![]() ![]() Some CAD change this from front to back side and others not. This comes from mirror and the way the angles count CW or CCW. If orientation is fixed, 0 and 180 degree could fit but not 90 and 270 degree. Formerly we used a Excel script to do this, later we wrote own Qt tool therefore. If there is a unique orientation like the IPC recommendations, it is usually possible to fix the setup by automatic offsets. If library does not have unique orientation of components, pick and place machine has to fix the rotations individual for all parts. It would help immensely if even some of the biggest cheap manufactures would update their systems so that they would use modern gerber features without hiccups.įirst, this is a question of the library and not of CAD. Unfortunately it’s impossible to change that situation, and adding features to gerber doesn’t help when they are not used. The problem isn’t in the file format or standard, it’s in the implementations. Small cheap manufacturers who use old gerber sw probably can’t use that information. ![]() ![]() On the other hand manufacturers who use ODB++ more probably can actually use that information. Surprise surprise: gerber spec has that information, too, and KiCad can export it, but Altium CM can’t. The last time I checked, Altium CircuitMaker exports ODB++ and adds net information to copper items, probably because it’s part of that standard. The real problem with gerber is that there are old and partial, even buggy, implementations everywhere. Most are using ODB++ as it solves all these problems.Īfter getting more familiar over some years with gerber format I think the newer formats don’t solve many problems which gerber doesn’t solve, too. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |