
best construction method. I recently built a small power distribution
board which involved four 0.1in-pitch connector headers, a voltage
regulator IC and a few passive components.

Why choose plain perfboard for this project? Mostly because the wiring
underneath was going to be fairly complex, so hand-wiring was going to
be the easiest way to make the board reasonably small. The advantage of
hand-wiring is that you can have as many crossovers as you like, using
insulated wire.

What other techniques didn't I choose? Even a double-sided PC board
would have needed some jumpers, and wouldn't have been worth the effort
for a one-off project. A single-sided PC board would have required lots
of jumpers, and copper-strip perfboard (Veroboard/Vectorboard) would
have been even worse.

So bare perfboard it was. The four headers were temporarily superglued
onto the board, so they wouldn't fall out when the board was turned over
to do the wiring. Under the board, I ran a common ground bus of
18SWG/16AWG tinned copper wire around all the headers. The other small
components were pushed through the holes, and anchored by their leads as
the various connections were made.

Most of the wiring was done point-to-point using the bare component
leads. Crossovers were handled using kynar insulated wire - sold for
wire-wrapping, but excellent for point-to-point soldered wiring too. By
the time all the header pins had been soldered to, the headers were well
anchored through the board and are very secure.

The whole thing looks quite tidy from the top. If neatness is important
(and indeed, why not make a good job of it?) the main consideration is
to cut the board cleanly and file off the ragged edges.


> And the ones with bits of copper at each hole had the advantage, as
>someone pointed out, that you could solder the components to the board
>before adding the wires.
>
>People were hesitant to make their own etched circuit boards, and even
>after they became fairly common in hobby circles, many would say "I
>don't want to bother" and they'd stick with perfboard.
>
Certainly... and as I just said, it's one of the preferred techniques
for one-off construction.

>If perfboard faded from view in recent years, it's likely because
>etched circuit boards have tended to take over, if not made by the
>hands of the hobbyist then because people were buying premade circuit
>boards.
>
Maybe plain perfboard just hasn't had much publicity. As an author, I
can see why: if it's a fairly basic 'follow these instructions' project,
then at the very least you're expected to design a PC board; but if it's
a project for experienced constructors, you don't need to tell them how
to build it. In either kind of article, plain perfboard probably doesn't
get a mention... but it's still there.

>As someone pointed out, perfboard is not so great for RF. Better to
>use a blank piece of copper circuit board, and build on top of that, so
>you have the copper as a good ground point.

Yep. The strengths of plain perfboard are for DC, audio and slow logic
circuits, and in the sheer versatility of hand-wiring underneath the
board.

>But that's likely "messier" than using perfboard with the wiring on the
>bottom.
>
>Of course, from time to time I've used copper circuit board as
>"perfboard", drilling holes where needed and reaming out the copper
>from around the holes so the components go in without shorting. Wire
>up on the non-copper side of the board, like perfboard, but all ground
>connections go to the copper on the top side.
>

If all the grounds are to the common top-side groundplane, it doesn't
look messy at all. The top-side looks very neat and the wiring
underneath is simplified by the absence of ground wires. Above all, the
RF performance will probably be very good.

For this kind of project, I very often use PCB design software to work
up the layout, but don't always etch a board. Just as often, I cut a
piece of single-sided board, tape a 1:1 printout of the PCB design onto
the board and use it as a drilling template. Then I hand-wire the
underside using the layout as a guide.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

[xpyttl]

"Michael Black" > wrote in message
...

> As someone pointed out, perfboard is not so great for RF. Better
> to use a blank piece of copper circuit board, and build on top of
> that, so you have the copper as a good ground point. But that's
> likely "messier" than using perfboard with the wiring on the bottom.
> But how something looks is irrelevant. You can stick it in a box
> out of view. Building over circuit board actually works better than
> perfboard, because it's easier to run wires in a three dimensional
> space.

If you look at the manhattan style work of Jim Kortge
(http://www.qsl.net/k8iqy/) or Chuck Adams (http://www.qsl.net/k7qo/) it's
hard to call it "messier".

Of course, few of us mortals can do the sort of work they can.

...

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> writes:

>Michael Black wrote:
>
>>Perfboard was around long before most hobbyists had heard of wire wrap.
>>
>>Once transistors came along, perfboard tended to be the method of
>>construction, unless you were planning to do it point to point on a
>>chassis like you would with tubes. "Messy" has no relevance since the
>>wiring was under the board. You'd use component leads to connect the
>>parts, and if they weren't long enough, bits of wire.
>
>That's right...
>
>Maybe it would help to give an example where plain perfboard was the
>best construction method. I recently built a small power distribution
>board which involved four 0.1in-pitch connector headers, a voltage
>regulator IC and a few passive components.
>
>Why choose plain perfboard for this project? Mostly because the wiring
>underneath was going to be fairly complex, so hand-wiring was going to
>be the easiest way to make the board reasonably small. The advantage of
>hand-wiring is that you can have as many crossovers as you like, using
>insulated wire.
>
>What other techniques didn't I choose? Even a double-sided PC board
>would have needed some jumpers, and wouldn't have been worth the effort
>for a one-off project. A single-sided PC board would have required lots
>of jumpers, and copper-strip perfboard (Veroboard/Vectorboard) would
>have been even worse.
>
>So bare perfboard it was. The four headers were temporarily superglued
>onto the board, so they wouldn't fall out when the board was turned over
>to do the wiring. Under the board, I ran a common ground bus of
>18SWG/16AWG tinned copper wire around all the headers. The other small
>components were pushed through the holes, and anchored by their leads as
>the various connections were made.
>
>Most of the wiring was done point-to-point using the bare component
>leads. Crossovers were handled using kynar insulated wire - sold for
>wire-wrapping, but excellent for point-to-point soldered wiring too. By
>the time all the header pins had been soldered to, the headers were well
>anchored through the board and are very secure.
>
>The whole thing looks quite tidy from the top. If neatness is important
>(and indeed, why not make a good job of it?) the main consideration is
>to cut the board cleanly and file off the ragged edges.

Ian, I'm in perfect agreement with what you and Michael Black wrote.

I base that on working prototypes made for over three decades. It
seems as though perfboard has been around longer...:-)

One thing that all should remember: Electrons don't care about "neat"
construction. "Neat" gets something past inspectors, appeals to
customers, looks mighty fine and "professional" in photographs.
Electrons don't care for any of that. Fields and waves only care about
placement of conductors and nearby dielectric material.

>> And the ones with bits of copper at each hole had the advantage, as
>>someone pointed out, that you could solder the components to the board
>>before adding the wires.
>>
>>People were hesitant to make their own etched circuit boards, and even
>>after they became fairly common in hobby circles, many would say "I
>>don't want to bother" and they'd stick with perfboard.

Perf and hand wiring SAVES TIME. Homebrewing is about making
electronic things at home. Few of us have TIME at our disposal.

For relatively simple circuit arrangements, it would take me (somewhat
experienced) more time to sketch out a PCB foil pattern and check it
against a schematic than direct-wiring a perf-board circuit. A PCB
still has to be masked and etched and cleaned.

Printed circuit boards originally were a tremendous advantage in mass
production of electronics. It could physically hold components as well
as perfectly reproduce wiring paths...compared to the longer time needed
to mount (vacuum tube style) components and then hand-wire all the
connections, usually in several stages of wiring by different assemblers.
Production costs dropped considerably once all got through the
capital equipment expenditure for PCB machinery.

SMT got a big following because it was small...but also because it
cut down on production even more. Fewer holes to drill (sometimes
none) and the "baking" ovens didn't need as much maintenance as
the flow soldering machines did with peanut oil, cleaner and degreaser,
solder solutions. SMT took the basic PCB construction technique.

>Certainly... and as I just said, it's one of the preferred techniques
>for one-off construction.
>
>>If perfboard faded from view in recent years, it's likely because
>>etched circuit boards have tended to take over, if not made by the
>>hands of the hobbyist then because people were buying premade circuit
>>boards.
>>
>Maybe plain perfboard just hasn't had much publicity. As an author, I
>can see why: if it's a fairly basic 'follow these instructions' project,
>then at the very least you're expected to design a PC board; but if it's
>a project for experienced constructors, you don't need to tell them how
>to build it. In either kind of article, plain perfboard probably doesn't
>get a mention... but it's still there.

