diode 0805

Near these parts, we tend to be representatives of KiCad lifestyle. Is there a better way to design PCBAs than free and open source tools that can be run anywhere? However, there are still some features in the commercial EDA software package that have not yet entered KiCad, so it may not always be the best tool. Altium Designer is a popular non-random choice, but the price per seat is as high as tens of thousands of dollars, and it is not always suitable for users and businesses without serious needs.

As a KiCad user, what do you do when you encounter a design that you want to collaborate with Altium? As of April 3, 2020, [Thomas Pointhuber] has merged

Enter KiCad, this version is expected to be released in version 6.0. As [Thomas] himself pointed out in the patch submission, this is hardly the first time a third-party Altium importer has been released. His new work is

By [thesourcerer8]. In January, another user left

Other (non-KiKad) tools to process Altium files.

If you want to try this beautiful new feature yourself,

Build KiCad from the source. As for testing against classic files

You can find what you saw above on GitHub. Take a break and watch [Thomas]'s boring but very exciting video about importers at work. We can't wait to try it!

Thanks for the tip [Chris Gammell]!

Finally, import

Board

Just one click (in the developer version).

This allows viewing and editing

versus

The software is therefore not actually open to everyone.

-Thomas Pointhuber (@Chaos_Robotic)

I am a big fan of Altium, so I recommend CircuitMaker as a free alternative. It is basically a simplified version of Altium, but still has excellent features. This is the necessary software I currently use for personal pcb projects.

Well, if someone wants to import your project into KiCad, my importer also supports CircuitMaker and CircuitStudio.

"We tend to be representatives of the KiCad lifestyle;" Is that intentional? (index)

Opponents oppose the cone shape, the supporters support the cone shape, and the exponents spray the cone shape everywhere.

Did you know that altium has a free version...

But it is not open source, so it is pure evil by default and must be avoided. Most importantly, it won’t even run on Linux installations from 1996, but on the old converted Amiga, so it’s good.

Hahahaha! that's good!

The only good PCB design is on vinyl.

It hasn't been updated for many years, and it was in beta version even before being abandoned. Unfortunately, I like it very much.

In response to your comment on the cost of Altium, "...but each seat is up to tens of thousands of dollars"...This may be the retail price or the listed price, but Altium sometimes offers special offers (e.g. spring 2019), One of them may have a permanent Altium permanent seat (including access to online training and one-year support services) for less than $3,000. Although US$3K is not cheap, it is certainly reasonable for many small and medium-sized companies.

The small company I work for has less than 50 employees, 10 of whom are engaged in electronic product design... How do we justify waiting for "sales" to upgrade department seats? Between our old OrCAD, Eagle and Altium seats, we are now transferring everyone to KiCAD. Some people are looking at the development content of 6.0 and are excited about many features. We are studying what is yet to be developed, and we are providing a business case for designated developers to do part-time coding on kicad in our company-release it as open source while working. Open source is the way of the future.

Wayne Stambaugh and Seth Hillbrand (2 KiKad mayor developers) have been set up

Seek commercial support. They can help you speed up your own developers, or you can hire them to do some custom work on KiCad.

Thank you, I will investigate!

As an amateur using kicad instead of any paid alternatives, what features am I missing?

Obviously a very expensive seat :)

As the wallet is thinner, Altium makes sitting in this seat more comfortable.

As an amateur? There may be nothing. Unless you are making very complicated circuit boards!

Eight years ago, we switched from Kicad to Altium, mainly because it can easily and successfully complete complex circuit boards compared to Kicad.

I think one of the best features Altium has is its very sophisticated design rules. You can almost say "I want my 10Ohms differential pair to have a width of 0.22mm on the top layer and 0.174mm on the third layer, but 0.1mm is ok under this fine-pitch BGA", or " I want the normal gap to be 0.125mm, but 0.15mm between the polygons and the lines. Oh, I want to leave a 2mm gap between the AC input and the rest of the circuit."

These rules are automatically used when pouring polygons (in most cases) when routing tracks.

In most designs, we have at least 20 rules. It clears up the most common routing errors you might encounter. It is especially useful when working with others on high-speed designs or when you need to comply with specific safety-related licenses. In this case, sometimes simple errors due to wiring errors will mean expensive and expensive redesigns (more expensive than Altium Licence The cost is much higher).

Finally, there are many "smart routing" tools, once you master these tools, your running speed will be 2-10 times faster than manual speed. Coupled with the ability to use STEP 3D models, so you can get an accurate final 3D model for mechanical integration. Plus more than 1,000 little things, such as muti-channed designs (copy and paste your routing in seconds).

Although there are some disadvantages. This is a tool that requires a lot of learning and practice to get the most out of it, and “just for one board from time to time” may not be worth it.

TBH, since Kicad has made a lot of progress in the routing part, I would love to return to it. First is a personal project, and then maybe a professional project (but we must add design rules to it).

One of the reasons is that in Kicad, every file is text-based, works (relatively) well with Git, and allows some verification tools to be built around it. This is much easier than reverse-engineering the part of the Altium file that is part of the text, part of the binary collage, and part of the repeated information. Thomas Pointhuber most likely knows this is better than what I did :)

tl; Doctor

To summarize, I want to say that Altium is better than Kicad

--Your design is 1000 components or more

– Your design has complex clearance or mechanical constraints (or ultra-fine pitch)

– Your design will be used in "high demand" industries

-You have made many revisions to many boards

Therefore, as an amateur, you can fall into one of the following categories, but this is unlikely.

1+

Probably the most accurate comparison. I recently started using kicad again (tried it in 2015 and was not impressed), the library and integrated 3d models are absolutely incredible. I can perform ray-tracing 3D models (beautiful pictures) of the entire circuit board, and export 3D circuit boards and component models for mechanical integration. If PCB design is your daily work, please stick to Altium :)

Fun fact: If you have more than 65,534 components or networks, KiCad is better than Altium, simply because the file format uses 16-bit (I hope unsigned) integers. It cannot represent more.

Regarding constraints: I haven't implemented them yet, simply because KiCad 6 will get a very similar system to Altium.

Indeed, there will be a new cool restraint system. PS. I don't know what the hardware is to run Altium on @chmousset, but in my experience, a ~1500-pin BGA + some memory makes Altium useless.

I mainly work on high-end laptops with dedicated GPUs. In the past, the GPU seemed to be the bottleneck (maybe not FHD; but this is the case for me in 4k), but since AD19, it seems to be more CPU consumption. The largest design I have is 1000 components, 22k pads, and about 40 planes. Yes, it does run slowly when 20 mosquito nets are routed (it can reach 20FPS even when zoomed). There are some adjustments that seem to be useful in online DRC, but I haven't found a way to make everything *really* smooth.

I am not sure whether Altium can handle 10,000 components on all TBH. I don't think the actual limit is the 16-bit file format :)

In contrast, the same design imported in pcbnew presents a silky smooth effect. But polygon generation is 100 times slower than Altium, which eventually crashes pcbnew...

