Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
Jim Barber wrote: I've been working on a high-power HF autotuner design that I'd just about shelved because of the necessity of soldering the DDS chip. (it uses an internal RF source to power the phase detector) This thread has helped a lot. When time permits I may order up some parts and give it a try. I have a good-quality magnifier lamp and a fine-point temp-controlled pencil, what I don't have is OEM eye lenses and flexible finger joints... ;-) Most of my SMD work is done using half-moon reading glasses - the strongest and cheapest available from the drugstore - in front of my normal glasses. When not in use, they hang from a neck cord. After publishing this suggestion, a very generous person *gave* me a professional-quality binocular microscope. This is wonderful for big jobs like assembling a whole new board... but to be honest, I still tend to use the double glasses more, because the "setup process" is much quicker. You will find that the tip of the soldering iron becomes much steadier when seen under the magnifier. This feedback loop is a wonderful thing, especially if you give it the best possible chance to work: * "Use the scope, Luke!" - learn to concentrate exclusively on what you're SEEING. This is harder than it seems, because for normal soldering we also rely a lot on our sense of touch, and automatically tend to press the tip of the iron against the parts being soldered. With SMD this is a disaster - it simply pushes the parts out of position - so you need to break that habit and concentrate on using ONLY your eyes. The problem with a 10x microscope is first FINDING the soldering iron tip in the field of view. If I am looking into the microscope and trying to place the iron on the work often the iron ends up way in left field (or I push it into my other hand OUCH!) TOO much magnification can be TOO much of a good thing. I wish I had another set of eye piece lenses (or an other objective) so I could go down to 5X sometimes. My microscope is a true binocular with poro prisms and dual objective and eyepiece lenses. It was a 'gift' from a former employer (they were cleaning up the lab and threw it out). I did have to jury rig a stand since only the optic head was found in the trash, the unit originally mounted on a long spring loaded 'gooseneek', like those circleline magnifier lamps. (One of the focus knobs is cracked in half, but I can live with that). * Steady your arm against the edge of the bench, so you're not trying to stabilize your whole body. * Stay off the caffeine - it creates a fine tremor that the brain cannot stabilize (too much "noise" in the feedback loop). Damn Cuban Coffee (Well, I work in Miami!) |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
ken scharf wrote:
I bought one of these kits to make use of a sample AD9851 chip I got from Analog Devices a few years ago. http://www.amqrp.org/kits/dds60/index.html I knew it was hopeless to bread board something with this chip, but even with a PC board soldering something with such close lead spacing is a challenge (especially when you're past 50 with failing close in vision and less than rock solid stable hands). Still I figured I'd give it a try. Armed with the smallest soldering tip available for my Weller PES51 soldering station, a good magnifier lamp AND a binocular microscope I gave it a try to solder the chip to the board. Well there is good news and bad news. The bad news is that it is impossible to solder the chip by hand without creating solder bridges. The good news is that I did a good enough job to get the chip 99% perfectly centered on the solder pads, and you can remove the solder bridges with solder wick without removing the chip from the PC board. It would have been easier with thiner solder (I had .021" dia solder) and a thiner soldering iron tip, but inspection with the microscope shows no shorts, and it looks like all the pins are properly soldered. Naked eye it doesn't look pretty but it should work. Now to solder those chip caps and resistors! (They should be easier, the AD9851 was the worst part to place with the tight spacing, all the other parts have lead spacing at least twice as wide). Be sure to more or less "drown" the pins to be soldered with flux. If you get solder bridges, you probably have to little flux applied - really slob the flux on the pins. When you think you have enough of flux, add more... Any bridges are corrected with solder wick. The AD98xx can be soldered with a 0.5mm ceramic tip. Get one of these cheap ( 10$ ) magnifying visors, especially if you are half blind as I am... The AD9851 is one of the easiest SMD IC's to solder as there are pins only on two sides. Besides... We have been using SMD's since the early eighties now so stop whinging over it, adapt! They wont go away and they actually improve most RF designs! //Dan, M0DFI |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On Dec 29, 3:37 pm, Dan Andersson wrote: Besides... We have been using SMD's since the early eighties now so stop whinging over it, adapt! They wont go away and they actually improve most RF designs! I've seen some suggestions go around that are very similar to hot-air rework. I just wanted to mention that SparkFun electronics sells some rework stations cheaply, and has useful tutorials on soldering SMD parts. Their site: http://www.sparkfun.com |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wackyvorlon wrote:
