Homebrew PCBs

I have a basic question about through-hole technology:

Are all 14 pin DIP's have the same footprint?   8 pin DIP's?
Or does it depend on the technology (CMOS, TTL, etc.)?    
(Assuming you don't need to route traces between adjacent
adjacent pins on the IC.)

I am guessing maybe 14 pin DIP's all have the same basic footprint as
do 8 pin DIP's.    What has your experience been?

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 17:57:34 +0200, alan00463 <alan00463@...> wrote:

> I have a basic question about through-hole technology:
>
>
> Are all 14 pin DIP's have the same footprint?   8 pin DIP's?
>
> Or does it depend on the technology (CMOS, TTL, etc.)?
>
> (Assuming you don't need to route traces between adjacent
>
> adjacent pins on the IC.)
>
>
> I am guessing maybe 14 pin DIP's all have the same basic footprint as
>
> do 8 pin DIP's.    What has your experience been?
>

DIPs are for 14 pin usually all the same, the larger ones come in two  
different widths which can lead to nasty mistakes...

To be sure you can always check the mechanical dimensions in the datasheet.

ST

Hi all,

I've just had my first try at making a PCB and it failed :-(. Could you 
guys (and girls) please look to my procedure and correct me if I did 
something stupid.

I am using the kit from Conrad ( 
http://www.conrad.fr/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=209546&langId=-2&parent_category_rn=18950 
), which consists of a black box containing 4 UV tubes and a heated etch 
stand.

I've designed a test board using eagle and exported it as an image ( see 
www.lieron.be/pcb/small_2400dpi.bmp ).
I've printed the pattern on a transparent slide using a inkjet printer 
(Canon Pixma 5400R), with all settings to "darkest" and highest quality. 
It came out very well..
Then I put the transparent on the glass plate in the UV box and placed a 
piece of photo sensitive PCB on top of it. After 2.5 minutes of lighting 
I developed the PCB in a NaOH solution (1 liter for 35grams NaOH).
You could quickly see the process failed then, the pattern didn't show 
up, only the big black spot and the widest track were somewhat visible.
I've tried several other light times, from 1.5 minutes to 3 minutes but 
they all seem to give the same result, the small tracks are gone every time.

I've also tried putting a second identical transparent on top of the 
first one to make it darker but that didn't help either. The weird thing 
is I taped the second one using regular green DIY tape and that seemed 
to stop the UV light better then the much darker transparrent. Could it 
be an issue of the inkt not stopping UV light?

Anyways, I'm just slightly depressed now, so I need some icecream ;-)

Thanks in advance for suggestions and greetings,


Ronald

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Ronald Vanschoren
<yahoogroups@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> 
> I've just had my first try at making a PCB and it failed :-(. Could you 
> guys (and girls) please look to my procedure and correct me if I did 
> something stupid.
> 
> I am using the kit from Conrad ( 
>
http://www.conrad.fr/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=209546&langId=-2&parent_category_rn=18950

> ), which consists of a black box containing 4 UV tubes and a heated
etch 
> stand.
> 
> I've designed a test board using eagle and exported it as an image (
see 
> www.lieron.be/pcb/small_2400dpi.bmp ).
> I've printed the pattern on a transparent slide using a inkjet printer 
> (Canon Pixma 5400R), with all settings to "darkest" and highest
quality. 
> It came out very well..
> Then I put the transparent on the glass plate in the UV box and
placed a 
> piece of photo sensitive PCB on top of it. After 2.5 minutes of
lighting 
> I developed the PCB in a NaOH solution (1 liter for 35grams NaOH).
> You could quickly see the process failed then, the pattern didn't show 
> up, only the big black spot and the widest track were somewhat visible.
> I've tried several other light times, from 1.5 minutes to 3 minutes but 
> they all seem to give the same result, the small tracks are gone
every time.
> 
> I've also tried putting a second identical transparent on top of the 
> first one to make it darker but that didn't help either. The weird
thing 
> is I taped the second one using regular green DIY tape and that seemed 
> to stop the UV light better then the much darker transparrent. Could it 
> be an issue of the inkt not stopping UV light?