8 years ago, we switched from Kicad to Altium

Eight years is

Rapid development programs like KiCAD take a long time! I have never used Altium, but I think the development speed of KiCAD is much faster than Altium. Also, please see my response to Alexander Wikström below. KiCAD has a complete pugins echo system built around it, and has been "grafted" to the open source mechanical CAD FreeCAD, which greatly simplifies 3D work. You can easily push and pull mechanical fillers (including STEP data) between the two.

>For a rapid development program like KiCAD, eight years is a long time!

That's why I can consider using it for personal projects or even professional projects;)

In the end, every "large" professional software (Altium, Solidworks, Catia) has reached the point where it is backward compatible and keeps the user's workflow as stable as possible, preventing them from adding new features or doing smarter things.

In my case of using Solidworks for about 15 years, there are few improvements compared to the 2010 and 2016 versions (at least for my "basic" usage). Then, Fusion 360 came and changed everything for me. My efficiency may be 2-3 times higher, and it comes with free FEM, but the price is only a small part of it. Indeed, Fusion will also reach a stagnant state in the future, but the distance is still far (20-30 year cycle). Kicad may also know. :)

> KiCAD has built a complete pugins echo system around it and has been "grafted" to FreeCAD

I don't want FreeCAD. I want the steps (pun intended) to export the PCB 3D model to be as simple as possible, so I can put the model into my favorite MCAD package. But this is my preference.

I do not know. I think most "big" companies tend to use mentors and/or rhythms.

For me, the biggest difference is that KiCad can run on Linux and the powerful functions of Python scripts for DRC and lib management. But there are many other interesting things – for example, Sourcery CodeBench from Mentor.

For those who work on circuit board layout, the most obvious difference is the component library and component editing functions.

Python? Democratic Republic of the Congo? You caught my attention :)

Do you have any examples?

I also use KiCAD myself. However, when it is possible to list a bunch of annoying quirks that KiCAD does, it is actually not a good software.

Fortunately, some minor details can be changed through settings. But some quirks seem to be intentional.

Eeschema's inability to make basic object selection is frustrating. (Selecting is not equal to moving.... It would also be a nice improvement to hold down a key and click each item you want to select multiple items. (Because almost all existing CAD programs seem to support this...).

Editing the properties of multiple components is also a good thing. I can understand that component references are not "supported" (even if it can be done logically). However, it would be great if I could set the footprint on the component. Or even add a "reference" so that the component also follows the reference I set. The same goes for linking data sheets and other things that may be needed.

To say the least, deleting rows in Eeschema is also annoying. Why must the entire row be deleted? Can't it stop at the intersection? (Yes, I can go and redraw the part, but I shouldn’t.)

We also have a component library, which contains almost everything a person needs, and it is not difficult to add new content to it.

However, creating new library components may become much easier, and basically faster... Almost all components made by one person will be a rectangular box. There are a bunch of pins on its X side... why can't it generate this for us? It only needs to know how many pins we have, what components to call, what pins to call and what to do. (If you want to perform basic debugging later.)

Then we have the footprint library.

Except that the footprint library sometimes crashes, it's not too bad.

The library contains multiple copies of some components. What is the difference between 0805 capacitor and 0805 resistor? Why do 0805 inductors, diodes, etc. need their own footprints? We can't just provide a library for all packages such as 1206, 0805, 0603, 0201. They should be the same after all. (Frankly speaking, they are very standardized, we can generate them when needed, thus saving the need to prepare hundreds of files for them...)

KiCad has provided generators for BGA (which does not seem to support interleaved pins), SOIC, S-DIP (interleaved pins), QFP, FPC. So this is good. Now, as long as there is a standard method, you can tell the program to automatically generate footprints. Instead of generating it first, it’s better to put it in a library (or create a new library for it), and then point the component to the occupied space...

Just tell the program how difficult it is to "generate: BGA, 5×5, pp-.5, ps-.3, mx-.5, my-.5", and let it generate 5×5 pin BGA pad size as 0.3 mm, the pad pitch is 0.5 mm, and the profile is 0.5 mm. Now, I don’t advocate using the formatting method I just edited, but I’m happy to say that one wants to generate a new footprint instead of always needing a library containing everything. It will also make the project more portable. Because you only need a generator, you don't have to worry about importing libraries.

On the downside, if the chip lacks pins (or currently just interleaved pins...). Some BGAs have pins with missing + signs after all, and some BGAs lack complete squares or other patterns. Some chips may even toss on a larger pad. But for truly odd chips, this is where the library becomes very useful.

But the core cadcad caused other problems, everywhere. I don't know whether the latest version of PCBnew still has the "automatically delete old tracks" function, regardless of the button settings in the UI.

PCBnew also has this wonderful little problem when using DRC tools. It does list a long list of all the questions and even marks them with arrows. But there is no ID on the arrow, and no ID on the problem. If the first of question 1 also has #1, and the corresponding arrow also has #1, that would be great.... Not to mention that when you click the arrow, it will also light up the track, via or component in question. (Just like it lights up the corresponding pad/track when drawing a trace.)

It is also good if:

1. You can add one text document or three in one person's project...for project documents.

2. Kicad supports the version history of a project. In this way, if you want to make changes, you can insert a "bookmark" at that point in time, and then fiddle with the changes. At the same time, you can still choose to return to the previous version. This means that we don't have to worry about redesigning parts, because we know that the previous version still exists. (Yes, we should be able to have multiple bookmarks. Some CAD programs save everything a person does as a "history", but it's too detailed and only makes it harder for people to really know that a person came from Where, and the backtracking time is shorter. Distance, "undo" / ctrl-Z is more effective.) The simplest implementation is to be able to have multiple versions of the PCB file in the project.

3. For the same project, we can have multiple different committees. That is, each board may have its own schematic diagram. And be able to import these boards into each other and place them where they should be when using the 3D viewer. Suitable for more complex 3D designs. Therefore, if the schematic indicates that two boards are connected, they will be connected in the 3D viewer. (Although, I have also seen a simple code error that can cause the program to go through infinite recursion. For example, there are 4 interconnected boards forming a cube...not to mention how to deal with flexible PCBs... (but flexible PCBs Is another topic together...))

4. We can export the 3D model from kicad to other CAD programs, where we can create other parts of the same project... Adapting to the envelope design will suddenly become much easier. (The 3D viewer can currently export images, but nothing else...)

5. We can use the bill of materials file as part of the project so that we know how many components and what types of components are needed. It is best to support the above version history. You can even take notes in it, and even check inventory through Octopart and others.

However, this note is now a text wall, so it ends here.

Every EDA tool has annoying quirks. Just because of the quirks you're used to, doesn't mean it is perfect.

gh, "Just because you are used to the quirks of [insert preferred EDA tool here] does not mean it is perfect".

