Reasons for/against circuit integrated with 3PDT PCB?

[tubegeek]

Lifetime warranty! What a wimp! That's nothing!

A GOOD warranty should extend more than just one generation.

I used to write for a magazine that went under. One of the reasons it went under was that a magazine's subscriber base are charged as a LIABILITY on their balance sheet rather than an ASSET, because you are committed to delivering a product in the future to those subscribers.

Seemed unfair to me.

Another reason it went under, of course, is that I used to write for it.

[R.G.]

Good night, Arc-ey.

[trixdropd]

Arcane, you come off as butthurt. I don't know what chaffed your cheeks, but R.G. is well liked by me and several thousand others. You should chill. I've followed the feud somewhat and R.G. speaks of logic and common sense, you seem to reek of "crazy ex-wife". Knock it off man!

[Arcane Analog]

That is not true. RG actually uses more logical fallacies in his posts than I ever could. I could go through his posts and pick them out but it is a waste of time. It seems to me RG is a big fan of the Gish Gallop.

Bottom line is that Military Spec - which is the standard for a quality build with durability in mind - incorporates wired leads. If PCB mounting was more secure/reliable/durable the US military would have used that technique. I fully recognize that such standards would be impossible to use for mass manufactured builds if you want to make money. I have already said that a few times. My point - and the only point needed to be made - is that wired is more durable than PCB mount.

Now, RG has argued in the past along the lines of "why doesn't the military now use wired leads for GPS and cell phones?" That question is a great example of a fallacy.

You can make this a popularity contest if you want. It does not change the facts.

I have wasted far too much time with this.

[gjcamann]

My phallic is not logical

[tubegeek]

I have wasted far too much time with this.

Then maybe you might want to stop.

[Arcane Analog]

I plan to as the argument is not really worth the effort.

[R O Tiree]

Bottom line is that Military Spec - which is the standard for a quality build with durability in mind - incorporates wired leads.

Umm... I'm in the UK military (which uses a lot of stuff made in the US) and most of the guts of bits of modern electronic kit I've seen the insides of have a plethora (love that word) of edge connectors, PCB-mounted switches and other controls/displays.

I once met a USN Prowler pilot who told me of the woes they'd had in its early days... it sailed through testing and all was fine for a while, then they kept getting odd failures. The techs would whip the LRUs out ("Line Replaceable Units" = board out, board in, fixed) and then test them exhaustively... "NFF" (No Fault Found) so they'd pop it back in the next plane that came back with a U/S LRU and, presto, it worked. They only sussed out what was going on when they had to launch a supposedly busted Prowler that had not yet been worked on. One of the WSOs in the back decided to switch his kit on, just on the off-chance, you know? Imagine his surprise when it worked as normal! The next crew took it on the next sortie and it was busted again. Luckily, the engineering officer smelled a rat and asked another crew to take the plane up... you guessed it, it was working again.

It turned out that, over the course of a few years of savagely hard carrier landings, the edge connectors had weakened to the extent that they were flexing as the plane smacked into the deck and took the arrestor cable. This was popping some of the boards out of their sockets. The next landing was popping them back in again. The cause, then, was simple (once they'd figured it out) but the fix cost several millions of $$ to re-design, test (properly) and then retro-fit. That exercise, in turn, led to a complex spec change for aircraft PCBs relating board weight and flexure, axis of mounting, length of edge connector, etc, that all new kit had to satisfy. Nothing wrong with edge connectors, then, or board-mounted controls... it just has to be done right. As RG alluded to, and I can testify to, wires' vibration can lead to equally troublesome gremlins and outright failures.

In an aircraft, of course, weight is a major driving factor (in a 60-ton battle-tank... not even close). There are miles and miles of wire and fibre in modern aircraft, so anything that cuts down on weight is generally good... as long as it's done right. A few grams here, a few grams there... suddenly the designers realise that their prototype is hundreds or even thousands of pounds heavier than they'd envisaged, with obvious implications for payload, top speed, range, etc.  Reliability and redundancy are also very high on the list. Cost is waaaaay down on that same list.

I'm with RG on this... Don't get me wrong - dangling a densely-populated 6" x 4" PCB off a single 3PDT mounted at one edge of the board is almost certainly asking for trouble. "Suspending" the other edge via long-pin 16mm pots will probably alleviate any problems, as long as you can assemble the thing with zero stress. If you have a feel for the distribution of forces, vibration, materials' strengths/elasticity/failure modes, min cycles to failure, etc, then you can, even without doing any further calculations, have a damn good stab at designing something that'll stand up to normal use (stand fast dipping in aqua regia, nuclear holocaust, drunken lead guitarists leaping on the damn thing from the far side of the stage). A little more thought and it's no more and possibly less difficult to repair than a "wired" layout.

