Loading...
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
Author Topic: Permanent proto shield installation  (Read 668 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Canada
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 3
Posts: 391
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Yes, see the picture below.  The middle two shields are of the offset type.  It works out even better in multiple stacks if the offsets alternate sides, but I don't have any free right for demonstration, so I just threw these together.
Logged

Canada
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 3
Posts: 391
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

@MichaelMeissner

Those are some pretty nice proto shields.  Have you used them?  How do they work out?
Logged

Ayer, Massachusetts, USA
Offline Offline
Edison Member
*
Karma: 27
Posts: 1093
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

@MichaelMeissner

Those are some pretty nice proto shields.  Have you used them?  How do they work out?
I bought the proto-screw shield but I haven't used it yet.

After buying it, I saw the announcement for the Omega ProtoPro-B, and I bought it, but I haven't received it yet.  The announcement thread was here, and there were some comments about it: http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/topic,140914.0.html

I just noticed the Spanish shield when it listed as a product other people were looking at when I was looking at one of my purchases.  I have not bought it yet.

I like the concept of proto-screw shield because I'm still a solder novice, and it is easier to have shields that don't need assembly.  However, the layout of the connected pins is unusual.  I can imagine some things would work, and others would not without making either solder bridges or having to cut traces.

In terms of the layout, I like the Omega ProtoPro-B better, because it mimics a small breadboard, so it is easier to move stuff from the tiny breadboard to the shield.

<edit>
Note, the Omega ProtoPro-B shields arrived on February 15th, after I initially posted this note.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 07:48:22 pm by MichaelMeissner » Logged

Offline Offline
Newbie
*
Karma: 0
Posts: 25
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Really?  If the headers are shifted in/out, they won't line up with standard shields.
Logged

Canada
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 3
Posts: 391
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

I am not sure what you mean.  Those 3 shields in my previous post all stack together.  They all connect properly to the host Arduino.  I've done this dozens of times and have several in operation.  Are you saying that picture is not real?  I can assure you it is. smiley-confuse
Logged

UK
Offline Offline
Tesla Member
***
Karma: 88
Posts: 6296
-
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Really?  If the headers are shifted in/out, they won't line up with standard shields.

If they're offset, it just means the upper and lower headers on each side are offset sideways from each other. As long as both sides are offset in the same direction, the distance between them is the same and they'll match the standard Arduino pin layout. You're thinking they'd both be offset inwards or both outwards? I agree that wouldn't work, but that's not how it's done.
Logged

Offline Offline
Newbie
*
Karma: 0
Posts: 25
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

I missed half dozen posts somehow, weird.  In any case, the way your shields were assembled you could certainly stack them  The ones I bought were already assembled and were not offset like yours. If you don't mind the stack listing, that's a pretty good solution.
Logged

Canada
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 3
Posts: 391
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Yeah, actually it works quite well.  In most cases if I go beyond a single shield I try to arrange them so one is offset right and the 2nd is offset left.  That way it doesn't list so much.  I have never needed more than 3 shields (touch wood), so the odd time where I'm stuck with two offset the same direction, it's only listing by .2 inches or so.
Logged

Dee Why NSW
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 11
Posts: 513
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset


This is an Ethernet shield with stackable headers on a Duemilanove.  Horrible!



That is just either substandard manufacture, or bad design,  or bad planning, or user abuse, and being stackable or offset has nothing to do with it.

@ bkenobi. I don't think the plastic block would help. They are about 2.5mm but the typical stackable headers have about 1mm extra clearance. And you can get stacking headers with even longer pins.
Logged

Canada
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 3
Posts: 391
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

... or user abuse,...

Why thank you.  I love you too.
Logged

UK
Offline Offline
Tesla Member
***
Karma: 88
Posts: 6296
-
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

That is just either substandard manufacture, or bad design,  or bad planning, or user abuse, and being stackable or offset has nothing to do with it.

I think you're being too harsh. The problem as I see it is that the top of the USB socket is higher than the top of the female headers, so the shield won't seat properly if it extends as far as the USB socket. Using offset headers moves the male headers down  which means the shield sits higher and if this is enough to avoid the problem then it's a good solution. It's not the offset that matters, but the extra height. Putting a spacer over the pins so that the headers don't engage so far would also be a reasonable solution. What's definitely NOT a good idea is leaving the shield resting on the USB socket and then let the far end be unsupported except for the bending stiffness of the pins. That's what is shown in the picture but I don't see that as abuse - it's a demonstration of the problem.
Logged

Canada
Offline Offline
Sr. Member
****
Karma: 3
Posts: 391
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

What's definitely NOT a good idea is leaving the shield resting on the USB socket and then let the far end be unsupported except for the bending stiffness of the pins. That's what is shown in the picture but I don't see that as abuse - it's a demonstration of the problem.