On Dec 29, 3:37 pm, Dan Andersson wrote: Besides... We have been using SMD's since the early eighties now so stop whinging over it, adapt! They wont go away and they actually improve most RF designs! I've seen some suggestions go around that are very similar to hot-air rework. I just wanted to mention that SparkFun electronics sells some rework stations cheaply, and has useful tutorials on soldering SMD parts. Their site: http://www.sparkfun.com When you have a proper pc board smt is easy (once you've mastered the new soldering techniques. I had no problem getting the AD9851 onto the board. I think the microscopic hairs I'm seeing are a result of using the solder braid wick. I may have not heated it enough and pulled it off too soon leaving solder hairs behind. Flux sure does help, and I'll use plenty when I solder the next few smt ic's down. I have some smt mounting boards that allow mixing smt parts with through hole on 100 mil grid proto boards. I fear that the extra long leads this adds to the smt parts will make rf performance a problem, especially with 100-400mhz clock signals to the dds chips (AD9951). I've heard of people designing their own pc boards using laser printer output and iron on toner for resit. I've tried this before but with 'bleeding' of the toner during application I don't think I can get better than 50 mil trace separation. Also I've had bad luck etching boards with very thin traces, the traces get etched away before larger areas of copper are finished etching. If I try designing boards for SMT parts I'll probably have to farm them out to a professional house, but this can be expensive for making but one board. (Unless you plan on writing a QST article and selling the extra boards....). |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
All of my first year students can hold 20 mil traces and spaces, the C
students can hold 15 mil, and the really good ones can hold 10. Jim I've heard of people designing their own pc boards using laser printer output and iron on toner for resit. I've tried this before but with 'bleeding' of the toner during application I don't think I can get better than 50 mil trace separation. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
RST Engineering wrote:
All of my first year students can hold 20 mil traces and spaces, the C students can hold 15 mil, and the really good ones can hold 10. Yeah, but I'll bet your first year students' eyesight is 30 years younger than that of the average participant in this NGgrin! -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com (I was a first-year student 29 years ago) |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2006-12-30, ken scharf wrote:
I've heard of people designing their own pc boards using laser printer output and iron on toner for resit. I've tried this before but with 'bleeding' of the toner during application I don't think I can get better than 50 mil trace separation. Print your design on some kind of clay coated paper (people have used everything from magazine pages to photo paper intended for inkjets) and look at the print with a loupe. Cheap laser printers will produce a result full of pinholes. A nice Xerox will make a good, solid black. I haven't had any trouble with toner melting or running. In fact, once you transfer it onto the PCB it's hard to get off! If I try designing boards for SMT parts I'll probably have to farm them out to a professional house, but this can be expensive for making but one board. (Unless you plan on writing a QST article and selling the extra boards....). You've got to pick the right board house for each order. Some, like batchpcb.com, are particularly cheap if you want few, small boards. They don't have setup fees or even per-board fees, only a per-order charge. But their $2.50/in^2 grows faster than some other places which have bigger minimum size boards/minimum orders. -- Ben Jackson AD7GD http://www.ben.com/ |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 04:22:42 -0600, Ben Jackson wrote:
You've got to pick the right board house for each order. Some, like batchpcb.com, are particularly cheap if you want few, small boards. They don't have setup fees or even per-board fees, only a per-order charge. But their $2.50/in^2 grows faster than some other places which have bigger minimum size boards/minimum orders. I have been using an off-shore fab for years and they seem to do just what i want, but have setup fees that make protos expensive. So I went and looked at batchpcb.com but they do mention a $US10 setup fee in their FAQ. http://www.batchpcb.com/faq.php?osCs...a389ad75decda8 Do they actually charge it? |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ben Jackson wrote:
On 2006-12-30, ken scharf wrote: I've heard of people designing their own pc boards using laser printer output and iron on toner for resit. I've tried this before but with 'bleeding' of the toner during application I don't think I can get better than 50 mil trace separation. Print your design on some kind of clay coated paper (people have used everything from magazine pages to photo paper intended for inkjets) and look at the print with a loupe. Cheap laser printers will produce a result full of pinholes. A nice Xerox will make a good, solid black. I haven't had any trouble with toner melting or running. In fact, once you transfer it onto the PCB it's hard to get off! If I try designing boards for SMT parts I'll probably have to farm them out to a professional house, but this can be expensive for making but one board. (Unless you plan on writing a QST article and selling the extra boards....). You've got to pick the right board house for each order. Some, like batchpcb.com, are particularly cheap if you want few, small boards. They don't have setup fees or even per-board fees, only a per-order charge. But their $2.50/in^2 grows faster than some other places which have bigger minimum size boards/minimum orders. My problem with the iron on transfers wasn't being able to print thin, close spaced lines on to the transfer medium. The problem was that when ironed on the toner lines 'spread out' so adjacent lines touched. Also a problem was timing just how long to leave the board in the soup to etch. I did heat the etchant up first and used an IR lamp to try and keep it warm, but even so the thin close spaced traces were close to being over etched long before larger and wider spaced traces were 'done'. (maybe a problem with 'Radio Shack' etchant?) |