I think any CAD tool is not perfect.

Both of them have shortcomings, even in some cases, even feature-rich tools can fall to the ground.

But please note that I have no complaints about KiCAD behaving/working like another program.

I have already said that if you want to expand the functionality of the program, it is really illogical to do so.

For example, if you want to support the ability to change the specifications of multiple components in parallel, KiCAD always wants to move the selected content because the program needs to be changed.

Hope to organize and clean up the schematic library and usually provide it with a wider range of functions (ie generating native footprints), which will enable KiCAD to do more, while still retaining all the current ways of using the program.

Then there are the core functions, these functions can not even achieve the functions they declare... This is an objective problem that needs to be solved.

My goal is not to make KiCAD work like Eagle, Altium or any other PCB CAD program.

Not to mention that one-third of my reviews did not even complain about the problem, but suggested new features to extend the functionality of the program to make it useful to a wider audience, while at the same time aiming to have a smaller impact on how current users use the program.

Sometimes, if another function is difficult to implement, you cannot add a new function.

Just like choosing things, don't move things randomly. And another question similar to deleting a line is whether we should delete the entire line or only the nearest intersection. Usually, this should be a user setting. (You can even use keys such as Shift to open instantly)

Finally, KiCAD is not inherently bad. Although it is full of small errors, it can sometimes make it quite scary. Not to mention it crashed. (very lucky.)

GIMP is another program similar to KiCAD but used for photo editing/drawing. It is also full of errors, has some weird features, and usually does strange things sometimes. Does this mean that it is inherently bad, but should behave like Photoshop? No, it's not.

But both GIMP and KiCAD should be committed to supporting a wide range of workflows, mainly because there are a wide range of people using the above programs to handle various things.

Therefore, "I'm used to [insert preferred CAD tool here], so KiCAD should behave like this!". Frankly speaking, this is the exact opposite of my goal.

There are multiple 0805 library symbols at least because they have different 3D outlines attached. Resistors, capacitors, diodes, and LEDs all look different in the 3D view.

The footprint generation wizard in KiCad is a short python script. Usually about 200 lines. Therefore, if you want to create custom package wizards for packages that are not yet supported, you can start with a good example.

I agree, although Eeschema is a bit behind. Most of the development of KiCad V5 has entered Pcbnew. However, Eeschema is not outdated for KiCad V6, and it will get some mayor updates. However, it may take a year or so to release a stable version.

Due to its openness, KiCad also supports a large and growing number of extensions and related projects. For other workflows, take skidl as an example. This is a python library that can generate network lists and more from scripts. It's a bit like VHDL for PCB design.

I am a daily user of Altium. By no means perfect-the idea is ridiculous.

_kicad is worse.

This is just a simple fact. Every time I discover new features of Altium, every time I want to throw the computer off the cliff, I will reflect on whether I can do better in Kicad. The answer has always been "no".

You can export a 3D model from KiCAD as a STEP or VRML file... It's just under "File"> "Export" in the main menu, not in the 3D viewer.

Well, not where I hope to find it. But this is also feasible. Now, if it supports more files, that would be great. But this is a small problem.

You can delete a simple line segment in eeschema, just click the line segment and press the DEL button.

To be honest, I have been using Altium for decades (since 98) and there are so many errors and the most annoying and serious errors (requires a complete restart) (for example, dll exceptions due to drc or parameter parsing errors) , Or any dll exception under random circumstances))-still there. They cannot be repaired in 20 years. And there are a lot of annoying errors in the PCB editor. There is no perfect EDA.

by the way. You have to learn the shortcut keys and operations again, and then you will find that KiCAD can almost complete all the operations you often use in Altium.

1. You can add text in the project. Just create a txt file in the project directory and you will see it in the list. When you open it, you can choose an editor program for the file.

2. Since KiCAD files are text-based, you can use SVN, GIT or any version control you like.

3. Yes, it is gone now...

4. You can export it. Pcbnew: File -> Export -> STEP

5. BOM version control can also be done through GIT or SVN, but yes, it lacks complex variant management.

I have personally seen people who use Altium and decided not to use it for a long time. Compared with KiCAD, it does not seem to have many advantages. At least there is nothing to be frank about the crazy cost.

At least in version 4.0.7, things will not be deleted in a good way. The content in the current 5.1.4 version may have been changed. But frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if it still works. At least the PCB layout tool only deletes a single segment. Eeschema deletes the entire line. (It doesn't matter if we have a node.)

It really depends on what you mean by "segment."

1. It would be great if Kicad showed this more clearly... because it is very difficult to add the "Create .txt file" option

2. It’s a little strange that there should already be a basic function that requires a plug-in. However, SVN, GIT, etc. do have other functions. I will not say that these are "not useful tools" because they are. However, it would be great if KiCAD had at least a basic method for handling revisions.

Not to mention that the most basic thing is just to enter the OS file manager and literally copy the files in the project, but this will not cause the project directory (in kicad) to have two sets of expected results for the file (probably because the project file is not Include the file. You can enter the directory and edit it to include two files, but why? Is the directory itself sufficient for the content in my project? If at least this super basic thing works, that would be great .... (If it can be done from within kicad and automatically incremented, the revision number would be great.)

3. Yes, it's gone. It can be a little complicated to implement.

4. The above comments are faster.

5. If you are working in a project with multiple development boards, having variants will be a great tool. But at least making a basic BOM is quite trivial. Just read the schematic to see how many identical devices there are.

Here, the basic tools can be used in many cases. For most users, using plugins to handle more advanced content (such as automatic inventory tracking, price statistics, etc.) is a bit too much. (Those who really need it will figure out how to implement it.)

in the end.

KiCAD needs a lot of work to be truly outstanding.

For now, it is very useful.

It would be great if you can make a circular trace along the radius... (we can draw such a line, even set the width, but not trace. How many lines of code are we talking about here? Copy a block and change some values ? Add a button? What else?)

It would also be great if one could more easily snap traces/lines to each other's endpoints. And, if you can tell the program not to piece things together... (we can go into the settings and change this setting at those times, we need it to never "lost appeal", or we can add buttons in the UI.)

@AlexanderWikström: KiCAD already provides some of the features you are looking for, but this requires a change in philosophy. Many people who are used to using open source packages like Altium want their packages to do all the work. So why not? They paid a lot for this! However, it is different from KiCAD. Since KiCAD is open source, it has

Around it. For example, regarding mechanical integration, KiCAD has "married" the open source mechanical software package FreeCAD, so you can easily push and pull between the two. (This is done through FreeCAD's'StepUP' plug-in, which is now provided with the plug-in manager.) Therefore, you can place the components exactly where you need them and have an accurate 3D model of the PCB (which can be easily exported as STEP, IGES, STL...Through FreeCAD instead of KiCAD's local machinery exporter), there are many other advantages. The KiCAD and FreeCAD teams are working together. I have personally used KiCAD in professional work involving camera chips, which must be accurately positioned on the PCB, but it is not difficult due to the integration of KiCAD-FreeCAD.

