Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1411055
28 PCB007 MAGAZINE I SEPTEMBER 2021 Stevenson: at's a great question. Basically, the processes in CAM take data from hundreds of different design programs and standardizes them to a single format to be used in manufac- turing. e people on the floor don't feel the impact from different data types because it has been output in the formats needed for each de- partment. A year ago, we would have said we prefer to only receive files in Gerber 274X format, but we have been seeing more and more custom- ers moving to ODB++ data and with recent CAM soware upgrades are in a better posi- tion to handle either type. All our automation is set up to use Gerber format for outputs, but our CAM team have gotten more familiar with ODB++ and in some cases are coming to pre- fer using it for the import of data. Some of the features that they have come to like are that the stackup is built in, preventing orders from go- ing on hold for layer order requirements. An- other is the hole sizes and plating requirements are available—again preventing holds asking whether holes are plated. From a CAM stand- point, though, Gerber has been around for a long time and has performed exceedingly well. ere is a reason it has withstood the test of time. ODB++ has some great features, though, so we are quite happy to receive either one of those from customer. A year ago, based on where we were from a CAM tooling soware timeline, I would have said that we only want Gerber files. at's the only thing our process is set up to take and that's where the automation is at its best. Now we have upgraded much of our CAM soware, especially on the automated side this year, and the ODB++ files have gained a lot of accep- tance from our CAM team to the point where, though our automation may not be any better for it, the toolers feel better when they're able to import the ODB++ formats as opposed to the Gerber. ey feel they get a better result, that they have a better look at the design us- ing the ODB++ data as opposed to solely Ger- ber data. Johnson: Okay. Can you go a little bit deeper into that? Stevenson: ere are a couple reasons for this. First, we're being pulled by the assembly houses a little bit, pick-and-place machines from a variety of different customers of ours that utilize the circuit boards; they find much more benefit to being able to take the ODB++ data. It really speeds up their programming in the pick-and-place machines. ey are hungry to get that type of smart data ODB++ and I'm guessing the IPC-2581 as well, having a broad- er look at the design from components, foot- prints, and everything on the scenes, as well as the physical layout, pad size, apertures, etc., to make it more economical on their end. ey're pulling from that end. Designers are seeing that and are pushing it from their end. In the past, we were caught in the middle. We standardized on Gerbers and that's what we like but now we have more soware tools at our disposal that are able to give us maybe not quite the view of the data as from assem- bly, but it is much more complete and actual- ly comes through our automation with good results. Actually, the results may be even bet- ter than the Gerber files because there are so many different naming conventions with Ger- ber files for layer 1, layer 2, layer N, where with the ODB++ being more standardized brings it in, does a much better job of pulling what is The people on the floor don't feel the impact from different data types because it has been output in the formats needed for each department.