Perf with hand-wired "solder side" connections doesn't photograph
well. Image is important in magazine layout. :-)

>>As someone pointed out, perfboard is not so great for RF. Better to
>>use a blank piece of copper circuit board, and build on top of that, so
>>you have the copper as a good ground point.
>
>Yep. The strengths of plain perfboard are for DC, audio and slow logic
>circuits, and in the sheer versatility of hand-wiring underneath the
>board.

Right on! But...if one is familiar with RF layout through experience
and a "feel" for lead placement and lengths, perf can be used on
up to 70 MHz. That is NOT recommended for beginners who have
just memorized Ohm's Law.

At RCA EASD in the 1970s we regularly used Douglas Electronics
11-DE-1 boards for prototyping digital logic at equivalent clock rates
up to 10 MHz. Those held 12 DIPs had three-hole pads and #24 or
#26 insulated wire did the interconnects on the component side. A
44-pin edge contact allowed plug-in assembly and extenders. That
was most excellent for churning out 1- to 3-of-a-kind prototypes at up
to 150 cards per system. Techs could just follow a schematic and
hand-wire the cards...sort of "connect the dots" kind of operation.
Was very good with few errors done by anyone.

Douglas is still in business and the 11-DE-1 prototype board is still
available in the USA at about $12 each. A comparable Vector
Electronics prototype board is about the same price. I prefer the
Douglas since it is gold-flashed and a variant is available with a
ground plane on the component side.

>>But that's likely "messier" than using perfboard with the wiring on the
>>bottom.
>>
>>Of course, from time to time I've used copper circuit board as
>>"perfboard", drilling holes where needed and reaming out the copper
>>from around the holes so the components go in without shorting. Wire
>>up on the non-copper side of the board, like perfboard, but all ground
>>connections go to the copper on the top side.
>
>If all the grounds are to the common top-side groundplane, it doesn't
>look messy at all. The top-side looks very neat and the wiring
>underneath is simplified by the absence of ground wires. Above all, the
>RF performance will probably be very good.
>
>For this kind of project, I very often use PCB design software to work
>up the layout, but don't always etch a board. Just as often, I cut a
>piece of single-sided board, tape a 1:1 printout of the PCB design onto
>the board and use it as a drilling template. Then I hand-wire the
>underside using the layout as a guide.

I cheat a bit. Originally an illustrator, I sketch out the foil paths on
vellum 1:1, mark the drill holes and use the vellum as a small
center-punch guide. The paths are then painted in with lacquer,
free-hand, using the vellum as a guide. Lacquer can be peeled off
after etching with a sharp graphics knife (an X-Acto modeller's knife
to olde-tymers) and dissolved in acetone to be reused later.

Lacquer works fine with ferric chloride etchant. Enamel does NOT.
Enamels, now common in aircraft model shops can be undercut in
the etching. One has to really hunt for low-enough-price lacquer
now but it once was standard "dope" for modelers. I'm still using
a half-pint bottle of Testor's model airplane Dope obtained in 1947
(Testor's wisely changed the name slightly after that). Acetone in
pint can sizes is available in U.S. do-it-yourself stores. :-)

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> writes:

>Michael Black wrote:
>
>>Perfboard was around long before most hobbyists had heard of wire wrap.
>>
>>Once transistors came along, perfboard tended to be the method of
>>construction, unless you were planning to do it point to point on a
>>chassis like you would with tubes. "Messy" has no relevance since the
>>wiring was under the board. You'd use component leads to connect the
>>parts, and if they weren't long enough, bits of wire.
>
>That's right...
>
>Maybe it would help to give an example where plain perfboard was the
>best construction method. I recently built a small power distribution
>board which involved four 0.1in-pitch connector headers, a voltage
>regulator IC and a few passive components.
>
>Why choose plain perfboard for this project? Mostly because the wiring
>underneath was going to be fairly complex, so hand-wiring was going to
>be the easiest way to make the board reasonably small. The advantage of
>hand-wiring is that you can have as many crossovers as you like, using
>insulated wire.
>
>What other techniques didn't I choose? Even a double-sided PC board
>would have needed some jumpers, and wouldn't have been worth the effort
>for a one-off project. A single-sided PC board would have required lots
>of jumpers, and copper-strip perfboard (Veroboard/Vectorboard) would
>have been even worse.
>
>So bare perfboard it was. The four headers were temporarily superglued
>onto the board, so they wouldn't fall out when the board was turned over
>to do the wiring. Under the board, I ran a common ground bus of
>18SWG/16AWG tinned copper wire around all the headers. The other small
>components were pushed through the holes, and anchored by their leads as
>the various connections were made.
>
>Most of the wiring was done point-to-point using the bare component
>leads. Crossovers were handled using kynar insulated wire - sold for
>wire-wrapping, but excellent for point-to-point soldered wiring too. By
>the time all the header pins had been soldered to, the headers were well
>anchored through the board and are very secure.
>
>The whole thing looks quite tidy from the top. If neatness is important
>(and indeed, why not make a good job of it?) the main consideration is
>to cut the board cleanly and file off the ragged edges.

Ian, I'm in perfect agreement with what you and Michael Black wrote.

I base that on working prototypes made for over three decades. It
seems as though perfboard has been around longer...:-)

One thing that all should remember: Electrons don't care about "neat"
construction. "Neat" gets something past inspectors, appeals to
customers, looks mighty fine and "professional" in photographs.
Electrons don't care for any of that. Fields and waves only care about
placement of conductors and nearby dielectric material.

>> And the ones with bits of copper at each hole had the advantage, as
>>someone pointed out, that you could solder the components to the board
>>before adding the wires.
>>
>>People were hesitant to make their own etched circuit boards, and even
>>after they became fairly common in hobby circles, many would say "I
>>don't want to bother" and they'd stick with perfboard.

Perf and hand wiring SAVES TIME. Homebrewing is about making
electronic things at home. Few of us have TIME at our disposal.

For relatively simple circuit arrangements, it would take me (somewhat
experienced) more time to sketch out a PCB foil pattern and check it
against a schematic than direct-wiring a perf-board circuit. A PCB
still has to be masked and etched and cleaned.

Printed circuit boards originally were a tremendous advantage in mass
production of electronics. It could physically hold components as well
as perfectly reproduce wiring paths...compared to the longer time needed
to mount (vacuum tube style) components and then hand-wire all the
connections, usually in several stages of wiring by different assemblers.
Production costs dropped considerably once all got through the
capital equipment expenditure for PCB machinery.

SMT got a big following because it was small...but also because it
cut down on production even more. Fewer holes to drill (sometimes
none) and the "baking" ovens didn't need as much maintenance as
the flow soldering machines did with peanut oil, cleaner and degreaser,
solder solutions. SMT took the basic PCB construction technique.

>Certainly... and as I just said, it's one of the preferred techniques
>for one-off construction.
>
>>If perfboard faded from view in recent years, it's likely because
>>etched circuit boards have tended to take over, if not made by the
>>hands of the hobbyist then because people were buying premade circuit
>>boards.
>>
>Maybe plain perfboard just hasn't had much publicity. As an author, I
>can see why: if it's a fairly basic 'follow these instructions' project,
>then at the very least you're expected to design a PC board; but if it's
>a project for experienced constructors, you don't need to tell them how
>to build it. In either kind of article, plain perfboard probably doesn't
>get a mention... but it's still there.

Perf with hand-wired "solder side" connections doesn't photograph
well. Image is important in magazine layout. :-)

>>As someone pointed out, perfboard is not so great for RF. Better to
>>use a blank piece of copper circuit board, and build on top of that, so
>>you have the copper as a good ground point.
>
>Yep. The strengths of plain perfboard are for DC, audio and slow logic
>circuits, and in the sheer versatility of hand-wiring underneath the
>board.

Right on! But...if one is familiar with RF layout through experience
and a "feel" for lead placement and lengths, perf can be used on
up to 70 MHz. That is NOT recommended for beginners who have
just memorized Ohm's Law.

