I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
[...]
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Another alternative might be SMT devices shining *through*
the PBC into pipes -- the thickness of the PCB offsetting
some of the required "height" of the pipe as it navigates
its bend)
I can't think of any other alternatives...
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
<snip>
Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found...
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
On 2023-10-08, Don Y wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
[...]
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Digikey has the Inolux IN-PI42TASPRPGPB [1] (but only 47k on hand, 8
week mfg lead time).
2mm tall right-angle addressable (1-wire) things,
and a quick spin through the datasheet shows the timing to be pretty
much the same as the WS2812 or SK6812 options (aka "Neopixel", if you're familiar with Adafruit / Sparkfun).
Mouser *probably* has something too, but their search / drilldown is godawful, and I gave up.
[1] https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/inolux/IN-PI42TASPRPGPB/9681236
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when one would think it should be "Top"?)
So, I'm wondering what the height of the device is (given that it has to sit *on* a PCB so the thickness of the board adds to the assembly's thickness -- that's the problem with anything mounted *on* the board hoping to cast light off to the side).
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
<snip>
Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found...
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears
that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying
on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when
one would think it should be "Top"?)
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
<snip>
Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found...
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears
that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying
on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when
one would think it should be "Top"?)
So, I'm wondering what the height of the device is (given that
it has to sit *on* a PCB so the thickness of the board adds
to the assembly's thickness -- that's the problem with anything
mounted *on* the board hoping to cast light off to the side)
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 06:45:26 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
<snip>
Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found...
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears
that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying
on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when
one would think it should be "Top"?)
So, I'm wondering what the height of the device is (given that
it has to sit *on* a PCB so the thickness of the board adds
to the assembly's thickness -- that's the problem with anything
mounted *on* the board hoping to cast light off to the side)
Terrible data sheet. It actually mounts "on its side", shooting light parallel to the board. Soldering will be tricky. We use similar parts
on some of our boards.
Here's our experiment.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/p03zpedrlkiudimfzrmot/h?rlkey=myk6loks5uhyxw5ahis3lic8p&dl=0
We used little mushroom light pipes to improve viewing angles. They
look nice too.
That led could also be mounted on the *edge* of a board, which would
get really interesting.
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Another alternative might be SMT devices shining *through*
the PBC into pipes -- the thickness of the PCB offsetting
some of the required "height" of the pipe as it navigates
its bend)
I can't think of any other alternatives...
søndag den 8. oktober 2023 kl. 15.45.37 UTC+2 skrev Don Y:
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
<snip>
Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found...
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying
on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when
one would think it should be "Top"?)
bottom right shows it mounted
drawing says 1mm, how thin do you need?
0.7mm https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/sunled/XZCBDMEDGK161W/8259045 https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/sunled/XZCCBDMEDGK161W/10449771
On 10/8/2023 4:32 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
[...]
2mm tall right-angle addressable (1-wire) things,
and a quick spin through the datasheet shows the timing to be pretty
much the same as the WS2812 or SK6812 options (aka "Neopixel", if you're
familiar with Adafruit / Sparkfun).
The internal driver is a win (I'd have to check to see if it has the "problems" of the original 2812) as it saves some components and board
space. But, board space is easier to come by than assembly
*thickness*. :< 2mm on top of a ~1.5mm board brings me to 3.5mm.
Then, encapsulation adds to this. (I'd have to see if I can reduce
the thickness of the PCB substrate)
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 04:08:55 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Another alternative might be SMT devices shining *through*
the PBC into pipes -- the thickness of the PCB offsetting
some of the required "height" of the pipe as it navigates
its bend)
I can't think of any other alternatives...
I've used top-firing leds under a square rod of lexan,
machined along its length and painted white on the
machined surface.
Viewed from the side, the eye sees the led projecting
on the white angled surface. Avoids annoying LED brightness
while still differentiating between adjacent indicators.
Stick as many emitters as you want, side by side - just cut
the lexan rod to length to cover the group.
This was for battery charging/discharging/fault indicators.
paint this surface > /l < view this surface.
illuminate from this ^.
On 10/8/2023 7:37 AM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
søndag den 8. oktober 2023 kl. 15.45.37 UTC+2 skrev Don Y:
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
<snip>
Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found...
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying
on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when
one would think it should be "Top"?)
bottom right shows it mountedYes, a TOP view -- the lands on the PCB are clearly visible "under"
the device. But, note the "Side" view (above and to the left) shows
the same shape. (side should be "elevation" -- which should
yield a height/thickness figure)
drawing says 1mm, how thin do you need?I only see "1" referenced in the "Top" drawing. Their notion of
"top" seems couterintuitive.
I can make 1mm work -- if that is actually the nominal height
of the component above the surface of the PCB (if I keep components
off the back side of the PCB).
