5x2 0.1" PTH on Gadgeteer modules

Is anyone interested in such thing, in addition to the Gadgeteer header ? I mean : only the holes, not complete headers, so that anyone can solder either male/female headers or even a wire on a specific pin.

They would be connected to the Gadgeteer header pins, of course. This is much like an “integrated extender” and non-Gadgeteer boards could connect easier to a module.

What do you think ?

[em]Edit:[/em] I say 2x5, but 1x10 could also be an alternative, as it would take less space and could even be place just near the Gadgeteer connector.

I would be interested

First version of the WiFi module had those. I am adding this on my new module.

How about a board that contains a male Gadgeteer plug and a set of solder pads. This could be used to add solder pads to any module.

I don’t know if a plug exists, that could be soldered to a board, and whether it could sustain repeated insertions/removals.

I would not like to see solder pads on all Gadgeteer modules. Takes up too much real estate.

1 Like

Kinda like a cable-less MakeBread/Wire board.

Didn’t someone do this on an ethernet module?

edit – The search isn’t finding anything for Godefrei’s ENC28J60; but I thought he did something similar to this.

RansomHall’s MakeWire board is indeed a very good board. The only “flaw”, if I can say this, is that you still need to solder the Gadgeteer header and this is not that simple. At least, less than soldering on a classic 0.1" pad.

The goal here is to be able to use the GHI’s Gadgeteer modules with other (GHI or not) boards. Right now, I have no ready-to-use offer from GHI for a RFID reader for a PandaII or a Cobra. I say RFID, but in fact, there are no more non-Gadgeteer modules (I don’t say shield… oops).
The only way here is to buy a Extender and a cable per module used. This may be ok for prototyping but not for regular production, even in small batches.

This would also help those of us (if any other than me) who don’t care about Gadgeteer and use plain NetMF for their projects.


Exactly. I want my new module to be used by Arduino community as well.

We certainly have borrowed a lot of existing OSHW reference designs from the Arduino and other communities. It would be great to offer this to reverse the trend a bit. The main reason I came up with the MakeBread was to make it easier to use my growing collection of gadgeteer modules on Pandas, Arduinos, Cerb40s, and other micros.

@ Bec - those gadgeteer headers are a pain to solder aren’t they? I still scorch the plastic occasionally, particularly when assembling a bunch of my breakouts in one go.

You need holes to solder wires, right? Then why not just use the gadgeteer cable? I mean half cable?

The Bluetooth module I have built (not the same one as the Seeed module, uses the $6 ebay HC05 module) has both a Gadgeteer header and a .1" row of connectors that can be used. It’s a U module and doesn’t use all the pins, but I put a 10-point connector for consistency. I didn’t spend time to get room to silkscreen all the connections in though.

Half a gadgeteer cable is still a messy connection at the other end. How do you then connect that to a header on the other device? Sure, I’ve soldered wires directly onto .1" pins and used that into a breadboard or female socket, but it’s not exactly easy to solder that up, especially using the thin gadgeteer cables. To make it very friendly you really want something ultra easy like a .1" socket.

I’ve done it before. Gadgeteer sockets and cables are too expensive to require them for non-Gadgeteer projects.

MS should take notice (and so should the Go! people). I understand the reasons they went with the connectors they did, but I don’t necessarily agree.

One quick thought: for GoBus the GoPort IDC headers (0.05" pitch ports and IDC cables) are only required on GoBus modules. Commercial companies who integrate the royalty-free GoBus protocol inside their commercial products can simply wire up virtual i/o chips using board traces or externally with standard 0.1" headers as desired.

For GoBus modules…we could also create a cable adapter board down the road using as few as 4 wires at 0.1" pitch…but we’ve decided to standardize on the $0.50-$1.00 GoPort IDC headers and the $1.25-$2.00 IDC cables for now because it keeps things simple for users. The port/cable cost is offset in part by the simpler design and no-brick nature of modules (i.e. having the extra pins).


I have the feeling that GHI and Go! people, amongst others, seem to forget that there’s at least one other category of users between pure hobbyists and commercial companies that need or can afford a complete PCB design with SOM and modules’ components directly integrated/soldered on the whole PCB.

For this kind of users, of which I am of course (but I may be the only one, in which case you can ignore my prose), where standard batches quantities are around 10-20 devices, 0.1" pads would be very useful in that they could simply plug modules on dedicated female headers (for example) on the PCB. See attached picture to see what it could look like on a custom PCB : assuming the modules do have 0.1" pads, you design your PCB with the modules footprints on it and you only have to plug them at will. It can also be a way of making different series of devices with optionnal features.

Modules as they are now are very nice, but they can’t be integrated easily in a real project because of their wiring, to me. Of course, very simple modules like the button one may not be the best candidates, but some others like SDCard, BT, ENC28 or L298 motors module, which all have “not-so-easy-to-solder” chips on them would greatly benefit of such plug-in feature, I think. And btw, I don’t see any use for reinventing the wheel : if GHI has already created a good module, why would I design another one only for it to fit on my PCB.

Lastly, if making money is a concern, which in no doubt is, then opening those modules to other areas than Gadgeteer is something to have in mind.

Indeed :frowning:

It’s even harder when the solder paste is too old and is not melting down as it should… I’m waiting for new paste in the next few days.

What about this. Both images are of the flash module but one with what you wanted. Original size is 22x27mm but new one is 27x27mm.

You can also move it between top mounting holes and move logos to the other side of the module.

True but I am trying to make something standard for all modules, something we can put in the gadgeteer standard. Basically, the “socket” component will automatically has the 0.1" holes built in so once you add it, the holes are added, at exact same location every time.

Do the 0.1" pads have to flank the SMT connector? Can they be both on the same side? Just provoking thought, I have no preference myself, but think the flanking arrangement proposed by Gus make routing/usage much simpler. The distance between rows should be a standard like 0.3" or 0.6" (standard DIP spacing). That way a user can add male headers and plug the module into a breadboard.

Valid point. Another issue with bottom row is that there will be no way to use it if socket is used as well. The cable will be in the way. Not a typical case to use both, but it can happened.

1 Like