RK8E controller board revisions - Chaos ahead, help needed

Philipp Hachtmann hachti at hachti.de
Mon Apr 26 14:02:47 CDT 2010


> The B2, B1, and C are the etch levels of the boards. The 310D means the
> board was made in  1973 or maybe 1983 during the 10th week. The D is the
> eco/fco rev of the board.
Ok, etch level is somewhat clear to me - it's marked in copper. And the 
eco/fco stuff - how to keep track of that? And what stands the D really 
for? A combination of board revision and eco level?
I'd like to know how to get the right schematic etc.
In the RK8E schematics for example I read "revision a" for the board. 
Does that refer to the etch revision or the overall version of the board 
including ecos and probably applied fcos?
Is there some kind of straightforward record of eco and fco levels?
What about the relationship between factory installed ecos and fcos? Are 
they equivalent?

To me it's all not that clear...



> I still have some other thing to go over with you off list, and will try to
> get to them this week.
> Paul
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Philipp Hachtmann <hachti at hachti.de> wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> I'm currently dealing with some RK8E Omnibus RK05 controller board sets.
>> I was unable to assemble even one stable RK8E from the stuff. I assume a
>> high failure rate. But I also assume that I have board revision problems.
>> I've been told that several revisions existed. And that there were
>> compatibility issues and some kind of paper (which I do not have) telling
>> what fits what.
>> I don't even know if the revisions are PCB revisions like "M7104 B2"
>> written in the etch or if there are also FCOs or alike that make boards with
>> same etch incompatible to other boards.
>> My personal RK8E passes all tests. It consists of:
>> M7104 B2
>> M7105 B1
>> M7106 C
>> But I have other boards flying around here as well.
>> Do stamps like "310 D" on the backside of the boards have any meaning with
>> respect to board revision or FCO level?
>> Another question is how to get different board revisions associated with
>> the right schematics.
>> I strongly appreciate any piece of enlightenment since I'm currently
>> getting depressed by that stuff. Even if I have bad boards - it won't make
>> sense to try to repair something if the whole is inconsistent in itself.
>> Many thanks,
>> Philipp

More information about the cctech mailing list