Idea for project... with CAD drawings... feedback please...

engstrom0304 · 13 Sep 2011 at 19:19

Hi Guys...

Ill keep it simple... this is what I have so far...

Would be for an A-level Design Project, which includes an analysis of an existing product, which I would probably choose the Antec Skeleton for... I'd take it apart and basically review it.

The design brief, would be that it makes testing components easy, as it is simple to change hardware, so is for the testing/benchmarking market and also the enthusiast market...

As for mobo protection, if I take away the mobo watercooling, not necessary with sandybridge, I could have an acrylic sheet that goes over the motherboard, held from 2 bolts at the top, that goes down to the graphics card, which is protected with a backplate....

Any feedback??

EDIT: Obviously, the graphics card will need support... Maybe even making a new gpu io plate?

James J · 13 Sep 2011 at 19:36

Is the motherboard actually raised from the metal its sat on? If not it would short out immediately. Also you could secure the gcard in the current setup by a support tube clamped to the top of the GPU block and is attached to the base of your design.

engstrom0304 · 13 Sep 2011 at 20:22

James J said:
Is the motherboard actually raised from the metal its sat on? If not it would short out immediately. Also you could secure the gcard in the current setup by a support tube clamped to the top of the GPU block and is attached to the base of your design.

No, ill be using standoffs.

Only problem with that is that it would mean it would only work with this gpu/block... and the idea of the project is to be a testers case... so Im thinking I would have to put the secure clamp on the end to meet the gpu io plate?

jumpy · 13 Sep 2011 at 21:10

CAD drawings? Where's your template and title block, plan and elevation views?

sorry hehe what software you using to draw that, some kind of sketchup thing?

Would you not have to simulate an enclosed case (though with easy access) for testing all the different gubbins working together, or are you simply using it to only test the actual hardware under ideal conditions, not how they might perform in a real world situation?

engstrom0304 · 13 Sep 2011 at 21:35

jumpy said:
CAD drawings? Where's your template and title block, plan and elevation views? sorry hehe what software you using to draw that, some kind of sketchup thing?

Would you not have to simulate an enclosed case (though with easy access) for testing all the different gubbins working together, or are you simply using it to only test the actual hardware under ideal conditions, not how they might perform in a real world situation?

Haha well that all comes later!

Well, the idea would be to test components for faults, and for benchmarkers, so an enclosed case would not be necessary...

Not 100% sure on this idea though... Do you think it would perhaps be a better idea to find a system where the motherboard lies flat, to stop the graphics card support problem??

EDIT: Used a mixture of Google Sketchup and Autodesk 3Ds Max Design

jumpy · 13 Sep 2011 at 21:54

Working with the mobo flat would definitely make it simpler in that respect. Certainly if functionality and simplicity are high on your list of design criteria.
Perhaps all of your power/cooling solutions could be part of a base unit of some sort... then again you'll probably sacrifice a narrow footprint for such a design.

However, whenever I've built a pc, the tower always gets laid on its side so I can look down into it and not have to faff about with my head at a funny angle. If the footprint is not a concern for bench testing and compatibility tweaking... I always thought towers were designed to fit the constraints of the home and office. When you look at them, it's always tall and thin. The only other alternative is those small form factor things you see with a monitor stood on top of it.
Again, if you're not having to pander to the needs of a workstation/office user in terms of space, then I'd have it flat, just for the sake of easier access to install cards and all that good stuff. You could always have some kind of 'gate' that could support the back io bit of any cards installed, something you could just lift out to gain access, as it wouldn't be actually supporting the card, but just preventing it from being bent or twisted away from perpendicular.

Do you have something specific in mind, or are you just scoping out the alternatives? Looking at an existing design and finding out what you dislike about it is a start. What's the competition like?

engstrom0304 · 13 Sep 2011 at 22:47

jumpy said:
Perhaps all of your power/cooling solutions could be part of a base unit of some sort...

What exactly do you mean by this? I have a triple radiator and psu integrated already??

jumpy said:
You could always have some kind of 'gate' that could support the back io bit of any cards installed, something you could just lift out to gain access, as it wouldn't be actually supporting the card, but just preventing it from being bent or twisted away from perpendicular.

