bastian/debyl-site
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Updated changes to reflect new static layout

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Bastian de Byl
2019-07-24 13:36:57 -04:00
parent 18d4285f38
commit 30d90545bf
7 changed files with 64 additions and 43 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

20
content/post/aperture-study.md
View File

@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ lost at that target distance of 1 meter.
The biggest difference can be seen between the *f/1.7* and *f/4.0* shots. Note
the increase in clarity on the pillows fabric.
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f17-f40-comp.jpg" sub="f/1.7 vs. f/4.0" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f17-f40-comp.jpg" sub="f/1.7 vs. f/4.0" >}}
---
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ At *f/2.8* and above I started noticing less increase in perceived sharpness of
the image, though the difference in comparison to *f/1.7* was still fairly
noticeable
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f17-f28-comp.jpg" sub="f/1.7 vs f/2.8" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f17-f28-comp.jpg" sub="f/1.7 vs f/2.8" >}}
---
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ difference in shutter speed, the overall difference does not seem as dramatic
from *f/2.8* to *f/4.0*. Personally, I'd say that *f/2.8* is the clear winner in
finding the best middle-ground between maximum aperture and image quality.
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f28-f40-comp.jpg" sub="f/2.8 vs. f/4.0" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f28-f40-comp.jpg" sub="f/2.8 vs. f/4.0" >}}
---
@@ -66,11 +66,11 @@ Below is the entire collection of all the photos taken of the subject at
increasing aperture steps.
{{< thumbgallery >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f17.jpg" sub="f/1.7" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f20.jpg" sub="f/2.0" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f22.jpg" sub="f/2.2" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f25.jpg" sub="f/2.5" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f28.jpg" sub="f/2.8" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f32.jpg" sub="f/3.2" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/aperture-study/f40.jpg" sub="f/4.0" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f17.jpg" sub="f/1.7" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f20.jpg" sub="f/2.0" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f22.jpg" sub="f/2.2" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f25.jpg" sub="f/2.5" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f28.jpg" sub="f/2.8" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f32.jpg" sub="f/3.2" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/aperture-study/f40.jpg" sub="f/4.0" >}}
{{< /thumbgallery >}}

16
content/post/headphone-fix.md
View File

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ side, I figured the only way *in* was lifting the mesh cover off. So I went at
it, carefully, with a pair of tweezers. I worked my way around the edge and
wedged the mesh upwards.
{{< thumb src="/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7505.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7505.jpg" >}}
# Okay, Maybe Turn It On
@@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ right speaker put out no sound._ I checked the known-good left speaker using my
wanted to find out what to expect when troubleshooting the right channel.
{{< thumbgallery >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7506.jpg" sub="Left Speaker" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7511.jpg" sub="Right Speaker" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7506.jpg" sub="Left Speaker" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7511.jpg" sub="Right Speaker" >}}
{{< /thumbgallery >}}
Knowing what to expect on the oscilloscope, I hooked up the probe to the right,
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ disconnected at this point in time to ease the troubleshooting process.
Lucky for me the PCB pads were labeled -- even better `SPKL+` (_left_) and
`SPKR+` (_right_) were easy to find.
{{< thumb src="/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7507.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7507.jpg" >}}
Outside of the bluetooth board hidden under the piece of tape, there's not a
whole lot going on in the circuit. It was my guess that the visible surface
@@ -53,13 +53,13 @@ search of `AIWI TI` (_as shown in the photograph_) resulted
in [the following datasheet](http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tpa6132a2.pdf)
which verified that to be the case.
<center>![Hello](/img/headphone-fix/TPA6132A2.png)</center>
<center>![Hello](/static/img/headphone-fix/TPA6132A2.png)</center>
**Bingo!** Now knowing the pinout, I could use my trusty multimeter (_a Fluke
115_) to test continuity of the circuit from the known-good and the now
known-bad speaker traces back to the `OUTL` and `OUTR` outputs of the amplifier.
{{< thumb src="/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7514.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7514.jpg" >}}
Removing the board from the housing required a bit of finesse. I didn't want to
bother desoldering the left speaker connections to make removal easier. So, with
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ Using the 3.5mm mini-jack's solder pads, I found continuity to be true from the
chips left and right outputs to the conveniently accessible solder pads. _A
bodge wire was in order_..
{{< thumb src="/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7515.jpg" sub="Note the bodge wire" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7515.jpg" sub="Note the bodge wire" >}}
# All's Well That Ends Well
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ pin to `SPKR+`. Lo and behold it was now closed-circuit! I was very happy to see
the expected waveform from the known-good left channel now also appearing on the
right channel.
{{< thumb src="/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7516.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/headphone-fix/IMG_7516.jpg" >}}
At this point I quickly re-soldered the wires to the speaker and enjoyed music
now coming into both ears!