At RCA EASD in the 1970s we regularly used Douglas Electronics
11-DE-1 boards for prototyping digital logic at equivalent clock rates
up to 10 MHz. Those held 12 DIPs had three-hole pads and #24 or
#26 insulated wire did the interconnects on the component side. A
44-pin edge contact allowed plug-in assembly and extenders. That
was most excellent for churning out 1- to 3-of-a-kind prototypes at up
to 150 cards per system. Techs could just follow a schematic and
hand-wire the cards...sort of "connect the dots" kind of operation.
Was very good with few errors done by anyone.

Douglas is still in business and the 11-DE-1 prototype board is still
available in the USA at about $12 each. A comparable Vector
Electronics prototype board is about the same price. I prefer the
Douglas since it is gold-flashed and a variant is available with a
ground plane on the component side.

>>But that's likely "messier" than using perfboard with the wiring on the
>>bottom.
>>
>>Of course, from time to time I've used copper circuit board as
>>"perfboard", drilling holes where needed and reaming out the copper
>>from around the holes so the components go in without shorting. Wire
>>up on the non-copper side of the board, like perfboard, but all ground
>>connections go to the copper on the top side.
>
>If all the grounds are to the common top-side groundplane, it doesn't
>look messy at all. The top-side looks very neat and the wiring
>underneath is simplified by the absence of ground wires. Above all, the
>RF performance will probably be very good.
>
>For this kind of project, I very often use PCB design software to work
>up the layout, but don't always etch a board. Just as often, I cut a
>piece of single-sided board, tape a 1:1 printout of the PCB design onto
>the board and use it as a drilling template. Then I hand-wire the
>underside using the layout as a guide.

I cheat a bit. Originally an illustrator, I sketch out the foil paths on
vellum 1:1, mark the drill holes and use the vellum as a small
center-punch guide. The paths are then painted in with lacquer,
free-hand, using the vellum as a guide. Lacquer can be peeled off
after etching with a sharp graphics knife (an X-Acto modeller's knife
to olde-tymers) and dissolved in acetone to be reused later.

Lacquer works fine with ferric chloride etchant. Enamel does NOT.
Enamels, now common in aircraft model shops can be undercut in
the etching. One has to really hunt for low-enough-price lacquer
now but it once was standard "dope" for modelers. I'm still using
a half-pint bottle of Testor's model airplane Dope obtained in 1947
(Testor's wisely changed the name slightly after that). Acetone in
pint can sizes is available in U.S. do-it-yourself stores. :-)

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Bob McConnell]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:31:08 -0800, James W
> wrote:

>When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
>the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
>using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
>seems a bit ugly.
>
> - jim

I don't have a catalog anymore, but Vector used to make a variety of
pins, for both wire wrap and solder, that fit in their perfboards.
Punch in the pins, mount the components on them, run the connections
on the bottom and solder. They also had a wiring pencil that could be
used to run the connections. The wire had an insulation that would
melt when hit with solder. I wired up a couple of simple IC based
digital designs with one. I just used normal DIP sockets for the IC's.

Bob McConnell
N2SPP

[Bob McConnell]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 06:31:08 -0800, James W
> wrote:

>When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
>the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
>using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
>seems a bit ugly.
>
> - jim

I don't have a catalog anymore, but Vector used to make a variety of
pins, for both wire wrap and solder, that fit in their perfboards.
Punch in the pins, mount the components on them, run the connections
on the bottom and solder. They also had a wiring pencil that could be
used to run the connections. The wire had an insulation that would
melt when hit with solder. I wired up a couple of simple IC based
digital designs with one. I just used normal DIP sockets for the IC's.

Bob McConnell
N2SPP

[The Eternal Squire]

I'm using a very elegant "in-between" technique which combines the
flexibility of perfboard wire with the shielding and relative precision
advantages of copper-clad.

It's also very cheap!

I buy rolls of adhesive copper tape of various widths from a stained-glass
supplies store. I'll use the wide tape for covering one side of the PCB
with the ground plane. Then, on the other side, I'll construct traces of
the
size and placement that I want with small pieces of copper tape.

If I need to make a correction, I can usually add or cut away more foil.
If I need to join pieces of tape electrically, a small dab of solder along
the edge works nicely.

Copper tape allows me to do double sided work at will without the
need for chemicals or the danger of using an electric drill to rout away
copper.

I've been able to bang out one small circuit per weekend and usually get
it right the first time, if not the second.

Try it! You'll be pleasantly surprised.

The Eternal Squire

Roy Lewallen > wrote in message
...
> A good way to connect the components is to simply bend the component
> leads over. Often, they're long enough to reach between connected
> components. If not, short bare wires can be added. It can be done quite
> neatly, and the result is very durable. But if beauty is important to
> you, you should probably go to the trouble of making a PCB.
>
> This method shares a problem with conventional one- or two-sided
> non-ground plane PCBs in that proper bypassing and "grounding" requires
> some skill and knowledge. It's easy to end up with "ground" currents
> from multiple circuits sharing a common conductor, which can often lead
> to crosstalk and oscillation. This becomes more of a problem with
> increasing frequency, but because virtually all modern semiconductors
> have substantial gain at very high frequencies, it can still be a
> problem even when the operating frequency is low. I personally favor
> "ugly" construction, in which components are mounted over a solid ground
> plane. This reduces the impedance of inter-circuit ground connections so
> is considerably more forgiving of less-than-optimum layout.
>
> Roy Lewallen, W7EL
>
> James W wrote:
> > When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
> > the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
> > using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
> > seems a bit ugly.
> >
> > - jim
> >
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.564 / Virus Database: 356 - Release Date: 1/19/04

[The Eternal Squire]

I'm using a very elegant "in-between" technique which combines the
flexibility of perfboard wire with the shielding and relative precision
advantages of copper-clad.

It's also very cheap!

I buy rolls of adhesive copper tape of various widths from a stained-glass
supplies store. I'll use the wide tape for covering one side of the PCB
with the ground plane. Then, on the other side, I'll construct traces of
the
size and placement that I want with small pieces of copper tape.

If I need to make a correction, I can usually add or cut away more foil.
If I need to join pieces of tape electrically, a small dab of solder along
the edge works nicely.

Copper tape allows me to do double sided work at will without the
need for chemicals or the danger of using an electric drill to rout away
copper.

I've been able to bang out one small circuit per weekend and usually get
it right the first time, if not the second.

Try it! You'll be pleasantly surprised.

The Eternal Squire

Roy Lewallen > wrote in message
...
> A good way to connect the components is to simply bend the component
> leads over. Often, they're long enough to reach between connected
> components. If not, short bare wires can be added. It can be done quite
> neatly, and the result is very durable. But if beauty is important to
> you, you should probably go to the trouble of making a PCB.
>
> This method shares a problem with conventional one- or two-sided
> non-ground plane PCBs in that proper bypassing and "grounding" requires
> some skill and knowledge. It's easy to end up with "ground" currents
> from multiple circuits sharing a common conductor, which can often lead
> to crosstalk and oscillation. This becomes more of a problem with
> increasing frequency, but because virtually all modern semiconductors
> have substantial gain at very high frequencies, it can still be a
> problem even when the operating frequency is low. I personally favor
> "ugly" construction, in which components are mounted over a solid ground
> plane. This reduces the impedance of inter-circuit ground connections so
> is considerably more forgiving of less-than-optimum layout.
>
> Roy Lewallen, W7EL
>
> James W wrote:
> > When working with simple perfboard (just holes, no 'traces' connecting
> > the holes) how does one connect the components together? I'm guessing by
> > using jumper wires for point-to-point wiring on the backside, but that
> > seems a bit ugly.
> >
> > - jim
> >
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.564 / Virus Database: 356 - Release Date: 1/19/04

[Frank Dinger]

> Of course, from time to time I've used copper circuit board
> as "perfboard", drilling holes where needed and reaming out the copper
> from around the holes so the components go in without shorting. Wire
> up on the non-copper side of the board, like perfboard, but all
> ground connections go to the copper on the top side.
=============================
Double sided copperclad board is a universal base for anything electronics
including RF circuits.
I prefer the already mentioned 'dead bug' or 'ugly construction ' method
where ICs are involved (legs up ), with the legs to be earthed bent down and
directly soldered to the board.
Earthed components serve as connection posts for other non-earthed circuit
components. For connecting points free from earth I use a special 'island
drill' ,a cylindric rotary bit covered with 'diamond grit' leaving a
insulated 5mm diameter island to which up to 4 components can be joined.
Instead of the islands I also use small 0.25 Watt , 10 MOhm resistors with
one end connected to ground ,the other end serving as post ,since many
circuits have impedences 2 orders of magnitude lower than 10 MOhm.