Yes, very likely. Black in visible is not necessarily opaque in other
bands.

Thoughts and subsequent experiments by someone on Screenprinters.net
found that using the light cyan and yellow to print for UV exposure
worked better than black. Reasoning: those two inks are the most prone
to fading due to UV damage. So those are the inks that have had the
most work done in blocking UV to make them last longer.

Since you cannot choose exactly which inks to use to print, you could
experiment with light green shades and some testing. Or sacrifice a
printer by loading a mix of light cyan and yellow into all the cartridges.

An alternative is to bop on over to screenprinters.net and find out
which brand of black inkjet ink they are using, as most are using a
particular brand of black ink (not necessarily all the same). That
website is sponsored by a company that sells RIP software for
screenprinters, I think they also sell their own ink just for this.

Steve Greenfield

7-10 g NaOH in 1 liter! 

Ronald Vanschoren <yahoogroups@...> wrote:    .....
  I developed the PCB in a NaOH solution (1 liter for 35grams NaOH).


			
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:59:34 +0200, Ronald Vanschoren  
<yahoogroups@...> wrote:

>
>
> Anyways, I'm just slightly depressed now, so I need some icecream
>
>
> Thanks in advance for suggestions and greetings,
>
>
>
> Ronald
>


I didn't know conrad had a french operation... long time since i bought  
there..


Anyway, about your board. I suggest the following:
Get a stip of photoboard, pull the protective foil off, and a sheet of  
black paper or cardboard or thin sheetmetal or.. (anything that is REALLY  
not letting through light.)

Now put the this cardboard on the light table, and the PCB on top of it.  
You want to expose only a small part of the PCB at first. After a while  
pull the cardboard back some more to expose a larger area. Time this and  
write down the times (you can mark the back of the PCB). You want like 10%  
to 1000% of the recommended time in coarse steps. Then develop that making  
sure you have the right concentration of developer.

This excludes any transparency problems, and shows you the ideal exposure  
time. Work from there with the transparency and you'll get there.

ST

I just bought this thing:
http://www.conrad.fr/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=221211&langId=-2&parent_category_rn=18948
Not sure if it is pure NaOH, but I guess so. I says to solve it into 1 
liter of water and develop for about 1 minute.*
*
guja wrote:

>7-10 g NaOH in 1 liter! 
>
>Ronald Vanschoren <yahoogroups@...> wrote:    .....
>  I developed the PCB in a NaOH solution (1 liter for 35grams NaOH).
>
>
>			
>---------------------------------
>Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Links, Files, and Photos:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
>
>If Files or Photos are running short of space, post them here:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs_Archives/ 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>  
>

Would I use a test patter or just expose the whole board? How do I see 
what the correct time is then? Will it be as clear as copper on one part 
(not exposed long enough) no copper on the other (exposed long enough)?

Stefan Trethan wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:59:34 +0200, Ronald Vanschoren  
><yahoogroups@...> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Anyways, I'm just slightly depressed now, so I need some icecream
>>
>>
>>Thanks in advance for suggestions and greetings,
>>
>>
>>
>>Ronald
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>I didn't know conrad had a french operation... long time since i bought  
>there..
>
>
>Anyway, about your board. I suggest the following:
>Get a stip of photoboard, pull the protective foil off, and a sheet of  
>black paper or cardboard or thin sheetmetal or.. (anything that is REALLY  
>not letting through light.)
>
>Now put the this cardboard on the light table, and the PCB on top of it.  
>You want to expose only a small part of the PCB at first. After a while  
>pull the cardboard back some more to expose a larger area. Time this and  
>write down the times (you can mark the back of the PCB). You want like 10%  
>to 1000% of the recommended time in coarse steps. Then develop that making  
>sure you have the right concentration of developer.
>
>This excludes any transparency problems, and shows you the ideal exposure  
>time. Work from there with the transparency and you'll get there.
>
>ST
>
>
>Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Links, Files, and Photos:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
>
>If Files or Photos are running short of space, post them here:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs_Archives/ 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>  
>

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 23:53:49 +0200, Ronald Vanschoren  
<yahoogroups@...> wrote:

> Would I use a test patter or just expose the whole board? How do I see
>
> what the correct time is then? Will it be as clear as copper on one part
>
> (not exposed long enough) no copper on the other (exposed long enough)?
>


no test pattern is needed, although you might put a transparency on the  
exposure unit to add in the attenuation.

