Tag Archives: Duane Benson

Let’s Talk about HAL – For Big Parts Only

Posted on by

The board surface names: HAL and HASL (hot air leveling and hot air surface leveling) refer to the same thing. They are interchangeable terms. With that out of the way, I’ll get to my point, which is that HASL is not the right surface for all applications.

Take a look at the photo on the right. This is a 0.5 mm pitch BGA land, using lead-free HASL. Don’t expect good results with this board. It’s a good quality HASL board. Even the bumps on the pads are not out of line for a HASL PC board. It’s not a defect. It’s the HASL works.

The catch is that, while the PC board is perfectly good, it’s not the correct board surface to use for all parts. HASL is fine for larger parts, but for small components, it’s archaic and not reliable.

BGAs require a flat surface (also called a planar surface). With the bumps common on HASL boards, the BGA won’t have a flat surface. The solder paste won’t adhere evenly to the pads. The BGA will probably slide off the pads before reflow. It may end up far enough off that it can’t self-center, as BGAs usually do.

The HASL pads won’t all have an even amount of solder left on the board. Some pads will have more, some less. When added to the solder paste, the pads with more solder may end up bridging.

All of the issues become even more severe as the parts get smaller. Wafer scale parts, 0.4 mm pitch parts, 0201 passives, and other similarly or smaller sized components are essentially incompatible with the HASL surface.

So, what do you do? Order your boards with immersion silver or ENIG. Both give a nice flat surface that BGAs like.

Duane Benson
Open thse Posd Basy Doors Hasl

http://blog.screamingcircuits.com

Milling Madness

Posted on by

Sometimes, we find things that kind of defy explanation. Fortunately, this didn’t come from Sunstone, our normal board house.

Regardless of who it came from, I’m sure it was a one-off mistake, but, wow. How could anyone miss this?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It just goes to show, it’s always a good idea to take a look at what you get from your board house before sending it on to us.

Duane Benson
Termites, maybe?

http://blog.screamingcircuits.com

Designing for Movement

Posted on by

What is the difference between electronics in a robot vs., say, a stationary temperature monitor and control device? For one, if the temperature controller goes haywire, you can pull it off the wall and stomp on it, while you might have to chase the robot (or be chased) to deactivate it if it’s gone into world domination mode. More relevant, though, is vibration.

Fixed embedded electronics generally don’t need to worry about vibration induced reliability issues. Mobile robots, however, do. Unsecured connectors can work their way loose. Bolts can back off. wires can brush against stuff. A lot of practices that don’t cause problems in a fixed installation can bite in a mobile setting.

For example, a simple board-to-board ribbon cable. On the left is a common friction-retention cable connector. Fine for a development board, but not for an environment subject to vibration. Instead, use a mechanically captive connector, as shown on the right.

 

 

 

 

Free hanging cables are also a “no” for mobile devices. Cables hanging loose can get caught on edges, or tall or hot components. That can lead to worn or melted insulation and shorts. Instead, use cable ties, insulating grommets, and careful routing.

There are plenty of other considerations, but these are two of the biggest traps to avoid when movement is called for.

Duane Benson
Klaatu barada nikto. Translation: “Spaceman says what”

Surface Mount Power Component Footprints

Posted on by

There was a time when the bison ran free on the plains and power components were easy to design with. Everything, with the exception of an exotic few, used either the TO-220 or TO-3 packages. Even when surface mount came along and cut the bison off from their grazing lands, most power components came in some derivative of the TO-220, with bent leads.

That’s no longer the case. Today, power components come in those TO-220 derivatives, SO-8 packages, QFNs, and down to 0.3 mm pitch wafer scale micro-BGAs. It’s madness.

The advantage of all of that chaos is that it gives more flexibility for sourcing and sizing of components. Which, of course, brings in a few more potential issues. Take the example below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The footprints were originally created for a package with four 1.27 mm (0.05″) pitch leads on one side and a big heat slug on the other. The component selected is a variant in an SO-8 package. It’s not an uncommon occurrence.

As long as pins 5 – 8 all share the same internal connection, there isn’t anything electrically wrong here. However, with that large open copper pad on top, it’s going to be very difficult to get a good solder joint.

The fix is pretty easy. Just add solder mask to separate the pins. Make the mask openings the same size as you would if the pins were on individual pads. You don’t need to cover the whole pad with solder mask — just surround the pins so solder will stay where it’s needed. The mock-up below illustrates what it would look like:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do the same with your solder paste layer. Unless the component has a heat slug underneath, make the paste layer block the big open area.

Duane Benson
Would a bisontennial be a 100 year old, large grazing animal?

Start the Year Right, Without PCB Placement Overlap

Posted on by

Today’s illustration isn’t a super-bad problem. You can usually make this work — unless  you’ve got to align with a hole in case. I’m talking about the venerable 3.5mm audio jack. They aren’t used all that often these days, but when they are, one of the most common formats has a design detail that makes edge alignment pretty critical.