All earthed components are soldered to other side of board via drilled holes
,hence are perpendicular to board face.

The 2 copper clad sides are joined either by multiple connections through
drilled holes ,or all-around board edge copper wire/strip connection, the
latter especially for vhf circuits.
I have no experience in UHF/microwave home brewing , but understand that
single sided copper clad teflon board (thin) is normally used.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

[Frank Dinger]

> Of course, from time to time I've used copper circuit board
> as "perfboard", drilling holes where needed and reaming out the copper
> from around the holes so the components go in without shorting. Wire
> up on the non-copper side of the board, like perfboard, but all
> ground connections go to the copper on the top side.
=============================
Double sided copperclad board is a universal base for anything electronics
including RF circuits.
I prefer the already mentioned 'dead bug' or 'ugly construction ' method
where ICs are involved (legs up ), with the legs to be earthed bent down and
directly soldered to the board.
Earthed components serve as connection posts for other non-earthed circuit
components. For connecting points free from earth I use a special 'island
drill' ,a cylindric rotary bit covered with 'diamond grit' leaving a
insulated 5mm diameter island to which up to 4 components can be joined.
Instead of the islands I also use small 0.25 Watt , 10 MOhm resistors with
one end connected to ground ,the other end serving as post ,since many
circuits have impedences 2 orders of magnitude lower than 10 MOhm.

All earthed components are soldered to other side of board via drilled holes
,hence are perpendicular to board face.

The 2 copper clad sides are joined either by multiple connections through
drilled holes ,or all-around board edge copper wire/strip connection, the
latter especially for vhf circuits.
I have no experience in UHF/microwave home brewing , but understand that
single sided copper clad teflon board (thin) is normally used.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

[Frank Dinger]

> So bare perfboard it was. The four headers were temporarily superglued
> onto the board, so they wouldn't fall out when the board was turned over
> to do the wiring. Under the board, I ran a common ground bus of
> 18SWG/16AWG tinned copper wire around all the headers. The other small
> components were pushed through the holes, and anchored by their leads as
> the various connections were made.
================================================== =====
As far as superglue is concerned a warning !

Superglue is Cyanoacrylate , which if heated releases a very nasty gas which
really 'hits' you when inhaled.

Recently I superglued a component before doing some additional soldering
work around that component.
I now know I shall NEVER do that again.
Superglue is fine but not in a environment involving heat at soldering
level.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

[Frank Dinger]

> So bare perfboard it was. The four headers were temporarily superglued
> onto the board, so they wouldn't fall out when the board was turned over
> to do the wiring. Under the board, I ran a common ground bus of
> 18SWG/16AWG tinned copper wire around all the headers. The other small
> components were pushed through the holes, and anchored by their leads as
> the various connections were made.
================================================== =====
As far as superglue is concerned a warning !

Superglue is Cyanoacrylate , which if heated releases a very nasty gas which
really 'hits' you when inhaled.

Recently I superglued a component before doing some additional soldering
work around that component.
I now know I shall NEVER do that again.
Superglue is fine but not in a environment involving heat at soldering
level.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

[Ian White, G3SEK]

Frank Dinger wrote:
>> So bare perfboard it was. The four headers were temporarily superglued
>> onto the board, so they wouldn't fall out when the board was turned over
>> to do the wiring. Under the board, I ran a common ground bus of
>> 18SWG/16AWG tinned copper wire around all the headers. The other small
>> components were pushed through the holes, and anchored by their leads as
>> the various connections were made.
>================================================== =====
>As far as superglue is concerned a warning !
>
>Superglue is Cyanoacrylate , which if heated releases a very nasty gas which
>really 'hits' you when inhaled.
>
>Recently I superglued a component before doing some additional soldering
>work around that component.
>I now know I shall NEVER do that again.
>Superglue is fine but not in a environment involving heat at soldering
>level.

I'm aware of that problem, but in the application I was suggesting, the
amount of superglue that can get heated by soldering is trivial.

There's no problem unless you are already inhaling flux fumes... so
"don't inhale."


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

[Ian White, G3SEK]

Frank Dinger wrote:
>> So bare perfboard it was. The four headers were temporarily superglued
>> onto the board, so they wouldn't fall out when the board was turned over
>> to do the wiring. Under the board, I ran a common ground bus of
>> 18SWG/16AWG tinned copper wire around all the headers. The other small
>> components were pushed through the holes, and anchored by their leads as
>> the various connections were made.
>================================================== =====
>As far as superglue is concerned a warning !
>
>Superglue is Cyanoacrylate , which if heated releases a very nasty gas which
>really 'hits' you when inhaled.
>
>Recently I superglued a component before doing some additional soldering
>work around that component.
>I now know I shall NEVER do that again.
>Superglue is fine but not in a environment involving heat at soldering
>level.

I'm aware of that problem, but in the application I was suggesting, the
amount of superglue that can get heated by soldering is trivial.

There's no problem unless you are already inhaling flux fumes... so
"don't inhale."


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

[Hans Summers]

I have ALWAYS used plain (no copper) perfboard for my digital circuits. It's
point to point wiring but I don't leave the wiring on the underside of the
board, I route it around on the upper side. I prefer this method because I
find it looks nicer, and it gives easier access to the bottom of the board
for soldering modifications, repairs etc. Overall I have found it provides a
very reliable and compact construction.

I'm not entirely sure why I started building this way. My first big digital
project started when I was aged 13
(http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/clocks/sidereal/intro.htm) and this
would've been when I first used the method. I didn't have any "mentor" to
follow on digital circuit construction, I just came up with this method as
the best available for what my resources were at the time, and have stuck
with it ever since. I still believe it's the most appropriate for my
circumstances (VERY limited hobby time etc).

There are many examples on my website (all my projects use this method),
some good pictures to start with are at:

http://www.hanssummers.com/computers/newz80/intro.htm
http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/equipment/spectrumanalyser2/index.htm

For RF work I tend to use "ugly", i.e. a groundplane PCB with the components
anchored above. If extra mechanical stability is required at some points I
use a very high value resistor or very tiny value capacitor (depending on
what the circuit will allow without alteration of its performance).

I have never used a PCB, for several reasons, not least because as Len said,
it can take longer to design and fabricate a PCB than to handwire a
perfboard. The main reason for me is that a perfboard is easy to modify, a
PCB isn't. This is useful when a design is finished if some modifications
are required, but most importantly in my case it's vital because I never
completely design a circuit before I begin constructing it, I just have a
bare bones design in my head then start building it and design the finer
details as I go.

73 Hans G0UPL
http://www.HansSummers.com

[Hans Summers]

I have ALWAYS used plain (no copper) perfboard for my digital circuits. It's
point to point wiring but I don't leave the wiring on the underside of the
board, I route it around on the upper side. I prefer this method because I
find it looks nicer, and it gives easier access to the bottom of the board
for soldering modifications, repairs etc. Overall I have found it provides a
very reliable and compact construction.

I'm not entirely sure why I started building this way. My first big digital
project started when I was aged 13
(http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/clocks/sidereal/intro.htm) and this
would've been when I first used the method. I didn't have any "mentor" to
follow on digital circuit construction, I just came up with this method as
the best available for what my resources were at the time, and have stuck
with it ever since. I still believe it's the most appropriate for my
circumstances (VERY limited hobby time etc).

There are many examples on my website (all my projects use this method),
some good pictures to start with are at:

http://www.hanssummers.com/computers/newz80/intro.htm
http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/equipment/spectrumanalyser2/index.htm

For RF work I tend to use "ugly", i.e. a groundplane PCB with the components
anchored above. If extra mechanical stability is required at some points I
use a very high value resistor or very tiny value capacitor (depending on
what the circuit will allow without alteration of its performance).

