The Gerber Guide, Chapter 2

Reading time ( words)

It is clearly possible to fabricate PCBs from the fabrication data sets currently being used; it's being done innumerable times every day all over the globe. But is it being done in an efficient, reliable, automated and standardized manner? At this moment in time, the honest answer is no, because there is plenty of room for improvement in the way in which PCB fabrication data is currently transferred from design to fabrication.

This is not about the Gerber format, which is used for more than 90% of the world's PCB production. There are very rarely problems with Gerber files themselves; they allow images to be transferred without a hitch. In fact the Gerber format is part of the solution, given that it is the most reliable option in this field. The problems actually lie in which images are transferred, how the format is used and, more often, in how it is not used.

In this monthly series, I will explain in detail how to use the newly revised Gerber data format to communicate with your fabrication partners clearly and simply, using an unequivocal yet versatile language that enables you and them to get the very best out of your design data. Each month we’ll look at a different aspect of the design to fabrication data transfer process.

This column has been excerpted from the Guide to PCB Fabrication Data: Design to Fabrication Data Transfer.

Chapter 2: Alignment (Registration)

Never mirror or flip layers! All layers must be viewed from the top of the PCB, which means that the text must be readable on the top layer and mirrored on the bottom layer. Alas, sometimes, in a mistaken attempt to be helpful, designers flip layers because they must anyway be mirrored on the photoplotter. This could be helpful in a world where the designer's files are used directly in fabrication, but these data layers are actually input for the CAM system. This needs the correct 2.5D PC structure, so designers need to follow the standard protocol for providing digital data. The fabricator's CAM system will do the rest: it will optimise and panelise the PCB and on output of the final, panelised data, it will mirror, rotate, shift and scale as required by production. Any designer that mirrors layers can only hope that the CAM engineer notices this and ‘unmirrors’ them. 

To read this entire article, which appeared in the September 2015 issue of The PCB Design Magazine, click here.


Suggested Items

Still Using 1980s Formats for Design Data Handoff?

03/09/2018 | Hemant Shah and Ed Acheson, Cadence Design Systems
The IPC-2581 format was created in the early 2000s with the merger of two competing formats: ODB++ and GENCAM. The new format, the brainchild of the late Dieter Bergman, languished with no adoption until 2011, when a small group of companies created the IPC-2581 Consortium with the goal of getting this open, neutral and intelligent format adopted. The consortium has been growing steadily in recent years. Its membership now includes more than 100 associate members in addition to its more than 90 corporate members.

Real Time with... DesignCon: Mentor Partners with Sintecs on EU Project

02/16/2018 | Real Time with DesignCon
During DesignCon 2018, Guest Editor Kelly Dack interviewed Sintecs' CEO Evert Pap and system architect Hans Klos in the Mentor booth. Sintecs used Mentor's software tools to design the dReDBox, a virtual prototype project funded by the European Union.

Who Really Owns the PCB Layout? Part 2

02/07/2018 | Paul Taubman, Nine Dot Connects
In Part 1 of this series, Paul Taubman made the bold statement that the PCB layout is just as much a mechanical effort as it is an electrical one. In Part 2, he threads the needle, explaining why he believes that a PCB truly a mechatronic design, and why mechanical engineers may be more prepared to take on the PCB layout.

Copyright © 2018 I-Connect007. All rights reserved.