FS: Custom "Arduino UNO" compatible boards designed and mfg. by me.

[RogueBotix]

I decided to re-design the Arduino uno board. I made a few design changes such as changing the usb chip so the board works well with USB 3. I also switch to a different regulator circuit so that the Arduino can happily run in a 24volt system. As well as a few other minor layout changes such as moving the pin 13 led and rx/tx right in front of their respective place on the header. The board uses high quality ceramic decoupling capacitors, so there are no electrolytics to dry out, and the board is assembled with eutectic lead solder, so it will not be subject to all the short comings of lead free solder such as: tin whiskers and mechanical fatigue.

I wanted to sell a high quality board, that was made in the USA, and would last virtually forever. I decided I should do all the production myself. I bought a Quad IVc pick and place, and a MiniPak wave soldering machine. So they were designed and assembled by me.

I am trying to sell them on ebay. currently I am selling them for the same price as the Adafruit boards. Please give me feedback, and if you would like, buy a board

https://www.ebay.com/itm/292886783729

Thank you so much

[sokoloff]

You probably need at least 29V and ideally 32V max input voltage to use on 24V (automotive, trucking, airplane) systems.

In any case, 26V is definitely not high enough for a charging lead acid battery of 12 cells, which is the overwhelmingly common 24V case.

[RogueBotix]

The regulator is designed for 24v systems, it has a 40v operating limit.

[mbest]

Could use another photo towards the connectors on the end.

[RogueBotix]

The USB and power jack? They are standard from a normal Arduino, but I will definitely add a picture tomorrow. Thank you for your feedback.

[janoc]

Careful about calling it "Arduino". That is trademarked and the Arduino AG will go after you for trademark infringement once they catch the wind of this. They are known for enforcing their marks.

The design of Arduinos is fair game but not the name. That's why Sparkfun calls theirs "Redboard" and Adafruit sells "MetroX" boards, even though they are clones of Arduino Uno.

[sokoloff]

The regulator is designed for 24v systems, it has a 40v operating limit.

That's great!!

Your Ebay listing though, says:

Using a higher quaility USB chip this will have better support for US 3.0, up to 26 volts input, allowing this to be used in a 24 volt system.

Typo on quality, USB, and suggests a spec of 26V upper limit.

[RogueBotix]

I didn't actually put Arduino on the board it self, I have however been putting it in the titles. What do you suggest I put in the title? Would it be ok if I put "Clone" After the word Arduino? Thanks for your feedback!

[RogueBotix]

The regulator is designed for 24v systems, it has a 40v operating limit.

That's great!!

Your Ebay listing though, says:

Using a higher quaility USB chip this will have better support for US 3.0, up to 26 volts input, allowing this to be used in a 24 volt system.

Typo on quality, USB, and suggests a spec of 26V upper limit.

Thank you so much! I observed your suggestion.

[RogueBotix]

I didn't actually put Arduino on the board it self, I have however been putting it in the titles. What do you suggest I put in the title? Would it be ok if I put "Clone" After the word Arduino? Thanks for your feedback!

Arduino-compatible is the proper verbiage AFAIK.

I Revised it. Thanks!

[janoc]

I didn't actually put Arduino on the board it self, I have however been putting it in the titles. What do you suggest I put in the title? Would it be ok if I put "Clone" After the word Arduino? Thanks for your feedback!

Arduino-compatible is the proper verbiage AFAIK.

I Revised it. Thanks!

Even better - create your own name for the boards. If it says only "Arduino-compatible", they could still send you a legal nastygram claiming that you are trying to profit from their trademark. If it says instead something like "SomeDuino 1 (compatible with Arduino Uno)" then you will likely be in the clear. I believe they even have a guide somewhere on their website that says what is OK and what is not with regards to the "Arduino" name and what you need to do if you want to make/sell own boards based on their designs.

EDIT: here it is: https://www.arduino.cc/en/Trademark/HomePage

   
    The product can't contain the name Arduino
    The board can't have Arduino written anywhere on it
    The board must not copy the Arduino Logo or graphic design
    The auction/website title can't use the Arduino name
    You can write in the description that the board is derived from Arduino.
    You must explicitly say that you're not connected to Arduino and your product is a derivative
    You must specify that any tech support request must be directed to you

So you must not put Arduino-compatible in the title but it may be in the description. Plus a few of the other formalities.

[Inverted18650]

Great idea and I will buy a couple to test in the 24V DIY BMS projects I have laying around. Nice work and thanks for sharing.

[Nusa]

If it's got a usb2 jack, in what way does it support usb3?