Other KiCAD plug-ins have greatly assisted RF/microwave design (for example, trace "teardrops" through fences, through stitching, chamfering, ties, etc.). The KiCost plugin can handle the variants in the BOM. For example, see the latest HaD article on KiCAD plug-ins:

. (Since last year, KiCost plugins have begun to encounter problems, because distributors such as Digikey, Mouser and others have begun to use anti-scratch technology on their websites. As a solution, KiCost started to use Octopart, but then Altium purchased Octopart, and then you The rest of the information can be guessed.) Therefore, don't limit yourself to the "correct" KiCAD, but look around in KiCAD's echo system. As for the history of pcb, since KiCAD files are based on ASCII, why can't you use version control tools like git or SVN? I think it is possible to import bitmap files into eeschema (the schematic capture of KiCAD), but I have never used it.

I agree that KiCAD's user interface is weird.

The Altium website began to criticize KiCAD:

. They are full of lies because they freely merge with open source (they are not the same, and open source projects have the legal will to enforce strict quality standards before accepting the code) and make it look as if KiCAD is Developed by people who do not have a better job (look at the nightly build activities will find problems!), so many errors in KiCAD may not be fixed (errors) for a long time. I want to know, is Altium worried about KiCAD eating away its market share?

Yes, KiCAD does support plugins.

It is open source.

It does make quite logical files, and it is not difficult to use these files in your own code.

However, this has not changed the fact that basic tools will still bring a more relaxed experience for many users.

Exporting/importing projects between different programs is a feature that any "professional" program should expect. KiCAD has such a tool, which is great. (Although the DXF importer seems to be very picky about what files to import or not to import.)

I'm not really saying that KiCAD should include everything from the beginning, it's too much. And it may be a mess now.

In addition, I have never used Altium myself. (I have seen other people use it and, frankly, KiCAD is a better tool for investment. (Yes, even KiCAD has a price, but it’s mainly time).)

But I think I have to put up with the standard open source replay:

"It is open source, you can add any features you need/want through plugins or your own code." For some people who are working fine. For others, this is a path obscured by mistakes, mistakes and tutorials, skipping the most important step....

I used Eagle around 2008, but due to too long time, I forgot any habit of using it. I recently started using KiCad, and my first project was to reverse engineer the old "Analog Exerciser" student trainer, apparently from these NIT's home-learning courses. My main goal is to make circuit schematics for use with ICL8038 and see if it can be used as part of a modular synthesizer. I mainly check whether the schematic diagram is drawn correctly during the layout of the circuit board.

KiCad is not too bad, but what bothers me the most is how the schematic and board editors use "different" selection examples. They all have weird CAD behavior, which is okay, but Eeschema draws or picks up objects immediately, and Pcbnew expects you to select an object before processing it.

The difference between 0805 capacitors and 0805 resistors is the 3D model that will be used for 3D rendering. "0805" refers only to length and width, not part height. But I can still see that the ordinary 0805 size will be very convenient. Therefore, create a custom footprint library the way you want.

Eeschema does need to stop dragging around the object immediately, and this is the only program I know of that does this.

It must also be said that a good PCB layout program should probably not use the footprint for 3D models. Instead, look at the 3D model pointed to by the component itself. Because this will provide us with greater flexibility to handle a larger range of components without making layout choices more confusing.

However, a very good component library will be based on "data sheets". Provide schematic components, 3D models of PCBs and corresponding packages for all different versions of components. It also provides detailed DRC rules and even provides some information about how to simulate components correctly when performing circuit simulation. (However, this actually requires a fundamental redesign of the way KiCAD handles components.) That is, just select the "data sheet", then select the variant, and then finish.

"Almost all components manufactured will be a rectangular box. There are a bunch of pins on its X side... Why can't it generate this for us?"

good idea. EasyEDA has a function called "Component Wizard".

The difference between a resistor seat and a capacitor seat is to prohibit the path and polygon under the capacitor. + Altium

I just started using KiCAD on Linux. Yes, that is an attraction. However, it seems to belong to the same category as OrCAD and Altium. As, not perfect, but usable. Moreover, I am willing to endure many flaws (though not many) in free tools. I have seen Eagle and gEDA, but KiCAD looks more beautiful, has a good following, and is associated with CERN? I have always been happy to use one of their earlier free tools :-)

I think it was developed by CERN physicists.

Some core developers work in the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and have support within the organization. However, it was not started by them. CERN's support began a few years later, and it coincided with the regular improvements to the platform.

Many of our customers use Dip Trace. I'm OK

This may be controversial, but after 10 years of schematic capture and layout in Altium, I came to the conclusion that importing designs is generally not a good idea. The import process brings many risks, and mitigating this risk is time-consuming detailed engineering work.

I have many customers who think that just by pressing a button, your design is in Altium (or preferred tool). The reality is that if you want to import schematics, you also need to import symbols/packages. It sounds easy until you face the prospect of combing through 100 symbols with a fine-toothed comb. To be honest, PCB is easier because there are no parameters in the package and there are fewer style problems.

Has anyone imported the design into Altium, only to find that one of the pins in the junction deviated by 0.0000001 units and made one pin on another net? Phantom Diamond right? Some things you can only find in the import.

Now that I know exactly how complicated Altium's file format is, I have to give the submitter crazy props. I never thought it was possible.

Obviously, Altium is too expensive and cannot meet the needs of typical HaD enthusiasts, but each seat will not cost "hundreds of thousands". There is not even 10,000 per seat. Hell, I have a seat for less than $3k and a free subscription for one year.

About EDA tools-an aspect that affects your choice. You may choose your favorite tool and know its charm better than the next software package discussed here. However, if you try to join a very promising project, its managers will insist that you use Altium because everyone else has done so, otherwise you will not get the job. It is difficult to turn off tools for a project, that is, unless it is a lucrative project that lasts more than 5 years and is currently the only source of income, you will not become too picky. The decision made for you is not technical or even rational, it is "because the boss says so". happened to me.

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (

)

The site uses Akismet to reduce spam.

.

By using our website and services, you expressly agree to our placement of performance, functionality and advertising cookies.

Vishay introduced a pair of surface-mount PIN photodiodes in a black package, and its opaque sidewalls eliminate unnecessary lighting, thereby improving its signal-to-noise ratio.

VEMD4010X01 and VEMD4110X01 have passed AEC-Q101 automotive certification, with a size of 0805 and a size of 0.7mm, which is 0.15mm lower than the previous generation. Sensitive area is 0.42mm

.

The peak sensitivity is 910nm and the half-angle sensitivity is ±55°.

Their reverse photocurrent is 2.4µA, and the dark current is usually 1nA. The operating temperature range is -40°C to +110°C.

