BOM values vs. silk-screen values

[madbean]

One thing I did not explicitly state in the build docs is that the component values of a lot of the VFE products changed over time. You should always use the BOM values (which are duplicated on the build image on the first page over every doc). Ignore the values printed on the silk-screen of the actual PCBs. Much of the time they are the same, but to avoid confusion follow the values shown on the build image.

I will update all the docs with this info.

[Cybercow]

I've wondered about this. A genuine problem exists between the fact that the part IDs on the schematics are listed NOWHERE else in the build docs or on the PCB silkscreen. So, when looking at the schematic and trying to identify which specific Q is Q5 (when Q4, Q5, Q6 & Q7 are all 2N3904s) but are marked as "Q4", "Q5", etc only on the schematic; it makes troubleshooting a PITA because we then have to trace portions of the circuit to determine which part is which.  Or is there something I've missed for specify component identification?

[Aentons]

Then it would be too easy for us... No pain, no gain. right! Feel the burn... 

[madbean]

I've wondered about this. A genuine problem exists between the fact that the part IDs on the schematics are listed NOWHERE else in the build docs or on the PCB silkscreen. So, when looking at the schematic and trying to identify which specific Q is Q5 (when Q4, Q5, Q6 & Q7 are all 2N3904s) but are marked as "Q4", "Q5", etc only on the schematic; it makes troubleshooting a PITA because we then have to trace portions of the circuit to determine which part is which.  Or is there something I've missed for specify component identification?

The part numbers in the actual Eagle files are generally misaligned and in some instances not there at all. I guess that is from the way these board were set up for production efficiency rather than as DIY projects. I do agree it would be better to have them clearly labeled. It's something I could look into. Not sure how long it would take to go back through 20 projects and try and get a clear solid image of each but it's not impossible.

[madbean]

Here's the Bumblebee as an example. Quite a mess. Again, not impossible to go back and smash all the components and re-align part names. Just a bit intensive for all projects. But, I won't say "no" to do doing so, of course.

[Cybercow]

MadBean - Yikes! What a mess indeed!. Still, that is quite helpful. Thank you very much.

Instead of running thru all 20 projects and pulling up the Eagles with part IDs, perhaps you'd be willing to do it, (as you've done here), when someone asks. (?)

Again, thank you for this and the explanation.

[jimilee]

What a headache.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[madbean]

I'll go ahead an put this on my to-do list. I think it better serves customers in the end so it's worth spending a few hours on. But, it won't likely happen for at least a couple of weeks (gotta finish this next batch first before I go on..err, "vacation").

[Aentons]

Sorry to drag this on but I have a kinda related question... I notice that some boards like VFE use the Eagle layer "tValues" and other such as the madbean boards use "tNames". I kinda prefer having the values but it seems the having the names may be a bit more common. Is that just because its the default or is there another reason to prefer it?

[gordo]

Could always recruit a few volunteers. This seems to have very little ROI in terms of your time.