WOW!..
thanks for the reply.. I guess I have more work to be done? LOL
and I thought I was doing pretty good on the schematic portion at least! lol
U2 is the new logic converter chip? (dont have it open currently?)
I added ground and name/value to it as well.. (thought I had uploaded that one as my last attempt? perhaps not...)
I'll go over your point 1 by 1 tomorrow when I get into the office!
(gonna hit the sack now!)
thanks!
PS:
let me know if you have any questions on that change log!
"I guess I have more work to be done?" Yes, a bit.
Schematic is nice, board layout needs revisting to make it work tho.
U1 & U2 are the voltage regulators.
The change log - what I wanted was a document that we could mark up & keep track of the design requirements, vs a never ending e-mail string where things get lost.
I currently have a 4-card design in the works, a 3-card design in the works, your update, another update that I ordered boards for over the weekend & need to order parts for, and another design that I am expecting details for shortly. So lets get semi-pro here on the requirements please.
thanks.. I'll make sure to focus on those vRegs tomorrow..
I thought I did provide a easy to follow, pointed list of design requirements/changes?
We dont need a new board..like the same footprint...etc.. but new DAC.. (same package but different pinout) 
I'll try to organize it anyway you suggest! 
I wasnt aware you were still busy... I tried to check in every week or so... sorry.
thanks
Thanks Jerry, I appreciate that.
I tried letting your design autoroute as it is while I was printing & saving stuff, I do that to get an idea of routability and see if placement needs work.
With the added ground planes (and before fixing up the areas noted) the router choked with 29 runs not connected, and those were going back forth across the board. Pretty sure you're going to need to update the placements to make that design fit.
One thing I do is number the decoupling caps for the pin they go next to on the uC, helps to visualize where they ought to be.
29 YIKES!
lol...
thanks for the tips.. Im on my way to the office soon (after kids get dropped off at school)..
and I'll go back over the the points you made.. (vRegs.. and numbering)..
the feedback is appreciated! Im really starting to like Eagle more and more.. I just need some more experience/exposure..
maybe a smaller, goal/project? something is smaller in size/requirements.. but still makes me utilize the basics in Eagle for?
well Im already into this project for a few hours.. so might as well stick it out!
thanks again..
Or maybe a little larger footprint to start. Hard to cram a lot in a small space when the experience level is low. Gets better after a few boards.
good idea! lol..
Im learning on the fly.. and taking things from other schematics and people 'approaches' to certian things! lol
I copied the using a DIODE footprint for pads idea from you! =)
a couple other things.. like having the I/O pads be a header set (5, 6,7..in a row..etc)
I was thinking.. is there a SINGLE 'through hole' like that that I can use?
I bet it would help for placement of the I/O-through holes if there they were singles.. instead of in set rows like that?
either way.. been swamped at work currently.. so I havent even opened up Eagle today!..
also.. question:
1.) when you hit auto route from Eagle.. will it do/add vias and traces to the bottom of the board for you? is that type of approach only done manually?
thanks
Yes, you can find single holes and pads in the Sparkfun library if you have downloaded it.
The autoroute will connect top & bottom if it is able. Sometimes you have to help it out to finish. Like draw a trace as two segments, then right-click one of them and select properties, change the segment from one layer to the other, eagle will add the via for you. You may then want to select the via, change its shape, change its size.
I like iteadstudio for that, you can have 12mil via on 10mil trace, they can make it. Other places won't go that small.
awesome! thanks.. thats what I was looking for!
and yes.. I LOVE the small traces and tiny vias you use and we got from iTead!!!!
I mean I like the footprint as it is now!.. no changes! lol hahaha
Let the DAC/uSD board run last night, went to bed. 80% complete this morning. Have to look at how I jumbled stuff around, see what I can do so it can complete.
What are you planning for a cap? Needs to mount on pads due to uSD card underneath. Leaded part? Something surface mount?
yeah.. I was planning on following the schematic of the WaveShield..and that link I sent:
(although one uses a smd potentiometer ..and the waveShield does not)
Im fine with static caps/resistors.. as long as we get a decent range.. (if thats what the pot was used for?)
but I woud like to use a 100uF tant cap.. ON-BOARD.. but the speaker pads.. (I was looking and I think if we rotate some caps over there... there might be room.. not sure what else is needed? (component wise)
surface mount 100uF tantalum capacitor.. Im not familiar with the package names? package size D is it?
Thinking also to change LM386 circuit. Right now has 2 resistors as a voltage divider. If we take the resistor that goes to DAC output, connnect that end to +5 instead, can have the LM386 input sitting at 2.5V. Then take the filtered DAC output and run it thru a cap to AC couple it into the LM386, so the '386 output sits at 2.5V and can swing from 0-5, then the 100uF output cap will AC couple it to the speaker to sit at 0V and swing -2.5/+2.5V.
The pot might have been to do the same thing.
I'll send you the pad sizes, you can review cap sizes against that & see what fits.
Maybe we can do holes, one on each side of the uSD side mount tab.
I'll have to defer that amp stuff to you...(its making my head spin already)..LOL
How does the WaveShield schemaic do it? I know they 'do not' use a pot... but that alt image/diagram I sent does.
Im open to either/whatever.. Im hoping for quality at least as good as the WaveShield. =)
Lost me here:
Maybe we can do holes, one on each side of the uSD side mount tab.
holes where? if you mean speaker & power pads...
I wouldnt bother.. possible short on uSD perhaps if goes through?? I dont mind the pads themselves.. size, placement..etc.
as a matter of fact Im super happy with the whole board/project.. outside of the fixes/change of DAC we need to do in order to get it to work/play audio! LOL
but layout, footprint/size.. I really like it! you did good work!
ok.. getting this thread back on track a bit here! lol..
the SMDuino_w/uSD socket: schematic & pcb layout.
First I wanna say thanks to everyone.. for looking and the feedback. Im learning alot in Eagle, which was the focus/goal (thanks Crossroads)
ok..
here is my latest attempt that is targeting the fixes outlined prior: (hope I did them all correctly)
*ICSP connector are not correct:
I think I went through and re-labled things and have the correct pinout/labels/connections now for ICSP
*Update using DIODE part for pads to real pad symbol/component:
I used the Sparkfun lib as instructed.. and I used a different one.. should be ok..yes? elongated one.. (kinda separates the battery/power pads from the rest. 
*U2/5v vRegulator GND fixed
*Connected the enabled pins to VIN on BOHT 3.3v & 5v vRegulators (per datasheet and your old schematic)
*changed caps C6,C8, from 10nF to 100nF value
*checked ERC tool in both schematic & pcb (no errors)
*Used polygon tool to draw a polygon (rectangle) over the board (same size as pcb dimensions).. on BOTH top and bottom layers... and named them both GND.
(never done that before.. nor ran across it any tutorials yet.. whats it for? do? a ground plane for something?)
So if tings are looking all in order... I can/should start on the routing aspect of things?
question:
1.) before I go into the PCB stuff (again)... and start fooling around..
should I maybe find a bunch of 'SINGLE' through hole symbols/components.. and replace these 'header strips' I am currently using? (ie: take my serial 'pin set'... which consists of a row/header of 5 pins, and add 5 separate/individual through hole symbols.. so its easier to place the I/O's along the side?... sorta allowing me to mix-n-match whre the go?..and help correct all the spaghetti strings I have going on a bit?...................OR.............. should I just leave things as they are.. and get to cracking on manual placement of traces on any left over errors, using vias and traces on both sides?)
thanks!
SMDuino_fixes.zip (58.3 KB)