Vero/Stripboard strategies and layout planning

[matopotato]

Hi,
What are some of your best practices when it comes to planning the layout of a circuit onto a vero/stripboard?
So far I try to place anything with a fixed place like pots that I won't wore. (Supports the build in the enclosure.)
And ICs somewhat central.
9v rail away from edges and ground rail on the egdes.
Still my most recent attempt seems to take up a lot of extra space, becomes quite complex and difficult to overview.
Grateful for any ideas.

[nocentelli]

http://tagboardeffects.blogspot.com/2012/09/vero-layout-guide.html

[matopotato]

Thanks, yes I had read through that page. And comments.
It is good, but I am still missing some of the planning, strategy and "philosophy" behind placements.

[andy-h-h]

It is good, but I am still missing some of the planning, strategy and "philosophy" behind placements.

Once you look at a few layouts, you will notice that quite often the only driving force seems to be making the layout small enough to fit in a Hammond 150B enclosure.  Keep input and outputs away from each other, and same for routing on the board - keep high level signals away from low level signals or you might have issues.

It just takes practice and a lot of checking.  If you are using DIYLC, try the "highlight connected areas" function when checking your layout.

I think just focus on what makes sense to you, as you are the one that will be building it.

[matopotato]

If you are using DIYLC, try the "highlight connected areas" function when checking your layout.

Thanks. Food points. Yes, I use DIYLC and the Alt click was very useful to see whT goes where. But there might be some bug since some spots color the whole board green 
(And I checked the cuts and they are same layer as a section that works.)

[Phend]

Extra points are awarded for neatness.

[matopotato]

Extra points are awarded for neatness.

Are there minus points?

[ElectricDruid]

Are there minus points?

Minus points for pointless wire links on the board side!

[StephenGiles]

Minus points for cramming a circuit on to a board so small so as to fit into a Hammond 150B enclosure, I always start off with a piece of veroboard 30cm x 10cm and make the circuit as big as it needs to be - later trouble shooting is then much easier!!

[andy-h-h]

Minus points for cramming a circuit on to a board so small so as to fit into a Hammond 150B enclosure, I always start off with a piece of veroboard 30cm x 10cm and make the circuit as big as it needs to be - later trouble shooting is then much easier!!

100% - small does not mean good.   I used to try and make them as small as possible, and then I realised that it was largely pointless, as I prefer larger enclosures anyway.  Strangely, at the same time that I changed to doing my own layouts, my success rate for builds went up dramatically - I guess knowing the layout really well before starting makes a difference.   

For me - minus points for placing large electrolytic caps in places that they clearly don't fit.

[Axldeziak]

Overly large layouts with acres of unused space and gaps.... for no reason.
Standing and flat resistors just willy-nilly everywhere. Pick one!
Thinking you have to layout the same redundant power filter on every board. Why?
Pots, and jacks mounted directly to the mainboard. Grrrr.
Not sectioning out the layouts so you can use standardized layouts for items that get repeated in different builds. (Standard power board, buffer, clipper sections, ect.)
Ugly ass colors.... just why?
Not taking a moment to look up the actual dimensions of the parts and saving them for later use. (No, that 470uf cap is NOT 5mm!)
Flying jumper wires everywhere.
Adding every mod in existence to a layout but not making up a plain jane stock example in addition to it.

[andy-h-h]

Standing and flat resistors just willy-nilly everywhere. Pick one!
Not sectioning out the layouts so you can use standardized layouts for items that get repeated in different builds. (Standard power board, buffer, clipper sections, ect.)
Ugly ass colors.... just why?

guilty as charged....   

[anotherjim]

No matter how ugly or messy, I'd rather have anything but one of those "work of art" PCBs that have neglected to have a decent peer review of the circuit that's not been properly evaluated before production. Why do so many do that with their fingers and anything else crossed in the hope it will be ok?

[digi2t]

