PFC 3.0 BOM not complete? (according to Eagle file)

#1

Hi all, were just getting started trying to wrap our heads around the PFC 3.0 electrical plans, and have been diving into the Eagle files in the pfc_edu/4.0 directory. We’ve noticed that there are a ton more components listed in the Eagle file vs the included BOM. Is the BOM incomplete, or are we missing something? We want to make sure we order everything correctly for assembly.

Has anyone else run into this? Happy to supply more specifics if that’s helpful. Thanks in advance!

David + team Method

0 Likes

Bare PCB for V3.0
#2

Have you already seen these two threads with some older discussion on BOM issues?

  1. "Brain" openag-device-software Q&A for PFC 3.0
  2. Manufacturing Q&A for PFC 3.0

It doesn’t look like those conversations reached much of a conclusion, but you might still find useful information there.

1 Like

#3

Thanks so much for the links. Yes, looks like this is an open issue as of now. We’ll see what we can do on our end to solve this, but it would be great if anyone at OpenAg knows anything about the undocumented parts.

0 Likes

#4

@Adrian the 4.0 is still very much a work in progress on our end. It is just a design and we haven’t made a board for it yet. We share most of our work with the public as we are doing it, and things change very quickly in the research / R&D world. So caveat emptor with the latest version of anything we do :slight_smile:

The current units we are testing / have made are the 3.0 version.

1 Like

#5

Hi all,

I’ve just realised the same thing, but I’ve also had the board that is in the https://github.com/OpenAgInitiative/openag-electrical/tree/master/prj/pfc-edu/v4.0 directory made. Am I accidentally the first one to have made a v4.0 board :see_no_evil: I’ve also got all the components from the BOM.

The Wiki (https://wiki.openag.media.mit.edu/pfc_edu_3.0#pfc_edu_bill_of_materials_and_design) links to this V4 directory, is it perhaps meant to rather point to the v3.0 directory? I had assumed that the Wiki linked to the recommended files.

It does seem like the spreadsheet with the BOM on the wiki and the Eagle files don’t match up entirely. From what I can see at the moment, it is mainly a lot of resistors and capacitors that are not included in the spreadsheet BOM, but appear in the Eagle parts list (when looking at the schematics).

Has anyone successfully built either the V3.0 or V4.0 board? Were there any other discrepancies you picked up? Or have I missed something entirely here (that is the more likely case I think!)

0 Likes

#6

@bradley @adrian we skipped building the 4.0 design. We are currently finalizing the 5.0 design and will be manufacturing it this month.

0 Likes

#7

@rbaynes, thanks for the info. I’ve a few questions, any help much appreciated!

  1. Would you then recommend building out of the V3 directory (https://github.com/OpenAgInitiative/openag-electrical/tree/master/prj/pfc-edu/v3.0) for a stable system?
  2. Which version of the build do the spreadsheets (BOM etc) on the wiki reference? V3.0 or V4.0 or some other iteration?
  3. Is there a revised/complete BOM for V3.0 anywhere? I saw another thread a few months ago with a reply saying it was in progress to be reconciled, but haven’t seen anything after that.
  4. Should the wiki perhaps be pointing to V3.0 directories and info rather? It could be a little confusing for people starting out with the references to the V4.0 build info.
  5. I’ve had the bare board from the V4.0 directory made. Would you recommend getting a V3.0 board made and working from that, or are the changes minor enough?

Thanks for the time, and apologies for all the questions. I’m more of a software guy, so a bit green at the hardware things.

If there is anything I can assist with in getting the build info together etc, I’d be happy to help. I’d just need some guidance around what is recommended for community builds etc.

0 Likes

#8

@bradley I would not recommend building or using the v3 or v4 design. If you must, the v3 design is stable and we have used them in a STEM middle school pilot last summer and we use them ourselves for minor research and demos. Furthermore the device code with release 1.04 or 2.01 is stable on the v3.0 hardware.

But I still strongly suggest you wait until we get the v5 board done this summer. We are currently in the process of adding new drivers and changing how we deploy software for the v5 board. The hardware team will be doing more documentation for the v5 hardware, since we will be sending it out to be manufactured (not building it in house like we normally do).

BTW: I’m the software team lead at OpenAg, I understand our hardware design process but don’t directly participate very much. I get small one-off boards to test and write drivers for, then those designs are incorporated into a larger board like the EDU.

Here is a picture of 24 EDUs in the Media Lab set up for a demo in 2 weeks. They are all growing basil under different lighting conditions:

0 Likes

#9

@rbaynes, thanks for the reply!

Ok, cool. Just one thing then, do you know if the components for V5 are similar to those used on V3? I have bought the BOM that was in the spreadsheet about a week ago, so if they can be used for V5 I will wait till then, otherwise since I have the stuff I may as well try make something :slight_smile:

If you need any more hands and fingers on the software side, feel free to give me a shout. I’d be happy to help out where I can.

Thanks for your help!

0 Likes

#10

PS the pic looks great! Makes me even more eager to build one here!

0 Likes

#11

@bradley v5 components will be similar to v3, we are just adding a few more.

0 Likes

#12

@rbaynes great, thanks for the info :+1:

0 Likes