Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1401769
28 PCB007 MAGAZINE I AUGUST 2021 right. Part of the chal- lenge there is accep- tance. I work with a lot of the OEM sides want- ing to use ODB++ and the challenges that we go through there is they must accept internal- ly that it's what they want to do. It usually be- comes a type of decision to say, "We're going to send this, and that's it." And the fabricator just learns to live with it. at's usually the way it seems to go. But before they're willing to make that leap, they don't have confidence in themselves that the transfer will be successful, that the man- ufacturer can work with it. We end up going through what might be several weeks, or even several months, of back and forth, comparing designs. ey want to try every type of design they have. If they have multiple EDA tools they want to test it on all the EDA tools because they want to commit to it all at once. en we end up going back and forth with the fabricators to obtain their acceptance. While this is not DFM related it's still what hinders them from a DFM perspective. Matties: My understanding is that there are some manufacturers offering price discounts if you're using IPC-2581. Max Clark: Yes. at's been tried even with ODB++ in the past, using it as a carrot to get data faster. e transfer is smarter; I don't care whether you're using 2581 or ODB++ from that perspective. e exchange is smarter, fast- er, it gets in the system, and more comes in correctly the first time, so that's a huge advan- tage. I think the first hurdle people must get over when it comes to DFM acceleration is the acceptance of a new, better, or improved-upon way to transfer that data. e analysis that you perform, either on the design side or the fab side, is only as good as the data you're being presented with. From my experience, trying to reverse engineer that intelligence into the Gerber data is only so accurate, and it is time consuming. Matties: Is this a generational issue? Will the young engineers gladly use IPC-2581 if we train them to that? Max Clark: I don't think so. ere's a mirror image of this in silicon manufacturing where the foundries at first were very inward look- ing and they didn't want to share a lot of in- formation. I think it's just a matter of maturi- ty within the industry. It needs to evolve. Pos- sibly the fabricators must do more insistence. Fabricators say, "ey don't want to lose any business." ey're afraid the customers will go somewhere else. at fear has got to leave. Rick Almeida: ey've been using Gerber a long time, and with all its warts, it still works for the design side. ese guys are getting older and older. It's just ingrained in them that when you're done you're going to produce Gerber and go. Unless there's some compel- ling reason to switch that process nobody really gets a couple months where there's no work to do and they can go in and try a differ- ent process for the sake of trying a different process. Joe Clark: Right, and they're very risk-averse. ey have a process that works. ey've been taking thousands of databases in Gerber for- mat for a long time, and they have perfect- ed this process. e fabricators went reluc- Max Clark Rick Almeida