In all my years of doing layouts in DIYLC, I've developed the following habits;
- I always start with an oversized board in DIYLC. Trimming it down to actual size when done is easy.
- In DIYLC set the transparency of all my components to 50%. Easy to see cuts underneath, but components are still clearly visible.
- I try to put the power rails as far apart as is feasible. I may have to nudge them up or down during conception, or jumper to other rows, but I try not to run them directly parallel to each other, if at all possible.
- I design the power section first. Then I'll build the audio chain(s). When I need power or ground to a certain point, I'll pull up or down to it with jumpers.
- For caps, I always try to respect the actual lead spacing. Nothing bugs me more than a radial electro cap with 2.5mm LS, and the leads are stretched over 14 rows. Same goes for smaller caps. It's fugly. OK OK, sometimes a stretch to the next row is a necessary evil. I won't tell if you don't.
- For resistors, I have no qualms whatsoever to stand them up. It saves space. If it works for the Japanese, it's hella good enough for me. For 1/4w resistors, I try not to stretch the leads too far either. Like caps, I hate to see a resistor spread out over umpteen rows or holes. I try to keep it under 6 holes, unless it's a real bugger.
- Don't be afraid to share a hole with two components, if the leads fit. Think a 4148 diode, or resistor chain. Sharing is good... it saves space!
- Put LOTS of info on your layouts. There's no such thing as "too much info". Number of cuts, number of jumpers, the BOM, wiring, miscellaneous info, warnings, and whatever else you might need. I even like labelling my rows, especially on big veros, it allows me to focus on what's going where and fed by what. There's nothing worse than being hip deep into your build, and suddenly realizing that you're not sure where a wire goes, or how a transistor should be orientated.
- Once I have a layout done, and checked that it matches the schematic, I usually walk away from it for a few days. Nothing... and I mean nothing, will bring out the "what the @#$% was I thinking there?" factor like a fresh set of eyes.
- Now begins the down sizing. Unless I'm working with a potentially noisy circuit (clocks, timers, etc.), I'll start to compress the layout as much as possible. It's like a form of sudoku, and might take me a few more days, depending on the size of the vero, of course. Usually this also requires additional trace checking to the schematic. You start moving things around, inevitably some things slip through the cracks.
- I ALWAYS reserve at least two 3 x 3 areas at diagonally opposite corners for 3mm holes. If I can work in 3 or even 4 holes, without sacrificing too much real estate, then I'll do it. I buff off the copper in these areas, and use these areas for screws and nylon standoffs. I don't do "floating" boards, or double sided tape, or foam, or whatever other cheesy fastening methods that are out there (leading up to the ever entertaining "Arrrrgh!! My project doesn't work when it's in the box!! HELP!!" threads). My boards are firmly secured to the enclosure. With hardware. If I kick it across the room... it'll still work. I mean, I don't actually kick them... but if I did...

Finally, if I'm lucky, I'll get a decent layout that not only fits the part, but looks it too, and not least of all, works...









And when I get really bored, I do stoopid shit like this...



That's just my two bits. Don't get me wrong... the guys over at Tagboard, or Sabrotone, or what(who)ever else is out there, do great work. Word. I just have my own foibles when it comes to vero design. With time, you'll figure out what works best for you. If it works, then it's not wrong. It all starts with... DOING!

[andy-h-h]

- I try to put the power rails as far apart as is feasible. I may have to nudge them up or down during conception, or jumper to other rows, but I try not to run them directly parallel to each other, if at all possible.

Just curious as I frequently do the opposite - is there a technical reason for separating the rails?   I often run both at the top, and then a link to ground at the bottom.   

PS Voltages on the Buzzaround?  +9V / -9V

[FiveseveN]

is there a technical reason for separating the rails?

Quite the opposite, they should be as closely coupled as possible, i.e. two adjacent power layers on a multi-layer board:



Obviously this can't be done on Vero. It's made for fast prototyping, not for best practices.

[StephenGiles]

At the end of the day, it's down to the individual's obsession surely!

[ElectricDruid]

- I try to put the power rails as far apart as is feasible. I may have to nudge them up or down during conception, or jumper to other rows, but I try not to run them directly parallel to each other, if at all possible.

Just curious as I frequently do the opposite - is there a technical reason for separating the rails?   I often run both at the top, and then a link to ground at the bottom.   

It's not a terribly technical reason, but one reason to do it might be that it makes shorts across the power rails less likely?

[digi2t]

^^^ This.

What Tom said. It's vero, and for those that don't develop the habit of scrapping out the flux (and potential solder bridges) between rows before plugging it in, well... power supplies no likey. Also, I've found over time that it helps cut down overall on the amount of jumpers needed to bring power to a point. I tend to work from left to right, following along with the schematic, so having the + across the top, and the GND across the bottom works for me. Then I can work at bringing the components to the power, rather than the other way around. Sorta like bringing the mountain to Mohammed. Of course, that might just be my brain's way of sorting it out, YMMV. As I mentioned before, things typically start to get dicey when you're dealing with LFO's and such, otherwise, I've never had any issues.

- I try to put the power rails as far apart as is feasible. I may have to nudge them up or down during conception, or jumper to other rows, but I try not to run them directly parallel to each other, if at all possible.

Just curious as I frequently do the opposite - is there a technical reason for separating the rails?   I often run both at the top, and then a link to ground at the bottom.   

PS Voltages on the Buzzaround?  +9V / -9V

Ah yes... The old bipolar Buzzaround. I forgot about that one.

The +9v should read "GND". Spank me.

[antonis]

I tend to work from left to right, following along with the schematic, so having the + across the top, and the GND across the bottom works for me. Then I can work at bringing the components to the power, rather than the other way around.

Infallible method..!!