delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: geda-user/2016/01/11/06:40:20

X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Primitive electrical types --> layers
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <CAJXU7q8edycnyhZbZ7+M3q6HA13U4Tr5R9M7KAG59HVpH2+cMg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
<56928D6F DOT 6080807 AT ecosensory DOT com>
<CE3B7FFB-7C6F-48CB-ADA9-A42D85A3C022 AT noqsi DOT com>
<5692AFEC DOT 9060807 AT ecosensory DOT com>
<20160110213849 DOT 460c7bb14e8f6645138bebd8 AT gmail DOT com>
<s6nsi25doll DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux>
<20160111080228 DOT GA32662 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es>
<20160111094144 DOT bee82694c414c1cc36b98cf8 AT gmail DOT com>
<5693884C DOT 7080003 AT iee DOT org>
<CAJXU7q8jzqqDkXbVXpadApYPg+YPKVPcQkR1Uq-ynJz_+XZMPg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
From: "M. J. Everitt (m DOT j DOT everitt AT iee DOT org) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <56939498.7090503@iee.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:40:08 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJXU7q8jzqqDkXbVXpadApYPg+YPKVPcQkR1Uq-ynJz_+XZMPg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:XLIQ5y4Gjt4XRjNkzBWUXRXHyKWQEUmqNizJDsOSOLyiKOjxoEZ
PkuNnG1vc/79nw5UmkSdzqAUCeNvgNmwCG2oH6a0WTZYhjLuenozEfknuSy7bTsLAYdUxf4
2wq7rtfwrdhQF63rsUqjx1zogTH3Uc3/IO3SBNGK5lIb4YmnulOqMY1dJjun0W1WNmrO8R2
QzR/3fGm6lUJXqlRu4aYQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:62+n2kaUTLE=:0c2FbjcmbwxMbgPltUO1g8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Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------020406030908090108080803
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 11/01/16 11:05, Peter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com) [via
geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> On 11 January 2016 at 10:47, M. J. Everitt (m DOT j DOT everitt AT iee DOT org
> <mailto:m DOT j DOT everitt AT iee DOT org>) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com
> <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com
> <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>> wrote:
>
>     On 11/01/16 08:41, Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com
>     <mailto:nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com>) [via
>     geda-user AT delorie DOT com <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>] wrote:Surely
>     its sufficient to draw in the outline your intended
>     cut-out/slit/etc .. now possibly making this "Keep-out" in other
>     layers
>     may be desirable, but since you're using a milling cutter to do the
>     outline, you need a path for it to follow. Perhaps you can 'shade'
>     this
>     in the GUI - I see no need for additional complexities making
>     polygons,
>     figuring out perimeters, etc, when you can line-draw and need to
>     anyway.
>     Perhaps having an outline 'layer' might help you achieve what you're
>     hoping for? We've even milled curved board outlines, using the curve
>     tool, and our fab. have managed this perfectly without problems.
>
>
>
> The convention is usually, that you model what you want as the
> physically produced, post-manufacturing shape. (This is the same with
> mechanical CAD too)..
>
> Tool-paths, drill size corrections (allowance for plating, or
> approximation of nearest available drill size), are the scope of the
> CAM post-processor.
>
> The reason board outlines as primitive lines on a drawing layer is not
> a great idea, is that those lines are drawn with finite-thickness,
> leaving the requirement of some convention for interpretation. Usually
> fabs follow the center-line I believe, but possible ambiguity here is
> why they often insist on the line being drawn in a small width. Due to
> coordinate rounding etc.., when curves get involved, you will often
> find miniscule gaps between outline segments, that the CAM system must
> jump over. (Not necessarily a "problem", but an additional heuristic,
> and potential for error with this approach).
>
> This is why all the more advanced board representation formats model
> an explicit outline, with poly(curve) type primitives, so an explicit
> design intent of the finished shape can be modelled. This is
> effectively a "polygon" shape in PCB, especially once the patches
> adding support for curved edges are merged. To avoid ambiguity in
> interpretation, this "polygon" needs (I believe) to be a first-class
> property of the stack-up model. (Something I'm working on designing
> and adding currently).
>
> Peter
I do know that CAM/CNC manufacturing uses successive-approximation
polygons for curves anyway, since arbitrary circular motion is hard to
set up.