The part of the connector that receives the jack is a short barrel, with an outside diameter larger than the height of the rest of the connector, as you can see in the image on the right. It comes in thru-hole and surface mount varieties.

This means that you have to have your solder pads or holes just the right distance from the board edge. Too close, and you can violate design rules. Too far inset, and you won’t be able to mount the connector flush.

 

 

 

 

 

This part can cause additional problems if the board is panelized. Like other overhanging connectors, the panel tabs, panel rails or other boards in the panel may make it impossible to mount the part, even if the spacing is correct.

The board shown below has both incorrect spacing, and another board in the panel blocking placement. The surface mount pads allow for more flexibility in positioning — it would have worked if not in a panel.

 

 

 

 

 

I’ve done this myself. Speaking from experience, I can say that it’s easy to avoid, and quite sad when discovered at assembly.

Duane Benson
Down at the edge, close by a panel rail
Close to the edge, round by the routing tab

Top 10 PCB Assembly Tips for 2016

Posted on by

I’ve already written my top 10 predictions for the coming decade, in this blog post. But, while predictions might be fun to muse upon, they really won’t help you get your job done. My top-ten8 pieces of PCB assembly advice for the coming year should make up for that.

000

Before you even start component selection, give thought to the design scale. What’s more important, board size, cost, or time to layout? A large board will be easier to route, but will cost more for the fab. A smaller board will cost less for the fab in terms of square inches, but may cost more due to extra layers, and may take longer to layout.

001

Factor in the cost of component size. For passives, roughly 0603 size parts will probably be the sweet spot in terms of lowest cost. The 0603 is also a good size for overall handling. We’ll assembly down to 0201 parts, but not all manufacturers will. 0603s are also easy to rework, and are manageable if you feel the need to hand solder a few.

010

Check out any exotic or very new parts. Some parts, these days, are only available in super small wafer scale BGA, or small QFN form factors. Take a look at your integrated circuits and make sure they come in packages that you’re comfortable working with.

011

Check for sole-source parts, or low-availability parts. The last thing you want is a completed design that’s sitting around waiting for one long-lead time, sole sourced part. If a sole-sourced part is at risk for availability, you might want to find something similar and more available.

100

Don’t forget manufacturing thermal concerns when laying out your board. Very large parts next to very small parts can cause problems. The large parts will act a bit like a heat sink and may prevent the solder for the small part from melting properly. The same thing can happen with internal copper planes that overlap on half of a small part, but not the other.

101

Give extra care to the clarity of reference designators and polarity markings. Make sure that it’s very clear which designator goes with which part, and that there isn’t any ambiguity in polarity markings. Take special care with LEDs, as manufacturers sometimes swap polarity markings between the anode and cathode – yes, the exact same mark can mean anode on one LED and cathode on another. Also, do your best to keep reference designators off of vias or any other spots that might break up the text.

110

When you’re ready to send your project our to be built, give your files a double check to makes sure you have the correct versions. bills of materials are especially susceptible to having bits of information out of date that might cause delays.

111

If you’re sending in a parts kit, double check that you have all of the parts, and that you have part number and reference designator on the individual part bags.

Manufacturing is just putting parts on boards, but it’s doing so with a whole lot of variables. A few extra checklist steps can go a long way toward removing variability of those variables.

Duane Benson
I am one with the net force. The net force is with me

7 Cost Reduction Design Tips For Makers

Posted on by

As a maker, you really need a decent price, with good quality and good service. Contrary to what many people think, you don’t need to look outside of North America for this. You can keep your gaze west of the Atlantic and east of the Pacific.

Like everything else in the modern world, design decisions can have a pretty big impact on your cost. So, let’s take a look at seven design decisions that can make your manufacturing more affordable.

Accept longer lead times. Lead times are one of the biggest factors in electronics manufacturing. Businesses can turn a kitted assembly job overnight, but it costs a lot of money to do that. When you can, a 20-day turnaround that is much more affordable. Accepting longer lead times on PCB fab will drop your cost as well.

Avoid leadless packages Like QFNs and BGAs. Screaming Circuits builds tons of QFN and BGA boards, even down to 0.3 mm pitch micro-BGAs. That’s great if you need those packages. However, since all of the leads are underneath, we have to x-ray every part. That adds a bit of cost to the process. If you can, stick with TSSOPs and other parts with visible leads.

Use reels and continuous strips. To save costs, use full or partial reels or continuous strips of at least 12″ long.

Stick with surface mount. These days, through-hole components tend to be hand soldered. That costs more than machine assembly, so use surface mount wherever possible. Surface mount components tend to be less expensive than through-hole, too. If you do need a few through-hole parts, this is an opportunity to put in a little sweat equity by soldering the through-hole yourself and save a bit of money.

