IPC International Community magazine an association member publication
Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1546209
30 I-CONNECT007 MAGAZINE I AUGUST 2026 Protocols for Data Transfer We've been hearing more about IPC-1751 and IPC-2581. What problems are these standards de- signed to solve, and do they help with what we have been discussing? Making sure everyone in the design and manufac- turing ecosystem is working from the same informa- tion has always been a significant challenge. These newer data transfer methods, such as IPC-1751 and IPC-2581, provide a more secure way to transfer electronic design data because the files can be fully encrypted and all of the information is contained in a single data package. They also provide the benefit of clarity of infor- mation and intent between the PCB designer and the rest of the manufacturing ecosystem. Having people read a set of notes and interpret them is asking for trouble. With these standards, the design requirements are built directly into the electronic data so that machines have everything they need. That becomes even more important in connected factories and Factory 4.0 or 5.0 environments. Instead of requiring an operator to do a great deal of programming up front, you feed the data directly into the machines, which are automated enough to run from that standardized information. Is this reflected in the whole product ecosystem? Yes, again, it gives that clarity of intention without the need for interpretation. Gerber and ODB+ are the two industry-standard formats for packaging and sending PCB design data to fabricators and EMS vendors, and both contain a lot of useful data. But I once had a bug in the ODB+ data ex- porter that the software could not detect. The data came out with a short across a point, and if the boards had been built to that data, they would have been scrap, wasting a lot of time and money. The new, standardized data transfer protocol elim- inates this possibility. It contains all the materials information for the fabricator and the temperature profiles for the assembler, including solder fluxes and test informa- tion. All the ecosystem data is in a single file, which you can encrypt and transfer. How does it remove the opportunity for human error? It provides consistency, accuracy, and data security. Your entire recipe is stored securely in a single file. To get human interpretation out of the ecosystem, you have pure data and clear intent. This feels very timely, so why hasn't the IPC-1751 data transfer protocol been more widely adopted? There are a few reasons. Some engineers will say, "This is just the way we do things." To change that mindset, there needs to be training and knowledge transfer to the design side of the ecosystem. The message needs to be that it is desirable and neces- sary. You have to overcome that cultural mindset. The other issue is with the CAD tools themselves, with multiple tools and methods needed to read, interpret, and manipulate the data from all sides of the ecosystem. Even with a standard, it takes time for the ECAD and MCAD tool communities to imple- ment the changes, but it's a critical variable for wide adoption and use. Regardless of some of the challenges, is IPC-1751 an inevitability where data transfer and security are concerned? Yes, having secure data transfer such as what is stipulated in IPC-1751 is inevitable, much as I believe going to cloud-based design systems is inevitable. That will be one of the big drivers toward standard- ized data transfer implementation. How does co-design factor in here? Having a universal data format will be necessary for successfully implementing co-design and cloud- based storage and design methodologies. For co- design to be a functional reality, the CAD ecosys- tem—ECAD, MCAD, and physics modeling—with different file formats, must be overhauled. The only way we successfully implement a harmonized envi- ronment for development design is with a new intel- ligent data format structure that can actually move between all these parts of the ecosystem without the need for human intervention or interpretation. Well said, Kristin. Thank you. Thank you, Marcy. I look forward to being part of the future. I-CONNECT007