First Time On Stripboard / Veroboard...

[liquids]

I've done a bunch of stuff on breadboard and even a few on PCB thus far, but it takes me a while to settle on designs I want to set in solder, so to speak. So only now am I  working on my first ever stripboard project.  I've never even tried soldering up one of the stripboard layouts posted here, so it's a big learning experience. steep learning curve working it from designing it on up to building it...

This pedal is going to end up as a tweaked-up version of Joe Davisson's Shocktave, actually, so the veroboard layouts on here wouldn't do me much good with all the mods I was doing.  I was also challenging myself to fit it in a 125B, because the way I have it, it on only has a volume knob and then a toggle switch for a little high end roll off, so the layout posted was altogether too big to work the way I wanted it, and a large box seemed silly given the parts count.  So I started designing my my own layout from scratch.

I spend so many hours working it out on graph type paper, and then mapping it with the layout creator. It's pretty compact, but if the board were any bigger it wouldn't really fit in there, so I kept considering starting over and just going with a bigger box...in the end I concluded it would work, so I've stuck with a small board.  Of course, if the board were any tighter it would be a troubleshooting nightmare. I can't even count the hours it took to create it, adjust the layout, re-do it, check it again, make sure the parts will physically fit the spaces in reality, etc, over an over!  It would have been a lot quicker (maybe just one night, even) if I gave myself more room to work with.  But I liked the challenge of trying to fit it efficiently on a small board, all said, in the end.

So I drilled out the broken traces last night and started soldering...it's fun, not as hard as I thought once the layout is correct.  Anyhow, all that to ask...anyone have any tips for working with stripboard, designing layouts, etc? 

My questions: here's a simple one. When I have a cap or resistor running along the traces from one hole to another, is it necessary to break the trace between the two holes?  I've always assumed so, and even breadboarded this way, but I keep wondering if that is necessary.  My though is, it would function like a resistor or cap in parallel with an open wire, meaning all signal would 'avoid' the resistor/cap and in essence not be in the circuit.  Is that true?  I'd hate to keep drilling trace breaks where I don't need them.

I've been using flux on nearly every solder joint, and it seems to look good and flow nicely, so in theory this is recommended (but I know I'm just a rookie here). On the flip side, I'm concerned about trace side solder joints merging together.  To the eye it seems like the solder stays on the trace and does not cross the thin area between traces, thus keeping the solder joints separate.  But there is plenty of flux from my added flux in there and the solder's flux, so it seems to build up between traces.  Should I be concerned?

Following that question, how hard should I work, when it's all soldered, to remove the flux?  How hard should I need to scrape with an exacto knife to ensure the traces aren't connected, or are there other proposed methods?

I designed this with troubleshooting in mind, as I consider it a happy surprise when something passes a signal the first time I plug it in.  Ususally any errors are simple if not, but I had that in mind when I design.  I've used the pre-bond wire to link areas or certain traces together.  For example, all my  'jumpers' connecting back to ground are black, while all signal flow 'jumpers' are another color, etc. This should help me make sense of it if something goes wrong, or later down the road long after I build it...seems to be working and I think is recommended.  

So, any other input to help a rookie stripboarder?  I guess I'm glad I bought some pre-made PCBs at first, but I can't imagine why I would do that anymore or mess with messy chemicals and all that, now that I'm trying classic stripboard.  On another note, I have a fair number of blank perfboards I've purchased, and can't for the life of me figure why I'd use that either, currently.   

Likewise,

[cathexis]

Hi,

Well, I love veroboard, it's become somewhat of a fetish. Making layouts for vero is a challenge akin to a good crossword puzzle, and I usually do mine away from a computer on paper - like in our summer house, where we don't have electricity. I laid out the MXR Noise Gate in a dental technician's waiting room once. I would probably like etching as well, but stinky acids around little kids is a no-go for the time being. See some of my vero layouts here:
http://www.aronnelson.com/gallery/main.php/v/cathexis/

My questions: here's a simple one. When I have a cap or resistor running along the traces from one hole to another, is it necessary to break the trace between the two holes?  I've always assumed so, and even breadboarded this way, but I keep wondering if that is necessary.  My though is, it would function like a resistor or cap in parallel with an open wire, meaning all signal would 'avoid' the resistor/cap and in essence not be in the circuit.  Is that true?  I'd hate to keep drilling trace breaks where I don't need them.