The parts are RoHS compliant, halogen-free and Vishay Green. According to the regulations of J-STD-020, the humidity sensitivity is level 3 and the service life of the floor is 168h.

It is expected to be used in automotive rain, light and tunnel sensors, as well as solar load sensors and gratings, and then used as reflective sensors in consumer non-contact faucets, toilets and trash cans.

The product page is here:

mark:

Your email address will not be published. The necessary places have been marked

Cooperate with RS Components to focus on introducing the most outstanding young electronic engineers in the UK today.

Send our news, blogs and comments directly to your inbox! sign up

Newsletter: tips, gadget masters and daily and weekly reviews.

Read our special supplement celebrating 60th anniversary

And look forward to the future of the industry.

Read the first post ever

Online: September 7, 1960. We have scanned the first edition so that you can enjoy it.

By using this website, you agree to the use of cookies. "Electronic Weekly" is owned by Metropolitan International Group Co., Ltd., a member of Metropolitan Group; you can check our privacy and cookie policy

In the world of electronic manufacturing, bad luck has been shrouded in a faint shadow. Finding parts is becoming more and more difficult, and the parts that can be found are expensive. No, it has nothing to do with the tariffs imposed by the United States on Chinese goods last summer. This is a question of no scapegoat. This is the core issue of any economic system. This is a shortage of capacitors and resistors.

When we first reported

, Things are fine for the time being. Yes, the major manufacturers say that they are splitting the production lines until they can be profitable by restarting them, but they are relieved: the parts are in stock and the cost is not that much.

Now, this is a different story. We are in a capacitor shortage in 2018, and we don’t know when it will get better.

The passive component industry (manufacturers of resistors, capacitors and diodes that are found boring but vital in every electronic device) is on the verge of shortage. You can always buy a 220Ω, 0805 resistor, but instead of spending 2 cents for a penny like now, it's better to buy one in the near future.

Yageo, one of the largest manufacturers of surface mount (SMD) resistors and multilayer ceramic capacitors, announced in December that they would not accept orders for new chip resistors. Yageo cut production of cheap chip resistors to focus on high-margin niche market components for automotive, IoT and other industrial uses,

. Earlier this month, Yaego resumed accepting orders for chip resistors, but 

 (For articles behind the paywall, please try to click

).

As a result, there are rumors that the sales volume of passive components in the Shenzhen electronics market is very high, and several tweets from the electronics industry say that the prices of certain components have doubled. Because every electronic device uses these "bean-shaped" parts, reduced supply or increased prices means that certain products will not be shipped on time, profits will decrease, or the price of the latest electronic products will increase.

The question remains: Are we on the verge of a shortage of resistors, and what does it mean to have a manufacturer without the required parts?

By using our website and services, you expressly agree to our placement of performance, functionality and advertising cookies.

Malvern, Pennsylvania, April 6, 2020 (Global News)-Vishay Intertechnology, Inc. (NYSE: VSH) today launched ThermaWick™​​

Surface-mounted thermal jumper chip. Vishay Dale thin-film devices enable designers to transfer heat from electrically isolated components by providing a thermal path to the ground plane or common heat sink.

The chip released today uses an aluminum nitride substrate with a thermal conductivity of up to 170 W/m°K, which can reduce the temperature of the connected components by more than 25%. This reduction allows designers to increase the power handling capabilities of these devices, or extend their lifespan under existing operating conditions, while maintaining the electrical isolation of each component. By protecting adjacent equipment from thermal loads, the reliability of the entire circuit is improved.

THJP's low capacitance as low as 0.07 pF makes it an excellent choice for high frequency and heat ladder applications. The heat conductor will be used for power supplies and converters. RF amplifiers; synthesizer pins and laser diodes; and filters for AMS, industrial and telecommunications applications.

The device offers six shell sizes from 0603 to 2512, and custom sizes are available. The 0612 and 1225 housings have long side terminations to provide additional heat transfer capability. Thermal jumpers can provide lead (Pb) bearings and lead-free (Pb) wrap-around terminals.

Samples and mass production of ThermaWick THJP series thermal patch cords are now available, and the lead time is six weeks.

It is a Fortune 1000 company listed on the New York Stock Exchange (VSH). It is one of the world's largest manufacturers of discrete semiconductors (diodes, MOSFETs and infrared optoelectronics) and passive electronic components (resistors, inductors and capacitors). These components are used in almost all types of electronic equipment and equipment in the industrial, computer, automotive, consumer, telecommunications, military, aerospace, power and medical markets. Vishay's product innovation, successful acquisition strategy and "one-stop" service make it a global industry leader. You can find Vishay on the Internet at:

.

ThermaWick is a trademark of Vishay Intertechnology.

(ThermaWick™ thermal patch wire surface mount chip)

Vishay Connect Technology

Peter Henrici, +1 408 567-8400

 Either

Korean pine

Bob Decker, +1 415 409-0233

Malvern, Pennsylvania, U.S.

Available formats:

It is easy to design a PCB for assembly, right? We just spray all the packages onto the circuit board, connect all the traces, send the gerber and location files, and that's it-right?

Wow, take the phone, young hooligan! Just as we can organize our working source code with variables named after our best friends, we can also design PCBs in ways that are difficult to assemble.

However, by following the recognized design specifications, we will put ourselves on the track of successful automatic assembly. If we want the other party to put the component on our board, we need 

Communicate the steps required to reach the destination. The best way is to follow the standards.

Now to mom

ent, let us imagine that we are the tip of the vacuum cleaner on the pick and place machine. These tools are designed to pick up the components on the reel from it

And classified according to their corresponding landforms. It seems very simple, right? The premise is that we need to know when designing our footprints that one day they will face the pick and place machine.

In order to reach the circuit board from the reel, we (designers) need two pieces of information in the part data sheet: the part centroid and the direction of the reel.

The centroid of the part is the XY position, which is used to mark the centroid of the part. It basically tells the machine: "Pick me up from here!" As designers, we have a responsibility 

. If we forget to do this, pick and place will try to pick up our parts from locations that may not adhere to the packaging firmly (for example, corners).

The reel direction is the direction in which the part is placed inside the reel. For pick and place machines, the reel is usually loaded into the machine in only one way. However, it is possible to locate the part on the reel in one of four ways-using pin 1 in one of the four quadrants.

Similarly, as designers, we have a responsibility 

In short, we only need to make sure that pin 1 on the pin design matches the same pin.

When the reel passes through the machine, it acts as a pin 1 on the reel.

Sounds simple, right? Usually, we are lucky. These two information are in the data sheet of the part. Sadly, this is not always the case. Sometimes, the main data sheet of the IC may not include the reel direction. For this information, they sometimes refer you to other data sheets that contain reel information for specific packaging types. For example, look at the D-PAK reel information[

] On

.

