The Survey Said: Designing Around Missing Data

Reading time ( words)

One of the best tools we have for keeping our fingers on the pulse of the industry is the reader survey. When we want to find out what’s going on, we just ask. Fortunately, our readers are not a shy bunch of folks. They don’t mind sharing—the good, the bad, and the ugly.  

In a recent survey, we asked our PCB designer readers, “What missing information or data (impedance requirements, library data, etc.) do you find yourself having to ‘design around’?”  

The replies were all over the place; I don’t think any two respondents said the same thing. Here are some of more illustrative replies we received, edited slightly for clarity. Do these comments reflect what’s happening at your company? 

1. Those are the things that I demand before beginning.
2. Usually several pieces of PCB specific data are missing or falsely specified, especially for impedance requirements.
3. Provisioning for functional test.  We often have to wait for the CAD office to approve new footprints, and for commodity management to approve part suppliers.
4. Quite frankly, we insist that we know fairly early in process, but getting rules/feedback from vendors is very difficult. Vendors don't seem to be able to articulate their own rules or capabilities and it varies significantly per facility if they have multiple facilities.
5. Impedance data—cost-effectiveness depends on the board material that is stocked by the board house. Workaround: We specify tracks and impedances, and permit board house to adjust the CAM files as needed. Assembly requirements: What's the permitted height of components close to the rails? What's the shadow area around high components? Library data is usually a non-issue: we simply don't trust outside sources for any library data.   

The I-Connect007 Research Team regularly polls members of the electronics manufacturing industry on trends in the industry so we can bring you topics that you care about. 

06/23/2022 | I-Connect007 Editorial Team

When we want to find out what challenges our readers are facing, we just ask. And they don’t mind sharing—the good, the bad, and the ugly. In a recent survey, we asked our PCB designer readers, “Why don’t you know who is going to manufacture your boards?” Here are some of more interesting replies we received, edited slightly for clarity. Do you see yourself in these replies?

04/08/2022 | Andy Shaughnessy, Design007 Magazine

Spring has definitely sprung, and the trade show season continues to roll right along. Managing Editor Nolan Johnson just returned from DesignCon 2022, and as he says in his review, the attendance was up from last year’s event, which had been at the McEnery Convention Center in the waning days of the pandemic. I hope we’re getting back to normal, whatever that means. This week, we have a few articles about Industry 4.0, as well as a column on setting your priorities. We have a cool article about methods for measuring the breakdown of resins during multiple thermal laminations, and a conversation with an EMS company president who realized that he was actually running a data collection firm that happened to make circuit boards. Can you say the same about your own company?

04/07/2022 | Nolan Johnson, I-Connect007

It was something of a homecoming as DesignCon returned to the Santa Clara Convention Center this week for DesignCon 2022. It’s been two years since the last DesignCon was held in this venue just before the pandemic began. I attended DesignCon 2021 at the San Jose McEnery Convention Center in July of last year, and I could see a big improvement in attendance as DesignCon moved back into its usual venue.