Puma board for FreeEMS

Marcos' unmaintained, but still in-use, Puma for FreeEMS circuit board/hardware design!
TonyS
LQFP112 - Up with the play
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:18 pm

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by TonyS »

Fred wrote:Mean while, NO one, other than you, has placed an order for parts!!!!!! WTF... have some focus! Do you really expect anyone from the spin 1 group to be in on spin 2 if spin 1 is a total disaster (from an actually getting used perspective)? Imagine the firmware progress that might have been possible by now if people had units hooked to engines! Such a shame....
Fred, it was a MISTAKE to propogate the Spin 1 boards outside of you and Marcos. Spin 1 of any board almost always have "problems".

You and Marcos have probably identified 90% or more of the hardware problems with this board. Why would anyone want to take the time to cut and paste a low cost board if they could just wait a little while for the next spin which corrects the majority of the problems with this board. If the next spin adds more new circuits (such as a switching supply), then I wouldn't even release that for purchase.

I personally don't believe Marcos's time should be spent on documenting a dead end. You might what to ask the people who purchased this board as to whether or not they would prefer waiting a bit for a released board or if they want the cut and paste instructions.
- Huff
User avatar
nitrousnrg
LQFP144 - On Top Of The Game
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by nitrousnrg »

Fred, upload the pics of your USB mods. Adding that, you can check the manual. BOM is ready, with MGF# to use different suppliers. I didn't check the passives quantities, but I'd suggest to order multiples 25 or 50 of each value used by puma (50 resistors ~= $1.3).

Btw, I just found many mfg# in blank, I'm completing them now.
Marcos
User avatar
Fred
Moderator
Posts: 15431
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:31 pm
Location: Home sweet home!
Contact:

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by Fred »

TonyS wrote:Fred, it was a MISTAKE to propogate the Spin 1 boards outside of you and Marcos. Spin 1 of any board almost always have "problems".
The problems are not the problem, Tony. Everything is identified and corrected, it's not a big deal to make it all work, it's not even a big deal to get it documented, but time that should have been spent on making the firmware accessible to real testers has been spent on revision after revision of MASSIVE changes into something that is being called spin2 but that is 90% different and should really be called something else all together and really requires a complete testing cycle as though there was no previous spin.

The real problem is one of the void between what is best for any given individual, and what is best for the group project. I'd like to point out that without functioning tested and semi complete firmware, all Puma boards are 100% useless. In this case, what is best for the group is ALSO best for Marcos and Puma. If tomorrow I stop pushing commits and write the rest of the code purely for my personal use, and that of my closest friends, where do you think this project will end up? It'll fade to nothing in months.

So, again, spin 1 getting documented and built and used by the people that want to is good for EVERYONE, not just them...

Another issue is that I'm the only one with the vision of how the project needs to move and grow, and I don't/can't/don't have time to, document that for everyone else. This problem needs a solution, because otherwise I end up spending excessive time bringing people back on track and in line with the group goals, as defined by me.

We're off topic again, though. My fault, but don't propagate it further... instead, have some faith in your fearless leader :-p

Fred.
DIYEFI.org - where Open Source means Open Source, and Free means Freedom
FreeEMS.org - the open source engine management system
FreeEMS dev diary and its comments thread and my turbo truck!
n00bs, do NOT PM or email tech questions! Use the forum!
The ever growing list of FreeEMS success stories!
User avatar
nitrousnrg
LQFP144 - On Top Of The Game
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by nitrousnrg »

I mostly agree with Huff, Spin1 was intended to mfg 4 boards, and it turned to be 37. It was a big motivator, but I learnt that I'm not doing that again. Such an early stage documentation is an incredible pain too. Only if I have the right feedback soon enough it will worth the effort.
it's not even a big deal to get it documented
I can't agree.
but time that should have been spent on making the firmware accessible to real testers has been spent on revision after revision of MASSIVE changes into something that is being called spin2 but that is 90% different and should really be called something else all together and really requires a complete testing cycle as though there was no previous spin.
Fred, wtf, your MASSIVE changes are the *adding* of 20 components or so, it makes 5% of the components, the rest are layout and footprint changes to make a more robust system; and the ign stuff. For some of weeks I spent 30' per day just packaging boards, shipment costs came from my wallet since I can't use paypal for the postage, and the only one trying hard to assemble it is spudmn and he's having problems to get it running, I helped him as much as I could, and I will continue helping him.
Just make people start the build process before is too late.
Marcos
User avatar
Fred
Moderator
Posts: 15431
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:31 pm
Location: Home sweet home!
Contact:

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by Fred »

nitrousnrg wrote:Such an early stage documentation is an incredible pain too. Only if I have the right feedback soon enough it will worth the effort.
You'll get no feedback until you tell people how to use them...
it's not even a big deal to get it documented
I can't agree.
I handed it to you on a fucking platter, it took me maybe 15 mins to write that post with all the required sections laid out. I wrote all the notes on the things that I found that needed changing, you and others wrote the rest, COPY AND PASTE THEM INTO A PDF AND THEN IMPROVE UPON IT AFTERWARDS. It's childs stuff. Not difficult. The docs don't need to be perfectly formatted, or have perfect spelling or perfect grammar, they just need to be complete and accurate, and contain enough info to buy parts and assemble board. They DON'T need to contain info on how to get a board, people already have them!!! ETC.
but time that should have been spent on making the firmware accessible to real testers has been spent on revision after revision of MASSIVE changes into something that is being called spin2 but that is 90% different and should really be called something else all together and really requires a complete testing cycle as though there was no previous spin.
Fred, wtf, your MASSIVE changes are the *adding* of 20 components or so, it makes 5% of the components, the rest are MASSIVE layout changes and MASSIVE footprint changes and MASSIVE topology changes to make a more robust system; and the ign stuff.
Fixed. Those things may lead to it being more robust in the long term, but as a bug fix post release, RC style fix, they are EXTREME at best. Adding resistors is a small deal, changing the routing and so on and so forth for 90% of the board is a big deal and all needs testing. You've not got something that is the same as spin 1 with some fixes, you've got something totally different which needs from-scratch testing all over again.
For some of weeks I spent 30' per day just packaging boards, shipment costs came from my wallet since I can't use paypal for the postage, and the only one trying hard to assemble it is spudmn and he's having problems to get it running, I helped him as much as I could, and I will continue helping him.
How is this relevant? Spudmn is the exception, he has parts laying around, most people need to place an order, and to do that they need information, and first rate information.
Just make people start the build process before is too late.
Exactly. Get the docs good so THAT THEY CAN before it's too late.

At the rate things are going, when I get to Spain, I'll stop firmware dev completely, fork puma at spin1, fix the shit that is wrong, and do a reference design and distribute that myself, WITH docs. Spin 1, despite its flaws, was pretty close to what was required, Spin 2 seems to be diverging into an esoteric design, which is sad for me. It's your design, though, and your decision what you do with it, carry on as you wish.

You can make all of the excuses you like now, but the fact remains, puma has been in physical existence for THREE MONTHS, and if you'd spent 30mins a day working on documenting it, and feeding that to me for review through ANY medium, you'd have docs by now, and they'd be rock solid. (And this conversation wouldn't be happening) The truth is, you've been offline for extended periods, and I've not had that skype chat yet that I asked for several weeks ago. Communications from you, with the exception of the forum, have been weak/non existent, mostly.

Don't think I don't know what you've done, and don't value it, that's not true. You're definitely valued, without the hacked up board in my car right now, the firmware wouldn't be where it is, no question, but if you'd put the same time you put into helping me with my build, into documenting it for everyone, we'd have other testers by now. I have chat logs of how much time you spent helping me, and telling you to feed that help into docs way back then. You've just not done it, and you should have, and it wouldn't/won't have been/be hard, and it's needed...

TALK to me, when you can, and let US get it right TOGETHER. If you remain silent with commits coming from no where to the IRC logs when you're not logged in anywhere, then how can we converge on the desired result? We can't. Please, be in touch.

Fred.
DIYEFI.org - where Open Source means Open Source, and Free means Freedom
FreeEMS.org - the open source engine management system
FreeEMS dev diary and its comments thread and my turbo truck!
n00bs, do NOT PM or email tech questions! Use the forum!
The ever growing list of FreeEMS success stories!
User avatar
nitrousnrg
LQFP144 - On Top Of The Game
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by nitrousnrg »

I really hate to waste time with this, and I bet you too.
TALK to me, when you can, and let US get it right TOGETHER. If you remain silent with commits coming from no where to the IRC logs when you're not logged in anywhere, then how can we converge on the desired result? We can't. Please, be in touch.
This is very true, and I have to fix it up. I'll try to bug you more :-)

Lastly, footprints changes were safe, except for the P&H that has to be tested, it can end as spin1. Layout changes doesn't really matter, except for high frequency stuff (crystal circuitry, but its just as spin1). There is an automated test (DRC) to ensure that everything meets the design rules (widths, connections, clearances, planes, etc), so as long as the schematic is the same, the final result will work fine. This applies for low freq circuits, SMPS layout relies on the datasheet examples.

So, when can I get those pics? :-)
Marcos
User avatar
jharvey
1N4001 - Signed up
Posts: 1607
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by jharvey »

Got the wrl, it took a while to open. I'd say the wrl should be made with out the traces and such. That simply created a lot of excess processing. Also would be nice to remove most of the components that aren't all that critical. Seems the WRL is young, so I was only able to get the outline, no vertical out of it. I'd bet we'll see some more good dev on that in the near future. Looking good, keep it up.
User avatar
KW1252
LQFP112 - Up with the play
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by KW1252 »

I took a quick look at the WRML, I think the traces do have a purpose; at any case, they're relatively easy to remove in 3D application.

What I did notice though the switching regulator seems to be quite out in the open; in the designs I've seen the circuit has some sort of ground shielding around it. A ground plane on both sides with the in- and outputs leapfrogged over the barrier with choke coils could be a very efficient solution.
User avatar
Spudmn
LQFP112 - Up with the play
Posts: 232
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:27 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by Spudmn »

I just wanted make some comments about the recent discussion of the Spin1 board.

I can't understand why Spin2 is being pushed forward so quickly when Spin1 has not been tested yet. For example, as far as I know, no one has tested the stepper motor circuit yet. Spin2 should be there just to fix up little problems that you found with Spin1. Eg this foot print was wrong, this track should have been cut etc. The way Spin 2 is moving is a completely different board. Done right Spin2 could be a completed product. What I see is Spin2 changed so much that it is a different product.

I have ever intention to use my Spin1 board for many years to come. It has all the functionality that I require. Sure it has a few problems, but nothing that a semi skilled person can't handle.

The BOM has improved a lot since the first version I downloaded but I think that it still needs to have the component designators in it.

I'm not a big fan of using the latests and greatest chips from a single supplier. Eg Don't use a fancy switching regulator made by one company, when a generic one will do, that can be sourced from many suppliers.

I have every intention to get my Spin1 board working and use it in my car. The only reason that I should need to change to Spin2 will be if Fred decides that the code won't support it any more. (Which I doubt he would do).

Ultimately everyone is going to do what they enjoying doing. Some of you enjoy redesign circuits and laying out PCB's and others enjoy making new circuits. What every floats your boat. I myself would prefer to get my car running and start developing new features that will make FreeEMS the best it can be.
User avatar
jharvey
1N4001 - Signed up
Posts: 1607
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: Puma board for FreeEMS

Post by jharvey »

From what I've seen from Marco's repo, he's using the same general layout, and he was adding the switch regulator as a heat reduction mechanism. When I talked about the Cinch enclosure, and the 3D stuff, I'm mostly thinking of putting PUMA on a connector card, that fits that layout. I think the case will work for that enclosure, both thermally as well as other physical constraints. I won't know for sure until I can smash some models together and look for issues.
Post Reply