[mremic01]

http://arcaneanalog.bigcartel.com/

Arcane, those builds look great, but are those little plastic standoffs mil-spec? My concern has always been that the adhesive backing would dry out and the PCBs would get loose. You seem to have very high standards for quality, which is something to be proud of, but you've also got some very black-and-white ideas about what's good and what's not. I'd never use those plastic standoffs because I don't trust them, but other guys build some rock solid pedals with them, just like yours. I'm ok with that. Is it really so hard to accept that we can do things different from the way you do them and still make a reliable piece of gear? Your pedals look incredible. I think it's your attitude that needs fixin'.

[pappasmurfsharem]

I don't see Carling 3PDT switches in your pedals Arcane

For someone so adamant about using quality durable parts in their products and not trying to save on costs that seems a little hypocritical.

Maybe your response would be that the blue switches are good enough.

Hmm that seems very similar to what RG was taking about...

Edit:
that plastic dc Jack doesn't seem like mil-spec either.

But when you want to save on costs vs durability it ok right? It's not the same thing is it?

That was a rhetorical question btw a response is not needed.

[Arcane Analog]

Now, I tried to get out of this thread, and I fully intend to but every time someone misquotes, implies I said something or complete fabricate a statement (see the two posts above) you leave me little choice but to clarify or correct you.

I never once said I build to mil-spec. Not once. Please find that quote and correct me if I am wrong. If you cannot find that quote then please do not imply that I said the same and correct yourself.

The same goes for parts. Please find the quote where I said I use mil-spec parts exclusively. Again, if you cannot that quote then please do not imply that I said the same and correct yourself. I have said in several threads I do not use the highest quality components available. See the Tayda jack thread for an example.

What I did say I fully understand purchasing parts, budgeting and building for your target audience. I mentioned that several times in this thread alone.

I tried to break the argument down into one comparison which was constantly Gish Galloped or spread so thin the discussion became a hole lot of nothing. That is a perfect example of illogical argumentation or pure avoidance of the simple issue. Let's claim it is too complicated or lets turn it into false analogies, derail it into 20 sub-arguments and make it all lost in the wash. Almost every one of RGs posts used that tactic.

The one point I stressed - and still do - is that lead wiring is more durable that PCB mounted builds. Hence, the NASA/mil-spec bit. I said that several times. That was my only point. RG refused to answer the comparison I gave on a well engineed PCB mount versus an equally well designed lead design. That is fine. I don't care anymore.

Of course the military uses different building practices now. Technology now is such that the military cannot make the products they require in the same any more. Microtechnology has taken over. I would love to see someone carry a GPS made with wired leads. That would be impressive. However, such a comparison is one of the fallacies discussed above.

Continue with the discussion by all means but please do not put words in my mouth and fabricate all manner of arguments or statements which are inaccurate or down right false and were never used by me. Disagree with me all you want - everyone has their opinion - but please rely on what i said. Do not make up a bunch of garbage and try to pan it off as something I said.

[pappasmurfsharem]

Now, I tried to get out of this thread, and I fully intend to but every time someone misquotes or implies I said something you leave me little choice but to clarify or correct you.

I never once said I build to mil-spec. Not once. Please find that quote and correct me if I am wrong. If you cannot find that quote then please do not imply that I said the same.

The same goes for parts. Please find the quote where I said I use mil-spec parts exclusively. Again, if you cannot that quote then please do not imply that I said the same. I have said in several threads I do not use the highest quality components available. See the Tayda jack thread for an example.

What I did say I fully understand purchasing parts, budgeting and building for your target audience. I mentioned that several times in this thread alone.

I tried to break the argument down into one comparison which was constantly Gish Galloped or spread so thin the discussion became a hole lot of nothing. That is a perfect example of illogical argumentation or pure avoidance of the simple issue. Almost every one of RGs posts used that tactic.

The one point I stressed - and still do - is that lead wiring is more durable that PCB mounted builds. Hence, the NASA/mil-spec bit. I said that several times. That was my only point. RG refused to answer the comparison I gave on a well engineed PCB mount versus an equally well designed lead design. That is fine. I don't care anymore.

Of course the military uses different building practices now. Technology now is such that the military cannot make the products they require in the same any more. Microtechnology has taken over. I would love to see someone carry a GPS made with wired leads. That would be impressive. However, such a comparison is one of the fallacies discussed above.

Continue with the discussion by all means but please do not put words in my mouth and fabricate all manner of arguments or statements which are inaccurate or down right false and were never used by me.