You will see after developing clearly the areas that are blank copper,  
which is exposed enough, and areas that will not develop well, some resist  
will be left, those are not exposed enough. The time is selected so it is  
surely long enough to achieve full exposure, but not unnecessarily  
overexpose.

ST

At the risk of stating the obvious, the printed side of the
transparency goes against the surface of the board.. :-)  

I never had much luck with inkjet printing, even when it did work for
one board, the next time the heads clogged or something else went
wrong.. and the proper transparencies were quite expensive.

I have settled on the blue press-n-peel and a laser printer..

have fun

Chris  (-=Spiyda=-)

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@...m, Ronald Vanschoren
<yahoogroups@...> wrote:

>
> Hi all,
> 
> I've just had my first try at making a PCB and it failed :-(. Could you 
>

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 at 23:51:11 +0200, top-poster Ronald Vanschoren 
regurgitated:
>I just bought this thing:
>http://www.conrad.fr/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=221211&langId=-2&parent_category_rn=18948
>Not sure if it is pure NaOH, but I guess so. I says to solve it into 1
>liter of water and develop for about 1 minute.*
>*
>guja wrote:
>
> >7-10 g NaOH in 1 liter!
> >
> >Ronald Vanschoren <yahoogroups@...> wrote:    .....
> >  I developed the PCB in a NaOH solution (1 liter for 35grams NaOH).

Reading this backwards, as required by Ronald...

[ guja deserves part of the blame ;-)
   but at least they trimmed their quotes
   - except the group links :-(( ]

...Ronald first says that he used 35g/litre NaOH then,
when challenged to use only 7-10g/litre,
Ronald admits to using CRC "revelateur en poudre 1442"
which he 'guesses' is pure NaOH.

But (a) it's not 35g, it's only 30g
and (b) it's not 'pure NaOH' - it isn't _even_ NaOH'  at all !!

It's 100% disodium metasilicate.

Hint: when unsure of a commercial product,
search for a MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheet), like
http://www.crcind.com/wwwcrc/msds/BB4031442-3.htm .

Sodium metasilicate is commonly used in laundry products
because (AIUI, IANAChemist) it dissociates into a highly
alkaline solution (pH 12.6 at 1 % concentration) but, unlike
NaOH, it does not decay in storage by absorbtion of
atmospheric carbon dioxide.

So 35g/litre NaOH is a different animal from 30g/litre
"revelateur en poudre", with a much bigger bite.

But what would you expect from a top-poster :-P

Sorry, Ronald, only joking - anyway, we'll be rid of you
after you self-medicate with a proprietary cold remedy
_and_ paracetamol tablets ;-) The chemistry does matter!


Regards, LenW
-- 
   Please trim quotes to minimum for context, then
   reply _below_ or interleave point-by-point replies.

I do expect a word on this from you Steve.

