Flawed Layouts Thread

[blackieNYC]

Among the faulty layouts, I like to see schematics included. I don't think everyone uses layouts, no?
So there's going to be a lot of mistakes on a build, but then there are cases like the BYOC Phase Royale I mentioned earlier, which has several mods not yet included in the kit from an old thread.  The mods appear to be from an admin at their forum.  I have witnessed the distortion and slight bass loss mentioned there. http://byocelectronics.com/board/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=40729
This is a hard to find thread with the mods, which I would consider essential and no phase royal builder should miss out.  The distortion requires the addition of a 68 k resistor which is not on the schematic. For example.
So - is the terminology above a satisfactory means of getting this info to whoever searches this forum for the phase Royale?  Is this the way we should go about distributing such info?  The inclusion of a link should probably be a must.  This particular thread will most likely inspire confidence in its accuracy, but that isnt always the case. I see the danger here, but surely there's a way to do this well.
I'll add that I do like my phase Royale very much, though Ive been to lazy to add the 68k resistor.
I suppose an exhaustive search on your build before your simply follow a well established schematic is a good idea to both prevent problems and discover options you won't want to read about after you've built the thing.

[armdnrdy]

I suppose an exhaustive search on your build before your simply follow a well established schematic is a good idea to both prevent problems and discover options you won't want to read about after you've built the thing.

You are on the right path here!

Before I commit to drawing a schematic/board routing in Eagle, I do a bit of research to check for availability of parts, inaccuracies, possible mods, and build reports.

How many times has someone grabbed the first P-90 layout they have found, built it and then posted, "my P-90 build doesn't phase"?

All the while there are countless threads which contain the fact that the zener may have to be changed according to the range of the JFETs.

My point is: by exercising a bit of due diligence, the internet has just about everything you need.....you just have to look for it! 

[nocentelli]

It seems harsh as i type it, but if you build a flawed layout, you only have yourself to blame. As a newby (i.e. before i could reliably read a schematic and compare connections to a proposed layout) i had to be content with building layouts that were clearly marked as verified, or were posted in threads alongside comments from others saying they had built them and they worked.

As rg points out, if it doesn't work, it's either you or the layout at fault, which is why the first question asked is always "can you post the layout you used?". If you can't tell if the layout is sound, why risk building it?

[armdnrdy]

read a schematic and compare connections to a proposed layout

I forgot to mention...
I search for as many gut shots as possible to verify component values and to verify an existing circuit board to the schematic.

When I first started building, I got bit a few times by deviations between schematics and board layouts.

I have learned...trust no one! People make mistakes...myself included!

[blackieNYC]

[quote I suppose an exhaustive search on your build before your simply follow a well established schematic is a good idea to both prevent problems and discover options you won't want to read about after you've built the thing.
[/quote]

You are on the right path here!

Before I commit to drawing a schematic/board routing in Eagle, I do a bit of research to check for availability of parts, inaccuracies, possible mods, and build reports.

My point is: by exercising a bit of due diligence, the internet has just about everything you need.....you just have to look for it! 

[/quote]    Not always easily found, and not always accurate.  For ex - find that one.  Your phase Royale is distorting, and you don't know the 68k R I told you about.  Additionally, though its well known that the scrambler leaves out a couple diodes from the original schematic in the original pedal, something like that, I couldn't find out which ones.  I asked the forum, shut off the iron, and got an answer the next day.  But m'stride was broken, the moment lost, and nobody likes that.   I don't see the point in making people reinvent the wheel for themselves.  Let them use their energy, creativity and research towards making the pedal do something new and cool.

[armdnrdy]

Not always easily found

I don't see the point in making people reinvent the wheel for themselves. 

No...some things involve actually sitting down in front of your PC and punching in different keywords. You know things like "P-90 build problem, Phase 90 mods, etc.

Then...you have to read though posts! Oh no!
It also helps if you compile useful information in a folder.

I'm not talking about reinventing the wheel...in my opinion, jumping into a build without doing a bit of research first is reinventing the wheel.
It's like taking a path that is well trodden by the mistakes of those who came before.

I think that some people believe that a project with a schematic and a board layout is like a kit...but you have to supply the components. I look at projects as something that needs to be verified with all of the information I can find. Then I build it.

[deadastronaut]

breadboard.

[karbomusic]

I don't see the point in making people reinvent the wheel for themselves.

TBH, it sounds more like not being able to tell when the tire is flat than reinventing the wheel. For example, if I personally had no idea what a circuit was doing and zero ability to understand if the layout might be good/bad, I'd just buy a pedal straight out; less aggravation and much cheaper comparatively.

