On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 11:59:57 -0400, John Bartley wrote:

David Forsyth wrote:
The "dead bug" way? I'm not sure what this means - please forgive me I'm
new to this :-)

Hehe, don't feel too bad. I have zero experience with solid state stuff,
so when I was told to build my trial projects in DBSF format, I was left
scratching my head. I laughed out loud when I was shown a "Dead Bug
Squashed Flat" project. This is your components laid out flat on a
perfboard and the wires run straight, point to point. It really does
look like a DBSF!!

I'm not sure how to do the tubes in a DB format, but everything else
should be straightforward.

"General Radio" used to sell tube sockets which were surface mount with
side terminals. I've looked high and low for some of these, but haven't
had any luck. They'd be ideal for breadboard tube projects.

cheers


Omron has surface mount sockets for thier line of relays, can't
remember if they're 8 or 11 pin though. Check it out, you might get
lucky .

David Forsyth wrote:
The "dead bug" way? I'm not sure what this means - please forgive me I'm
new to this :-)

Hehe, don't feel too bad. I have zero experience with solid state stuff,
so when I was told to build my trial projects in DBSF format, I was left
scratching my head. I laughed out loud when I was shown a "Dead Bug
Squashed Flat" project. This is your components laid out flat on a
perfboard and the wires run straight, point to point. It really does
look like a DBSF!!

I'm not sure how to do the tubes in a DB format, but everything else
should be straightforward.

"General Radio" used to sell tube sockets which were surface mount with
side terminals. I've looked high and low for some of these, but haven't
had any luck. They'd be ideal for breadboard tube projects.

cheers

--
regards from ::
John Bartley
43 Norway Spruce Street
Stittsville, Ontario
Canada, K2S1P5
( If you slow down it takes longer - does that apply to life also?)



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

The "dead bug" way? I'm not sure what this means - please forgive me I'm
new to this :-)
=========
This is a method of construction where components are soldered to unetched
printed circuit board islands (made with a special rotary bit which only
removes a thin ring from the copper surface ) or to insulated PCB patches
glued onto the unetched PCB ,with ICs glued to the PCB with the legs up
(hence dead bug) and connected to other components .
If permissible ,additional 'connecting points' are achieved by soldering
high value resistors (a number of MegaOhms) perpendicularly onto the PCB
with the other end serving as the connecting point.

It is also called ugly construction . Extensive info on these methods is
given in an excellent book for homebrewers :
"Experimental Methods in RF Design" Chapter 1. ; published by ARRL.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

The "dead bug" way? I'm not sure what this means - please forgive me I'm
new to this :-)
=========
This is a method of construction where components are soldered to unetched
printed circuit board islands (made with a special rotary bit which only
removes a thin ring from the copper surface ) or to insulated PCB patches
glued onto the unetched PCB ,with ICs glued to the PCB with the legs up
(hence dead bug) and connected to other components .
If permissible ,additional 'connecting points' are achieved by soldering
high value resistors (a number of MegaOhms) perpendicularly onto the PCB
with the other end serving as the connecting point.

It is also called ugly construction . Extensive info on these methods is
given in an excellent book for homebrewers :
"Experimental Methods in RF Design" Chapter 1. ; published by ARRL.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

David Forsyth wrote:
The "dead bug" way? I'm not sure what this means - please forgive me I'm
new to this :-)


Dave



"Bill Hennessy" wrote in message
. ..

Yes, I have found when building regenerative receivers wood is the best
chassi. However a metal front panel is a must. However I only use

battery

tubes with low voltage. Never more than 45 volts. But when building
solid-state regeneratives. A good ground plane helps. Build it the dead
bug way.






'Dead bug' refers to IC's mounted upside down with their legs
sticking up in the air like a dead roach.

David Forsyth wrote:
The "dead bug" way? I'm not sure what this means - please forgive me I'm
new to this :-)


Dave



"Bill Hennessy" wrote in message
. ..

Yes, I have found when building regenerative receivers wood is the best
chassi. However a metal front panel is a must. However I only use

battery

tubes with low voltage. Never more than 45 volts. But when building
solid-state regeneratives. A good ground plane helps. Build it the dead
bug way.






'Dead bug' refers to IC's mounted upside down with their legs
sticking up in the air like a dead roach.

The "dead bug" way? I'm not sure what this means - please forgive me I'm
new to this :-)


Dave



"Bill Hennessy" wrote in message
. ..
Yes, I have found when building regenerative receivers wood is the best
chassi. However a metal front panel is a must. However I only use
battery
tubes with low voltage. Never more than 45 volts. But when building
solid-state regeneratives. A good ground plane helps. Build it the dead
bug way.

I recently became interested in trying to build a small two-tube regen
type
receiver for broadcast and/or shortwave reception. I designed a simple
chassis based on some vintage articles on the subject. This is the
classic
'metal box with attched front faceplate' design. I was going to use
cold-rolled steel since we have this at work and spot weld the face to the
main chassis, but then I got to thinking that perhaps the steel might
interfere with the coils. I noticed also after this that every old
article
that I've come across usually suggested aluminum for the chassis. They
don't make mention of the reasons for this, however. I was wondering if
ease of machinability for the amatuer working with simple hand tools, and

Aluminum is usually easier for most to work with with simple hand tools.
Steel is fine but it might rust and look bad after a while. Make the
chassie out of whatever kind of metel that you think is the best for you to
work with . Electrically there will be little if any differance.

"Ralph Mowery" ) writes:

Aluminum is usually easier for most to work with with simple hand tools.
Steel is fine but it might rust and look bad after a while. Make the
chassie out of whatever kind of metel that you think is the best for you to
work with . Electrically there will be little if any differance.


And of course, everyone did use steel (once things progressed beyond
wood and bakelite chassis) right up until aluminum because readily
available and/or cheap enough, at which point I doubt anyone used
steel except if what they were building was really really heavy, ie
a kilowatt modulator or final.

Michael VE2BVW

Michael Black wrote:

"Ralph Mowery" ) writes:

Aluminum is usually easier for most to work with with simple hand tools.
Steel is fine but it might rust and look bad after a while. Make the
chassie out of whatever kind of metel that you think is the best for you to
work with . Electrically there will be little if any differance.


And of course, everyone did use steel (once things progressed beyond
wood and bakelite chassis) right up until aluminum because readily
available and/or cheap enough, at which point I doubt anyone used
steel except if what they were building was really really heavy, ie
a kilowatt modulator or final.

Michael VE2BVW

I have seen a few nice layouts on Brass chassis, as well. Easier to
work than steel, and you can still solder to it. I built some tube RF
decks on 1/16" brass sheet stock, and mounted them into a steel cabinet
years ago.
--


Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida