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

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 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

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

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/electroni...real/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/electroni...ser2/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

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/electroni...real/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/electroni...ser2/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 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

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

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/electroni...real/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/electroni...ser2/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

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/electroni...real/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/electroni...ser2/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