RE: [Balloon] Re: Next Balloon

> -----Original Message-----
> From: balloon-admin@balloonboard.org
> [mailto:balloon-admin@balloonboard.org] On Behalf Of Steve Wiseman
> Sent: 21 July 2004 18:31
> To: balloon@balloonboard.org
> Subject: Re: [Balloon] Re: Next Balloon
>
>
> 21/07/2004 14:47:08, Tim Froggatt <tgf20@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >A brief introduction... I work for the design group in the
> Cambridge
> >Engineering Dept,
>
> Sometimes I wonder if this internet thing actually extends
> outside Cambridge :)
>
> >The small size isn't required for us, and presumably a larger
> board would
> >be cheaper,
>
> Not really.

I did some work liasing with the PCB house and fettling the board, and
I'd agree with Steve. The main difficulty isn't so much to do with the
tight packing of components as the small distance between pads on the
Strongarm and fpga, and the necessity to put more than one track between
adjacent pads.


I also strongly agree that a minimal build option should be available,
one which puts no components on the back of the board.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________