I'm generating some gerber files for them using Orcad Layout, for a board that is going to be used for testing various signal switching ICs. I believe they have 9 or 10 different ones.
There will be a DC power jack mounted for 13V as well as a regulator to generate a 5V supply.
Each IC to be tested will need capacitors; 2 per input and 2 per output per chip; a total of 4 per chip, about 40 in all.
Each input/output will be connected to an RCA jack; 40 RCA jacks in all.
and of course each chip needs to be grounded.
For EMI shielding, I think minimizing loop area, bypass capacitors and employing wide tracks for power and ground should be sufficient.
As far as the jacks go. I will have to create new symbols and footprints for the RCA jacks, the power jack and perhaps 5 or 6 of the ICs so that it is layed out properly on the PCB.
I've agreed to an hourly charge of 20$/ hour.
How much time would you charge for a contract like this? I'm new to Orcad layout, but I'm learning it quick. I won't charge my time for research and learning how to use the program because I'm junior. However, I do seek a price that is worth my while. I'm also hoping that this opportunity will lead to full-time employment. Either way it looks good on a resume.
Thanks for responding. About 310 pins with approximate dimensions: 3 x 15 inches.
Sam
Not enough information.
Tell me the following, and I will give you what _I_ would estimate in time.
1) Number of 'pins'
2) Size of PCB - X & Y
That should be all I need.
Regards,
James Jackson Oztronics
I'm generating some gerber files for them using Orcad Layout, for a
> board that is going to be used for testing various signal switching
> ICs. I believe they have 9 or 10 different ones.
>
> There will be a DC power jack mounted for 13V as well as a regulator to
> generate a 5V supply.
>
> Each IC to be tested will need capacitors; 2 per input and 2 per
> output per chip; a total of 4 per chip, about 40 in all.
>
> Each input/output will be connected to an RCA jack; 40 RCA jacks in
> all.
>
> and of course each chip needs to be grounded.
>
> For EMI shielding, I think minimizing loop area, bypass capacitors and
> employing wide tracks for power and ground should be sufficient.
>
> As far as the jacks go. I will have to create new symbols and
> footprints for the RCA jacks, the power jack and perhaps 5 or 6 of the
> ICs so that it is layed out properly on the PCB.
>
> I've agreed to an hourly charge of 20$/ hour.
>
> How much time would you charge for a contract like this? I'm new to
> Orcad layout, but I'm learning it quick. I won't charge my time for
> research and learning how to use the program because I'm junior.
> However, I do seek a price that is worth my while. I'm also hoping that
> this opportunity will lead to full-time employment. Either way it
> looks good on a resume.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sam
>
OH yeh.....! What's the percentage of commercial organisations using linux for standard apps....??? Pretty darn small!
Ha, Ha, download and start crashing more like...!
Documented ASCII file formats. The vendor isn't trying to lock you in to his tool set by sticking you with a proprietary binary format.
How many are truly locked..? Most apps have an ASCII storage mechanism i.e PADS, P-CAD, Protel, OrCAD Layout, Cadstar....
Simple. Find someone with a Cadstar, load-in your design and save in CPA = ASCII archive format
That's the point: the support is normally ultra-poor
Who wants the code...!! Do I want a copy of Microsfot Word code, or Excel code...? Of course not. I want an app that's reliable and of professional standard...!
That says it all. Just to save a few dollars some folks are prepared to torture themselves and wear sackcloth and ashes....
with
Oh yeh, they are...? Nobody I deal with would risk critical projects to shareware
Where I worked a few years ago on military comms systems, the 'official' compiler was so full of bugs that the the software engineers used the GNU compiler for development.
:>>That's what folks said about Linux about five years ago. Those that :>>aid it look like backward-looking trogledytes now. :>
:> OH yeh.....! What's the percentage of commercial organisations using :> linux for standard apps....??? Pretty darn small! :>
:>>The advantages of free/open-source tools are these: :>>* Full versions usually downloadable for free. No cripple or :>>nagware. Just download and start designing. :>
:> Ha, Ha, download and start crashing more like...! :>
[. . . . remaining opinions snipped . . . .]
:>>People are using this stuff in industry. Open your eyes and look :>>around. You'll see more of it as time goes on. :>
:> Oh yeh, they are...? Nobody I deal with would risk critical projects :> to shareware
: It's 'open source', not shareware.
