-
-
News
News Highlights
- Books
Featured Books
- design007 Magazine
Latest Issues
Current IssueSilicon to Systems: From Soup to Nuts
This month, we asked our expert contributors to weigh in on silicon to systems—what it means to PCB designers and design engineers, EDA companies, and the rest of the PCB supply chain... from soup to nuts.
Cost Drivers
In this month’s issue of Design007 Magazine, our expert contributors explain the impact of cost drivers on PCB designs and the need to consider a design budget. They discuss the myriad design cycle cost adders—hidden and not so hidden—and ways to add value.
Mechatronics
Our expert contributors discuss the advent of mechatronics in PCB design, the challenges and opportunities this creates for circuit board designers, and the benefits—to the employee and the company—of becoming a mechatronics engineer.
- Articles
- Columns
Search Console
- Links
- Events
||| MENU - design007 Magazine
Design Automation Tools, Today and in the Future
June 6, 2016 | Andy Shaughnessy, PCBDesign007Estimated reading time: 2 minutes
Kelly Dack has been designing PCBs for over three decades, at OEMs of all kinds. Now a PCB designer with a Washington state contract manufacturer and a certified trainer with EPTAC, Kelly enjoys waxing philosophic about PCB design and design automation in general. I asked Kelly to answer a few questions about the direction EDA tools are headed, and whether he’d like to see more control, or more automation in his PCB design tools.
Andy Shaughnessy: You’ve been a PCB designer for quite a few presidential administrations, shall we say! In general, what do you think of today’s design automation tools?
Kelly Dack: I’ve heard them described by different designers as just different sets of hammers, in that they all get the jobs done. That classic metaphor might need to be modified a bit. Take for instance a modern roofing hammer. With the help of a nail gun, utilizing pneumatics and standardized nails on reels, hammering a shingle onto a roof is now highly automated. The tool systems can be very effective, but often with automation can come frustration. My sister Karin recently purchased a nail gun to re-roof her garage. The gun kept jamming so she returned it to the store and came back with a different model. It worked for a while but then it jammed too. She ended up having to try different nail types and even exchange the gun again for a different brand in order to finish her roof. Any old timer watching the job would have said, “I could’ve had that job done with an old fashioned hammer by now.”
I think this story could be considered a metaphor for PCB design automation today. Design automation requires a consistent application and vision, budget, time, trial and error and repetitive need in order to be considered an efficient PCB design solution.
Shaughnessy: For your day-to-day design work, would you rather see more automation in your tools, or have more manual control? Is it just a matter of having the correct mix?
Dack: Great question, and I can stick with the same metaphor. Like my sister had the vision to see her garage roof quickly finished using an automated tool, I’d love to be able to slam out board designs using more automation. But as my sister needed to pull out the compressor, order special nails, run the hoses and replace equipment before ever starting the job, the PCB design automation strategy for a particular job may not be worth the effort. Just because we have automation tools we should not be obligated to use them unless they really improve the task at hand.
Shaughnessy: In what areas of design do you usually favor more automation?
Dack: Repetitive processes and processes prone to human error. The CAM output routine is a simple example. The software I use allows me to set up a CAM output file routine and hit start. The two-layer, four-layer, and six-layer jobs I do usually have consistent stackups so pre-programmed routine works well. Unless it doesn’t. But because my process is consistent it is easy to find where the process the error occurred. I find that output errors usually occur with something inconsistent in the design; unique patterns of associated copper that must be switched on, etc. To facilitate automation I find myself striving to be more consistent in my design methodologies.
To read this entire article, which appeared in the May 2016 issue of The PCB Design Magazine, click here.
Suggested Items
Trouble in Your Tank: Things You Can Do for Better Wet Process Control
09/11/2024 | Michael Carano -- Column: Trouble in Your TankFor 40 years, I have been involved in the printed circuit board, circuit board assembly, and semiconductor technology segments, preaching about minimizing defects and improving yields. This is especially true as technology becomes increasingly complex, and additional focus must be placed on yield improvements. Process management and wet process control must be front and center, so it’s quite interesting and timely to talk about wet process control and management for this month’s issue. This theme fits quite well with today's global events. For this industry, the technical curve has steepened dramatically in the past few years.
Atotech to Participate at KPCA Show 2024
09/03/2024 | AtotechMKS’ Atotech will participate in this year’s KPCA Show 2024 in Incheon, held at Songdo Convensia from September 4-6, 2024.
Victory Announces Breakthrough in PCB Technology with New Product Launch
08/29/2024 | openPRShenzhen Victory Electronics Technology Co., Ltd., a leader in the printed circuit board (PCB) manufacturing industry, is proud to announce the successful development of a groundbreaking new product.
Connect the Dots: Designing for Reality—Electroless Copper
08/28/2024 | Matt Stevenson -- Column: Connect the DotsRoll up your sleeves because it's time to get messy. In a recent episode of I-Connect007’s On the Line with… podcast, we discussed electroless copper deposition. This process deposits a copper layer into the through-holes and vias of what will eventually be a PCB. Electroless copper deposition feels like a black box to many people. It sort of looks like a black box, too. The boards go in one side, come out the other, and emerge differently. So, let's crack open that black box and look inside.
Maximizing ROI Through Better Wet Process Control
08/20/2024 | I-Connect007 Editorial Team“When things get out of control, the variation in your wet process begins,” says Mike Carano,. “Just because they look like good boards and may even pass electrical test, it does not necessarily mean you have good boards. Once the chemistry is headed toward the right or left side of the process control parameter cliff, the plating is compromised. If the copper is thinner than it should be, when the customer puts it into service, the board may fail after 500 cycles vs. the requisite 1,000 or 2,000 cycles. The root cause issue is that you plated 7/10ths of a mil of copper instead of one-mil of copper because you were not controlling your process. The fact that you passed your own electric test becomes inconsequential.”