I need to fabricate some large status displays -- on
> the order of a 4+ sq ft. The information displayed need
> not be textual (note following requirement for "easy scan")
> The update rate is on the order of fractional hertz.
>
> They tend to be unique -- one per installation -- so
> very little to gain from scale /of entire displays/.
>
> And, they tends to be sparse -- with areas of high
> information density.
>
> They have to be "viewable" by folks of varying sensory
> (and mobility) capabilities. I.e., can't rely on
> vision as their sole modality.
>
> They have to be quickly "scan-able" by those same clients.
> I.e., just like a sighted user can run their gaze over
> a visible display to "notice" anything that is signalling
> an error, so should the information in these displays
> be digestible.
>
> The sheer size seems to contraindicate a "PCB" approach;
> few houses could handle QTY 1 of such a large (single piece)
> panel. (Breaking it into multiple panels that need to be
> assembled just adds to the design cost without any real
> $aving$ in fabrication)
>
> I'm thinking of making a *tiny* "single point" module
> that can be "addressed" to indicate a particular state.
> These could then be inserted into a "frame" (that places
> them in the correct physical relationships with each
> other) and wired together. The frame existing solely
> to position the indicators and hold them in place.
>
> Depending on the outline of the modules, the frame
> could be manually fabricated, on-site. E.g., if circular
> modules, the frame could be as simple as a sheet of
> polycarbonate "drilled" with appropriate openings to
> accommodate the individual modules. An appropriate
> "overlay" could dress it up.
>
> [Circular would suggest one wouldn't want the indicators
> to have a "top" or "bottom" as that would require a
> physically "keyed" hole]
>
> As they are one-offs, wiring the modules could also be done
> by hand. As they could be located immediately adjacent
> to each other (subject to the physical characteristics of
> the "framing" material), it's unlikely that any connectors
> would be practical.
>
> [But, the panel should be high enough reliability that
> replacing modules is a rare event]
>
> In this sort of approach, I see no value in using FR4
> instead of polycarbonate (or some other sheet-form material).
> It's value would lie in being able to assist with the
> interconnect -- I don't see how that could be done on
> a physically large and varied scale.
>
> Anyone tried anything along similar lines (using another
> material to mechanically position "modules")?
>
Like this?
formatting link
piglet