Schematic Design For TM4C123GH6PM

Might it be (fairly) said that, "Forcing such relatively new students - so soon - into MCU pcb layout" is hugely unproductive?   How is it that the schools (so many of them) miss this obvious point?    Would industry - even small tech firms such as mine - ever trust one "so new" in such layout?

The vast amount of (new) learning forced upon students (or hobbyist) by the complexity of the ARM MCU is quite sufficient - don't we think?   Adding pcb layout to a new user's agenda makes little (perhaps NO) sense!

Vendor's LPads and/or this/other vendors' Eval Boards are low cost - and built by those experienced & skilled - insuring quality & meeting of design rules/guidelines.   If - and only if - the design requires "special ICs" and/or signal routings - a daughter board (minus fine pitch devices) - proves a far more appropriate use of the new user/student's "pcb" skill & knowledge levels.

Perhaps it proves, "Not too much of a reach" to predict that w/in the next few weeks will emerge:

• A "first time effort" pcb
• first time effort pcb assembly

And of course:

• school dictated "DRM" code - most often (only) sparsely commented

And this is - in total, "Highly unlikely to work!"   (As hardware (first ever pcb), assembly (fine pitch MCU) and (likely) DRM code all are new, unverified.)     Most successful firms/individuals try to, "Limit the number of variables/unknowns" - in contrast, (here) ALL appear (warmly) welcome!

Might something be "amiss" with this scenario?    How will the (hapless) novice poster know whether her (issues) are hardware or software?   (or both)   And what about intermittents - what then?   Could we have devised a (more) error-prone undertaking?  (Especially when well tested LPads stand, "At the ready!")

Is my group (alone) in, "Seeing this coming - wishing to sound an alarm?"   (and should this (premature) effort (really) be encouraged? - by all but one...)

Amit,

As you & your fellows answer (so many) MCU issues here - and (by far) most result from very well tested/verified LPads & Eval Boards - how can encouraging a pcb design novice make ANY sense?

This is NO knock on our poster - but instead firm's/my, "Intruding sense of reality" - which (unfortunately) escapes too many w/in the university structure.   Our poster was "unaware" of the need for JTAG connections & header - was she not?    Is she ready, willing & able to absorb complex, PCB guidelines?    Really?
 
Seriously - embarking upon a fine-pitch, MCU board design - when hundreds of "Code Examples" are thus "bypassed/neglected" makes NO Sense!   As owner of a small tech firm NEVER/EVER would we direct a pcb design to a novice.   And ALWAYS we'd want them able to effectively solve "real-world" programming and MCU utilization challenges.   I guarantee that there is NOT time to teach & perfect BOTH - not a chance!

Forcing students into a low-value - highly demanding - design exercise (one they are woefully unprepared to meet) - WHILE sacrificing the very needed programming & problem-solving skills small tech firms NEED - proves destructive - does it not?

It is only if we "Suspend Disbelief" that this school-directed - far "OFF Mark" home-brew pcb exercise - makes ANY Sense!   We note that the school (apparently) "Could not be bothered" to emphasize the importance of JTAG!    (i.e.   Does this not much ring of, "Lambs to Slaughter?)     (Someone had to say this!)

Hi Sylvia,

Never/ever did I suggest that "you" were unprofessional - nor ignorant, nor that your questions & objectives were "stupid."   I had mistakenly (we now learn) assumed that your school had, "forced such assignment upon you."    And - as noted - that simply overloads any new person - pcb design (good pcb design) is both an "art & science!"   Never/ever for a beginner - especially if they desire a robust, high-performing pcb!

My goal was to alert you to the fact that learning to exploit the ARM MCU is a demanding & critical task - all on its own.   Simply spend some time here - or at other ARM forums - you'll note so many - crash/burn!    And they use "pro boards!"  

And - if you are to start with:

• an untried, untested/verified pcb
• untried, untested pcb assembly skills
• equally untried, untested/verified software

You have created a (deadly) condition which firm/I describe as, "Maximum Randomness!"   How (ever) will you know if your board design, or assembly, or component values or your software cause issues?   Ans: you cannot - that is why I (continue) to press strongly for your development work to be done on a "pro" LPad or Eval board.   Only later - when your software has been test/verified - would I venture to "your own pcb design!"   This greatly removes/reduces you from the "clutches" of "Maximum Randomness."

Your venture - just like mine - usually must focus on those things you can "uniquely do" and do well.   Becoming expert in ALL AREAS is unlikely - after more than a few decades in this field - I still try to learn - each/every day.  

Focus is very important - our investors always advise that we "Stick to our expertise" and engage others for the (needed) extra.   Getting your product to work - and to market - surely "trumps" doing everything yourself - and arriving late.  (or last!)   Race is to the swift - profit margins are highest then - huge penalties await those using DRM (worse still - ASM) or doing things "outside of their capability/strength!"

Wish you well - I am NOT negative - but strongly resist those tactics I KNOW to be inefficient - and often - simply - WRONG!   (and this method/madness enabled me to past co-found, then take tech firm public...)