1.5 - 2mm would be a tougher job.
0.7mm https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/sunled/XZCBDMEDGK161W/8259045 https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/sunled/XZCCBDMEDGK161W/10449771
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 04:08:55 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Another alternative might be SMT devices shining *through*
the PBC into pipes -- the thickness of the PCB offsetting
some of the required "height" of the pipe as it navigates
its bend)
I can't think of any other alternatives...I've used top-firing leds under a square rod of lexan,
machined along its length and painted white on the
machined surface.
Viewed from the side, the eye sees the led projecting
on the white angled surface. Avoids annoying LED brightness
while still differentiating between adjacent indicators.
Stick as many emitters as you want, side by side - just cut
the lexan rod to length to cover the group.
This was for battery charging/discharging/fault indicators.
paint this surface > /l < view this surface.
illuminate from this ^.
On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 12:45:37?AM UTC+11, Don Y wrote:
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
<snip>
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
lets you download the datasheet, and on page 8 the second drawing on the left hand side of the page shows the peak height of the dome as 1.5+/-0.1mm
That doesn't seem to include any solder filet under the device. Presumably the LEDs shoot sideways out of the side of the dome.
I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when one would think it should be "Top"?)
The dome doesn't seem to be any kind of lens but rather just a flattened blob over the the three-LED assembly.
On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 12:45:37 AM UTC+11, Don Y wrote:
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:<snip>
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
lets you download the datasheet, and on page 8 the second drawing on the left hand side of the page shows the peak height of the dome as 1.5+/-0.1mm
That doesn't seem to include any solder filet under the device. Presumably the LEDs shoot sideways out of the side of the dome.
On 2023-10-08, Don Y wrote:
On 10/8/2023 4:32 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
[...]
2mm tall right-angle addressable (1-wire) things,
and a quick spin through the datasheet shows the timing to be pretty
much the same as the WS2812 or SK6812 options (aka "Neopixel", if you're >>> familiar with Adafruit / Sparkfun).
The internal driver is a win (I'd have to check to see if it has the
"problems" of the original 2812) as it saves some components and board
space. But, board space is easier to come by than assembly
*thickness*. :< 2mm on top of a ~1.5mm board brings me to 3.5mm.
Then, encapsulation adds to this. (I'd have to see if I can reduce
the thickness of the PCB substrate)
Mount them to a flexible PCB or other "daughter-assembly" type thing?
I've got a spool of WS2812's like that (albeit the standard
perpendicular orientation rather than RA)... nice enough, and that
flexible substrate is paper thin.
søndag den 8. oktober 2023 kl. 21.23.28 UTC+2 skrev legg:
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 04:08:55 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angleI've used top-firing leds under a square rod of lexan,
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Another alternative might be SMT devices shining *through*
the PBC into pipes -- the thickness of the PCB offsetting
some of the required "height" of the pipe as it navigates
its bend)
I can't think of any other alternatives...
machined along its length and painted white on the
machined surface.
Viewed from the side, the eye sees the led projecting
on the white angled surface. Avoids annoying LED brightness
while still differentiating between adjacent indicators.
Stick as many emitters as you want, side by side - just cut
the lexan rod to length to cover the group.
This was for battery charging/discharging/fault indicators.
paint this surface > /l < view this surface.
illuminate from this ^.
standard ones are not painted, https://www.ledtronics.com/Products/ProductsDetails.aspx?WP=321
On 10/8/2023 12:23 PM, legg wrote:
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 04:08:55 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Another alternative might be SMT devices shining *through*
the PBC into pipes -- the thickness of the PCB offsetting
some of the required "height" of the pipe as it navigates
its bend)
I can't think of any other alternatives...
I've used top-firing leds under a square rod of lexan,
machined along its length and painted white on the
machined surface.
Hmmm... I'd have thought a (molded, rounded) surface would give
the desired "reflection" (assuming compliant with refractive
index). I wonder what the absorption losses are in the paint?
Viewed from the side, the eye sees the led projecting
on the white angled surface. Avoids annoying LED brightness
while still differentiating between adjacent indicators.
Stick as many emitters as you want, side by side - just cut
the lexan rod to length to cover the group.
This still doesn't avoid the "assembly thickness" issue.
(crap, designing for "tiny" is *really* hard!)
Or, the added assembly step (to machine & add the light pipe).
I was hoping to buy a component with the light reoriented in
the plane I wanted...
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 13:41:08 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:
On 10/8/2023 12:23 PM, legg wrote:
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 04:08:55 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
Another alternative might be SMT devices shining *through*
the PBC into pipes -- the thickness of the PCB offsetting
some of the required "height" of the pipe as it navigates
its bend)
I can't think of any other alternatives...
I've used top-firing leds under a square rod of lexan,
machined along its length and painted white on the
machined surface.