I think it is fine to just take layouts and pop parts onto a board but on the surface that sounds like a frustrating path ultimately leading to finding ways to fix all the broken layouts which is even harder. Oh wait.    

[armdnrdy]

if I personally had no idea what a circuit was doing and zero ability to understand if the layout might be good/bad

ultimately leading to finding ways to fix all the broken layouts which is even harder.  

If history is any indication...I think that the person you are referring to in the first sentence would most likely come to a forum such as this, so that kind hearted members would find a way to fix their broken layout.

"Finding ways" in the second sentence could be exchanged with "finding someone" to possibly be more accurate. 

[armdnrdy]

breadboard.

+1

I used to route boards with my own mods only to find they didn't work. Ended up hacking on the boards quite a bit!

A breadboard is a very important tool in my arsenal now!

[deadastronaut]

^ yep 100%

i breadboard everything ...takes longer, but you know it WILL work..........erm........eventually.

[armdnrdy]

^ yep 100%

i breadboard everything ...takes longer, but you know it WILL work..........erm........eventually.

Damn Rob...
I've seen you breadboard the same circuit for a year! 

One can never be too certain! 

[deadastronaut]

ha ha...correct. i'll finish it one day..

[Canucker]

It seems harsh as i type it, but if you build a flawed layout, you only have yourself to blame. As a newby (i.e. before i could reliably read a schematic and compare connections to a proposed layout) i had to be content with building layouts that were clearly marked as verified, or were posted in threads alongside comments from others saying they had built them and they worked.

As rg points out, if it doesn't work, it's either you or the layout at fault, which is why the first question asked is always "can you post the layout you used?". If you can't tell if the layout is sound, why risk building it?

Regardless of who people blame many come here asking for advice on why something they built doesn't work...they are then directed to the "how to troubleshoot" section on how to properly give data so they someone can help them. Or someone might point out an error in the project they built that they overlooked or weren't aware of when they selected the project. I figured if there was a lot of advice in one place it might help people better select projects or prevent them from asking the same questions again and again.

[bluebunny]

Damn Rob...
I've seen you breadboard the same circuit for a year! 

One can never be too certain! 

From an earlier thread...  I stand corrected.  This isn't Rob's breadboard.  This is Rob's pedalboard.

   

[deadastronaut]

^ yeah i need to sort that 1 plug out...it keeps blowing fuses..

[duck_arse]

like da says, breadboard.

start with a bit of paper, draw the circuit. fix the bits you think need fixxing, put it on the breadboard. use the parts you have, find out how the blasted thing works, or not. do mods, scribble all over some more sheets paper. come to an agreement w/ a working diagram.

switch to yr layout. you can't use published, cause you can't afford/can't etch/can't fit your particular set of components. erase the first half dozen layouts, start doing little sections of the circuit, fit them all together, shift half one row down, etc, etc, etc.

by the time you come to cut your pcb/vero/perf, you know every bloody inch of the layout, what goes where and why, and that you have all the parts there, and they all fit.  and then you make a little change .......

and that's why you do your own layout, and why doing a layout doesn't bother you. and that's why you hate other people wanting you to read their layout, it's in a foreign language.

[karbomusic]

by the time you come to cut your pcb/vero/perf, you know every bloody inch of the layout, what goes where and why, and that you have all the parts there, and they all fit. 

Quoting this because it is a thing of beauty!

[deadastronaut]

+1.

[GGBB]

I think that some people believe that a project with a schematic and a board layout is like a kit...but you have to supply the components. I look at projects as something that needs to be verified with all of the information I can find. Then I build it.

Okay, then let's have a thread to keep track of what has been verified as faulty.  Anybody opposed to that?

Although I tend to be in the same camp as you, I think both approaches are perfectly valid.  For those who just want to build the darn thing and be done with it, it doesn't necessarily follow that they aren't capable of properly verifying/testing/researching/breadboarding and everything else that is often involved, it might mean they just want to build a pedal quickly.  It might even be a circuit that they already have breadboarded yada yada yada in the past, but now they need another one and they found a new layout that they like a little better.  Nothing wrong with that approach at all, and it would be nice for them if they could in some way do at least a minimal check to see if said layout or schematic was good to go.  That type of information specific to a particular file on the web somewhere is often very difficult to pin down.

Posting build reports - which are confirmations of a layout/schematic/project - is highly encouraged here.  When a flaw is found, that gets reported as well - we don't just keep it to ourselves to avoid hurting the author's feelings by outing unmasking their mistake.  All the OP wants is a central topic for the build reports that confirm a problem.  I just don't get why any of us would be opposed to that and suggest that people should always build the slow and hard way.