I've not used any pcb systems that are as advanced to have 3D components
and true board representation, giving you a real indication of how your
board looks, as parameters that are controlled at manufacture-time are
likely not to be available to the casual user. Most are based on a 2D
system, and then it's a matter of appropriately handling layers, shapes
and connections.

I am very interested in the effort to be able to create 'blind' vias, as
although these are more expensive to manufacture, could be helpful to
those making small pcb 'stacks'.

MJE

--------------020406030908090108080803
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    On 11/01/16 11:05, Peter Clifton (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com">petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com</a>)
    [via <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>] wrote:<br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAJXU7q8jzqqDkXbVXpadApYPg+YPKVPcQkR1Uq-ynJz_+XZMPg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">On 11 January 2016 at 10:47, M. J. Everitt (<a
          moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:m DOT j DOT everitt AT iee DOT org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:m DOT j DOT everitt AT iee DOT org">m DOT j DOT everitt AT iee DOT org</a></a>)
        [via <a moz-do-not-send="true"
          href="mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>]
        <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
            href="mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com" target="_blank">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>&gt;</span>
        wrote:<br>
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On
              11/01/16 08:41, Nicklas Karlsson (<a
                moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com">nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com</a></a>)
              [via<br>
              <div>
                <div class="h5"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>]
                  wrote:Surely its sufficient to draw in the outline
                  your intended<br>
                </div>
              </div>
              cut-out/slit/etc .. now possibly making this "Keep-out" in
              other layers<br>
              may be desirable, but since you're using a milling cutter
              to do the<br>
              outline, you need a path for it to follow. Perhaps you can
              'shade' this<br>
              in the GUI - I see no need for additional complexities
              making polygons,<br>
              figuring out perimeters, etc, when you can line-draw and
              need to anyway.<br>
              Perhaps having an outline 'layer' might help you achieve
              what you're<br>
              hoping for? We've even milled curved board outlines, using
              the curve<br>
              tool, and our fab. have managed this perfectly without
              problems.<br>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>The convention is usually, that you model what you want
              as the physically produced, post-manufacturing shape.
              (This is the same with mechanical CAD too)..<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Tool-paths, drill size corrections (allowance for
              plating, or approximation of nearest available drill
              size), are the scope of the CAM post-processor.<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>The reason board outlines as primitive lines on a
              drawing layer is not a great idea, is that those lines are
              drawn with finite-thickness, leaving the requirement of
              some convention for interpretation. Usually fabs follow
              the center-line I believe, but possible ambiguity here is
              why they often insist on the line being drawn in a small
              width. Due to coordinate rounding etc.., when curves get
              involved, you will often find miniscule gaps between
              outline segments, that the CAM system must jump over. (Not
              necessarily a "problem", but an additional heuristic, and
              potential for error with this approach).<br>
              <br>
              This is why all the more advanced board representation
              formats model an explicit outline, with poly(curve) type
              primitives, so an explicit design intent of the finished
              shape can be modelled. This is effectively a "polygon"
              shape in PCB, especially once the patches adding support
              for curved edges are merged. To avoid ambiguity in
              interpretation, this "polygon" needs (I believe) to be a
              first-class property of the stack-up model. (Something I'm
              working on designing and adding currently).<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Peter<br>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    I do know that CAM/CNC manufacturing uses successive-approximation
    polygons for curves anyway, since arbitrary circular motion is hard
    to set up.<br>
    <br>
    I've not used any pcb systems that are as advanced to have 3D
    components and true board representation, giving you a real
    indication of how your board looks, as parameters that are
    controlled at manufacture-time are likely not to be available to the
    casual user. Most are based on a 2D system, and then it's a matter
    of appropriately handling layers, shapes and connections.<br>
    <br>
    I am very interested in the effort to be able to create 'blind'
    vias, as although these are more expensive to manufacture, could be
    helpful to those making small pcb 'stacks'.<br>
    <br>
    MJE<br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------020406030908090108080803--

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019