That's a very good idea if I were to go down the flat route... Problem with that is that I don't necessarily want to completely rule out a whole market by doing that.

Another problem is.... building the pc as it is in my design would be tricky as it cant be laid on its side due to the curved back??

jumpy said:
Do you have something specific in mind, or are you just scoping out the alternatives? Looking at an existing design and finding out what you dislike about it is a start. What's the competition like?

Nothing specific in mind at the moment. Would quite like to include the Acrylic part with the gaps between each layer, as in my current design, if possible.

EDIT: Perhaps then, I'm looking for a design that works equally well in either orientation?

jumpy · 13 Sep 2011 at 23:10

engstrom0304 said:
What exactly do you mean by this? I have a triple radiator and psu integrated already??

hmm, I was sort of thinking aloud, well you've got your base unit there already, I guess; which leads me to -

engstrom0304 said:
That's a very good idea if I were to go down the flat route... Problem with that is that I don't necessarily want to completely rule out a whole market by doing that.

Another problem is.... building the pc as it is in my design would be tricky as it cant be laid on its side due to the curved back??

How is it market specific? And how would laying all of it flat make it so (just curious); are we talking home user stuff for geeky overclockers (example) in which case is it form over function like a niche sales thing?
Looking at the curved back, there's a lot of unused space there - only mobo supports I'm thinking? Maybe you could look at tilting the mobo at 45 degrees, with the option to orientate it so that cards etc would run 'up and down' rather than 'side to side', or combinations of to suit the maker... most mobo trays in cases allow for various stand off positions/holes to accommodate different manufactures boards. You'd just be taking it a step further. The io gate could still work in that case.

engstrom0304 said:
Nothing specific in mind at the moment. Would quite like to include the Acrylic part with the gaps between each layer, as in my current design, if possible.

EDIT: Perhaps then, I'm looking for a design that works equally well in either orientation?

But then are you looking to compromise on ideas you might like to see as key features of your design?

Sorry, more questions

(sleepy time for me now) You have any links to an existing product we can gawk at? See how the competition do things?

engstrom0304 · 14 Sep 2011 at 19:18

jumpy said:
How is it market specific? And how would laying all of it flat make it so (just curious); are we talking home user stuff for geeky overclockers (example) in which case is it form over function like a niche sales thing?

Well, as you say, many people will be wanting a tower that takes not too much room, and although it is a form over function product, a 45 degree angle for the mobo sounds like a great compromise. Thanks!! Great idea there!

jumpy said:
Looking at the curved back, there's a lot of unused space there - only mobo supports I'm thinking? Maybe you could look at tilting the mobo at 45 degrees, with the option to orientate it so that cards etc would run 'up and down' rather than 'side to side', or combinations of to suit the maker... most mobo trays in cases allow for various stand off positions/holes to accommodate different manufactures boards. You'd just be taking it a step further. The io gate could still work in that case.

What do you mean by "or combinations of to suit the maker" ?? Do you mean, the maker could rotate the motherboard 90 degrees for different purposes?? Also, what advantage would having the motherboard in either orientation have?

jumpy said:
But then are you looking to compromise on ideas you might like to see as key features of your design?

I think the 45 degree idea could be fitted in to a design that still includes some of the key features I have in mind!

I got the general idea from this by the way

Whatever comes out of this will become a build log by the way!

jumpy · 14 Sep 2011 at 21:31

Interesting image - I take it the back bit is mostly cosmetic, hiding various tubes & cables?

Re: the 'combinations' thing - depending on where the sockets and wires are located on the mobo (I know there's a 'standard design' from all the different manufacturers) the user could perhaps have the choice to mount it so the wires were either at the top or bottom, in which case the stand-off holes would have to be located accordingly... I don't know if that would mean holes overlapping or not, never looked :confused:

Maybe to simplify your build, giving the user a choice of different ways to mount the mobo would be unnecessary, so choose io gate bits either at the top or the bottom in that case. You'd probably have a little more weight on the board itself with the various expansion cards at the top, as opposed to having them at the bottom.. but seeing as the expansion slots are generally fairly tight and (some that I've seen) have a locking tab it should make little difference? other than the cards flexing on the board.