I have never used a PCB, for several reasons, not least because as Len said,
it can take longer to design and fabricate a PCB than to handwire a
perfboard. The main reason for me is that a perfboard is easy to modify, a
PCB isn't. This is useful when a design is finished if some modifications
are required, but most importantly in my case it's vital because I never
completely design a circuit before I begin constructing it, I just have a
bare bones design in my head then start building it and design the finer
details as I go.

73 Hans G0UPL
http://www.HansSummers.com

[Ian White, G3SEK]

Avery Fineman wrote:


> One thing that all should remember: Electrons don't care about "neat"
> construction. "Neat" gets something past inspectors, appeals to
> customers, looks mighty fine and "professional" in photographs.
> Electrons don't care for any of that. Fields and waves only care about
> placement of conductors and nearby dielectric material.
>
[...]
>
> Right on! But...if one is familiar with RF layout through experience
> and a "feel" for lead placement and lengths, perf can be used on
> up to 70 MHz. That is NOT recommended for beginners who have
> just memorized Ohm's Law.
>
Wish I knew how to pass on that "feel" for RF layout to other people.
It's easy to explain to someone why their existing layout doesn't work,
but more difficult to make positive recommendations so their next
attempt *will* work.

I once wrote an article about that for RadCom, which was lifted by the
ARRL Handbook and survived for some years as part of the Construction
chapter as 'From Schematic to Working Circuit'. That chapter, taken as a
whole, is a pretty good basic reference.

But in the end, there's no substitute for your own experience. Just
build and build and build. Notice what works, and what doesn't... and
then the trick is to understand why.




>>For this kind of project, I very often use PCB design software to work
>>up the layout, but don't always etch a board. Just as often, I cut a
>>piece of single-sided board, tape a 1:1 printout of the PCB design onto
>>the board and use it as a drilling template. Then I hand-wire the
>>underside using the layout as a guide.
>
> I cheat a bit. Originally an illustrator, I sketch out the foil paths on
> vellum 1:1, mark the drill holes and use the vellum as a small
> center-punch guide. The paths are then painted in with lacquer,
> free-hand, using the vellum as a guide.
>
The lack of those paper-graphics skills is why I use the PCB software.
Heck, I even use it for roughing-out stripboard layouts, to try to
maximize the use of the strips.

In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.

As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

[Ian White, G3SEK]

Avery Fineman wrote:


> One thing that all should remember: Electrons don't care about "neat"
> construction. "Neat" gets something past inspectors, appeals to
> customers, looks mighty fine and "professional" in photographs.
> Electrons don't care for any of that. Fields and waves only care about
> placement of conductors and nearby dielectric material.
>
[...]
>
> Right on! But...if one is familiar with RF layout through experience
> and a "feel" for lead placement and lengths, perf can be used on
> up to 70 MHz. That is NOT recommended for beginners who have
> just memorized Ohm's Law.
>
Wish I knew how to pass on that "feel" for RF layout to other people.
It's easy to explain to someone why their existing layout doesn't work,
but more difficult to make positive recommendations so their next
attempt *will* work.

I once wrote an article about that for RadCom, which was lifted by the
ARRL Handbook and survived for some years as part of the Construction
chapter as 'From Schematic to Working Circuit'. That chapter, taken as a
whole, is a pretty good basic reference.

But in the end, there's no substitute for your own experience. Just
build and build and build. Notice what works, and what doesn't... and
then the trick is to understand why.




>>For this kind of project, I very often use PCB design software to work
>>up the layout, but don't always etch a board. Just as often, I cut a
>>piece of single-sided board, tape a 1:1 printout of the PCB design onto
>>the board and use it as a drilling template. Then I hand-wire the
>>underside using the layout as a guide.
>
> I cheat a bit. Originally an illustrator, I sketch out the foil paths on
> vellum 1:1, mark the drill holes and use the vellum as a small
> center-punch guide. The paths are then painted in with lacquer,
> free-hand, using the vellum as a guide.
>
The lack of those paper-graphics skills is why I use the PCB software.
Heck, I even use it for roughing-out stripboard layouts, to try to
maximize the use of the strips.

In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.

As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

[Hans Summers]

And here's another (very recent) example on my website, a 30m QRSS beacon
see http://www.hanssummers.com/radio/qrss/, showing both perfboard
construction for the digital circuits and "ugly" for the RF bits, in the
same project.

Hans


"Hans Summers" > wrote in message
...
>
> I have ALWAYS used plain (no copper) perfboard for my digital circuits.
It's
> point to point wiring but I don't leave the wiring on the underside of the
> board, I route it around on the upper side. I prefer this method because I
> find it looks nicer, and it gives easier access to the bottom of the board
> for soldering modifications, repairs etc. Overall I have found it provides
a
> very reliable and compact construction.
>
> I'm not entirely sure why I started building this way. My first big
digital
> project started when I was aged 13
> (http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/clocks/sidereal/intro.htm) and
this
> would've been when I first used the method. I didn't have any "mentor" to
> follow on digital circuit construction, I just came up with this method as
> the best available for what my resources were at the time, and have stuck
> with it ever since. I still believe it's the most appropriate for my
> circumstances (VERY limited hobby time etc).
>
> There are many examples on my website (all my projects use this method),
> some good pictures to start with are at:
>
> http://www.hanssummers.com/computers/newz80/intro.htm
>
http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/equipment/spectrumanalyser2/index.htm
>
> For RF work I tend to use "ugly", i.e. a groundplane PCB with the
components
> anchored above. If extra mechanical stability is required at some points I
> use a very high value resistor or very tiny value capacitor (depending on
> what the circuit will allow without alteration of its performance).
>
> I have never used a PCB, for several reasons, not least because as Len
said,
> it can take longer to design and fabricate a PCB than to handwire a
> perfboard. The main reason for me is that a perfboard is easy to modify, a
> PCB isn't. This is useful when a design is finished if some modifications
> are required, but most importantly in my case it's vital because I never
> completely design a circuit before I begin constructing it, I just have a
> bare bones design in my head then start building it and design the finer
> details as I go.
>
> 73 Hans G0UPL
> http://www.HansSummers.com
>
>

[Hans Summers]

And here's another (very recent) example on my website, a 30m QRSS beacon
see http://www.hanssummers.com/radio/qrss/, showing both perfboard
construction for the digital circuits and "ugly" for the RF bits, in the
same project.

Hans


"Hans Summers" > wrote in message
...
>
> I have ALWAYS used plain (no copper) perfboard for my digital circuits.
It's
> point to point wiring but I don't leave the wiring on the underside of the
> board, I route it around on the upper side. I prefer this method because I
> find it looks nicer, and it gives easier access to the bottom of the board
> for soldering modifications, repairs etc. Overall I have found it provides
a
> very reliable and compact construction.
>
> I'm not entirely sure why I started building this way. My first big
digital
> project started when I was aged 13
> (http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/clocks/sidereal/intro.htm) and
this
> would've been when I first used the method. I didn't have any "mentor" to
> follow on digital circuit construction, I just came up with this method as
> the best available for what my resources were at the time, and have stuck
> with it ever since. I still believe it's the most appropriate for my
> circumstances (VERY limited hobby time etc).
>
> There are many examples on my website (all my projects use this method),
> some good pictures to start with are at:
>
> http://www.hanssummers.com/computers/newz80/intro.htm
>
http://www.hanssummers.com/electronics/equipment/spectrumanalyser2/index.htm
>
> For RF work I tend to use "ugly", i.e. a groundplane PCB with the
components
> anchored above. If extra mechanical stability is required at some points I
> use a very high value resistor or very tiny value capacitor (depending on
> what the circuit will allow without alteration of its performance).
>
> I have never used a PCB, for several reasons, not least because as Len
said,
> it can take longer to design and fabricate a PCB than to handwire a
> perfboard. The main reason for me is that a perfboard is easy to modify, a
> PCB isn't. This is useful when a design is finished if some modifications
> are required, but most importantly in my case it's vital because I never
> completely design a circuit before I begin constructing it, I just have a
> bare bones design in my head then start building it and design the finer
> details as I go.
>
> 73 Hans G0UPL
> http://www.HansSummers.com
>
>

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, Bob McConnell
> writes:

>I don't have a catalog anymore, but Vector used to make a variety of
>pins, for both wire wrap and solder, that fit in their perfboards.
>Punch in the pins, mount the components on them, run the connections
>on the bottom and solder. They also had a wiring pencil that could be
>used to run the connections. The wire had an insulation that would
>melt when hit with solder. I wired up a couple of simple IC based
>digital designs with one. I just used normal DIP sockets for the IC's.

