Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS
- Soldermask
- +0:02
- sliver vs slither
- +0:02
- resolution problem
- +0:04
- Pad expansion
- +0:04
- Set soldermask relief to zero
- +0:05
- A key point when inspecting a new pcb supplier is soldermask over pad
- +0:07
- might do negative soldermask relief over BGA
- +0:07
- Adding numbers to
- +0:09
- PCBshopper
- +0:13
- escaping BGA
- +0:17
- Via in pad impacts cost
- +0:17
- Plugging vias
- +0:18
- EEVblog video about BGA fanout
- +0:18
- tools for automated fanout
- +0:20
- Pin swapping
- +0:21
- 1000 orders per day
- +0:25
- KiCad live stream
- +0:26
- Embedded/Macrofab crossover show
- +0:29
- Matt from Autodesk EAGLE is trying to take on footprints/modules in new versions of the software
- +0:32
- Possible footprint solutions
- “I’ve bitten myself”
- +0:37
- Dave got a new custom LCD!
- +0:38
- Holtec driver
- +0:38
- +0:43
- Sam Zeloof
- +0:46
- SAM21D
- +0:51
- Things Network
- +0:52
- Richard Ginus
- +0:52
- What is Hardware Studio?
- +0:54
- Scott Miller
- +0:54
- Zach Dunham
- +0:55
- Recent article about Hardware Studio
- +1:00
- Chris proposes they use a rubrick to determine if projects make sense.
- +1:03
- Manufacturing: First, Be Perfect
- +1:04
- Stamp on the page wouldn’t have mattered
- +1:08
- BITE
- +1:10
- Callback
- +1:11
What service did Dave use for those 5 boards delivered?
https://twitter.com/eevblog/status/993395415138549762
Hi!
Why do we need soldermask between pads?
To my understanding is only required if there are traces in between that get exposed. FR4 resin is epoxy like soldermask. I can only imagine a difference of texture as FR4 surface is rough for better adhesion… or maybe creepage distance, as it creates a bump. But solder gets adhered to metal and surface tension cleans spaces in between.
With fine pitch parts is just not possible, and if you reduce the clearance misalignment can get it over some pad and create a coplanarity problem.
I might be doing it wrong¿? My assemblers have never complained about it.
I only use it to confine solder within the pad, to avoid migration through traces or planes during reflow. But solder only migrates through metal.
I have to wonder, if Dave did start an “EEVBlog Approved” certification for Kickstarter projects, would he open himself up to liability if the project fails?
Wednesday’s Digi-Key email featured a Maxim MAX32660 Cortex-M4F in a 1.6mm by 1.6mm wafer-level 16-bump package.
How would modular PCB layout work? Squares of PCB designs with little roads for interconnecting traces in between? Sounds like a massive waste of PCB real estate and layers. Wouldn’t you also be dependent on some other company’s design ability and component selection? If you’re getting the design for free, the quality probably matches the price. So you would be taking on their risk and not reducing in-house costs by reusing the same parts across your in-house designs or your contract manufacturer’s commonly stocked parts. This idea feels more flawed and for more reasons than the ridiculous modular cell phone concept.
Software libraries use agreed upon formats. PCB component libraries attempt to do the same, but the big three ECAD companies refuse to use each other’s protocol. Some offer converters, but they’re mostly a joke. The other MASSIVE reason is that too few manufacturers create the component libraries themselves. If checking a library takes just as long as creating it, there’s no point. A manufacturer’s library is the only one you wouldn’t need to check. There’s not enough engineers pushing manufactures for this. I myself give preferential design treatment to manufacturers that supply 3D models and Altium libraries.