I haven't received that issue yet. But now I'm looking forward to it. I wonder what this months center-fold will be... :)
Tim -----Original Message----- From: Samuel Cox "Sam" [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 2:01 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: Re: [PEDA] PCB Panelization FYI, Take a look at the April 2002 issue of Printed Circuit Design Magazine.... It's focus this month is on Panelization as a means to High-Volume Manufacturing... Sam Cox. At 01:36 PM 4/12/2002 -0300, you wrote: >Thanks to all who helped with this thread. I'm reviewing them and haven't >made a decision yet... > >Tim Fifield > >-----Original Message----- >From: Mike Reagan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 9:49 AM >To: Protel EDA Forum >Subject: Re: [PEDA] PCB Panelization > > >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 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
