Updating industry software involves much more than a simple button press.

Software updates and engineering process changes are hidden roadblocks for industry adoption of modern data exchange formats like Gerber X3, ODB++ and IPC-2581. Akin to the iceberg lurking under the surface, significant issues are holding back the industry from wider adoption. And it raises the question of whether these formats meet the needs of the designer without addressing the needs of the factory.

While intelligent formats offer improved digitization and control of data flow from designer to fabricator and assembler, their benefits haven’t been positioned in a way that will entirely win over the manufacturing side. It is a pain to manage all the different separate Gerber, drill, BoM and placement files, however, so I look forward to a resolution.

I mostly hear from designers advocating for the new formats, but I don’t hear a lot of fabricators echoing their concerns. Sometimes I think the formats just need a better sales pitch, because attempting to strongarm fabricators is certainly not going to work. At the PCB East conference this year a group of attendees was asked which formats they used. Very few indicated they use one of the modern data exchange formats. And even when they do, they still send them with Gerbers. Everyone was still using Gerber 274X because, as I have heard time and time again, it just works, and everyone accepts it. It is hard for the industry to move away from a file format held as the standard of PCB fabrication information.

A significant difference in IT styles between PCB designers and PCB manufacturers widens the gap for adopting these new data formats. PCB designers usually have an IT support team and the engineering or technical savvy to handle updates. In those rare circumstances in which a major CAD vendor updates software, it sends ripples through the industry because everyone needs retraining, something deemed a necessary cost and evil.

The resource disparity between designers and fabrications rears its head at this point, however, because most fabricators don’t have the luxury of stopping the lines for a week to retrain on software they knew how to use the day before. That also assumes all the other software tools, scripts, hardware tools and lines will function properly with the new update! When I was selling and supporting software for PCB fabricators, I would often hear a sigh of relief when they heard the interface wasn’t changed, the software tool functioned as before and the new updates and features were held separate from the base functions, because most users have been burned by updates.

And frankly, sometimes manufacturers don’t have the tools to handle the previously mentioned file formats. Those formats may be importable with the latest version from the software vendor, but many factories are running on software that hasn’t been updated in more than five years. It is a big deal for the factory to update its critical flow software tools, as an unknown bug or issue could take the factory offline, meaning huge costs in the form of delays.

Here is a short list of additional issues that the manufacturers face when updating software tools and processes around them:

• Compatibility: While this is the reason many want to update their software, legacy support for various lines must be maintained. And this is one of the reasons that even when a factory does have the latest capabilities to use IPC-2581, et. al., they still trust and rely on 274X.
• Learning curve: New features and user interfaces require retraining, taking staff and lines off the floor, so the return on investment in training must be worth it.
• Data migration: Files from 15 years ago still need to be able to be processed and built, and if the designers aren’t sending new formats, the old formats have to be workable.
• Stability and reliability: Having multiple file formats with different information and capabilities means factories’ frontends must support multiple different processes for handling and managing data, which can lead to inconsistencies and errors. Many factories have automation scripts integrated into their flow and now the factory needs to verify they still work.
• Bug risks: Bugs in the factory’s software in reading the new format, bugs in the designer’s software in writing the new format and bugs in the file format itself. Even different interpretations of file formats by the various software vendors can cause issues.
• Security: IT security is extremely important for PCB design and fabrication, and when new software tools are introduced, security holes are often patched closed, but new vulnerabilities may be introduced.
• Cost: Software updates generally come with additional licensing maintenance fees, upgrade expenses, training and factory and employee downtime.

In production environments, no one wants to be the science project. I cringe every time my SUV attempts a software update as I don’t know if in fixing old bugs they will introduce new ones. Will my brakes work after this update? Will my speedometer show the correct speed? Now imagine those concerns on the factory floor. It isn’t so easy to just “update” the software to the latest version.

Geoffrey Hazelett is a contributing editor to PCD&F/CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY. He is a technical sales specialist with more than 10 years’ experience in software quality engineering and sales of signal integrity software. He has a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..