There's no point in this, is there? That would just short the legs of the component. Think about it...

I've been using flux on nearly every solder joint, and it seems to look good and flow nicely, so in theory this is recommended (but I know I'm just a rookie here). On the flip side, I'm concerned about trace side solder joints merging together.  To the eye it seems like the solder stays on the trace and does not cross the thin area between traces, thus keeping the solder joints separate.  But there is plenty of flux from my added flux in there and the solder's flux, so it seems to build up between traces.  Should I be concerned?

I've never used flux, apart from what's in the solder - can't see why you'd need to. If your veroboard is oxidized so you have problems with solder adhesion, you should just clean the board before you start. I don't have any problems with small amounts of flux left between traces, apart from once when I had a particularily sooty blob that bridged input to vbias - made an annoying low level crackle that had me suspecting faulty caps for a while. You should always check carefully and closely for bridges between tracks, by far the most common fault found while debugging, IMO.

For jumpers I use cut off component leads, takes less room, cheap, easy to place. They also take a probe well while you're measuring/debugging/audio probing. I use zero ohm resistors if I have them because I think they look cool

Rule number one when making vero layouts: quintuple check everything! Make a few copies of the schem and the layout, and get the highlighters out - go over the whole circuit until you make a full pass without finding mistakes. It is worth it!

Now, let us see your layout - maybe that'll make us think of more tips!

LARS

[liquids]

Lars thanks immensely for the tips! 

I guess I was not clear enough about what I mean about my breaking traces between legs of a component placed 'along the traces' rather than jumping from one trace to another...

Imagine you have a resistor flowing along a trace, with lead A in one hole, the resistor body going 'over' the next two holes along the same trace, and then lead B going in the next hole, spanning a total of 4 holes.  I've been breaking traces for one of the two center holes, between the two leads.  Does that make sense? If so, is that standard practice, or is it not really necessary? I'm banking on the former, but don't want to do needless work if my logic is skewed.   

I've definitely been working to keep the copper traces clean, roughing it up before I use it with copper scratch pad (a little piece of chore boy) and rubbing alcohol as well.  Likewise I rough up the leads before I solder them as well. I've had no issues with solder flow persay, I just like what flux does when soldering to flat metal, like switches, jacks, etc and though it might work well.  The joint ends up looking nicer to me.  If it's overkill but not going to harm anything I'll probably keep doing it, but it's good to know it's not something most guys find necessary.

I've definitely used a component lead as a jumper where the distance traveled is extremely short and fear of the bare lead jumper touching another component is not an issue, but it's good to know that is not uncommon practice, nor something that I need to fear causing issues in general.  Likewise, since the layout is a little tight, I figured the insulated (color coordinated) wiring might help me, in this particular case especially.  And it looks nicer.  But I guess my using more colored, bonded wire for bigger jumpers is my excessive appreciate for thinks looking orderly, ease of tracing signal flow if things go awry, and the intensity of my frustration when I can't get something to work right away.   

Thanks for the tips about checking the circuit, schematic, and layout.  I definitely went over the schematic and layout for many, many hours over the last few weeks.  I feel like I could have gone over it a ton more even, but figured...heck, I'm getting impatient. Great tips on your methodology! I'll definitely use them for the future, because my method was scatterbrained at first and slowed me down, I think. 

At the end of all the planning, I was going stir crazy with all the theory of the layout and just needed to do something with actual components and soldering.  I marked up my print out from the "good enough!" layout I had tweaked and tweaked in layout creator.  I then made any last minute adjustments (no, move this trace break back here, move this lead here...) by hand, and am now working off that, so my 'digital' layout is not up to date yet.  I also don't know how to use all the features for labeling in that DIY layout program yet, as this was my first time and I was learning as I went, so it won't be super clear to read, but it's a start.  When I get home I'll update those changes and upload it so you can have a look -- thanks for asking!

[cathexis]

I guess I was not clear enough about what I mean about my breaking traces between legs of a component placed 'along the traces' rather than jumping from one trace to another...