Be interesting to see the results.

engstrom0304 · 14 Sep 2011 at 22:33

jumpy said:
Interesting image - I take it the back bit is mostly cosmetic, hiding various tubes & cables?

Re: the 'combinations' thing - depending on where the sockets and wires are located on the mobo (I know there's a 'standard design' from all the different manufacturers) the user could perhaps have the choice to mount it so the wires were either at the top or bottom, in which case the stand-off holes would have to be located accordingly... I don't know if that would mean holes overlapping or not, never looked

Maybe to simplify your build, giving the user a choice of different ways to mount the mobo would be unnecessary, so choose io gate bits either at the top or the bottom in that case. You'd probably have a little more weight on the board itself with the various expansion cards at the top, as opposed to having them at the bottom.. but seeing as the expansion slots are generally fairly tight and (some that I've seen) have a locking tab it should make little difference? other than the cards flexing on the board.

Be interesting to see the results.

The curved back is indeed for aesthetics.

What exactly do you mean by an io gate?? Not quite understanding what you are picturing!

As for the weight on the board, Id say it would be fine... The gpu isnt that heavy and the weight is still going downwards, into the board, rather than against the socket.

TRNC · 14 Sep 2011 at 23:01

Acrylic is bad for static so not ideal.

Also those arent CAD drawings, they are 3D visualisations.

engstrom0304 · 14 Sep 2011 at 23:16

TRNC said:
Acrylic is bad for static so not ideal.

Also those arent CAD drawings, they are 3D visualisations.

Good point... Do you guys reckon i'd get away with acrylic?

qqg3 · 14 Sep 2011 at 23:27

TRNC said:
Also those arent CAD drawings, they are 3D visualisations.

CAD = Coumputer Aided Design?

jumpy · 15 Sep 2011 at 00:00

engstrom0304 said:
The curved back is indeed for aesthetics.

What exactly do you mean by an io gate?? Not quite understanding what you are picturing!

the bit where everything plugs into the board... I mixed my references

TRNC · 15 Sep 2011 at 09:52

qqg3 said:
CAD = Coumputer Aided Design?

Do you work in the industry??? No....didnt think so.

Neither Sketchup or 3DS Max are design programs. Sketchup is amateur crap. 3DS Max is for visualisation and animation, not design.

CAD origionates from AutoCAD, the market leading 2D design software, 3D CAD software are programs such as Inventor, SolidWorks, Catia, ProEngineer etc.

Those are nothing more than pretty pictures.

feriso · 15 Sep 2011 at 12:05

TRNC said:
Do you work in the industry??? No....didnt think so.

Neither Sketchup or 3DS Max are design programs. Sketchup is amateur crap. 3DS Max is for visualisation and animation, not design.

CAD origionates from AutoCAD, the market leading 2D design software, 3D CAD software are programs such as Inventor, SolidWorks, Catia, ProEngineer etc.

Those are nothing more than pretty pictures.

I'll agree with you there, CAD to me involve multiple view/elevation drawings; what you show are visualisations

This is coming from an AutoCAD/Inventor user

/pendatic mode

Xandos · 15 Sep 2011 at 12:15

Coming from a 3D Artist, using 3D Studio Max, I can say that these aren't what I'd call CAD drawings, although I would also argue that you can design things in Max. You can design something with a pen and paper, and doing it in Max is a Computer Aided solution.

So, I'd say that the industry term agrees with your pendanticism, however common sense does not...

jumpy · 15 Sep 2011 at 15:34

lol

You can spot AutoCAD users from a mile off; we're a jealous bunch when it comes to our software, haha

...careful now, or I'll explode all of the dimensions!

engstrom0304 · 15 Sep 2011 at 21:42

In my defence, I am using the "design" version of max...

There are 2 versions, one focused on animation, effects etc etc.. and the other is called 3ds max design, which is more like a CAD program.