Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1161956
14 SMT007 MAGAZINE I SEPTEMBER 2019 some truth to that, but it does seem like IPC is trying. Prasad: Keep in mind that when we say "stan- dards," there are so many different kinds. There are many that I'm not involved in. People only get involved in standards they and their com- panies are interested in. Holden: We're talking about IPC stan- dards, but what about IEEE, elec- trical standards, government organization standards, and UL? UL is kind of related standards because UL reassures to fire and insurability, which means you don't have to design to UL stan- dards, but there are consequences if you don't meet UL. Prasad: Good point. RoHS is a standard, so then the Chi- nese have their own as well as Europe, and everybody is follow- ing that, so that's the standard. Pedersen: Compliance with ITAR, DFARS, RoHS, rules of different coun- tries, etc. is one thing that contin- ues to come up more and more. It is something that we have to follow. Johnson: Jan, a question for you with regard to compliance and traceability. What do you see the role of the CAD tool software manufacturers to be? Pedersen: I think that what we see is, or what we need is, CAD tool manufacturers and sup- pliers. It is important that they are able to import and export the files needed as well as communicate, like what we were talking about earlier, regarding the article specification. This includes not only export a file but also describ- ing what they want and what the requirements are. There is a mismatch today and some miss- ing language on how to communicate specifi- cation. We all use Gerbers, ODB++, and some of us even use IPC-2581, but whatever tool we use, you need to communicate the article spec- ification. That's where I see the biggest miss- ing link today. Four years ago, if you were a designer inside Ericsson, you could go three floors down into the PCB shop and test out your designs. Today, you cannot. Thus, OEMs and design- ers have less and less knowledge about how you produce a PCB. I tell them that they can use me as a voice or that they can meet up them- selves, but they are probably not allowed to travel much because of costs. They need somebody to speak for them, and I'm one of those people. Holden: One of the biggest problems with Industry 4.0 and the people involved in the manufacturing side of imple- menting Industry 4.0 is the fact that IPC standards are not elec- tronic. But CFX is a start as IPC real- izes that CFX is going to have to be electronic as part of the data stream. Pedersen: And when you're talk- ing about Industry 4.0, then you also need a specification that can be transferred digitally. Today, we are losing requirements down the value chain. You could end up with a Class 2 PCB delivered to somebody that has a Class 3+ requirement. But I think that we are going in that direction in the complete value chain; we can exchange digitally all of the needs and files we have as well as control pro- cesses better. Johnson: How do you see the younger mem- bers of our industry engaging in the standards process?