[OpenTRV-dev] I2C expansion connector round 3

[Adrian Godwin]

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Damon Hart-Davis <EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN> wrote:

> Hmm,  I can by Vero board with cuts between adjacent holes, which is how I
> made my RPi shield.
>
> This one at Maplin I think though the pic is not very good:
> http://www.maplin.co.uk/p/tripad-board-jp52g
>
>
Fair point.




> A split arrangement is going to increase board space and make a stacking
> header more complex/expensive, isn't it?
>
>
Don't think so. Long-spill single-row headers are widely available for use
on arduino, so you could use them for easy availability. Long-spill
double-row may be a bit harder to get. I don't think it will increase board
space : it's the same number of pins, and the single-row layout is easier
to do as you don't need tracks so close together.

The main advantage of the double-row is that it can easily be used with
ribbon cable. I'm not sure if that's an issue here.




> We're going to have to decide the physical form RealSoonNow(TM), so if you
> can point me to working examples of what you propose then I'm keen to see
> them.
>
>
Something like an arduino pro mini :

http://arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardProMini


(perhaps without the end pads, which are FTDI compatible on that board)

Rgds
>
> Damon
>
>
>
> On 8 Sep 2014, at 22:04, Adrian Godwin <EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN> wrote:
>
> > Could you consider 2 rows of single pin headers instead of 2-pin? It's
> much easier with veroboard (no cuts between 0.1" holes) and also
> self-supports a board better. Split sets like arduino but NOT with silly
> spacing can help polarise, especially if the power pins fall in a hole when
> reversed.
> >
> > On 8 Sep 2014 19:36, "Damon Hart-Davis" <EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN> wrote:
> > They are all good questions, and are helping to keep me thinking
> straight.  Keep asking!
> >
> > Rgds
> >
> > Damon
> >
> >
> > On 8 Sep 2014, at 19:31, Richard Chilton <
> EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN> wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks, with the new context it makes more sense. It could be a long
> game, but hopefully your Energy Return On Energy Invested in answering my
> stupid questions will exceed 1.0 at some future point in time!
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8 Sep 2014, at 18:45, Damon Hart-Davis <EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> We need something NOW for the prod eng / consumer board to let us
> program in place and we also have a secret hush-hush IoT thing going on
> where we may want to stuff as-yet-unknown sensors in easily.
> >>>
> >>> I also want to make the R&D/hobbyiest boards as easy to extend and
> connect as possible, eg with a single bridge board to the RPi, long overdue.
> >>>
> >>> And I don't have time to do it perfectly, you know the story.  I'll
> have cheese with my whine, thank you!  %-P
> >>>
> >>> So, yes, compromise.
> >>>
> >>> The prod eng guy had my connector in his schematic withing about 5
> minutes of me sending it over, and I didn't want to hold back our
> discussions today at all as I'm back at the day job for all or most of this
> week!
> >>>
> >>> Project roadmap?  What a good idea; I've heard of those!  (Today was
> meant to be partly planning time, but, well...)
> >>>
> >>> Rgds
> >>>
> >>> Damon
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenTRV-dev mailing list
> >> EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN
> >> http://lists.opentrv.org.uk/listinfo/opentrv-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenTRV-dev mailing list
> > EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN
> > http://lists.opentrv.org.uk/listinfo/opentrv-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenTRV-dev mailing list
> > EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN
> > http://lists.opentrv.org.uk/listinfo/opentrv-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenTRV-dev mailing list
> EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN
> http://lists.opentrv.org.uk/listinfo/opentrv-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opentrv.org.uk/pipermail/opentrv-dev/attachments/20140909/547a50df/attachment-0001.html>