The practice of splitting the scroll information into separate documents is basically a bit lazy for the supplier. I can hear their voices now: "Why should the reel information be put in the data sheet of each part, and we can only put it in 

data sheet 

Discuss the reel information corresponding to the specific part size? "However, although this approach can plunge us into a frenetic chase 

Information summary 

Listed. sooner or later, 

Mass production of products with supplier parts will be required, and this direction information is essential for assembly.

Do everything possible, some places

There is no clear way to indicate its direction. These components are usually polarized passive devices (capacitors and diodes) with symmetrical footprints. Check the packaging of this capacitor:

This capacitor (PN: T55P475M010C0200) is polarized, but has a 0805 land pattern, which is symmetrical (non-polarized). Assume that the PCB assembly shop obtains the standard location file through part transformation 

gerber files, do they have enough information to determine which way to go for capping? Unless they agree with each other in the default direction, they won't!

This is the transaction: t

The IPC-7351 specification defines the "pin-1" orientation for these components, which should match the reel orientation. The specification we discussed in the previous section 

Eliminate any ambiguity. However, the problem is that as a footprint library manufacturer, we do not follow the restrictions of the above specifications.

. When creating a library takes up space, we can place pin-1 in any quadrant we want! Dear PCB designer, there is a danger of importing some random chum footprint libraries online. Unless we check every footprint, we cannot guarantee that the footprint design of the above chum meets the IPC-7351 specification.

If you have any questions, you may 

Need help to assemble your building with some infographics to show the correct direction. The screenshot should have several tags.

Depending on our design software, sometimes we will use schematic symbols bound to parts with specific part numbers. Other times, we can use strict symbols, and then fill these symbols with actual part numbers later. If you are in the second camp, proceed with caution: before jumping to the layout, make sure that these symbols are associated with the footprints that actually match the actual parts.

Want a 10uF ceramic capacitor, the size of 0805, an X7R temperature coefficient and a rating of 25 V? so terrible! Shoulda' dug Digikeys, first to see if there is such a part. In this case, it is actually not.

The risk here is quite low, but there is still an opportunity to assume that a certain resistance with a certain tolerance and rated power will appear in the footprint we expect. In practice, this may surprise us: 

And get impossible resistance and capacitance values. Make sure to check these values ​​first!

There are two main options for actually delivering components to the manufacturer: 

(The assembly plant extracts the parts) or 

(You usually provide the parts to the supplier on the reel). Since assembly plants know more about the interpolation of their machines than we do, assembly plants that provide these two types of assembly usually prefer turnkey projects. But ask!

No matter which process you use, you still need the BOM to tell the supplier which reference corresponds to which part. Every assembly plant is different, and your BOM may not appear in their favorite format. In general, despite this, I recommend re-adjusting the BOM so that it is composed of unique components (ie: all references should be combined into one field). why? If we imagine ourselves on the assembly side, we need to load reels of the same parts on the machine. It is easy to obtain a bill of materials from customers organized by unique components, allowing us to determine the number of reels that need to be loaded into the pick and place machine. Similarly, if you have any questions, please ask the assembly plant how they choose the BOM.

Sometimes, you have components that should not be filled. In this case, simply ignore them from the BOM and location files, and the assembly plant will safely ignore them.

The datum is used as the coordinate reference point of the pick and place machine that is loading the part. In short, the machine that places these parts needs to overlay a coordinate frame on top of the PCB to match the part coordinates with the correct points on the board. At least two benchmarks are required.

These points allow the machine to use trigonometric functions to calculate the actual board orientation. Place them on opposite corners as close as possible to the edge of the circuit board. The exact location does not matter, but the greater the distance between the two points, the smaller the error of the overlay coordinate system. Place the three fiducials as close as possible to the corners as much as possible. This also allows the machine to calculate any skew in the actual PCB layers that may be introduced when the PCB is manufactured, although this is usually not necessary.

It takes time (sometimes 2 weeks-oops) and money (from a few hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars) to assemble the circuit board. It may take us a few hours to check ourselves carefully, but if an error is found, it is worth the two weeks of waiting. Before we send the wafer files to the fab, I recommend printing the copper and silk screen layers on paper at a 1x scale. then,

On hand, place them on the scale image and make sure that the coverage pattern can indeed be checked out.

It’s very important that we catch any part size issues

The board is manufactured. This step is especially important if you have made any custom footprints or downloaded some chum footprints from the wild network. Still, it helps 

If you want to get footprints from valid sources. In the misfortune here, I just chose the wrong footprint.

At Hackaday, we like disposable products: microwave ovens that cry like Windows XP or portable console mods that allow us to carry GameCubes with us. Many of the victories we show here were done by an engineer at once, that's okay! In these hackers, we don't need to keep our work tidy. We don't need to clean up in the code ourselves. If it makes sense to us, then everything is fine, right?

Whether you like it or not, one day we need to do something about our design, which is indescribable in the world of underground hackers. we want 

it. Sharing may not sound like a big deal, but if we stay away from standard practice for too long, we will never be able to find engineers for help after get off work. We will never be able to communicate with assembly plants or contract manufacturers who are supposed to handle some heavy processes for us. Want to cut parts in the machine shop? It seems we need to learn how to use 

. Do you want to assemble your PCB? It is best to put these centroids in the right place!

Follow international design codes

In the long run it makes our lives easier. If we choose to use standard practices that our engineers agree on, then when we need someone, we will all float in the same boat

Assemble our board. We will speak the same language, the language of engineers.

If you want to make a PCBA to be assembled professionally, please keep in mind the checklist. Remember, there are a lot of such software online. I recommend choosing the tool that best suits your CAD tools and workflow.

Very valuable information.

I didn't notice the problem it mentioned-after fixing some footprints, I now print them on paper at a ratio of 1:1 and check it, which really helps to check the footprints. For leaded components, I recently used a wooden board, I designed a new footprint, converted the Outline + Drill layer to SVG and laser cut them so that I can accurately and easily check the location of the holes. Is anyone interested in the tutorial?

The entire chapter of the article is called "Final Footprint Size Check" and has the same 1:1 paper printout method.

I have done a lot of designs using QFN packages, and since the leads and ground plate are not visible on the mounted parts, this check does not work. Some assembly plants do provide a thorough design for manufacturing "DFM" inspections to check for serious footprint errors that can cause assembly problems or thermal imbalances that can cause chip collapse. Although most of the errors I encounter are because the parts kit does not match the BOM or the BOM does not match the ODB++.

I use paper to check the QFN package. Turn it upside down (if you feel fancy, turn the paper over too), and slide in the x and y directions to see the spacing lines.

Put a drop of clear oil on the paper to make it transparent, and then check from the other side.

Although it is a good choice for designers to rotate correctly, we have given up a lot and just insisted on marking pin 1 on the screen printing. If this is not the case, the work will be delayed until we can contact the designer.

As for the origin, they "must" be in the center of the part.

Yes, the second time I use the graphics on the board to indicate the part direction. A good rule of thumb is to enable someone with a physical circuit board and BOM to figure out how to place parts without having to browse through your CAD files.

