[eagle] Re: CAN-Do-Too!
juan-rivera at sbcglobal.net
Mon Jul 16 18:28:45 PDT 2007
I seem to recall that you wanted me to try loading down the CAN-Do switcher
to see if the frequency went up. Was that you? I can't find the email. If
it was, what additional load do you want me to apply? And are you going to
send me some shielded inductors to test? Let me know and I'll jump on it
From: eagle-bounces at amsat.org [mailto:eagle-bounces at amsat.org] On Behalf Of
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 6:10 PM
To: Chuck Green
Cc: Dave Black ((Work)); Dave Black ((Home)); David Smith; AMSAT Eagle;
Samsonoff at Mac. Com; Juan.Rivera ((Work))
Subject: [eagle] Re: CAN-Do-Too! ??????????
Mouser has a very large selection of D-sub connectors including the high
density versions. Most are in stock.
I see no inherent reason for not using them.
w5did at mac.com
On Jul 16, 2007, at 7:19 PM, Chuck Green wrote:
I have had one experience with the high density D connectors. They were much
larger pin count than 9 or 15! After someone absolutely insisted that we use
them I did the board lay out. Turned out that they were *totally*
unavailable!!! I did the board layout again@#$%&^* using standard Sub-D's.
That was a number of years ago so I would hope things have changed. If
someone is absolutely confident they can obtain the parts we need then I'm
not at all opposed to using them (remember, I'm not volunteering to do parts
procurement for this project; this is a good time to use someone that's good
at parts procurement).
While at Goddard for P3D vib test I noticed NASA satellites using standard
Sub-D's. That was also a few years ago. Anyone know of High Density Sub-D's
being used on other satellites?
Bdale Garbee wrote:
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 09:02 -0700, Chuck Green wrote:
The sub-miniature D connector series has served us well. If anyone has
*experience* with something they think might be a better choice, we'd love
to hear about it.
At the AMSAT annual meeting that was held near Washington, D.C., a
couple of years ago (three?), someone approached me after the CAN-Do!
talk that Stephen and I gave to ask why we weren't using the
higher-density connectors that put 15 pins in the same shell size as the
9-pin version of the series we have been using... and followed up by
sending me what looked like mil/aero-spec samples of such a part that I
probably still have in my basement somewhere. I'm sorry that I can't
recall at all who that person was, but it was someone who claimed to be
using such connectors professionally with good results.
At the time, we weren't likely to be redesigning the units any time
soon, so I didn't take any action on this suggestion. If we're going to
revisit the design and think we need more than 9 pins, it might be worth
investigating higher density connectors like that?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Eagle