[eagle] Re: Revised Module Suggestion
greencl at mindspring.com
Tue Oct 16 15:32:52 PDT 2007
I've had two experiences with having things built for AMSAT. In one
case, I was very disappointed with the parts placement precision. I'd
like to think that was just the result of a poor choice of vendors. In
both cases I found the amount of solder on most joints to be less than I
would want to fly so I added solder to every joint. But having the
parts already in place saved me a *lot* of time.
Robert McGwier wrote:
> While I would have preferred a different route for this discussion to
> have been joined, it is timely. I have suggested that we do not have
> the right computer for our new possible mission. We are pushing on the
> new opportunity with all our might. It does not make sense in any way
> to fly the IHU-3 with IPS on it since there is no reason whatsoever to
> have real time control of the possible new mission package. We need the
> simplest kind of computer that we believe will control the packages,
> conduct communications with contro, and last for 15 years.
> That said, there is nothing that changes in our need for the IHU-3. We
> are committed to bringing them to the table for P3E and should we fly a
> satellite, stand alone, it is likely to be needed there. I am going to
> arrange to have the IHU-3's built incorporating the changes/mods we have
> learned about from others. Lyle and I have discussed this and I have
> promised him I would have them built.
> For the future:
> I am actually even suggesting that we are near the end of life on our
> ability to build these kinds of devices in our basements/shops and get
> them reliable enough with a high enough yield to be useful. I am
> suggesting that if a cool head takes a long hard look at where we are,
> where the parts are, and what resources we have, that we are likely to
> decide we are better off having our people do the designs and then
> having the boards manufactured for us. The price has fallen so far on
> set up charge and building that this probably makes sense. I am not
> mandating this, I am suggesting that we should investigate this.
> I have suggested that if we fly our own core in a fully qualified rad
> hard FPGA, there are OPEN CORES for processors. We can easily modify
> these cores to have fully EDAC registers and memory on chip for cache
> and off chip memory can be the slow EDAC we know about. In other words,
> time has marched on, and there is no reason we should not investigate
> whether we should not move on as well. These cores are available TODAY
> in the opencores.org group. We should look.
> Rick Hambly (W2GPS) wrote:
>> Thank you. You are exactly correct.
>> AMSAT LM2232
More information about the Eagle