Hmmm... I'd have thought a (molded, rounded) surface would give
the desired "reflection" (assuming compliant with refractive
index). I wonder what the absorption losses are in the paint?
If you want to read led indicators over a wid viewing angle, you've
got to diffuse the light somehow on the protruding portion.
You can buy this type of package (or haul out the sandpaper).
The assembly I've described is only useful if you look at it
straight on ~ like any meter that performs the same function.
Viewed from the side, the eye sees the led projecting
on the white angled surface. Avoids annoying LED brightness
while still differentiating between adjacent indicators.
Stick as many emitters as you want, side by side - just cut
the lexan rod to length to cover the group.
This still doesn't avoid the "assembly thickness" issue.
(crap, designing for "tiny" is *really* hard!)
The 'emitting' surface here is the paint - you can make the
mech height anything you want.
So go ahead and buy something . . . no arm twisting here. . .
Or, the added assembly step (to machine & add the light pipe).
I was hoping to buy a component with the light reoriented in
the plane I wanted...
but, frankly, led indicators are ridiculously bright and
difficult to dim uniformly.
RL
So go ahead and buy something . . . no arm twisting here. . .
but, frankly, led indicators are ridiculously bright and
difficult to dim uniformly.
RL
I've used top-firing leds under a square rod of lexan,
machined along its length and painted white on the
machined surface.
Hmmm... I'd have thought a (molded, rounded) surface would give
the desired "reflection" (assuming compliant with refractive
index). I wonder what the absorption losses are in the paint?
If you want to read led indicators over a wid viewing angle, you've
got to diffuse the light somehow on the protruding portion.
You can buy this type of package (or haul out the sandpaper).
The assembly I've described is only useful if you look at it
straight on ~ like any meter that performs the same function.
Viewed from the side, the eye sees the led projecting
on the white angled surface. Avoids annoying LED brightness
while still differentiating between adjacent indicators.
Stick as many emitters as you want, side by side - just cut
the lexan rod to length to cover the group.
This still doesn't avoid the "assembly thickness" issue.
(crap, designing for "tiny" is *really* hard!)
The 'emitting' surface here is the paint - you can make the
mech height anything you want.
Or, the added assembly step (to machine & add the light pipe).
I was hoping to buy a component with the light reoriented in
the plane I wanted...
So go ahead and buy something . . . no arm twisting here. . .
but, frankly, led indicators are ridiculously bright and
difficult to dim uniformly.
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:
So go ahead and buy something . . . no arm twisting here. . .
but, frankly, led indicators are ridiculously bright and
difficult to dim uniformly.
RL
Would constant current sources improve uniformity? If not, why not?
On 10/9/2023 7:35 AM, legg wrote:
I've used top-firing leds under a square rod of lexan,
machined along its length and painted white on the
machined surface.
Hmmm... I'd have thought a (molded, rounded) surface would give
the desired "reflection" (assuming compliant with refractive
index). I wonder what the absorption losses are in the paint?
If you want to read led indicators over a wid viewing angle, you've
got to diffuse the light somehow on the protruding portion.
You can buy this type of package (or haul out the sandpaper).
Yes, but that's usually on the "exit surface". I'm talking
about light "leaking" out of the "pipe" due to critical
bend angles; i.e., a curved transition loses less light
than an abrupt one (depends on material).
The assembly I've described is only useful if you look at it
straight on ~ like any meter that performs the same function.
Viewed from the side, the eye sees the led projecting
on the white angled surface. Avoids annoying LED brightness
while still differentiating between adjacent indicators.
Stick as many emitters as you want, side by side - just cut
the lexan rod to length to cover the group.
This still doesn't avoid the "assembly thickness" issue.
(crap, designing for "tiny" is *really* hard!)
The 'emitting' surface here is the paint - you can make the
mech height anything you want.
Yes, but it is ADDED to the height of the LED (which may,
in turn, be added to the "height" of the PCB). This is why
I suggested down-firing LEDs with a pipe that can start its
bend "within" the thickness of the PCB:
VVV
==========\\\==========
----------
--------
(ugh! ASCII art won't cut it)
I.e., the top (here, BACK) side of the LED is at the same point
in space as if it was UP firing. But, instead of the pipe starting
its turn ABOVE that point, the turn can be started "in" the thickness
of the PCB so that the light is (eventually) emitted closer to the
plane of the PCB. In effect, emulating a right-angle LED
Or, the added assembly step (to machine & add the light pipe).
I was hoping to buy a component with the light reoriented in
the plane I wanted...
So go ahead and buy something . . . no arm twisting here. . .
but, frankly, led indicators are ridiculously bright and
difficult to dim uniformly.
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.So, use the "thinnest" assy.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.So, use the "thinnest" assy.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only
solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional"
components (they were called BAG phones).
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve!