Another tip is to contact your assembly plant to find out which board size array they prefer. If you are designing a small circuit board, it is much more difficult to run one circuit board at a time than the process of running a 4 x 4 array on a machine. You can also place the fiducials on the "rails" of the array and disconnect them after separating the individual plates.

If benchmarking is performed on the rails of the array around the motherboard, you should still add at least one to a single motherboard. At least our assembly plants and circuit board manufacturers (different companies) use this reference to mark the circuit boards in the array that have failed electrical tests. Therefore, the assember will not fill the array board with known errors, nor does it have to throw away the entire panel just because of a small defect in the copper. Moreover, if you have good spacing and BGA parts, you usually have to add some datums directly next to these parts. They will be used as reference points to place the components more precisely on the target.

One of the pitches I got from the board about the centroid data was that they wanted pin1 to come from a through-hole connector. I don't know if this is standard.

I think this is not a standard. Usually centered on the origin, especially on large speaker connectors.

Once you have your own pick-and-place machine, you will truly appreciate the benefits of consistent library orientation-when you know that parts can operate correctly without inspection, the whole process will be smoother!

An annoying problem is that there are chips in the tube and the tape, and their directions are different. You may not know it when designing.

I have been in circuit board manufacturing for about 18 years, and I think I have never paid attention to the direction of the footprints or center alignment. I must have chosen a tolerant company to work with.

My impression is that modern P&P machines visually process the parts before placing them. Most even do the top and bottom parts. Reels from different manufacturers (for example, original parts cannot be used for 6 weeks, please use this replacement part) may have different component orientations on the reels.

Machine vision actually just compares the bottom of the part with what you said in the training. If pin 1 is in the upper right corner of the tape, you switched to the hose/tray, and it is in the lower left corner, all parts will be rejected and the machine will stop until you fix it.

Page Breaks?

Yes, the Congress page does need a break.

I agree. It is required for the main blog page.

Added, thank you.

If you can assemble the board by hand, neither can the machine. Don’t hide small components behind walls of tall components.

Regarding components: Check if there are more manufacturers making the same components (resistors and capacitors are easy to manufacture), but to avoid this super-exclusive problem, that is, it is difficult to find components with a long lead time. Try to specify components by their characteristics, especially if componentvalue is not important. Or use the manufacturer’s local equivalent (for example, BC547 in Europe, 2n2222 in the US)

And send it to them a hand-assembled working prototype, which they can use to measure components and use as a visual reference.

"10 uF ceramic capacitor with 0805 size, X7R temperature coefficient and 25 V"

Yes, I wonder if this was written in the early 2000s?

*new!

Inventory: 0

Order: 1 bajillion.

Available in Newark:

They do exist. ;)

Yes... I just bought a *roll*.

Oh, X5R. Okay, I guess you got there.

Most modern assembly plants can rotate your parts at any angle, limiting your design to the reel direction may negatively affect placement/signal efficiency.

Regarding the design you described (especially U3): I suggest that you do not short-circuit the pads directly between the actual pads. It usually looks like a PCB manufacturing error, especially if the original designer is not redesigning a PCBA that is not working properly.

Printing out your layout is great advice! Make your life so easy.

You should base your footprint on the reel direction. Of course, you can freely adjust the footprint on the board. But rotating the footprint correctly means that your placement file will also contain the correct angle.

advantage:

0603 ceramic capacitors have incredible resilience to prevent poor alignment, many value-added options, and are usually cheaper spools

0805 1% resistor is the best general-purpose package, and is standardized around general-purpose values ​​during the design process

In fact, QFN is easier to handle than LQFP-based software packages

SOIC is easy and very adaptable to alignment issues

LQFP is easy to use, but the output is often slightly lower than QFN

harm:

Considering the insufficient pin pitch and package weight, MSOP 8 may be the worst on a large board

Any product with a lead pitch less than 0.5mm will reduce your profit margin by one percentage point

ugly:

BGA was never intended to be larger than 1/4 inch square, and it is the number one mistake in modern devices. If you can, avoid using them, because if you do, your yield will increase.

COB tends to damage the chip die during bonding and should be avoided as much as possible because the rejection rate will be higher than the re-inspected chip

Some advice:

*Consider reusable components in other projects during the design process, your process will be better. Having some unique unicorns in the process will make the product vulnerable to price fluctuations or discontinuation.

*Minimize the number of parts, designed for 50 ohm, 220 ohm, 1k, 4k7, 10k, 22k, 100k, 250k, 500k, 1m... And you can safely buy 100,000 coins at a cheap price...Similarly, if the value of the fairy you require is within +-1%, the design will be unstable. However, please use metal film parts with a tolerance of 1%, because nowadays the price of these parts is usually 5%, which will increase the yield of the circuit board.

* Since the invention of the banana, SAC305 is almost the best thing, it will reliably glue anything to anything

*If possible, use single-sided PCB (single-line production can improve yield)

*If you can, no jumpers (even SMT plugs are expensive, and you have to pay to plug in the cable)

*Try to make the orientation of all parts the same as the orientation of the tape picker (the robot will avoid the parts from rotating)

* Cluster similar parts (a robot with multiple heads can be filled in one retrieval cycle)

* Avoid punching as much as possible, because any part of manual installation will increase the cost of 3 dollars, and there are few selective soldering equipment

*Avoid using odd-shaped PCBs, so as not to waste circuit board space and cause robot indigestion

*Add an edge connector at the PCB separation of the panel PCB to automate the test (each PCB should have an LED to indicate the worker or robot to pass/fail)

*Use existing project box geometry standards, so you don't need to customize the enclosure (PCB-based end panels with labels are very easy)

*Glue each flexible part with RTV silicone glue and wire connection

practical:

*Break these rules as needed;)

I have never designed a circuit board for production, but it seems that you have given us some good suggestions.

In addition to the following, it is usually good advice:

There is no benefit in avoiding the rotation of different parts (unless you are welding SMD parts)-the rotation should be done in parallel with the xy movement, so it should not add time/cost. And in any case, you don't know what an "empty" spin is, because it will depend on the machine used (even depending on which feeder magazine the part is loaded into). Similarly, unless in some very special circumstances, the cluster part is unlikely to have any significant advantages.

On some machines, the axis of rotation will change with wear, and larger chips will certainly benefit from minimal movement. You might argue that machine vision systems make precise placement easier, but this article does not mention that processing 3D warping actually requires at least three marks. For higher speed placement, it is recommended to increase the yield of the circuit board.

There are many reasons for clustering:

1. Visually... Automatic inspection equipment and manual labor must analyze smaller areas of interest, and compared with adjacent references, the defects are obvious.

2. The same part loaded on the 8-head robot will be placed very fast in one pass (if set to the same moving speed, its speed will be 3-4 times faster than the NeoDen shown in this article). Indeed, such a strategy makes no difference on smaller devices.