Vector Electronics has a website with catalog information on it.

The wire you are mentioning is like "SolderEze" or some name
similar to that, usually found in #26 AWG size. I've used it but
would just as soon go with ordinary Kynar insultaion wire-wrap
stuff. SolderEze tended to get abrasion of the insulation, resulting
in cross-circuiting. Especially so with heat.

I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
easily and never abrades the insultation.

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, Bob McConnell
> writes:

>I don't have a catalog anymore, but Vector used to make a variety of
>pins, for both wire wrap and solder, that fit in their perfboards.
>Punch in the pins, mount the components on them, run the connections
>on the bottom and solder. They also had a wiring pencil that could be
>used to run the connections. The wire had an insulation that would
>melt when hit with solder. I wired up a couple of simple IC based
>digital designs with one. I just used normal DIP sockets for the IC's.

Vector Electronics has a website with catalog information on it.

The wire you are mentioning is like "SolderEze" or some name
similar to that, usually found in #26 AWG size. I've used it but
would just as soon go with ordinary Kynar insultaion wire-wrap
stuff. SolderEze tended to get abrasion of the insulation, resulting
in cross-circuiting. Especially so with heat.

I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
easily and never abrades the insultation.

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> writes:

>In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
>specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
>thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
>not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.
>
>As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
>wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
>patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.

I'll add something from the machine shop that is probably in
the UK as well: Marker lacquer used to make marks on metal
about to be machined. Over here it is usually a deep blue and
is very dilute lacquer, obvious from the acetone odor. Various
brands, some are available in red or green (not good colors).
Scribes nicely. Brushes well with small brushes available from
craft stores.

From the drafting department of old: K&E ink pens, the two-part
cylindrical, concentric ones. Those will hold dilute lacquers and
there is a pen holder that takes the nibs. Must soak them in
acetone after using since the capilliary clearance is tiny. With
practice those pens can draw straight lines but any dilute lacquer
likes to migrate to the straightedge...:-)

Office Depot and Office Max chains over here carry the Sanford
"Sharpie" pens (permanent marker type) whose ink is ferric
chloride resistant. I find it difficult to maintain a fine nib on those
for small foil lines and prefer a small brush. Mileage varies.

I once tried acetone-diluted liquid rosin as a resist, had mixed
results. Nice odor combination while doing it. :-)

As always, with any kind of resist, the unetched copper surface
must be clean and oxide free, smooth in order to take the resist
evenly.

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> writes:

>In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
>specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
>thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
>not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.
>
>As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
>wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
>patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.

I'll add something from the machine shop that is probably in
the UK as well: Marker lacquer used to make marks on metal
about to be machined. Over here it is usually a deep blue and
is very dilute lacquer, obvious from the acetone odor. Various
brands, some are available in red or green (not good colors).
Scribes nicely. Brushes well with small brushes available from
craft stores.

From the drafting department of old: K&E ink pens, the two-part
cylindrical, concentric ones. Those will hold dilute lacquers and
there is a pen holder that takes the nibs. Must soak them in
acetone after using since the capilliary clearance is tiny. With
practice those pens can draw straight lines but any dilute lacquer
likes to migrate to the straightedge...:-)

Office Depot and Office Max chains over here carry the Sanford
"Sharpie" pens (permanent marker type) whose ink is ferric
chloride resistant. I find it difficult to maintain a fine nib on those
for small foil lines and prefer a small brush. Mileage varies.

I once tried acetone-diluted liquid rosin as a resist, had mixed
results. Nice odor combination while doing it. :-)

As always, with any kind of resist, the unetched copper surface
must be clean and oxide free, smooth in order to take the resist
evenly.

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[MR NO SPAM]

Have had reasonable success using the "Sharpies." What kicks me is way back
when, when I bought a PCB kit from the Shack, I tried to make one and the
ink came right off. I gave up - I was still young and stupid, but it was the
ink that failed. A few years later, I decided to give it another go, using
sharpies after reading some others having used them. I did nothing else
different. The success was in the pen. Had I tried a different pen way back
when, instead of giving up, I could have been very good at it by now, rather
than OK. I have made a few PC boards and though "my" artistic talent isn't
that great, the boards came out ok and work as intended. When I do decide to
make a project, I actually enjoy going through the whole process including
making the board. It is fun to go from nothing to a working item. I've made
some test equipment for my shop that has saved me a few hours time already
and paid for themselves in parts, time and effort. Just out of curiosity,
anyone else buy the Shacks PCB kits and have any problems with the pens? OR
solution? For me, the solution has been ok. MNS


"Avery Fineman" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> > writes:
>
> >In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
> >specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
> >thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
> >not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.
> >
> >As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
> >wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
> >patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.
>
> I'll add something from the machine shop that is probably in
> the UK as well: Marker lacquer used to make marks on metal
> about to be machined. Over here it is usually a deep blue and
> is very dilute lacquer, obvious from the acetone odor. Various
> brands, some are available in red or green (not good colors).
> Scribes nicely. Brushes well with small brushes available from
> craft stores.
>
> From the drafting department of old: K&E ink pens, the two-part
> cylindrical, concentric ones. Those will hold dilute lacquers and
> there is a pen holder that takes the nibs. Must soak them in
> acetone after using since the capilliary clearance is tiny. With
> practice those pens can draw straight lines but any dilute lacquer
> likes to migrate to the straightedge...:-)
>
> Office Depot and Office Max chains over here carry the Sanford
> "Sharpie" pens (permanent marker type) whose ink is ferric
> chloride resistant. I find it difficult to maintain a fine nib on
those
> for small foil lines and prefer a small brush. Mileage varies.
>
> I once tried acetone-diluted liquid rosin as a resist, had mixed
> results. Nice odor combination while doing it. :-)
>
> As always, with any kind of resist, the unetched copper surface
> must be clean and oxide free, smooth in order to take the resist
> evenly.
>
> Len Anderson
> retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[MR NO SPAM]

Have had reasonable success using the "Sharpies." What kicks me is way back
when, when I bought a PCB kit from the Shack, I tried to make one and the
ink came right off. I gave up - I was still young and stupid, but it was the
ink that failed. A few years later, I decided to give it another go, using
sharpies after reading some others having used them. I did nothing else
different. The success was in the pen. Had I tried a different pen way back
when, instead of giving up, I could have been very good at it by now, rather
than OK. I have made a few PC boards and though "my" artistic talent isn't
that great, the boards came out ok and work as intended. When I do decide to
make a project, I actually enjoy going through the whole process including
making the board. It is fun to go from nothing to a working item. I've made
some test equipment for my shop that has saved me a few hours time already
and paid for themselves in parts, time and effort. Just out of curiosity,
anyone else buy the Shacks PCB kits and have any problems with the pens? OR
solution? For me, the solution has been ok. MNS


"Avery Fineman" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> > writes:
>
> >In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
> >specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
> >thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
> >not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.
> >
> >As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
> >wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
> >patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.
>
> I'll add something from the machine shop that is probably in
> the UK as well: Marker lacquer used to make marks on metal
> about to be machined. Over here it is usually a deep blue and
> is very dilute lacquer, obvious from the acetone odor. Various
> brands, some are available in red or green (not good colors).
> Scribes nicely. Brushes well with small brushes available from
> craft stores.
>
> From the drafting department of old: K&E ink pens, the two-part
> cylindrical, concentric ones. Those will hold dilute lacquers and
> there is a pen holder that takes the nibs. Must soak them in
> acetone after using since the capilliary clearance is tiny. With
> practice those pens can draw straight lines but any dilute lacquer
> likes to migrate to the straightedge...:-)
>
> Office Depot and Office Max chains over here carry the Sanford
> "Sharpie" pens (permanent marker type) whose ink is ferric
> chloride resistant. I find it difficult to maintain a fine nib on
those
> for small foil lines and prefer a small brush. Mileage varies.
>
> I once tried acetone-diluted liquid rosin as a resist, had mixed
> results. Nice odor combination while doing it. :-)
>
> As always, with any kind of resist, the unetched copper surface
> must be clean and oxide free, smooth in order to take the resist
> evenly.
>
> Len Anderson
> retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[cornytheclown]

