Homebrew PCBs

Hi,

After getting a 'knack' for home PCB imaging/etching, I thought my
veroboard/stripboard days were well over. Especially since I've always
laid out veroboard circuits by hand 'as I go', which has been a tad
stressful.

However, an idle search turned up an excellent page on using Eagle (or
similar PCB CAD programs) for veroboard design:
http://www.geocities.com/mike_aus_us/micros/projects/Stripboard_EAGLE/Stripboard_EAGLE.htm?200722

I tried it out with a board I'm currently working on - a universal
development/debugging/programming board for PIC12F675 MCU.

Since I don't have CNC drilling at the moment (still waiting for my mech
eng to get his act together), the PCB version of the layout had 76 holes
to drill, plus 4 topside wires.

In comparison, the veroboard version had zero holes to drill, 36 track
cuts and 12 topside wires.

Result is that for this simple board, the veroboard version took way
less time and effort than etching/drilling a comparable PCB version.
I completed the track-cutting and overhead wire soldering in much less
time than it would have taken to image and etch a bare board, let alone
drill the board after etching.

Something else that made the veroboard construction easier is being able
to print out the layout onto paper and glue it onto the veroboard. This
saved a wad of time with finding the correct places to cut tracks and
solder topside wires. Another time saver was using a handheld rotary
tool with a fine tapered diamond bit for the track cutting. And a third
time-saver was using tricks from the above URL for using Eagle's board
editor for veroboard layout.

My conclusion is that veroboard is vastly easier/quicker overall for
1-off or 2-off boards, provided that:

 * one doesn't have CNC drilling
 * component density requirements are not extreme
 * all components are through-hole, no SMDs
 * board is not intended for larger scale production
 * most/all components have multiple of 100mil pin pitch (or can be bent
   to fit), and have <= .9mm drill holes

Cheers
David

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, David McNab <rebirth@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> 
> After getting a 'knack' for home PCB imaging/etching, I thought my
> veroboard/stripboard days were well over. Especially since I've 
always
> laid out veroboard circuits by hand 'as I go', which has been a tad
> stressful.
> 
> However, an idle search turned up an excellent page on using Eagle 
(or
> similar PCB CAD programs) for veroboard design:
> 
http://www.geocities.com/mike_aus_us/micros/projects/Stripboard_EAGLE/
Stripboard_EAGLE.htm?200722
> 
> I tried it out with a board I'm currently working on - a universal
> development/debugging/programming board for PIC12F675 MCU.
> 
> Since I don't have CNC drilling at the moment (still waiting for my 
mech
> eng to get his act together), the PCB version of the layout had 76 
holes
> to drill, plus 4 topside wires.
> 
> In comparison, the veroboard version had zero holes to drill, 36 
track
> cuts and 12 topside wires.
> 
> Result is that for this simple board, the veroboard version took way
> less time and effort than etching/drilling a comparable PCB version.
> I completed the track-cutting and overhead wire soldering in much 
less
> time than it would have taken to image and etch a bare board, let 
alone
> drill the board after etching.
> 
> Something else that made the veroboard construction easier is being 
able
> to print out the layout onto paper and glue it onto the veroboard. 
This
> saved a wad of time with finding the correct places to cut tracks 
and
> solder topside wires. Another time saver was using a handheld rotary
> tool with a fine tapered diamond bit for the track cutting. And a 
third
> time-saver was using tricks from the above URL for using Eagle's 
board
> editor for veroboard layout.
> 
> My conclusion is that veroboard is vastly easier/quicker overall for
> 1-off or 2-off boards, provided that:
> 
>  * one doesn't have CNC drilling
>  * component density requirements are not extreme
>  * all components are through-hole, no SMDs
>  * board is not intended for larger scale production
>  * most/all components have multiple of 100mil pin pitch (or can be 
bent
>    to fit), and have <= .9mm drill holes
> 
> Cheers
> David
>

Hi David,

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
* generally the best and fancy components only are SMD
* same reasons for the pitch

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. Maybe the 
Eagle utility that you mention could be useful for using as a "do-and-
forget-what-is-happening" in the board, but most of the times the 
simple implementation of parallel copper tracks with jumpers simply 
does not work (RF, noise, ground loops, etc.)

I would encourage you to do some PCB experimenting. I am sure that 
when you gained some minimal experiencie you will enjoy it and maybe 
you could say goodbye forever to your veroboards.

Good luck.

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