Ivan,
        while I haven't actually done this for a singular or onesy twosy
designs (note: I let the fabricators do this normally, it is their forte for
production jobs). From my experience I would think that Camtastic may work
quite adequately for a step and repeat type singular job. Where it seems to
fall down for a single design would simply be the lack of an absolute
coordinate movement system and snap functions. Both of those shortcomings
should not be too much of an issue if you are just using an array (step &
repeat) type function. I tried to take one of our boards and do this right
now, seemed easy enough although I didn't confirm the output which onscreen
just looked like a single board with 15 locations allotted. I guess this is
what the step and repeat does, single occurrence then it is offset and
repeated automatically for the output files.

Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

Lead PCB Designer
Norsat International Inc.
#300 - 4401 Still Creek Drive,
Burnaby, B.C., Canada, V5C 6G9.
Tel   (604) 292-9089 (direct line)
Fax  (604) 292-9010
Website: www.norsat.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Bagotronix Tech Support [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:58 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Merging boards


Brad (and anyone else who wants to chime in):

Does CAMtastic work OK when you panelize an array of the same PCB?  I may
want to try this sometime soon.

I have used CAMtastic for basic Gerber manipulation (adding targets, etc.).
It worked OK for that.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website:  www.bagotronix.com

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to