> so the bottom line is that it would be nice if there were some > 'standard' way to have this in the electronic file that did > not rely so much on operator skills and reading ability > both of which are on downward trends > > doesn't the excellon format support slots?
Dennis, Well that basically this is already happening. Either IPC's GenCam (industry owned standard) or Valor's ODB++ are means by which one should be able to capture ALL design intent in one file structure by which the particular vendor can extract their part as needed. I am not 100% sure ODB++'s intend is, but I do know the intent of GenCam is to do just that. Whether it be a stack-up, impedance control, copper weight, hole type etc, should be able to be transfered electronically, so any Fab House CAM system can bring the data in and run with it. Now the hitch is alot of our CAD vendors are dropping the ball on this. ALL of the CAM vendors are ready and waiting to take your files in this way. Some CAD vendors have embraced Valor's solution, Some IPC's and some both, but each still has its problems. But I would sincerely hope in the near future for this to happen. IPC the industry owns, whereas ODB++ one company Valor owns. Not going to judge either, just REALLY wish one would become the defacto standard like gerber did. Bob Wolfe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Saputelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 11:27 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] oblong Pads/Slots (plated) in P99SE > we have done it most of the different ways you have outlined > > it hasn't seemed to have mattered much which methond we use, > if the notes are clear it comes out ok by almost whatever method you use > > but one time it didn't ... > we just got a hole instead of a plated slot and all of the quick > turn multilayer bds were ruined, they couldn't be grunched > (and time lost which was even more valuable) > > our notes and methods were clear and the same shop followed > them correctly on previous orders > > when i complained they launched an 'investigation' > > after a day or so they called and said they found out what the > problem was > > "what?" i ask > > "we make mistake" they said > > they replaced all the boards > > so the bottom line is that it would be nice if there were some > 'standard' way to have this in the electronic file that did > not rely so much on operator skills and reading ability > both of which are on downward trends > > doesn't the excellon format support slots? > > Dennis Saputelli > > "John A. Ross [Design]" wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Michael Biggs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 6:48 PM > > > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > > > Subject: [PEDA] oblong Pads/Slots (plated) in P99SE > > > > > > I have noticed in P99SE component library that you cannot > > > change the hole size to be a oblong or plated slot for > > > footprints. I know there are alternative ways to call out > > > these drill holes to be plated slots within the pad, but what > > > is the proper or favorable way to do this in P99SE? Thank You > > > in advance for responses. > > > > Michael > > > > My favoured way for definition of a cut out (plated or otherwise) within > > a pad is as follows. > > > > Create pad as a rectangular shape and define pad stack ensuring the pad > > dimensions have allowed for enough free land around the slot. > > > > In the centre of the pad I make the hole size the same as the width of > > the slot (rout) that is needed within the pad. > > > > If the slot is to be plated, then mark the hold plated, if not plated > > then mark it as such. > > > > So up to now we have the pad defined, plating status and slot width as > > well as the centre of the slot. > > > > I usually define Mech layer 1 as a board outline and use Mech layer 2 > > for board dimensions. > > > > On mech layer 1 & 2 I draw an outline of the slot I need the same as the > > hole diameter in the pad and using arcs with the same radius of the pad > > hole to terminate the slot ends. > > > > On layer 2 I add the overall dimensions so that the fab shop can see > > where to draw the drill/rout path. I also make a small annotation here > > as well to indicate plated status as the pad definition seems to be too > > subtle for some fabs, :-( even although it is documented in the release > > notes. > > > > Sometimes I also place 2 x co-ordinates at the centre of the opposite > > arcs within the slot on layer 3, as some front end systems allow for the > > start/end points of the slot to be typed in instead of drawn. But these > > are useless if the same origin is not used after import to the usable > > film box within the CAM tools the fab shop uses. > > > > I prefer to use a single pad for this, I have seen other suggestions > > using 2 to mark the rout start/end, same idea as my co-ords above so > > that the CAM guys can just draw/snap between the 2 but this has other > > issues. > > > > Best Regards > > > > John A. Ross > > > > RSD Communications ltd > > Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > WWW http://www.rsd.tv > > ================================== > > -- > Dennis Saputelli > > ========= send only plain text please! - no HTML ========== > _______________________________________________________________________ > Integrated Controls, Inc. www.integratedcontrolsinc.com > 2851 21st Street tel: 415-647-0480 > San Francisco, CA 94110 fax: 415-647-3003 > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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/[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