[RogueBotix]

If it's got a usb2 jack, in what way does it support usb3?

The Blue USB ports on computers are USB 3. These boards work with the USB 3.0 ports

[Nusa]

If it's got a usb2 jack, in what way does it support usb3?

The Blue USB ports on computers are USB 3. These boards work with the USB 3.0 ports

Meaning that some usb 3.0 implementations fucked up the 2.0 support? Haven't run into that problem personally.

Anyway, the way you have it worded now, wouldn't surprise me if someone returned it for not having a usb 3 port.

[sokoloff]

The regulator is designed for 24v systems, it has a 40v operating limit.

That's great!!

Your Ebay listing though, says:

Using a higher quaility USB chip this will have better support for US 3.0, up to 26 volts input, allowing this to be used in a 24 volt system.

Typo on quality, USB, and suggests a spec of 26V upper limit.

Thank you so much! I observed your suggestion.

It looks like the listing still suggests a 26V max input voltage at the top. That's not enough for a 24V vehicle (which runs at a nominal 28.8-ish volts).

If the actual limit is 40V, why not suggest that as a limit?

Similarly, listing still says "US 3.0, sporting a 26 volt upper limit", which I think should read "USB 3.0, sporting a 40 volt upper limit"

[Monkeh]

The regulator shown does not support 40V operation..

[Inverted18650]

The regulator shown does not support 40V operation..

Sure as hell doesn't. 26V continuous, 60V transient.

http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm2937.pdf

[retrolefty]

Interesting design. Using a switching regulator is a big improvement. I would have however preferred a USB micro or mini board connector, the old original USB connector is so big it sucks. I own probably 20 'arduino' boards using various AVR (168,328,1284, mega2560) chips mostly clones but a couple of real Arduino manufacture. However I never buy such a board that doesn't at least publish it's schematic. Doesn't have to be open sourced but a schematic drawing is  a must.

Do you have such a drawing to share? If not, why?


 

[RogueBotix]

Interesting design. Using a switching regulator is a big improvement. I would have however preferred a USB micro or mini board connector, the old original USB connector is so big it sucks. I own probably 20 'arduino' boards using various AVR (168,328,1284, mega2560) chips mostly clones but a couple of real Arduino manufacture. However I never buy such a board that doesn't at least publish it's schematic. Doesn't have to be open sourced but a schematic drawing is  a must.

Do you have such a drawing to share? If not, why?

I'll publish the schematic, its on my computer at work.

[bitseeker]

Neat board. Seems to have generated a good bit of interest.

How is the regulator mounted to the PCB? Is that a rivet? If so, it'd be nice to be able to more easily replace the regulator in case of an "input accident".

Aesthetically, and perhaps even practically, it'd be beneficial to have pin 13's LED further from the connector like you did with the RX/TX ones. That way, its placement looks similar, the pin label can go back in line with its neighbors, and you can see the LED better from that side of the board. Not a big deal, but a nice tweak.

For the photos, consider using a clean background (e.g., simple sheet of white or gray paper would suffice).

[janoc]

   
    The product can't contain the name Arduino
    The board can't have Arduino written anywhere on it
    The board must not copy the Arduino Logo or graphic design
    The auction/website title can't use the Arduino name
    You can write in the description that the board is derived from Arduino.
    You must explicitly say that you're not connected to Arduino and your product is a derivative
    You must specify that any tech support request must be directed to you

Stuff them. Ask an IP lawyer, and check if their claims are legitimate or not.
IMHO, you infringe a trademark if you give any false sensation that your product it that trademarked product.
If you make it clear that it's compatible or derived, then you should be fine, regardless how they formulate their words in their trademark guidelines.
Adding a line declaring the trademark belongs to Arduino and your product is an imitate should keep you safe in court.

Why those requirement shouldn't be legitimate? What they are asking is completely reasonable, IMO. If you go to an IP lawyer with this you will only walk out $500 lighter for the "consultation" and still will have to do the above.

The first 4 items follow directly from the fact that "Arduino" and the logos are protected marks. That's the trademark law imposing this, they are only making it clear for you. The rest is theirs requirements - but you ignore them at your own peril, people got sued/had legal problems for less when it came to trademarks (Sparkfun and Fluke's yellow multimeters come to mind).

Your "stuff them" advice may work for someone in China but hardly for the OP who is in the US where Arduino has been suing people (and winning!) over their trademarks before.