I can concede that you never stated that you built to Mil spec but RG in more words stated that there is a time and a place for everything when it comes to build and you in more words tried to discredit him. He never stated that PCB mount components were the most durable, and the fact that you were so adamant about using wire leads for jacks for durability but then skimp on the switch and the Jack just kind of makes you into a hypocrite.

The fact of the matter is you were being very disrespectful which whether that was an intention or not is irrelevant. That's how it reads.

He did answer you in regards to the difference between pcb mounted or wired leads, because the answer didn't sit right with you is why you refuse to accept it.
It's a loaded question with lots of variables. It's not just black and white which is what he explain. That why he talked about not designing a PCB that mounts on multiple planes. EG: Board mount jacks on the horizontal plane, and Footswitch and Jack on the Verticle plane. Or vice versa depending on how you look at it.

You only have one plane to deal with.

You also went on to insult his intelligence by commenting on his "quoting skills" which as a matter of fact is the prefered way IMHO to read his responses. He makes comments on each aspect of the post he is responding too which makes for a much easier read to understand read for those who are not part of the conversation at hand.

RG doesn't seem like the type to just tell someone yes it's this way and it will always be when that isn't true 100% of the time.  There are always exceptions which is what he tried to put forth in his post, but you just take that as side stepping the issue when it's not. There is always a grey area. Perhaps the area isn't blurred as much when it comes to pedals (which he also stated) but he was speaking from a general manufacturing perspective.

"The devil is in the details"

*snip*

Don't take this personally

[Arcane Analog]

You are right. He never did say they were more durable because he avoided answering the question put to him on sveral occasions.

Thank you for correcting your self. A shame you decided to follow that up with more garbage and stating I "skimp" on parts. I use industry standard parts which is excatly what I said in this thread and the thread in which you were trying to defend tayda's cheap jacks.

I could never take anything posted by you personally especially with the manner in which you have quoted me. That speaks for itself. Fell free to continue to fabricate statements on my behalf, though. I am affraid I will not be able to continue to correct you though. This has entilrey wasted too much of my time.

[pappasmurfsharem]

You are right. He never did say they were more durable because he avoided answering the question put to him on sveral occasions.

Thank you for correcting your self. A shame you decided to follow that up with more garbage and stating I "skimp" on parts. I use industry standard parts which is excatly what I said in this thread and the thread in which you were trying to defend tayda's cheap jacks.

Fell free to continue to fabricate statements on my behalf. I am affraid I will not be able to continue to correct you though. This has entilrey wasted too much of my time.

You obviously need to relax and reread through these comments. He did answer your question. It just wasn't what you wanted. You aren't defending yourself at this point you are showing your lack of understanding and frankly it's really juvenile.

[Megatron]

Papasmurf: Continuing to try to get a rise out of him seems to be pretty damn juvenile to me. Maybe you should make fun of his mom too. 

[pappasmurfsharem]

Papasmurf: Continuing to try to get a rise out of him seems to be pretty damn juvenile to me. Maybe you should make fun of his mom too.  

If that's how I came across then that wasn't the intention  , I can see why it would read like that, this of course excludes the first few posts because those were definitely contentious in nature and as a whole I suppose they can't be excluded. It was an improper way to bring that point. However his holier-then-thou attitude when it comes to his opinion is a bit over the top. He refuses to see anyone elses position and there is no concession. Granted this is a forum where opinion can be expressed I just think he goes about it the wrong way. I am not intentionally trying to get a rise out of him and so I am removing my comment on his business practices. I am trying to point out where there is hypocracy in his arguement.

Either way, RG did answer his question and he attacked him because he didn't like the way it was presented.

[Megatron]

Never mind.

[Arcane Analog]

I am not intentionally trying to get a rise out of him and so I am removing my comment on his business practices.

I see you have now moved into slandering my name and my buisness practices. Very classy. I doubt Aron would apreciate you posting such comments on his forum.

[merlinb]

http://arcaneanalog.bigcartel.com/

Arcane, those builds look great, but are those little plastic standoffs mil-spec? ...

There appears to be some very heavy shielded cables dangling off those jacks and footswitch. Maybe it's the photo, but I can't see anything tying them down? If that's the case then you have a serious reliability issue- those cables are going to vibrate all over the place, and the stress is directly on the solder joints.

[defaced]

Bottom line is that Military Spec - which is the standard for a quality build with durability in mind - incorporates wired leads. If PCB mounting was more secure/reliable/durable the US military would have used that technique.

You got the number of the spec you follow?  I'd be interested in looking at that.