4
content/post/humble-beginnings.md
View File

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ my GitHub fork of the **Tracks** theme.
# Rough Start
Right off the bat I noticed the navigation bar seemed a bit off, to say the least:
<center>![Problem Navbar](/img/humble-beginnings/header-problem.png)</center>
<center>![Problem Navbar](/static/img/humble-beginnings/header-problem.png)</center>
The links showed as numbers and pointed to `/0`, `/1`, and `/2`
respectively. These, of course, lead to 404s. It didn't seem like the intended
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ The original uses the `.Site.Sections` variable, which I replaced with
user-defined `config.toml` nav links weren't ever utilized or populated anywhere
on the site.
<center>![Nav Links from Tracks Theme config](/img/humble-beginnings/tracks-config.png)</center>
<center>![Nav Links from Tracks Theme config](/static/img/humble-beginnings/tracks-config.png)</center>
I borrowed the code found in `layouts/partials/sidebar.html` (*which also never
appears to be used*) to include the nav links and get my desired behavior:

14
content/post/thinkpad_usb_fix.md
View File

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ missing, along with 3 out of 4 pins having been completely broken off. Needless
to say this required fixing.
<!--more-->
{{< thumb src="/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04781.jpg" sub="Final result" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04781.jpg" sub="Final result" >}}
# Damage Assessment
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ The first step was to look at the PCB to assess how this could be, if at all,
replaced. From the outside you could see the damage done. Note the single
pin left and lack of the inner pad (_bolster?_).
{{< thumb src="/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04722.jpg" sub="One pin remains" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04722.jpg" sub="One pin remains" >}}
# Measure Twice
@@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ needed to have the relevant dimensions in comparing to receptacle part drawings
of those available for sale.
{{< thumbgallery >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04714.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04718.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04714.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04718.jpg" >}}
{{< /thumbgallery >}}
Using generic, non-branded digital calipers I was able to get the following
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ unbranded digital caliper. Those values are nearly spot-on.
The part was ordered, and arrived quickly at my doorstep. Stacked on top of each
other the two receptacles matched up just as I had hoped.. **Fantastic!**
{{< thumb src="/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04773.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04773.jpg" >}}
# It's not over yet
Initial attempts at desoldering the existing (_broken_) receptacle proved
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ the modification "process"_. Cutting and bending the pins, I was able to get it
soldered on (poorly). There wasn't much wiggle room for cleaning up the
bodged-in replacement; this will have to do.
{{< thumb src="/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04774.jpg" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04774.jpg" >}}
The part was essentially soldered as a wholly surface mount part, which it is
not. This could have future issues due to a lack of solder-terminated strain
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ motherboard from correctly fitting. This was quickly solved by using a Dremel
with a low-grit sanding drum and removing material off of the receptacle. The
result was acceptable, and provided a tight fitment into the laptop case.
{{< thumb src="/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04775.jpg" sub="End of the journey" >}}
{{< thumb src="/static/img/thinkpad-usb-fix/DSC04775.jpg" sub="End of the journey" >}}
[^1]: [Molex Part No. 482580002](https://www.molex.com/molex/products/datasheet.jsp?part=active/0482580002_IO_CONNECTORS.xml&channel=Products)
[^2]: [Digi-Key Part No. WM7087CT-ND](https://www.digikey.com/products/en?keywords=WM7087CT-ND)