General > General Technical Chat
what's your recent fail?
exe:
--- Quote from: twospoons on May 06, 2021, 03:41:26 am ---SPI - forgot that MOSI and MISO need to be crossed over (not MOSI to MOSI and MISO to MISO !) . So, another board revision needed. Stupid mistake.
--- End quote ---
I'd say MOSI of master connects to MOSI of the slave, no? So, it's MOSI to MOSI. MOSI = "master out, slave in"
harerod:
SPI:
1) at a slave the pins are usually called something like Serial Data Out / Serial Data In. That makes the whole setup much clearer.
2) in a situation like this one really starts to appreciate serial terminators
Coming from a guy who managed to confuse RX/TX on one interface on some board with 5 asynchronous interfaces and 1 SPI. Single FAILure on a PCB with 600 components...
T3sl4co1l:
I much greatly prefer the MOSI/MISO terminology to RX/TX. It's a shame it's not standard for async.
Tim
Refrigerator:
2AM me forgot to tidy up the silkscreen before i sent my files to the fab.
nctnico:
--- Quote from: harerod on May 04, 2021, 06:14:21 am ---nctnico, regarding your PCB fail: I would be curious as how you followed up in that PCB issue. Stealthily "optimizing" designs is an absolute showstopper in my book. One of my customers recently found out that a manufacturer had adjusted my layout (fully specified PCB), without giving feedback.
--- End quote ---
Usually assemblers do give feedback about changes they want to make to PCBs and in most cases I change the design instead of having the assembler change the Gerber files. In this case I wasn't involved in outsourcing the design to it could be that the assembler has given feedback and the customer gave an OK or not. From the little information I have it seems the PCB manufacturer has changed the Gerbers on their own though. This came to light after ruling any other possibility out and the problem had to be the PCB itself. The assembler wanted to order PCBs from a local quick turn around outfit which promptly complained the clearances where way below of what they could produce. From there it got clear where the problem is quickly.
In a broader sense having changes made to PCBs layouts by an assembler is a bit of a grey area. You'd say soldering is soldering but every assembler I have come across so far seems to have a specific setup / workflow. PCBs one assembler can solder without any problems are a nightmare to solder for the other (using the manufacturer specified land patterns and paste mask).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version