Board Outline

Gary Gofstein schrieb:

Making a board with a precise outline...

What is the normal way to specify the board outline in the Gerber files?

Should there be a separate "outline file" or is it just whatever the

outermost contour in the silkscreen is understood to be the routing

contour? Do I need to take the tool size (kerf) into account or just

draw a thin line and let the board house take care of it?

I always draw a thin (0.01 mm) contour in the "milling" layer and

provide that as separate gerber file to the board house. There never

were any problems (with none of several board houses). AFAIK, providing

the outline as separate gerber file is pretty common standard.

Don't use width 0, since this generates invalid gerber code (aperture

width 0 is illegal). Don't use thick wires since this might lead to

confusion whether the inner, the center, or the outer sizes are meant.

Don't use the dimension layer since this contains implicit objects (hole

outlines).

In question, talk to them.

Tilmann

"Tilmann Reh" <usenet2007nospam@autometer.de> wrote in message

news:id294r$uji$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Don't use width 0, since this generates invalid gerber code (aperture

width 0 is illegal). Don't use thick wires since this might lead to

confusion whether the inner, the center, or the outer sizes are meant.

Don't use the dimension layer since this contains implicit objects (hole

outlines).

Hm.. I have used width 0, and the gerber is generated. Maybe some

manufacturer's tools will complain, but it looks like width 0 is supported.

"Tilmann Reh" <usenet2007nospam@autometer.de> wrote in message

news:id294r$uji$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Don't use width 0, since this generates invalid gerber code (aperture

width 0 is illegal). Don't use thick wires since this might lead to

confusion whether the inner, the center, or the outer sizes are meant.

Don't use the dimension layer since this contains implicit objects (hole

outlines).

Hm.. I have used width 0, and the gerber is generated. Maybe some

manufacturer's tools will complain, but it looks like width 0 is supported.

Am 30.11.2010 10:10, schrieb Morten Leikvoll:

"Tilmann Reh" <usenet2007nospam@autometer.de> wrote in message

news:id294r$uji$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

>> Don't use width 0, since this generates invalid gerber code (aperture

>> width 0 is illegal). Don't use thick wires since this might lead to

>> confusion whether the inner, the center, or the outer sizes are meant.

>> Don't use the dimension layer since this contains implicit objects (hole

>> outlines).

 

Hm.. I have used width 0, and the gerber is generated. Maybe some

manufacturer's tools will complain, but it looks like width 0 is supported.

 

 

 

Width 0 is not supported by Gerber. IMHO your board manufacturer

knows what to do in such a case. He simply will change the width

to a reasonable one and have the board manufactured.

--

Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best regards

Richard Hammerl

CadSoft Support -- hotline@cadsoft.de

FAQ: http://www.cadsoft.de/faq.htm

"Richard Hammerl" <ric@cadsoft.de> wrote in message

news:id350o$1d2$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Width 0 is not supported by Gerber. IMHO your board manufacturer

knows what to do in such a case. He simply will change the width

to a reasonable one and have the board manufactured.

I do not see any reservation on aperture macro "circle" diameters in the

Gerber RS-274X Format's User Guide (Part Number 414 100 014 Rev D March,

2001 from Barco), but maybe the original spec says something about it?

Then again, I think it is good to use width=0, so that an unexperienced

manufacturer is forced to stop and think when he finds this aperture.

Maybe he is forced to stop and think when the width is very small too, but

you never know.

"Morten Leikvoll" <mleikvol@yahoo.nospam> wrote in message

news:id52rh$cnu$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

 

"Richard Hammerl" <ric@cadsoft.de> wrote in message

news:id350o$1d2$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

>> Width 0 is not supported by Gerber. IMHO your board manufacturer

>> knows what to do in such a case. He simply will change the width

>> to a reasonable one and have the board manufactured.

 

I do not see any reservation on aperture macro "circle" diameters in the

Gerber RS-274X Format's User Guide (Part Number 414 100 014 Rev D March,

2001 from Barco), but maybe the original spec says something about it?

 

Then again, I think it is good to use width=0, so that an unexperienced

manufacturer is forced to stop and think when he finds this aperture.

Maybe he is forced to stop and think when the width is very small too, but

you never know.

 

>

Richard is correct here... a zero width is basically an undefined aperture,

so usually the manufacturer will define the aperture during the tooling

process.  And no matter what the outline width is, the center of the outline

is usually considered the actual route path.

Terri