I'm building an enclosure using the side profile 1 assemblies. I need a bit more information so I can determine the height of my circuit board within the enclosure. What are the dimensions C, D, E, and F in the drawing below? I cannot find this information in the enclosure manual. Thank you.
Posted By: Glen Akins on Feb 21, 2010 06:33PM Category: Front Panel Designer
The dimension you are looking for are listed below
C = 4mm
D = 1.5mm
E = 1.5mm
F = 7mm
Posted By: Leland Savage on Feb 22, 2010 09:22PMReply
Thanks! That's exactly what I needed to know.
Posted By: Glen Akins on Feb 22, 2010 10:36PMReply
Perfect! I was looking for this info as well. Might help to update the enclosure manual.
Posted By: Matt Watkins on Aug 28, 2010 12:30AMReply
I'm building a project for which I will use two HiFi 2000 enclosures.
The GX388 and the GX283.
Do you have any templates for the front and rear panels please?
Posted By: Andy Michael on Jan 24, 2010 12:24PM Category: Front Panel Designer
Unfortunately we do not have templates for the HiFi 2000 enclosures. If you could possibly provide a DXF or DWG we could assist you in designing the enclosure.
Posted By: Leland Savage on Jan 25, 2010 11:00PMReply
I have the files.
Can you give me an email address to send them to please.
Posted By: Andy Michael on Jan 27, 2010 09:47PMReply
Please email the files to firstname.lastname@example.org
Posted By: Leland Savage on Jan 29, 2010 02:15AMReply
Can you provide me the files for the GX283 front panel?
Posted By: Gary Wood on Dec 06, 2010 05:11AMReply
Thank you for contacting us regarding these files. Oddly enough, Andy Michael ended up being a customer from the UK, and the files submitted for ordering and manufacturing went to our sister company in Berlin.
I went ahead and E-mailed Andy to determine whether or not he will release the files for your use. Please stand by.
Posted By: Paul Birkeland on Dec 06, 2010 08:23PMReply
Hello again Gary,
Andy has given us permission to distribute the files. I am attempting to obtain them from him via e-mail. If I cannot, we will need to wait for our sister company in Berlin to forward along the files.
Many thanks for your continued patience.
Posted By: Paul Birkeland on Dec 06, 2010 08:50PMReply
I have a panel to be made soon for which the exposed raw aluminum at the cut edges is unacceptable, so we will need to get them anodized afterward. So I selected the raw aluminum material in the software and was warned that you do not guarantee surface condition.
Is the condition going to be good enough that I can buff out imperfections before anodizing, or am I better off ordering an anodized panel and having it stripped and re-anodized afterward?
I don't need a polished surface, my buffing would end up with a brush finish if that makes a difference.
Thanks in advance,
Posted By: Ed Heitzman on Jan 12, 2010 08:40PM Category: Production
It's better to go with anodized aluminum. The anodizer needs to etch the aluminum anyway, no matter if raw or already anodized. However, the etching wouldn't remove potential surface scratches of raw aluminum, whereas our pre-anodized material guarantees a scratch free surface.
Posted By: Diane Haensel on Jan 15, 2010 03:31PMReply
Hi, I've recently downloaded the software and done a few trial runs of the FPE software and am more than impressed.
Since this is particular section is wish list I'd like to ask that purple or violet infil colour and/or anodisation be considered for possible future inclusion. This has become a standard colour for greywater systems and it's inclusion would please one of my customers.
Posted By: David Sawtell on Jan 12, 2010 03:03AM Category: Whishes
This inclusion is a possibility. You can purchase the individual colors for $70 per 250ml. We keep the paint in stock for one year and use it only for your projects.
Posted By: Leland Savage on Jan 29, 2010 02:27AMReply
It will be of great aid to have a layer that can be hidden or visible that will not be used in the design by Front Panel, but will be used by designer for various uses.
Example of use:
To add comments or part numbers, instructions of functions etc, This can be used in the documentation for the design.
Posted By: Jorge de la Paz on Jan 02, 2010 04:02AM Category: Whishes
Thank you for your suggestion. I think this would be a really useful function for a lot of FPD users.
I will discuss this with our software development.
Posted By: Diane Haensel on Jan 05, 2010 04:56AMReply
Particularly useful, in this vein, would be some dimensioning tools.
Posted By: Matt Watkins on Apr 12, 2010 11:34PMReply
The easiest way to add this function might be to add tools to the tool selection menu such as "comment 0.2mm" which would draw like "engraver 0.2mm" but be ignored by the milling and pricing programs.
I really want to be able to show existing features of ready-made parts I send you to work on, both for my design purposes and for the sake of making it clear how the part gets loaded in the milling machine.