thanks

ST


On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:47:21 +0200, Len Warner <yahoo@...>  
wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 at 23:51:11 +0200, top-poster Ronald Vanschoren
> regurgitated:
>> I just bought this thing:
>> http://www.conrad.fr/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=221211&langId=-2&parent_category_rn=18948
>> Not sure if it is pure NaOH, but I guess so. I says to solve it into 1
>> liter of water and develop for about 1 minute.*
>> *
>> guja wrote:
>>
>> >7-10 g NaOH in 1 liter!
>> >
>> >Ronald Vanschoren <yahoogroups@...> wrote:    .....
>> >  I developed the PCB in a NaOH solution (1 liter for 35grams NaOH).
>
> Reading this backwards, as required by Ronald...
>
> [ guja deserves part of the blame ;-)
>    but at least they trimmed their quotes
>    - except the group links :-(( ]
>
> ...Ronald first says that he used 35g/litre NaOH then,
> when challenged to use only 7-10g/litre,
> Ronald admits to using CRC "revelateur en poudre 1442"
> which he 'guesses' is pure NaOH.
>
> But (a) it's not 35g, it's only 30g
> and (b) it's not 'pure NaOH' - it isn't _even_ NaOH'  at all !!
>
> It's 100% disodium metasilicate.
>
> Hint: when unsure of a commercial product,
> search for a MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheet), like
> http://www.crcind.com/wwwcrc/msds/BB4031442-3.htm .
>
> Sodium metasilicate is commonly used in laundry products
> because (AIUI, IANAChemist) it dissociates into a highly
> alkaline solution (pH 12.6 at 1 % concentration) but, unlike
> NaOH, it does not decay in storage by absorbtion of
> atmospheric carbon dioxide.
>
> So 35g/litre NaOH is a different animal from 30g/litre
> "revelateur en poudre", with a much bigger bite.
>
> But what would you expect from a top-poster :-P
>
> Sorry, Ronald, only joking - anyway, we'll be rid of you
> after you self-medicate with a proprietary cold remedy
> _and_ paracetamol tablets ;-) The chemistry does matter!
>
>
> Regards, LenW

I normally top post, but because you helped me so much I'll write it at 
the bottom especially for you :-p

Len Warner wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 at 23:51:11 +0200, top-poster Ronald Vanschoren 
> regurgitated:
>   
>> I just bought this thing:
>> http://www.conrad.fr/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=221211&langId=-2&parent_category_rn=18948
>> Not sure if it is pure NaOH, but I guess so. I says to solve it into 1
>> liter of water and develop for about 1 minute.*
>> *
>> guja wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> 7-10 g NaOH in 1 liter!
>>>
>>> Ronald Vanschoren <yahoogroups@...> wrote:    .....
>>>  I developed the PCB in a NaOH solution (1 liter for 35grams NaOH).
>>>       
>
> Reading this backwards, as required by Ronald...
>
> [ guja deserves part of the blame ;-)
>    but at least they trimmed their quotes
>    - except the group links :-(( ]
>
> ...Ronald first says that he used 35g/litre NaOH then,
> when challenged to use only 7-10g/litre,
> Ronald admits to using CRC "revelateur en poudre 1442"
> which he 'guesses' is pure NaOH.
>
> But (a) it's not 35g, it's only 30g
> and (b) it's not 'pure NaOH' - it isn't _even_ NaOH'  at all !!
>
> It's 100% disodium metasilicate.
>
> Hint: when unsure of a commercial product,
> search for a MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheet), like
> http://www.crcind.com/wwwcrc/msds/BB4031442-3.htm .
>
> Sodium metasilicate is commonly used in laundry products
> because (AIUI, IANAChemist) it dissociates into a highly
> alkaline solution (pH 12.6 at 1 % concentration) but, unlike
> NaOH, it does not decay in storage by absorbtion of
> atmospheric carbon dioxide.
>
> So 35g/litre NaOH is a different animal from 30g/litre
> "revelateur en poudre", with a much bigger bite.
>
> But what would you expect from a top-poster :-P
>
> Sorry, Ronald, only joking - anyway, we'll be rid of you
> after you self-medicate with a proprietary cold remedy
> _and_ paracetamol tablets ;-) The chemistry does matter!
>
>
> Regards, LenW
>   
Ok should have looked into it better, I just trusted the guy who sold it 
as he said it was NaOH (I should have had a clue about his competence 
when he first tried to sell me etchant). But it _is_ 35gr as you can see 
on the package if you click this link

http://www2.produktinfo.conrad.com/datenblaetter/50000-74999/065226-an-01-fr-T_sachet_revelateur.pdf

Not that it makes much of a difference though.

Actually it's a good thing that it's the metasilicate stuff (I think), 
because I read on some places on the net that it is hard to overdevelop 
using metasilicate. What are your ideas/experiences on this?

Thanks for pointing it out.


Ronald

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Ronald Vanschoren" <yahoogroups@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: My first try failed miserably..


