Originally Posted by craigbrass
PLEASE state that all $ figures are US$ amounts.
There are quite a few Australian people on this forum and there is quite a difference between AU$1 and US$1 so this $57.50 you quote is actually AU$66.10
It would also be nice to do this on your website too so that there is no confusion.
Ah yes. Sorry about that. I will update the post. Since USD is the worldwide currency, though, I for one would personally assume that a price was USD unless stated otherwise.
Yes I'm an electrical engineer and would never say fine for a PCB design like that, or lack thereof, I don't think there has been any knowledge put behind how the traces has been routed. PCB routing like that also radiates a lot of noise to the environment around it and there might be environments where the PCB itself doesn't work.
Originally Posted by craigbrass
Equipment needs to comply with EMC directives when it is placed on the market, just as much to make sure it doesn't disturb other equipment nearby or electrically connected.
Even if the radio "works" it will most likely work better with a proper PCB design. It's never a black or white thing if a product works or not, the better designed, the better it will most likely work with weaker signals (higher signal sensitivity) and the bigger chance it will also work in very harsh environment (like cars can be) and the less chance there is it will disturb any other equipment in the car. A car is a very electrical noisy environment, and it's also very important that electrical equipment doesn't disturb security electronics in the car, like ABS, airbags etc.
Proper engineering is not about designing something that works, but about designing something that doesn't fail, as a wise teacher once told me. There's a big difference between the two way of going about things.
While the LM317T 3.3 V voltage regulator is run outside specifications when powered from a voltage within USB specifications, I'm more concerned about the PCB design than the schematic. The way the PCB traces was routed to and from the decoupling capacitors is a standard textbook example of how not to do PCB design and decoupling.
Originally Posted by bes51659
What I am saying though is why have two other EEs checked it over and said there were no problems with it? I'm tempted to say that you are like a couple of other users here and not happy this has become a commercial product for some reason...
. for £32 I will stick with what I have.
@ blues, My board has LM1086 on it. I think he changed the design some point
Can I ask where the £32 price is from please?
Also, the design has only slightly changed since his ~Jan/Feb design. This is down to the Venice 7 having different power requirements.
Ah right. That price was for the Venice 7 on its own. We were talking about the board design here.
There's always going to be room for improvements. I've not yet seen a design of anything software or hardware related that could not be improved upon in some way! In that respect the product offered by Craigbrass is no different.
I'm a software engineer - send me some software you've written, and i'll pick holes in it, likewise you'll be able to do the same with my code!
The product being offered is Ver2 of the PCB by all accounts - maybe Ver3 can accomodate some of the suggestions here. Meanwhile, whats being offered is a board that works well in automotive environments for an IMHO reasonable £65 Incl Venice7 module.
I have one of said boards and have not had an issue with it as yet - it works fine.
There is nothing stopping anyone not happy with the board design from Craigbrass from designing their own board. You can even get a legal V7 module from Craigbrass for the £32 quoted - which is probably less than it will cost you to buy a DAB radio for its V5/V5.1 module.
Why not design/test/trial the perfect board (and lower the component costs in the process), then market your own solution - or flog your design to Craigbrass?!
This thread is getting as catty as the one on digital-car!
Thanks Nigel. I never said it was perfect, all I am saying is that certain users appear to be posting here with the intent of derailing the post because they are not happy that this has become commercial. I don't plan to stop developing this board and will have it looked at again for V3 as you put it. All I am saying is the two EEs I had look at it said there was nothing specifically wrong with it...