Posted By: KEVIN LOVINGOOD on Apr 21, 2010 04:15PMReply
Thank you for your suggestion. I think that would be a valuable feature for many of our customers. It would also help us to determine the reference of customer provided material in a more efficient way.
Thanks again, I'll let our software developer know.
Posted By: Diane Haensel on Apr 22, 2010 12:39AMReply
I agree a non-design layer (layout layer) would be very helpful. I currently have to create several versions of the same drawing and add "engraving objects" so I can either get a feel of the look of a layout without holes and so forth and to visualize placement of hidden components/objects and outline behind the front panel
should be somewhat simple
(1) create a non design or "Ref layer"
(2) user right clicks on any object
(3) click "Ref Layer"
(4) likewise an object can be moved back to the "Design Layer" with a right click. Maybe Alternate action on object between the two layers.
Posted By: Jeff Wilson on Jul 10, 2010 05:41PMReply
Hello Jeff et al,
I completely agree with all of you that a reference layer is a neat idea. I know it comes in really handy for me when working with CAD software to design PC boards. The biggest issue for me is the "what you see is what you get" quality to our software. For a reference layer, we would have to come up with a creative way to make it extremely obvious that what is seen will not be milled into the panel.
In my own past experience, I would leave my reference items grouped together, then mirror them across the origin (horizontally) when I needed to move something, then move them back. Right before placing my order, I would remove the reference objects, save a _final version, and order that.
I think maybe this should be an option that takes some effort to activate? What do you all think?
Posted By: Paul Birkeland on Jul 12, 2010 06:48PMReply
Most of my front panels have a PC board on the underside. The one I am presently working on has LEDs and 7-segment displays which protrude through the front panel and have pins which will be inserted into the PC board. A non design layer would be God-sent. I presently print the front panel design and draw the PC board on it, avoiding switches and other front panel objects. I would welcome such a layer where I could hopefully group objects from this layer to the front panel drawing. I would like to be able to print the layers combined and separate. Thank you. Larry
Posted By: Larry Smith on Jan 23, 2011 08:47AMReply
Up until the time that we are able to integrate this idea into our software, here is an idea for you.
Generally the PCB production files can be converted into .plt plotter files, and these files can be imported into our software. With the PCB artwork temporarily laid out in Front Panel Designer, it becomes much easier to position elements with confidence.
I have also used the print function, as many PCB cad software packages also have the 1:1 printout option, and laying the two over each other on a light table allows for quick verification.
Posted By: Paul Birkeland on Jan 24, 2011 05:13PMReply
-If nothing else, it would be very helpful to get an option to include an "outline" to macro parts that you don't have to go in and delete before production. We place and use a lot of mil-style connectors.. so a big center hole, 4 corner holes.. but there is a flange sticking out from the corner holes, so if I make the Macro just as 5 holes.. placing 80 of these connectors on a front panel while ensuring that the flange spacing is appropriate, suddenly gets challenging. What we/I do is draw in an outline on the macro part, then lay out the panel, then go through and delete all the outline engravings.. which takes a lot of time.
Posted By: Kjell-Edmund Ims on Feb 24, 2011 07:18PMReply
After another year, this thread deserves a good bump.
A non-machined design layer would really help.
Posted By: Chris Knudsen on Feb 23, 2012 10:34PMReply
I just wanted to vote again for a non-design layer (layout layer) for printing and documentation that can be printed, but is never machined.
If you polled users I think this would be the number one new feature that we'd like you to add as soon as possible.
Thank you very much!
Posted By: Joe Torre on Jun 29, 2012 04:48PMReply
I pushed this feature to a higher priority on our IT todo list.
Thank you for mentioning it again.
Posted By: Diane Haensel on Aug 02, 2012 10:44PMReply
Just like Punxsutawney Phil, every February I emerge to ask about a notes/non-machined layer.
Oh look... Nope, my mistake. Yet another year and still nothing new.
Posted By: chriskner on Feb 28, 2013 09:12PMReply
I just wanted to add my voice to the group calling for this feature and to bump the thread *again*.
Posted By: EvanFoss on Jun 07, 2013 05:32PMReply
Oh FSM, why does this not yet exist?
Shall I grow moldy and stale before we're graced with this functionality?
Posted By: chriskner on Oct 17, 2014 05:22PMReply
I am receiving the following error when trying to create a new Macro object.
Can you provide any suggestions as to what I may be doing wrong?
Posted By: Landon Solomon on Dec 31, 2009 03:40PM Category: Front Panel Designer
I would like to check your fpd file. Can you please email it to us (email@example.com) and let me know which objects you were trying to group as a macro?
Posted By: Diane Haensel on Jan 05, 2010 01:17AMReply