Keep surface mount parts on one side. Putting surface mount parts on both sides of the PCB is a great way to better utilize space. However, if cost is more of a concern, and you only have a few parts to put on the back side, it may be more cost effective to move them to the top side. If you’ve got a lot of parts, the additional cost for assembling both sides may be less than the cost for the extra board size, but with a small number of parts that’s probably not the case. Quote it both ways and see which is less expensive.

Panelize small boards. Sticking with a larger size makes the job easier, and, again, creates extra savings. If your board is smaller than 16 sq. in., panelize it.

Save on start-up costs. Just the act of starting out can pretty much break the bank. Software like PCB123 offers full-featured PCB CAD systems you can get free of cost.

By following these guidelines, you can get a decent price and quality service.

Duane Benson 

 

Fab Drawings or Assembly Drawing Standards?

Posted on by

It’s not always possible to have all of the information needed for a successful PCB assembly printed on the blank PC board. When this is the case, we ask for an assembly drawing – like I suggest here. But what about things that are important at the PCB fabrication stage rather than at assembly.

That’s where the fab drawing comes in.

One of the problems with this system is that the “standards” for fab and assembly drawings are only loosely adhered to, if you can call them standards at all. If in doubt, label the fab drawing “Fab drawing” and the assembly drawing, “Assembly drawing.” That may seem obvious, but in the wide world of technology, obvious too often is anything but.

(image from xkcd.com)

Clearly label anything that the fab shop needs that isn’t obvious from the Gerber files, make a PDF, and label it “Fab drawing.pdf.” Do the same for any assembly information and instructions and label it “Assembly drawing.pdf.” If information is needed by both the fab shop and us, the assembler, put it in both drawings.

We recently had a case where a component polarity wasn’t marked on the board or in the assembly drawing, but was in the fab drawing. We do our best to catch such things, but it ads a bit of ambiguity to the process. If you’ve been reading this blog before, you’ve likely picked up that I do not like ambiguity. I do not like it one bit.

Duane Benson
Vote for clarity! Kick ambiguity out to the street

http://blog.screamingcircuits.com

Accursed Diode Marking

Posted on by

Am I a broken record? Pretty much — especially when it comes to confusing diode marking.

For example, everyone knows what the diode symbol looks like, and pretty much everyone knows which side is the anode and which is the cathode. Right? It’s just like in the following picture:

Is that big enough?

Normally, the clearest way to indicate polarity on an LED is to put something like this diode symbol in silk screen next to, or between, the copper pads. In theory, that should remove ambiguity.

Ambiguity in marking is the enemy of polarized parts. Unfortunately, as I cover in this, and many other blog articles, LED manufacturers seem to conspire against us all when marking is concerned.

We recently ran across a case of built-in ambiguity. The PCB had, what looked like, a very clear marking. The image on the right is from the assembly drawing, which is just a blow-up of the board silk screen and documentation layer.

With that marking, I’d quickly come to the conclusion that the anode is on the right and the cathode is on the left. I’d even confidently state that it’s a sure thing and extremely unlikely to cause any problems. But …

Here’s where I’d be very wrong, and why it’s so important to always check the datasheet when dealing with diodes. Take a look at the following clip from the component’s datasheet. Scroll down to the bottom of the image for the punch line.

Wow. I can’t even …,

The board designer was just following the datasheet. That’s a perfectly proper thing to do, except when the manufacturer flips a coin, as it appears to have happened here. In this case, dispense with the symbol altogether and use “A” for anode and/or “K” for cathode in the silk screen. (Use “K” because “C” looks too much like a reference designator for a capacitor.)

Duane Benson
In the land of the insane, only the sane are crazy

http://blog.screamingcircuits.com/

What Do You Do If You Can’t Have Reference Designators?

Posted on by

The first answer to that question is probably going to be along the lines of, “Put them on the board.”

But, sometimes you can’t have reference designators on your board. Maybe it’s too densely populated and there isn’t room. Maybe, for aesthetic reasons, you’ve chosen to leave them off. With some products, like development boards, it’s sometimes necessary to use the space for instruction or functional identification and reference designators would confuse your customers. 

It’s always best to put reference designators as close to the part as possible, and on the same side as the part, but if that’s not possible, you can still create an assembly drawing. When laying out the board, put the reference designators in a different layer than the text you want in silk screen. Then, create a PDF that has all the component outlines in their place, with reference designators. Make one for the top and one for the bottom. Call this document “assembly drawing” and include it in the files sent in to be manufactured.

Figure 1 shows a good assembly drawing format. It has reference designators and polarity marks.

You might ask why reference designators are needed when all the surface-mount parts are machine-assembled. First, any through-hole parts are hand-assembled. Their locations and board side needs to be clear for the people stuffing them.

Second, CAD systems don’t always have 100% accurate information. If the center point of the footprint is off, surface mount machines (ours and anyone else’s) will center the part where file says to put it, which, in the case, would be the wrong spot.

The reference designators are also part of quality control. It’s another opportunity to remove ambiguity. Ambiguity bad. Certainty good.

Duane Benson
Car 54, where are you?

http://blog.screamingcircuits.com/