Imagine you have a resistor flowing along a trace, with lead A in one hole, the resistor body going 'over' the next two holes along the same trace, and then lead B going in the next hole, spanning a total of 4 holes.  I've been breaking traces for one of the two center holes, between the two leads.  Does that make sense? If so, is that standard practice, or is it not really necessary? I'm banking on the former, but don't want to do needless work if my logic is skewed.   

You mean like this, right?

If you don't break a copper trace that connects the two leads of a resistor, then you have a short circuit between the two legs of that resistor, rendering it useless. (quoth the Dalek: "resistance is useless" sorry, couldn't resist that one, sci-fi geek joke).

When I make a vero layout I usually print out a reversed copy where I mark the trace cuts in red, then I mark all holes to be drilled with a red marker on the copper side of my vero board. Saves me a lot of thinking in reverse, which comes in handy when making something like the A/DA Flanger that had like 134 cuts. I make the cuts with a 3-4mm drill in a hand-held electric screwdriver. Looks like this:

[liquids]

Sweet!  So I scored a large piece of stripboard today locally at a distributor today and am even more psyched now, after successful trace drilling that looks a lot like what you posted above.  Encouraging.

I'm lacking the time (and the patience) to figure out how to get my layouts posted here (and I'm anxious to get back to soldering!), so here's a quick fix, I rigged up a link to a compressed copy of the image I just updated for my layout, which you can view here: http://sites.google.com/site/teaandfiction/Home/shocky

I didn't list any values, but I can basically tell you the simple but effective circuit mods I settled on, to help trace the circuit or for anyoen interested... I've got a .001uf cap to ground off the input to shave highs for tracking.  I've got stage two biased with the stock cap and a 4.7K resistor to ground off the emitter, hard wired, for the highest gain range from breadboarding trial and error with various resistor values.  There is no clean signal path because I'm going for the 'wacko' and 'synthy' tones, so no mix pot needed.  The .47uF cap after Q2 is easier as an electrolytic 1uF. I've got a .022uf cap to ground (again for tracking purposes) right after the diode meets Q3's base.  At the output, I'll wire up a .001 cap switched in and out of the circuit to choose between a 'toothy high end' tone or a more filtered, bleepy tone, both of which are usable, though I tend to like the high end filtering more with my rig.  I use this  exclusively with a vintage-output style neck pickup, and the caps keep me from having to do any tone knob twiddling with my rig, but YMMV.  Otherwise, I think I left everything as is...    I call it 'shocky' for fun, thanks to Joe Davisson, and hope this is cool with him.

Aa for the layout - I do realize it's a tad dangerous, given things like putting a + and - strip next to each other...I kept trying to find an alternative, but if there is a good one, I certainly never found it, and as I said above, I settled on the layout compromises given that I can keep it in a smaller box, given my amateur drilling/stripboard layout/pedal layout skills.

Everytime I look at it, I still see things I know I'd change, this time no exception.    That said, any help and suggestions for my layout andf layouts in general would be helpful.

[LEON.01]

http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?moduleno=1926

One of the only things Maplin are good for! Expensive, but neat and tidy!

[Paul Perry (Frostwave)]

I have a spot face cutter - just like the Maplin one - but i prefer a short drill bit (as used to prepare holes for pop rivets) held in a chuck with a T-bar through it.
I proto everything on vero.

[liquids]

I appreciate all the info offered above!

As for the layout, I updated the link to a version of the layout that is corrected--some of the BJT's were positioned backwards, etc.  I also tweaked it a bit as I continue to learn more about how to use the program.  All of this is just for good measure in case anyone else is trying it out.

It's pretty much verified, except that the version I have working is not exactly as above, but should function exactly the same, only the above looks a lot nicer than mine.  It was, overall, fairly easy, and my only real troubleshooting issue was having the transistors in backwards (as noted above, a good system for figuring what things should look like trace side down, board side up, etc I now see is extremely important) and some stray solder bridging the output to ground.  After figuring that out, it was good to go!  I'm really happy with it, and can't wait to get the box to drill so I can start turning heads with the sounds from outer space at practice. 

[Renegadrian]

http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?moduleno=1926

One of the only things Maplin are good for! Expensive, but neat and tidy!

I just use my small knife...
I love vero, both laying  things out and soldering components on it - I just don't like perf...

[punkin]

Hmm...haven't tried using those types of boards yet...only perforated types. Can't seem to find them at my local RadioShack