"Ian White, G3SEK" > wrote in message >...
> Avery Fineman wrote:
>
>
> > One thing that all should remember: Electrons don't care about "neat"
> > construction. "Neat" gets something past inspectors, appeals to
> > customers, looks mighty fine and "professional" in photographs.
> > Electrons don't care for any of that. Fields and waves only care about
> > placement of conductors and nearby dielectric material.
> >
> [...]
> >
> > Right on! But...if one is familiar with RF layout through experience
> > and a "feel" for lead placement and lengths, perf can be used on
> > up to 70 MHz. That is NOT recommended for beginners who have
> > just memorized Ohm's Law.
> >
> Wish I knew how to pass on that "feel" for RF layout to other people.
> It's easy to explain to someone why their existing layout doesn't work,
> but more difficult to make positive recommendations so their next
> attempt *will* work.
>
> I once wrote an article about that for RadCom, which was lifted by the
> ARRL Handbook and survived for some years as part of the Construction
> chapter as 'From Schematic to Working Circuit'. That chapter, taken as a
> whole, is a pretty good basic reference.
>
> But in the end, there's no substitute for your own experience. Just
> build and build and build. Notice what works, and what doesn't... and
> then the trick is to understand why.
>
>
>
>
> >>For this kind of project, I very often use PCB design software to work
> >>up the layout, but don't always etch a board. Just as often, I cut a
> >>piece of single-sided board, tape a 1:1 printout of the PCB design onto
> >>the board and use it as a drilling template. Then I hand-wire the
> >>underside using the layout as a guide.
> >
> > I cheat a bit. Originally an illustrator, I sketch out the foil paths on
> > vellum 1:1, mark the drill holes and use the vellum as a small
> > center-punch guide. The paths are then painted in with lacquer,
> > free-hand, using the vellum as a guide.
> >
> The lack of those paper-graphics skills is why I use the PCB software.
> Heck, I even use it for roughing-out stripboard layouts, to try to
> maximize the use of the strips.
>
> In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
> specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
> thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
> not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.
>
> As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
> wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
> patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.

Those Dalo pens are nothing but lacquer pens... Sharpies, laundry
markers....even other brands of common permanent markers will
work..........you can get by cheaper and have a better supply of tip
sizes from ultrafine for smt work to xtra large that will cover ground
planes nicely. Other permanent markers will also work. Stadtler pens
are nice too, dont know their chemical makeup but they are tougher to
remove than sharpie lacquer pens with solvents.

I do surface mount by hand with a double ended sharpie, one end has
the normal fine tip and the other end has the ultrafine tip.
I used a piece of clear plastic to layout the patterns for common soic
and surface mount resistor capacitor pads and drilled these out with a
very fine drill bit used for drilling out small gas appliance
orifices, it works great

Anyhow.....I have used perfboard for projects before, its quick and if
you take your time you can do some really nice work. I have also used
g-10 with the copper completely etched off for projects that used
larger components where it was easier just to used 18 gauge wire
underneath as opposed to ridiculously large traces.
For hobbyist purposes perfboard is fine.......its making sure the
circuit works and works reliably that counts.

[cornytheclown]

"Ian White, G3SEK" > wrote in message >...
> Avery Fineman wrote:
>
>
> > One thing that all should remember: Electrons don't care about "neat"
> > construction. "Neat" gets something past inspectors, appeals to
> > customers, looks mighty fine and "professional" in photographs.
> > Electrons don't care for any of that. Fields and waves only care about
> > placement of conductors and nearby dielectric material.
> >
> [...]
> >
> > Right on! But...if one is familiar with RF layout through experience
> > and a "feel" for lead placement and lengths, perf can be used on
> > up to 70 MHz. That is NOT recommended for beginners who have
> > just memorized Ohm's Law.
> >
> Wish I knew how to pass on that "feel" for RF layout to other people.
> It's easy to explain to someone why their existing layout doesn't work,
> but more difficult to make positive recommendations so their next
> attempt *will* work.
>
> I once wrote an article about that for RadCom, which was lifted by the
> ARRL Handbook and survived for some years as part of the Construction
> chapter as 'From Schematic to Working Circuit'. That chapter, taken as a
> whole, is a pretty good basic reference.
>
> But in the end, there's no substitute for your own experience. Just
> build and build and build. Notice what works, and what doesn't... and
> then the trick is to understand why.
>
>
>
>
> >>For this kind of project, I very often use PCB design software to work
> >>up the layout, but don't always etch a board. Just as often, I cut a
> >>piece of single-sided board, tape a 1:1 printout of the PCB design onto
> >>the board and use it as a drilling template. Then I hand-wire the
> >>underside using the layout as a guide.
> >
> > I cheat a bit. Originally an illustrator, I sketch out the foil paths on
> > vellum 1:1, mark the drill holes and use the vellum as a small
> > center-punch guide. The paths are then painted in with lacquer,
> > free-hand, using the vellum as a guide.
> >
> The lack of those paper-graphics skills is why I use the PCB software.
> Heck, I even use it for roughing-out stripboard layouts, to try to
> maximize the use of the strips.
>
> In Europe there's a gadget called a Dalo resist pen which is made
> specifically for hand-drawing on PCBs. It has a fine fibre tip and very
> thick, quick-drying ink. It's very expensive for what it is (namely a
> not very good fibre-tip pen) but with care it can be quite effective.
>
> As many people already know, the Staedtler marker pens (waterproof/
> wasserfest grade) are excellent for touching-up photo and iron-on resist
> patterns, but they're not as good as the Dalo for filling large areas.

Those Dalo pens are nothing but lacquer pens... Sharpies, laundry
markers....even other brands of common permanent markers will
work..........you can get by cheaper and have a better supply of tip
sizes from ultrafine for smt work to xtra large that will cover ground
planes nicely. Other permanent markers will also work. Stadtler pens
are nice too, dont know their chemical makeup but they are tougher to
remove than sharpie lacquer pens with solvents.

I do surface mount by hand with a double ended sharpie, one end has
the normal fine tip and the other end has the ultrafine tip.
I used a piece of clear plastic to layout the patterns for common soic
and surface mount resistor capacitor pads and drilled these out with a
very fine drill bit used for drilling out small gas appliance
orifices, it works great

Anyhow.....I have used perfboard for projects before, its quick and if
you take your time you can do some really nice work. I have also used
g-10 with the copper completely etched off for projects that used
larger components where it was easier just to used 18 gauge wire
underneath as opposed to ridiculously large traces.
For hobbyist purposes perfboard is fine.......its making sure the
circuit works and works reliably that counts.

[Michael Black]

cornytheclown ) writes:
>
> Those Dalo pens are nothing but lacquer pens... Sharpies, laundry
> markers....even other brands of common permanent markers will
> work..........you can get by cheaper and have a better supply of tip
> sizes from ultrafine for smt work to xtra large that will cover ground
> planes nicely. Other permanent markers will also work. Stadtler pens
> are nice too, dont know their chemical makeup but they are tougher to
> remove than sharpie lacquer pens with solvents.
>
There was an article in Ham Radio, in the late eighties or so,
when someone wrote about using common pens for etch resist. He
mentioned adding some rubbing alcohol to the ink (ie pull open
the pen, and put in a bit of it) to make the ink flow better.
I know I tried it at the time, and the ink did apply better. I
can't remember if I ever etched boards with such a souped up pen.

Michael VE2BVW

[Michael Black]

cornytheclown ) writes:
>
> Those Dalo pens are nothing but lacquer pens... Sharpies, laundry
> markers....even other brands of common permanent markers will
> work..........you can get by cheaper and have a better supply of tip
> sizes from ultrafine for smt work to xtra large that will cover ground
> planes nicely. Other permanent markers will also work. Stadtler pens
> are nice too, dont know their chemical makeup but they are tougher to
> remove than sharpie lacquer pens with solvents.
>
There was an article in Ham Radio, in the late eighties or so,
when someone wrote about using common pens for etch resist. He
mentioned adding some rubbing alcohol to the ink (ie pull open
the pen, and put in a bit of it) to make the ink flow better.
I know I tried it at the time, and the ink did apply better. I
can't remember if I ever etched boards with such a souped up pen.

