Thank you Dennis S for the pitch
----- Original Message ----- From: Dennis Saputelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Protel EDA Forum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 9:05 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] PCB Panelization > > this has been kicked around a lot and i do not at all dispute what you > have said here > > nevertheless, we frequently seem to have requirements that the bd house > could not appreciate > > e.g., sometimes a part hangs significantly over a board edge (the > features of which may not be apparent to a board house) and a clever > arrangement of the panel can allow the part to hang into the right > adjacent area of an adjacent bd thus saving hand solder steps > > sometimes wastage of material is more than offset by assembly savings > due the arrangement of the boards and the dimensions of throw away rails > vs. what they offer > > clearly, however, the pitfalls of doing it yourself are real > > i think the best compromise on this topic that i have seen is mike > reagan's: > > draw all the details of the panel, breakaways and such and then include > only one instance of the bd and explain what it is that you want > this more or less allows you to have your cake and eat it too > no DRC issues, no objects missed in copy and paste (got burned on that > once), time offloaded to the board house > > (this method however doesn't address the best utilization of their raw > material size and tank sizes) > > in general i don't think there is a hard cost for the fab shop's > panelization efforts (since they do it anyway), it is more or less > overhead depending on your relationship and size of order, etc. > so having said that i agree that their time is 'free' and may save in > other ways also > > BTW, > over the years (and even lately) having dealt with maybe 40 or more > board shops i have seen more than once the following amusing relevant > quotation quirk: > i panelize several different boards, sometimes just dumb shear aparts > (we have a shear), the appearance is one board, one rectangle > > the shops calls and says "i see you have several part numbers here" (by > looking at the nomenclature on the board) > then they try to angle for more money ... > it's as if they feel burned for the setups they didn't get > guess who i don't call back > > another one > we make a nice multi-up panel of say 6 of the same bd, maybe rails > around the perimeter and tab routing and all kinds of crap that unify it > into a single deliverable 'thing' > > the bd is to be delivered as presented, i.e., we break it apart AFTER > assembly so from our viewpoint it is ONE bd > what follows all too often is endless confusion over how many bds we > want, they often want to count the individual ones to get the price up > i ordered 24 pcs, i got 4 bds > i have taken to the rather lengthy: > > '4 pcs ea of 'our panel' (their panel is different!, got burned on that > too) which consists of 6 bds per each of 'our panel' > after a few phone calls about how many that really means that usually > does the trick > > Dennis Saputelli > > Andrew Jenkins wrote: > > > > On 04:04 PM 4/11/2002 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Tim, > > >In my opinion, I would not do the panelization in any of them. I let the Fab > > >house do ... it. > > > > I agree. I recently ran the numbers on a small board from several PCB shops, both pre-panelized and by allowing them to handle the optimization. In no uncertain terms, each of the hosues told me that had I chosen to do the panelization myself, it would have probably cost me more, due to their knowledge of the "stock" board sizes that they use to create the customer ouput, versus my own ignorance of each of their individual stock sizes and equipment, etc... (And there would have been more effort on my part...more cost..serious cost (manhours)...and more of an opportunity to fudge something while panelizing...more potential for increased cost...) > > > > Unless you're talking from the perspective of a board house, ie, by "we are performing our first panelization" means that you're the service, not the servicee, then I have to wonder why you're taking this on, aside from a potential academic interest in accomplishing the task, that is. > > > > regards, > > > > aj > > > > -- > ___________________________________________________________________________ > www.integratedcontrolsinc.com Integrated Controls, Inc. > tel: 415-647-0480 2851 21st Street > fax: 415-647-3003 San Francisco, CA 94110 > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
