-3
\$\begingroup\$

I have a question about my PCBs. So my previous versions haven't worked; I know why, but I'd like to know is there a way I can test to see if the circuit will work? If there is can someone let me know, if not any help/tips are much appreciated!

Thanks everyone :D!

\$\endgroup\$

closed as unclear what you're asking by PeterJ, Scott Seidman, Null, Leon Heller, Fizz Oct 27 '15 at 7:20

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ In what way did your previous versions not work? What aspect of the new design do you want to test? As this question stands, it's really not clear what you are asking. \$\endgroup\$ – The Photon Oct 27 '15 at 1:36
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ What are you using to design your PCBs? Do you want to simulate the circuit on a computer before having it fabricated? are you worried about physical placement/limitations/etc.? I assume that you have learned form your previous experiences already - also I think posting the circuit here would be a fairly good way of getting a 2nd pair of eyes to look it over and comment on any potential pitfalls \$\endgroup\$ – user2813274 Oct 27 '15 at 1:40
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Since you know why the previous version didn't work, please convey that to us. Was it something simple like crossed traces, or a missing connection, or a wrong footprint? Was it a thermal problem? Was it something in the principles of operation of the circuit? The range of possible reasons why something didn't work is broad, and the ways to "see if the circuit will work" vary greatly too. \$\endgroup\$ – Nick Alexeev Oct 27 '15 at 1:44
1
\$\begingroup\$

I'm assuming you are trying to detect problems with your PCB layout (and not the circuit itself).

To avoid ordering PCBs that have errors in them, I always generate gerber files and view them with a 3D gerber viewer tool before ordering the boards. Try visiting Mayhew Labs. I thoroughly enjoy using the service this website provides.

Cheers

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ The problem with this answer is that we don't know what the question is about. One can only make assumptions. \$\endgroup\$ – Nick Alexeev Oct 28 '15 at 0:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ When one answers a question asked by some person, unchecked assumptions are dangerous; this other person may not hold the same assumptions as oneself. However, when one states their assumptions (as I have done in my reply), it allows the other party to understand where the explanation is rooted. Detailing ones assumptions may actually benefit another person more than the answer itself as the other person is able to gain insight into how their question was interpreted. \$\endgroup\$ – Ryan Jensen Oct 29 '15 at 21:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ There is more than one audience here. (1) There is the O.P., who can check your assumptions because he knows what's actually going on. (2) Then there is the main audience: people who will find this thread later. They don't know what's actually going on, because the O.P. have done nothing to clarify the question (it's been 2 days). \$\endgroup\$ – Nick Alexeev Oct 29 '15 at 21:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ The people who will find this thread later (2) will have the same amount of information from the OP as I do. But my answer doesn't need the OP's question to make sense as a standalone statement. I tried to parse the OP's question to the best of my abilities and then state my understanding of it. But anyone visiting this post in the future need not necessarily concern themselves with the OP's question to understand my post. \$\endgroup\$ – Ryan Jensen Oct 30 '15 at 3:07

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.