Risking a lawsuit (or at the very least having the auction pulled and potentially account banned by eBay) over something as idiotic as putting the "Arduino compatible" in the title of an auction instead of the description is just that - idiotic. It also gives anyone who would want to attack the OP over this a rather big "stick" because they could claim the OP acted in bad faith when they ignored even these very basic demands.

[wraper]

If it's got a usb2 jack, in what way does it support usb3?

The Blue USB ports on computers are USB 3. These boards work with the USB 3.0 ports

Meaning that some usb 3.0 implementations fucked up the 2.0 support? Haven't run into that problem personally.

Anyway, the way you have it worded now, wouldn't surprise me if someone returned it for not having a usb 3 port.

More like something fucked up on both ends. Because those ports work with other USB2.0 devices just fine. And it's not like silabs chip supports USB3, it just doesn't fail to work properly. Also what I can say with certainty is that original Arduino UNO has fucked up USB shield and ESD protection schematic. Designed by some idiot. It's so bad that ESD protection is not only non functional but MCU data pins can be fried through this "protection" if ESD hits the shield .

[sokoloff]

   
    The product can't contain the name Arduino
    The board can't have Arduino written anywhere on it
    The board must not copy the Arduino Logo or graphic design
    The auction/website title can't use the Arduino name
    You can write in the description that the board is derived from Arduino.
    You must explicitly say that you're not connected to Arduino and your product is a derivative
    You must specify that any tech support request must be directed to you

Stuff them. Ask an IP lawyer, and check if their claims are legitimate or not.
IMHO, you infringe a trademark if you give any false sensation that your product it that trademarked product.
If you make it clear that it's compatible or derived, then you should be fine, regardless how they formulate their words in their trademark guidelines.
Adding a line declaring the trademark belongs to Arduino and your product is an imitate should keep you safe in court.

Why those requirement shouldn't be legitimate? What they are asking is completely reasonable, IMO. If you go to an IP lawyer with this you will only walk out $500 lighter for the "consultation" and still will have to do the above.

The first 4 items follow directly from the fact that "Arduino" and the logos are protected marks. That's the trademark law imposing this, they are only making it clear for you. The rest is theirs requirements - but you ignore them at your own peril, people got sued/had legal problems for less when it came to trademarks (Sparkfun and Fluke's yellow multimeters come to mind).

I'm not convinced that the word "Arduino" cannot appear in the title (in the form/context of "Arduino compatible") of an auction or web page.
I'm also not convinced that the last two items are absolutely mandatory in the form of compelled speech. (I agree that you can't suggest that you're part of Arduino project, but I would be willing to risk not saying that I wasn't part of it in every single piece of collateral.)

I read these list of requirements as "if you do these, we won't bother you", but not "if you fail to do any of these, we will both bother you and we will win".

[Nusa]

   
    The product can't contain the name Arduino
    The board can't have Arduino written anywhere on it
    The board must not copy the Arduino Logo or graphic design
    The auction/website title can't use the Arduino name
    You can write in the description that the board is derived from Arduino.
    You must explicitly say that you're not connected to Arduino and your product is a derivative
    You must specify that any tech support request must be directed to you

Stuff them. Ask an IP lawyer, and check if their claims are legitimate or not.
IMHO, you infringe a trademark if you give any false sensation that your product it that trademarked product.
If you make it clear that it's compatible or derived, then you should be fine, regardless how they formulate their words in their trademark guidelines.
Adding a line declaring the trademark belongs to Arduino and your product is an imitate should keep you safe in court.

Why those requirement shouldn't be legitimate? What they are asking is completely reasonable, IMO. If you go to an IP lawyer with this you will only walk out $500 lighter for the "consultation" and still will have to do the above.

The first 4 items follow directly from the fact that "Arduino" and the logos are protected marks. That's the trademark law imposing this, they are only making it clear for you. The rest is theirs requirements - but you ignore them at your own peril, people got sued/had legal problems for less when it came to trademarks (Sparkfun and Fluke's yellow multimeters come to mind).

Your "stuff them" advice may work for someone in China but hardly for the OP who is in the US where Arduino has been suing people (and winning!) over their trademarks before.

Risking a lawsuit (or at the very least having the auction pulled and potentially account banned by eBay) over something as idiotic as putting the "Arduino compatible" in the title of an auction instead of the description is just that - idiotic.

Y'all must have missed the lawsuit over the Arduino trademark a couple years back between Arduino LLC (arduino.cc) and Arduino SRL (arduino.org). They ended it by forming a merged holding company, but the fight lasted for years. Given that history, I suspect the current company is quite willing to defend the Arduino trademark. The hardware is open source, no problem there, but they DO own the name.