On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 05:39 +0000, jcarlosmor wrote:
> Maybe for a very simple board it is true, but for a medium/advanced
> PCB home maker it is faster to build a PCB than to cut traces and do
> the veroboard layout. In fact you are stating the reverse of your
> points, because mostly this days,
>
> ∗ component density requirements are becoming extreme
For complex circuits needing to fit into tight enclosures, yes. But
certainly not for my simple PIC12F675 programming/development board.
> ∗ generally the best and fancy components only are SMD
Of course I'd go the PCB route if I was using SMD-only parts.
> ∗ same reasons for the pitch
Ditto
> Regarding the lack of a CNC machine I am sure as said above that it
> is more faster and less stressing to drill by hand dozens of holes
> than to plan the veroboard layout and cutting the traces.
Believe me, it was faster and less stressing for me to cut 36 tracks
than to hand-drill 78 holes. I've done both. The cutting takes only one
second per track with a rotary hand tool with tapered diamond bit.
> Maybe the
> Eagle utility that you mention could be useful for using as a "do-and-
> forget-what-is-happening" in the board
Well, it's useful as a 'do and ∗know∗ what is happening' layout tool.
> but most of the times the
> simple implementation of parallel copper tracks with jumpers simply
> does not work (RF, noise, ground loops, etc.)
Not a problem with simple circuits.
> I would encourage you to do some PCB experimenting.
I've been doing plenty.
> I am sure that
> when you gained some minimal experiencie you will enjoy it and maybe
> you could say goodbye forever to your veroboards.
I've been doing PCBs on and off for 2 years - simple to intermediate
single-layer boards.
With the setup I'm using, I know how long it takes to create a PCB of a
given level of complexity. I made the original post because using the
info about Eagle and stripboard, I was able to get the same board built
and working on stripboard in less than half the time.
Cheers
David