: Where I worked a few years ago on military comms systems, the 'official' : compiler was so full of bugs that the the software engineers used the GNU : compiler for development.
Indeed. Herr Prescott certainly has his opinions, and he is welcome to them. Nobody's mind will be changed by reading usenet posts, anyway. However, some people reading this will take the opportunity to actually try out some of the apps (although likely not Hr. Prescott), and *that* will likely change some minds.
I'll end my participation in this thread by noting this: Hr. Prescott makes the false association open-source = free/share-ware = bad quality. In reality, there is good software and bad software. Sometimes, the free stuff is bad, sometimes it's great (e.g. Linux, gcc, apache, Python, Perl, TCL, OpenOffice, gEDA etc. etc. etc.) Hr. Prescott evidently also thinks commercial/proprietary software = good quality. In reality, everybody knows of many commercial apps which stink, as well as some really great stuff (MATLAB, Mathematica, Mac OSX).
The point is that the open-source development methodology has proven itself capable of developing remarkably stable & usable applications. In a penny-pinching economic environment where low-end speciality apps (e.g. EDA) are shoddily supported and expensive, folks will turn to open-source alternatives if those alternatives are up to the task. It's up to the users to make their own choices. And that's what the open-source stuff is all about: user choice instead of vendor choice.
These astroturf posters are always entertaining...
Actually, the percentage of organisations (commercial or otherwise) that is *not* dependant on open source software is pretty small - and even those are dependant on ISPs and other infrastructure that is dependant on open source. Linux is, of couse, only one example of commonly-used open source software.
The percentages will vary enormously according to type of software. The percentages of companies using open-source EDA software for commercial designs is going to be small, albeit growing. The percentage for more common software like browsers or word processors is pretty big, and growing rapidly. The percentage for server software such as web servers and small database servers outweights that of commercial closed-source software.
Sounds like a solid, well-researched, reasoned argument to me.
And how many of these have complete freely available documentation, unencumbered by licenses and restrictions? And how many are considered the standard default file format? And how many actually include all the features and details of their own closed binary format?
Basically, the problem is being able to change from one tool vendor to another without losing all access to your own data. Each vendor, thinking in its own little world is concerned with keeping users locked in - if they made it easy to convert data, it would be easy to change vendors.
What a marvelous solution - ask your competitors nicely if they will help you convert files from a proprietry undocumented binary format to a proprietry undocumented ASCII format.
Do you know what the term "legacy support" actually means? It means "able to work with old data formats" - something that lots of commercial software can't do (for example, the easiest way to get Excel 97+ to read Excel 4 files is to use Open Office to convert the formats).
And if you are talking about support for software - I personally like the idea of sending an email on a mailing list and getting a reply from the software's author, rather than paying through the nose to be told to re-install the software or buy the latest version.
No one in their right mind wants the code for MS Word. Every time large closed-source projects have been open-sourced (Star Office, Mozilla, Interbase, etc.), it has been very clear that open-source coders write code that will stand the light of day, while closed-source coders can write whatever hacks come into their heads.
For most people, especially large companies, source code access is an insurance policy - it means that they always have a way out if the authors discontinue the project, or there are bugs which never get fixed. It doesn't mean they plan to look at the code - it means they can pay someone to fix or change the code if they need to.
And thanks for the laugh mentioning "MS Word" and "professional standard" in the same sentence.
Open source EDA tools are probably not yet ready for the mass market, but they are getting there. There are plenty of people that choose different tools for different reasons, and for some, the open source EDA tools are already viable. Personally, I don't use gEDA or PCB - but I do use an open source tool (confluence) for FPGA design. My alternative commercial solutions (VHDL or Verilog) are also free - yet I choose the open source tool because it does a better job for me.
As I thought - an astroturfer, with no idea what "open source" means. And if you mean that no one you know uses open source EDA software for critical projects, then you are probably right at the moment - it's a specialised world. If you mean no one uses open source software for critical projects, then you really are talking though a hole in your head.
I only know of eight multinational corporations headquartered locally that use Linux, several others use Open Source for their own apps. Even Microsoft uses Apache in-house, as does the NSA and several other government groups. A lot of DOD stuff is based on a linux Kernel too.
My company uses only open source, and we use Linux for all control systems.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.