3. Given the limited accessibility of parts, this usually occurs around larger chips

4. Generally, for analog or RF work, this is certainly not the best practice.

However, the board I saw was only a strip of board, such as a block wall. ;-)

There has never been a truly global best solution, but even if 10,000 units are produced per week, only a 1% output difference is meaningful.

;-)

Very good hint, thank you!

It is worth noting that minimizing the number of parts is also good for hobbies. For example: For LDOs in the uF range, you need a ceramic capacitor. Instead of using multiple combinations of 1, 2.2, 10uF and 6.3, 10, 16V, I only used 10uF 16V, which met 99.9% of the demand. Of course, for 1u/6.3V, they are each 0.02 instead of 0.01, but given the small size, I better manage a value.

Thank you for these tips! Even if you don't have a motherboard running more than 10K, this seems to be good information. =)

No mention of paneling and tool holes..?

By the way, the common usage of the third fid is to check if the PCB is loaded correctly, which is why you never add the fourth one!

I want to add a suggestion to ensure that the two fid positions are asymmetrical (or not even close) when the panel is flipped. If it is a little slower, the three works well. My pick-and-place tool performs four checks on the local fid on each board in the array (cameras on both heads, double check).

We only have one benchmark on the circuit board itself, and the rest are on the edge of the production panel (or in extreme cases, close to the BGA and fine pitch components). A datum on each board in the panel serves as a good/bad indicator. If the electrical test fails, the circuit board manufacturer will put a label on the benchmark, so we can still assemble the rest of the panel without wasting a lot of components or the complete panel, which will only cause minor copper defects.

I disagree with this:

"The practice of splitting the reel information into separate files is basically a bit lazy for the supplier. I can hear them now: "Why put the reel information in the data sheet of each part, And we can only put it in a separate data sheet and discuss only the reel information corresponding to the specific part size? "\\

Although the first idea I can understand is laziness, it may be done to facilitate document revisions. If they specify this information in each part data sheet, if they want/need to make changes, they must modify all part files that use the placeholder/volume/etc. Going through the engineering change process can be a nightmare, so doing it the way they do it might actually make sense.

Yes, from a document management perspective. From the perspective of actual customers, this is really annoying.

Totally agree, but after both parties deal with it by themselves, I can't determine which is worse...

Someone needs to invent a document technology that can merge various parts of multiple documents into one, which can solve this problem well...

I believe it can be done using LaTeX or html homepage compiled to pdf.

I don’t even save local files, just link to the manufacturer’s specifications so that I always get the latest version of the part. Of course, it is only suitable for small projects.

My relatively short DFM experience still allowed me to add one of the most important rules:

Prototype first!

Please do not order panels for a panel until you get OSHPark (or anyone else) to make you one of the few panels for you to test. Repeat the process until you can safely order a batch of panels without change.

This may seem obvious, but the minimum number of wood-based panels will be around $2,000. If you plow them directly into the landfill, you will cry a lot.

To shame you, link to the illegally released IPC specification under license management.

Goog information, thank you!

Draw every library/footprint you are using from scratch.

At the very least, please double check the existing library against the data sheet.

Never assume that some random libraries on the Internet will "work normally" in production. This also applies to "included" libraries in EDA/CAD software.

Over time, as you reuse your library again and again, and you have proven experience in production, you will need to reduce your workload and the library will continue to grow.

Even small changes in seemingly trivial things, such as 0402 resistors, can make a huge difference in tombstones and yield.

Remember, it's not just the copper layer-the solder mask and the solder paste template layer are also different.

"Do you need a 10 uF ceramic capacitor with 0805 footprint, X7R temperature coefficient and 25 V rating? Too bad! Shoulda' dug Digikeys to see if there is such a part first. In this case, actually That’s not the case."

*cough*

GRM21BZ71E106KE15L

: P

I worked on the smt production line a long time ago, so any fab that can't solve the position rotation for you is not worth working with. Popular software packages are included in the system: the machine checks the overall width and height. The vision system can check all kinds of bent pins. It takes a few minutes for the new design to travel in all directions. The vision system will show the location of the circuit board and put pin marks on the package. It's simple.

Know the tolerances your design can withstand so that your parts can be matched with inventory.

If there are small spaces or gas around your room, please put a pair of cemeteries on their corners as well.

If your panel is smaller than a mobile phone, it will be messy rows or grids. If you are in a panic, please leave enough space for the circuit board manufacturer to mark the rejection (for example, one of ten panels), then the smt machine can automatically skip this part when marking.

. Flux is also used to align the solder paste screen to the circuit board. They will be laser etched onto the screen, so don't keep them away from your most edge holes.

We must be very tolerant to our original customers. Many times we only run as few as 10 panels, 15 parts per panel, and deliberately put billboards on some parts (with lids on the sides). Once the first process is cleared, the operation is over, and the production line is quickly stripped.

Provide sufficient inventory to avoid placing parts by hand. Your smt operator will like your product more.

The contract machine designed for fast conversion is beautiful (mydata), but I am very satisfied with the slower Yamaha machine

The solder template tool is aligned with the hole (the edge of the separate carrier that is usually scratched on the panel) and the pin.

It depends on your definition of "yes". Depending on the solder paste method, holes can be used for template alignment. For other "is" values, the datum contained on the paste layer is used.

The most important rules are still missing:

Talk to your circuit board manufacturers and assemblers! Talk to them at each stage of development (concepts, schematics, layout, etc.), ask them to provide suggestions, possible pitfalls/problems, tell them what you think, and make regular comments and improvements as early as possible. If they don’t want to talk to you or spend several weeks answering, it’s best to find some other place to start your business.

If you know what they want and can do, and you know what you actually want to achieve and expect, then many problems can and will be avoided.

Thank you!

Why try to match the footprint to the reel-instead of matching the footprint to the standard?

Isn't this a standard? Otherwise, why should the author propose standards? In my opinion, trying to match the fishing reel is just causing confusion. Are the reel directions of the replacement parts the same? What about other packaging, such as tubes and pallets? Would you use different versions of different directions on the same footprint?

I think you should only follow the standard and let cm handle exceptions.

Agree, what about the tray? I have found the full explanation about the targeted marking.

Can you use cheap services

Or oshpark and then send it to the assembly hall?

Yes – or use PCBway, they can assemble in-house

I used PCBWay for the first PCB I made recently. I installed 10 SMT parts. Very satisfied with communication, speed, quality and price. I choose to fill my own through-hole parts to save costs, because small quantities can make me cheaper. When I make 300 boards, I will supply and fill all parts for them.

My only problem is 2 bad footprints. I should not trust them, but the source seems reliable. I can recover by filling all the pins on the switch to fit the small holes! PITA, but it works!

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comment section great. (

)

The site uses Akismet to reduce spam.

By using our website and services, you expressly agree to our placement of performance, functionality and advertising cookies.