[TowerTalk] I.C.E. Vendors

[Fred Spinner]

Manhattan style is where you take small pieces of PCB (little squares or
whatever) and hot-glue (or epoxy or whatever) them to a bigger piece of PCB
or other surface, typically a ground plane of some sort, to make a
multi-layer stack (like a "skyscraper" or "manhattan").  I personally don't
like building that way.

http://www.k8iqy.com/construction/ConstructionMethods.htm

Seems to have a good explanation.  I prefer a dremel and a small router bit
and hand etching a board that way instead.

Fred W0FMS

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Stan Labinsky Jr.
<wa2puq at frontiernet.net>wrote:

> Fred, "Manhattan" style... I missed that one in class... care to explain?
>
> Stan
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Spinner" <fred.spinner at gmail.com>
> To: <towertalk at contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 11:03 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] I.C.E. Vendors
>
>
>   There is nothing to stop anyone from hacking a small part of a PCB,
>> soldering the chip on to it, soldering leads on to it and making a leaded
>> part out of a SMT part.  this is handy if retrofitting an existing etched
>> board design.
>>
>> But for something like a filter, a Dremel etched PCB or "manhattan" style
>> construction with SMT parts would be no more difficult than building
>> point-to-point with leads-- it would probably be easier and the end result
>> would work better.
>>
>> But yeah, if you can get the values in SMT, you can always MAKE leaded
>> parts
>> out of them.  Doing that is a completely valid substitution for an
>> one-off.
>>
>> Fred W0FMS
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Dan Zimmerman N3OX <n3ox at n3ox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> You can get every necessary value for the BC band-reject filter  from
>>> Mouser
>>> (and I'm sure, Digikey) in 100V 5% ceramic surface mount type.  I forgot
>>> to
>>> check if all were available in C0G, but I know some were, and I think all
>>> are... it's very standard and the correct choice for RF applications.
>>>  Prices are low... 40 to 60 cents in Qty. 1 for some spot checks.
>>>
>>> >From what I can find the HF Q of the standard chip caps at least
>>> >600-1000
>>> (dissipation factor of at most 0.0015 is quoted many places, which is
>>> Q=667,
>>> some data sheets say Q>1000).  And I think all this is probably more or
>>> less
>>> the same for C0G ceramic disks vs. C0G ceramic chips if dielectric
>>> dissipation is at fault.
>>>
>>> Intuition tells me that anything a leaded ceramic disc cap could do, a
>>> surface mount chip cap can do better with the exception of handling
>>> continuous RF currents and dissipating the resulting heat... not because
>>> they're more lossy (they may be less) but because they are physically
>>> smaller.  For receiving filters this should not be an issue.  For things
>>> like QRP low pass/bandpass filters, etc, they might.  (For QRO filters
>>> you'd
>>> probably be looking for mica caps anyway.  But even there, surface  mount
>>> versions seem to be more available and a bit cheaper ($4-$5 in Qty.1) at
>>> least in new parts )
>>>
>>> It's not too hard to use surface-mount chip caps in dead-bug construction
>>> as
>>> long as you have a decent pair of tweezers.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Dan
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TowerTalk mailing list
>>> TowerTalk at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
>
>