Exactly!  I thought I was pretty clear but maybe I left too much to the imagination.  Not everyone has a good one though, so here it is with a little more rigor.

The measurement from the bottom of the board to the top of the USB socket is 12.60mm

The measurement from the bottom of the boar to the top of the header is 10.16mm

The difference is 2.44mm.  So if there is only 1mm of extra clearance with the typical stackable header, then the problem shown will exist.  These measurements were taken from a new, out of the box today, un-abused, genuine Italian Arduino Uno R3.

BTW, also shown below is the measurement of the plastic block of a typical male header.  It measures at 2.36mm which would go a long way toward eliminating the problem.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 06:35:26 pm by BillO » Logged

Dee Why NSW
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 11
Posts: 513
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

That is just either substandard manufacture, or bad design,  or bad planning, or user abuse, and being stackable or offset has nothing to do with it.

I think you're being too harsh. The problem as I see it is that the top of the USB socket is higher than the top of the female headers, That's what is shown in the picture but I don't see that as abuse - it's a demonstration of the problem.

Harsh? Me? Not for one moment. I merely state the bleeding obvious.

I see the height of the USB socket over the top of female headers is just trivea to be toyed with by those with limited imagination. The real problem is clearance over an RJ45 Erthernet socket.

If that photo attached is actually a case of squeezing a shield over a USB socket, then it is a fair  example of bad design, bad planning, and user abuse but I utterly fail to see how this can be fixed by using offset headers.  And the second “much, much nicer” picture demonstrates nothing, and  absolutley nothing that cannot be done with stackable headers. Actually, what it might demonstrate is that you can fix the problem on a Duemilanove by moving the shield 0.15” sideways, but I doubt it, there is certainly no evidence to that effect, and I can’t be bothered to look any further.

Clearly, if this is to be fixed, it will be fixed by addressing the length of the pins rather than their position.  So yes, a male pinrow to hand measures 11.25mm overall while the exposed length of pin on the standard stackable header measures 11.1mm, but I’m far from sure that 0.15mm is anything to write home to your mother about, and this presupposes that laboriously pulling the pins through the plastic block, to ensure that advantage taken from the extra length, is actually worthwhile.  Trust me, I've done it, and it isn't.

The only thing that matters in the pictures, both, is the only thing that cannot be seen and of which there is no mention – the length of the pins.  What we do see is a pathetic exercise that  depends on scrounging plastic pinrow blocks, which might be better employed for their original purpose, and sloppy soldering, which may result in the pins not being properly bedded down.

Imagination has little to do with this but measurement has quite a lot to do with it.  Indeed, an absurd preference for using male headers in a situation like that is more likely to be the cause of the problem than a solution.  I say that simply because I am unaware of male header with extra long pins and such a predeliction may obscure the view of stackable headers that fill the bill.

The top picture below shows a storebought ethernet shield clearing the dreaded USB port with daylight to spare and with a homebrewed terminal board on top clearing the RJ45 socket. The pins simply go to the bottom of the socket, like God and Arduino intended

Those needing more rigorous demonstration may see the minimal merit of male pins over a stackable header evident in the second picture.

The third picture shows the comparative length in the only thing that counts – the amount of visible brass.

I think it fair to say that using male headers is likely to give you four things

1.   a wider board
2.   a substantial hit in wiring convenience
3.   one less row of holes
4.     twice as much soldering

all of which are more likely to be liabilities than assets.

So, in summary, sticking with male headers is a dumb exercise reserved only for those devoid of imagination – as I’m sure bkenobi has already worked out.  There is no little irony in  that the Adafruit board originally alluded to is available as an unassembled kit, thereby enabling the headers to be replaced without the angst the OP inevitably suffered. One can only conclude that the board was designed by somebody who actually knew what he was doing, sort of, only to find it assembled and marketed by morons.

I might point out, that another solution to the clearance problem is to remove the problem by using a truncated board, thereby enabling the use of standard headers. I have a few and they are quite sufficient.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 01:43:32 am by Nick_Pyner » Logged

Windy City
Offline Offline
Jr. Member
**
Karma: 0
Posts: 76
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

...and I can’t be bothered to look any further.

Pfffft..!

The swan song of the permanently ignorant.  Not that you are of course, but you are certainly singing the song.

To each their own.
Logged

Dirt Biker

Dee Why NSW
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 11
Posts: 513
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

...and I can’t be bothered to look any further.

The swan song of the permanently ignorant. 

Gee, are you telling me that, if I ride my bike down that particular road, I might find something? From casual glance,  Duemilanove looks very much like most other Arduinos.
Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
Print
 
Jump to: