Alt-BEAM Archive

Message #06869



To: "Chris" 123abc@chek.com, beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: "Larry F. Allen-Tonar" larryat@cts.com
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 13:55:51 -0700
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: to Flip or Not to Flip PCB pattern. Ian's PCB designs


Chris,

When you print out the final, iron-on version of the pattern, you should
be able to put it down, flat, and place your components on it, with
the pins in the right place, Emitter, Base, Collector in the right
orientation, etc. You are looking down, from above the components,
past the component side of the PCB, past the pattern side of the PCB,
to the paper with the PCB pattern-to-be. It has the same orientation
as the components.

When you flip the board (imagine it with the paper pattern stuck on),
you will have a mirror image -- the PCB pattern copper has a "flipped"
orientation of the component-side. However, you are now looking at the
back-side of the paper PCB pattern-to-be (just white paper). When you
pull off the paper from the PCB and flip it back again so you can see
the printed (or copied) pattern, it is now in a component-side orientation.

If you copy-reduce a 2x or 4x pattern down to actual size, the copier
retains the same orientation (otherwise you would have to use a mirror
to read a copy!), so you can double check the original by imagining
placing 2x or 4x-sized components on it.

So -- print out the pattern just like you get them.
To double check, make sure your parts line up when placed on it from above.
-- Hope this is clear,
Larry

At 11:43 PM -0700 10/16/99, Senior wrote:
>Chris wrote:
>>
>> Ok. I see some of you do not understand me. What I mean by edit is
>>that do I need to mirror it? by that I mean take the image and flip it
>>around so that I can take it up to a mirror and it will look normal,
>>because when you flip something over like a stamp it goes on normal but
>>when you look at the actual rubber it's letters are backwards. I am
>>makeing this into a stamp because I'm using the iron-on method.
>
>Has anyone told you to? Instead of asking three times, just take a quick
>minute to think about it. Visualize what you're doing. Even pretend
>you're doing it! but without actually ironing it on. Then you'll know if
>you need to mirror it or not.
>
>-Kyle

--
Regards, Larry F. Allen-Tonar (larryat@cts.com) +1 760/746-6464 (voice)
Principal Designer +1 760/746-0766 (FAX,
P.O. Box 463072 upon request)
Escondido, CA 92046-3072
"Futuaris nisi irrisus ridebis.", Carlton in _The Road to Mars_ by Eric Idle



6870 Mon, 18 Oct 1999 14:04:29 -0700 [alt-beam] Re: Tilden used something that can be made into an Electronic Jean auBois , beam@sgiblab.sgi.com "Larry F. Allen-Tonar" Jean,

Somewhere I saw or read of a predatory beetle which ran so fast toward
its target prey that its visual processing couldn't keep up. So, it would
scoot a ways toward its prey, then stop and wait until it could "see"
again, change direction if necessary, scoot some more, with any number of
cycles, until its mandibles had clutched the prey.
-- Truth is stranger than science,
Larry

At 2:44 AM -0600 10/17/99, Jean auBois wrote:
>IMNSHO, however, the reason for the alternate sense-then-move style
>behavior is based on the UXO robot. In other words, there are times that
>it is valuable for your sensors to be stable (less jitter, for example) or
>simply turned off (for example, if they'd be swamped by some robot-created
>signal). Offhand, I think that the biological world tends to use this
>scheme only when the creature isn't under any particular stress or is
>stalking... more often, though, this is not at all a very biological
>approach -- try walking towards some goal 30 feet away three steps at a
>time with your eyes closed, open your eyes to determine where you are
>going, repeat... and see what happens... try something similar with a glass
>of water. The more biological approach is that sensing and movement occur
>simultaneously.
--
Regards, Larry F. Allen-Tonar (larryat@cts.com) +1 760/746-6464 (voice)
Principal Designer +1 760/746-0766 (FAX,
P.O. Box 463072 upon request)
Escondido, CA 92046-3072
"Futuaris nisi irrisus ridebis.", Carlton in _The Road to Mars_ by Eric Idle



6871 Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:46:57 -0400 Ever the wet blanket (Was: I am a dreamer (WAS: Radio John A. deVries II
> At 07:21 AM 10/18/99 , Arno Jansen wrote:
> >Hmmm, I keep dreaming about communicating scrapbugs.
>
> From Romeo and Juliet:
>
> >ROMEO: I dream'd a dream to-night.
> >MERCUTIO: And so did I.
> >ROMEO: Well, what was yours?
> >MERCUTIO: That dreamers often lie.
> >ROMEO: In bed asleep while they do dream things true.
>
> It is really tough to decide with dreams, isn't it? Still, I've got to
ask
> the questions:
>
> (1) if the scrapbugs ('bots) are communicating, WHAT are they
> communicating? Emotion? Location? Power level? Existence?
>
> (2) if you know WHAT they are communicating, how does it make that 'bot
> different (on an evolutionary basis) from the same 'bot that doesn't have
> the ability? Of what VALUE is it to the robot? In the last analysis, of
> what value is the ability to YOU once you've "tamed" such a 'bot? Is it
> merely cool or is it cool and makes a difference as well?
>
>
> Curmudgeonly,
>
> Zoz
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> John A. deVries II
> zozzles@lanl.gov

Home