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.So, use the "thinnest" assy.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only
solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional"
components (they were called BAG phones).
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve!
That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator
on their edges? I don't.
On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don Y
<blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.So, use the "thinnest" assy.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only
solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional"
components (they were called BAG phones).
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve!
That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicatorBut *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions
on their edges? I don't.
that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints
that it imposes on the design.
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don YBut *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions
<blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.So, use the "thinnest" assy.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only
solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional"
components (they were called BAG phones).
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve!
That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator
on their edges? I don't.
that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints
that it imposes on the design.
Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market.
But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum.
On 10/11/2023 7:56 PM, John Smiht wrote:
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02?PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don YBut *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions
<blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints. >>>>>>> So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting aSo, use the "thinnest" assy.
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only
solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional"
components (they were called BAG phones).
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve!
That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator >>>> on their edges? I don't.
that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints
that it imposes on the design.
Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market.
But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum.
Which is exactly why I have folks who do my board layouts, glass designs, >packaging, market surveys, board fabrication, etc.
I use THIS forum for experiences folks have POSSIBLY had meeting similar >ELECTRONIC design challenges.
"If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself to blame" >naively ignores the fact that markets constrain designs.
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02?PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don YBut *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions
<blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.So, use the "thinnest" assy.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only
solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional"
components (they were called BAG phones).
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve!
That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator
on their edges? I don't.
that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints
that it imposes on the design.
Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market.
But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum.
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 19:56:36 -0700 (PDT), John Smiht
<utube...@xoxy.net> wrote:
On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:29:02?PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 10/10/2023 4:12 PM, legg wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:42:28 -0700, Don YBut *I* am concerned with MY product and the design decisions
<blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
On 10/10/2023 10:06 AM, legg wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:05:00 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
wrote:
<snip>
The problem is finding something that fits the size constraints.So, use the "thinnest" assy.
So far, the "thinnest" assembly is the result of mounting a
thru-hole LED on it's side AT the edge of the PCB (because
you can absorb the thickness of the PCB in the calculation)
"Thin" assys give me the XXXs. For XXX's sake, who needs them?
If you don't have the space (volume), then "thin" is the only
solution. Imagine designing a cell phone with "conventional"
components (they were called BAG phones).
My problem was a retrofit to use available space in a large
filled body. It was applied to a captive board display that
was already cheaply fabbed, in volume, for use in an
exhorbitantly marked up consumer product who's tooling
budget might have financed world XXXing peace.
They 'stole' the concept for the next rev, rather than redesign.
If you're designing from the ground up, you've only got yourself
to blame.
Or, rather, the *market* you want to serve!
That's a keyboard/display and camera. Think they need an rgb indicator >> > on their edges? I don't.
that *I* have to make to address MY market and the constraints
that it imposes on the design.
Well, then maybe *YOU* should employ a professional to help *YOU* with *YOUR* decisions to satisfy *YOUR* market.Don't wear out your "shift" key!
But,of course it might cost considerably more than the help *YOU* get on this forum.
Once you've mounted your emitter, maybe give light 'pipe' issue
over to mech case designer. Electronics guys don't know nothin'.
(I've met some pretty dim and intractible mech guys too.)
Me, I'm a 'make it go on schedule' guy. I have no shame.
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
On 10/8/2023 4:26 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 08/10/2023 12:08, Don Y wrote:
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
<snip>
Right angle RGB SM LED, first one found...
https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/everlight-electronics-co-ltd/EASV3015RGBA0/6156087
I'm confused by the datasheet's dimensioning; on page 8, it appears
that the "dome" portion stands UP from the board instead of lying
on it. (i.e., the second illustration is labeled "Side" when
one would think it should be "Top"?)
So, I'm wondering what the height of the device is (given that
it has to sit *on* a PCB so the thickness of the board adds
to the assembly's thickness -- that's the problem with anything
mounted *on* the board hoping to cast light off to the side)
I need to mount (many) RGB indicators at right angle
to the PCB (i.e., so the light travels parallel to the
plane of the PCB)
The entire assembly needs to be *really* thin.
Using SMT components, it seems like I'd have to use
lightpipes to bend the light (typically emitted normal
to the PCB). This will add to the thickness of the assembly
(board thickness + component + pipe)
A better approach might be to use leaded components
mounted on their sides AT the edge of the PCB and
selecting them for smallest diameter possible (as
this would conceivably be the largest dimension in the
assembly's thickness).
I'm looking for ~100K qty (LEDs) and can provide my own
drive electronics (I looked at the "RGB LEDs with integrated
drivers" and came up lacking).
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 94:29:01 |
| Calls: | 6,719 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,252 |
| Messages: | 5,359,270 |
| Posted today: | 1 |
