On 10/25/18 9:48 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: > > > On 10/25/18 9:18 AM, Guy Sotomayor Jr via cctalk wrote: >> Now that I think about it, a flying probe may be easier for us hobbyists to >> construct. The trick will be getting sufficient x/y resolution and not >> having the two probes interfere when the two probes are close to each other. >> > > I hadn't thought about that. > Two probes, one on the front and one on the back of the board... > No interference. you could use two of these https://shop.evilmadscientist.com/productsmenu/846
- does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist? Al Kossow via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool e... Eric Schlaepfer via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool e... Guy Dunphy via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA to... Al Kossow via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool e... Jon Elson via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA to... Chuck Guzis via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering ED... Jon Elson via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineerin... Guy Sotomayor Jr via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engin... Al Kossow via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engin... Al Kossow via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-e... Al Kossow via cctalk
- Re: does a rever... Guy Sotomayor Jr via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA to... Guy Dunphy via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering ED... Christian Corti via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering ED... Al Kossow via cctalk
- Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool e... r.stricklin via cctalk