> Ok should have looked into it better, I just trusted the guy who sold it
> as he said it was NaOH (I should have had a clue about his competence
> when he first tried to sell me etchant). But it _is_ 35gr as you can see
> on the package if you click this link
>
> http://www2.produktinfo.conrad.com/datenblaetter/50000-74999/065226-an-01-fr-T_sachet_revelateur.pdf
>
> Not that it makes much of a difference though.
>
> Actually it's a good thing that it's the metasilicate stuff (I think),
> because I read on some places on the net that it is hard to overdevelop
> using metasilicate. What are your ideas/experiences on this?

Yes, it's got a lot more latitude. I use NaOH because I can buy it locally.

Leon

Hello Ronald,

  Tuesday, April 11, 2006, 8:59:34 PM, you wrote:



  WOW too much NaOH.

  Only 7 to 10g per liter of water!

-- 
 Best regards,
 Zoran A. Scepanovic
 zastos@...

*********
Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened.
*********

Please be advised what was said may be absolutely wrong, and hereby this disclaimer follows.  I reserve the right to be wrong and admit it in front of the entire world.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Len Warner <yahoo@...> wrote:    [ guja deserves part of the blame ;-)

Hint: when unsure of a commercial product,
search for a MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheet), like
http://www.crcind.com/wwwcrc/msds/BB4031442-3.htm .

But what would you expect from a top-poster :-P
     
  At www.conrad.de  MSDS are well organized and only a few clicks away.
  If you search for developer (=entwickler) you can easily find “sicherheitsdatenblatt”
  and see if it is “dinatriummetasilikat”, “Monohydrat eines Alkali-Metallhydroxids” or NaOH.
  On the other side, http://www1.int.conrad.com/ and http://www1.uk.conrad.com/ have no chemicals at all. Try 528773, 528803, 527882 and see. 
   
  conrad.fr have developer from CRC, conrad.de have Bungard/Seno chemicals.
   

		
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I cannot pick out who said what in this post. I'm seeing more and more
where the quoted text and new message look exactly the same.

I'd appreciate it if everyone could set their quoting to the standard
system of adding an angle bracket and space. I consider this -much-
more important than top or bottom posting in following threads.

Steve Greenfield
listowner Homebrew_PCBs

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, guja <guja2001bg@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Len Warner <yahoo@...> wrote:    [ guja deserves part of the blame ;-)
> 
> Hint: when unsure of a commercial product,
> search for a MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheet), like
> http://www.crcind.com/wwwcrc/msds/BB4031442-3.htm .
> 
> But what would you expect from a top-poster :-P
>      
>   At www.conrad.de  MSDS are well organized and only a few clicks away.
>   If you search for developer (=entwickler) you can easily find
"sicherheitsdatenblatt"
>   and see if it is "dinatriummetasilikat", "Monohydrat eines
Alkali-Metallhydroxids" or NaOH.
>   On the other side, http://www1.int.conrad.com/ and
http://www1.uk.conrad.com/ have no chemicals at all. Try 528773,
528803, 527882 and see. 
>    
>   conrad.fr have developer from CRC, conrad.de have Bungard/Seno
chemicals.
>    
> 
> 		
> ---------------------------------
> Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

All,

After some busy weeks I finally had the time to give the PCB making 
process a second try. It went way better then last time, but I still 
have some work to do to get it perfect.
I'm just popping this message to let you know that the previous attempt 
failed because I used the "all black" setting of the printer. I figured 
that using only black ink would make the pattern come out darker, but 
that's not the case. You can easily see it's way darker when you 
unselect that option and allow the printer to use all inks.



greetings,

Ronald

Steve wrote:

> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Ronald Vanschoren
> <yahoogroups@...> wrote:
>   
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've just had my first try at making a PCB and it failed :-(. Could you 
>> guys (and girls) please look to my procedure and correct me if I did 
>> something stupid. ... Could it 
>> be an issue of the inkt not stopping UV light?
>>     
>
> Yes, very likely. Black in visible is not necessarily opaque in other
> bands.
>
> ...
> Steve Greenfield
>