Michael VE2BVW

[mcalhoun@ksu.edu]

>...[snip]....
> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
> easily and never abrades the insultation.

And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!

--Myron.
--
Five boxes preserve our freedoms: soap, ballot, witness, jury, and cartridge
PhD EE (retired). "Barbershop" tenor. CDL(PTXS). W0PBV. (785) 539-4448
NRA Life Member and Certified Instructor (Home Firearm Safety, Rifle, Pistol)

[mcalhoun@ksu.edu]

>...[snip]....
> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
> easily and never abrades the insultation.

And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!

--Myron.
--
Five boxes preserve our freedoms: soap, ballot, witness, jury, and cartridge
PhD EE (retired). "Barbershop" tenor. CDL(PTXS). W0PBV. (785) 539-4448
NRA Life Member and Certified Instructor (Home Firearm Safety, Rifle, Pistol)

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, writes:

>> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
>> easily and never abrades the insultation.
>
>And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
>into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!

Yes! But, I didn't want to rub that in to homebrewers. :-)

Sigh, I'm way overdue for searching electronic dumps for teflon covered
wire...old nylon-jacketed PVC is still old and still melts.

[I'm secretly glad no one remarked on the extra T in 'insulation,' that
would be instigation of insulting the insulation installation... :-) ]

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, writes:

>> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
>> easily and never abrades the insultation.
>
>And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
>into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!

Yes! But, I didn't want to rub that in to homebrewers. :-)

Sigh, I'm way overdue for searching electronic dumps for teflon covered
wire...old nylon-jacketed PVC is still old and still melts.

[I'm secretly glad no one remarked on the extra T in 'insulation,' that
would be instigation of insulting the insulation installation... :-) ]

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Ian White, G3SEK]

Avery Fineman wrote:
>In article >, writes:
>
>>> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
>>> easily and never abrades the insultation.
>>
>>And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
>>into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!
>
> Yes! But, I didn't want to rub that in to homebrewers. :-)
>
> Sigh, I'm way overdue for searching electronic dumps for teflon covered
> wire...old nylon-jacketed PVC is still old and still melts.
>
At a hamfest on Sunday, a trader was selling teflon insulated
silver-plated stranded hookup wire in two sizes, as "aerial wire". I
bought 50 metres, but by no means all of it is going up in the air.

Len, you said it "strips easily"... well, maybe I haven't found the
right kind of wire strippers yet. What kind do you use?


> [I'm secretly glad no one remarked on the extra T in 'insulation,' that
> would be instigation of insulting the insulation installation... :-) ]
>
Would we ever do such a thing?


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)

http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

[Ian White, G3SEK]

Avery Fineman wrote:
>In article >, writes:
>
>>> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
>>> easily and never abrades the insultation.
>>
>>And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
>>into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!
>
> Yes! But, I didn't want to rub that in to homebrewers. :-)
>
> Sigh, I'm way overdue for searching electronic dumps for teflon covered
> wire...old nylon-jacketed PVC is still old and still melts.
>
At a hamfest on Sunday, a trader was selling teflon insulated
silver-plated stranded hookup wire in two sizes, as "aerial wire". I
bought 50 metres, but by no means all of it is going up in the air.

Len, you said it "strips easily"... well, maybe I haven't found the
right kind of wire strippers yet. What kind do you use?


> [I'm secretly glad no one remarked on the extra T in 'insulation,' that
> would be instigation of insulting the insulation installation... :-) ]
>
Would we ever do such a thing?


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)

http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> writes:

>Avery Fineman wrote:
>>In article >, writes:
>>
>>>> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
>>>> easily and never abrades the insultation.
>>>
>>>And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
>>>into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!
>>
>> Yes! But, I didn't want to rub that in to homebrewers. :-)
>>
>> Sigh, I'm way overdue for searching electronic dumps for teflon covered
>> wire...old nylon-jacketed PVC is still old and still melts.
>>
>At a hamfest on Sunday, a trader was selling teflon insulated
>silver-plated stranded hookup wire in two sizes, as "aerial wire". I
>bought 50 metres, but by no means all of it is going up in the air.
>
>Len, you said it "strips easily"... well, maybe I haven't found the
>right kind of wire strippers yet. What kind do you use?

Up until about year 2000 I had a wonderful multi-gauge stripper
made in my home town of Rockford, Illiniois, about 1950 (!).
The "recoil spring" (to return the two-handled beastie to open
position) broke and a replacement was impossible. The design
had been sold to another company (perhaps General Cement)
in the 1950s and that company no longer produced it.

For stripping in general I use small diagonal wire cutters (kept
sharp) and, by feel, go part-way through about three places on
the jacket, then gently tear off the jacket. Very no-frills stripping
(of wire, that is). Practice made perfect a long time ago.

The toolbox also has an ultra-simple el cheapo stripper stamped
out of sheet stock, looking like cheap cutters with a single V-groove
on each head, opposed. Very easy to keep sharp but the straight-
side cutter edges tend to nick the wire, especially on stranded
variety. I use that only as a last resort.

For chassis-PCB wiring, I prefer to use solid wire and cut Teflon
sleeving to suit for insulation. No flexibility is needed there and the
Teflon sleeving, although costing more than PVC, is reasonable in
price in bulk (depending on supplier/distributor). The sleeving IS
reuseable (and wires used for short runs) after a project is scrapped
and/or revised.

>> [I'm secretly glad no one remarked on the extra T in 'insulation,' that
>> would be instigation of insulting the insulation installation... :-) ]
>>
>Would we ever do such a thing?

Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh... :-)

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

[Avery Fineman]

In article >, "Ian White, G3SEK"
> writes:

>Avery Fineman wrote:
>>In article >, writes:
>>
>>>> I got spoiled with #24 and #26 Teflon insulated solid wire, strips
>>>> easily and never abrades the insultation.
>>>
>>>And you can just jam the point of a soldering pencil down
>>>into a "rats nest" and not melt a bit of insulation!
>>
>> Yes! But, I didn't want to rub that in to homebrewers. :-)
>>
>> Sigh, I'm way overdue for searching electronic dumps for teflon covered
>> wire...old nylon-jacketed PVC is still old and still melts.
>>
>At a hamfest on Sunday, a trader was selling teflon insulated
>silver-plated stranded hookup wire in two sizes, as "aerial wire". I
>bought 50 metres, but by no means all of it is going up in the air.
>
>Len, you said it "strips easily"... well, maybe I haven't found the
>right kind of wire strippers yet. What kind do you use?

Up until about year 2000 I had a wonderful multi-gauge stripper
made in my home town of Rockford, Illiniois, about 1950 (!).
The "recoil spring" (to return the two-handled beastie to open
position) broke and a replacement was impossible. The design
had been sold to another company (perhaps General Cement)
in the 1950s and that company no longer produced it.

For stripping in general I use small diagonal wire cutters (kept
sharp) and, by feel, go part-way through about three places on
the jacket, then gently tear off the jacket. Very no-frills stripping
(of wire, that is). Practice made perfect a long time ago.

The toolbox also has an ultra-simple el cheapo stripper stamped
out of sheet stock, looking like cheap cutters with a single V-groove
on each head, opposed. Very easy to keep sharp but the straight-
side cutter edges tend to nick the wire, especially on stranded
variety. I use that only as a last resort.

For chassis-PCB wiring, I prefer to use solid wire and cut Teflon
sleeving to suit for insulation. No flexibility is needed there and the
Teflon sleeving, although costing more than PVC, is reasonable in
price in bulk (depending on supplier/distributor). The sleeving IS
reuseable (and wires used for short runs) after a project is scrapped
and/or revised.

>> [I'm secretly glad no one remarked on the extra T in 'insulation,' that
>> would be instigation of insulting the insulation installation... :-) ]
>>
>Would we ever do such a thing?

Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh... :-)

Len Anderson
retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person