The many billions of dollars in direct funding or incentives the US Chips Act has bestowed on domestic manufacturers continue to obscure the basic adage that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
That truism was tested, again, in late November as Denkai America, the US-based subsidiary of the Japanese materials company, announced its intentions to close and liquidate its copper foil manufacturing plant in Augusta, South Carolina, the last such factory in the United States.
The news comes just two years after its parent company, Nippon Denkai, heralded the site as the future of foil production, with tens of millions of dollars in investments planned and hundreds of new jobs expected. The company cited financial problems stemming from semiconductor shortages, a decrease in exports of batteries manufactured domestically, lower demand for smartphones, and other factors for the decision.
I’m not one to harp on the supposed deficiencies of higher education. The reasons why not to are numerous, but foremost is the disconnect between what industry often wants from higher ed (I’m including colleges and universities in this mix, although there are certain fundamental differences that distinguish them) and what those institutions are designed to (and not to) do.
Universities and colleges are places to seek knowledge and conduct research. They are (generally) not out to make a buck, although I would point out that “nonprofit” does not equal “for loss.” And they aren’t designed to churn out employees ready-made for the working world. Hands-on training is left to those who know exactly what the job entails. Schools are too far from the center to keep up with changing industry needs.
And it’s to their credit, I think, that they have remained somewhat immune to the wider forces that constantly try to shape their approaches and output. Facts matter, and the aim for dispositive critical inquiry means following the scientific method as envisioned by Aristotle no matter where it leads.
Dumb data won’t die. And the blame rests squarely on users who resist upgrading to formats that are designed with today’s boards and manufacturing methods in mind.
That’s the message from the PCEA Portland (OR) Chapter at its meeting in late October. The sentiment was shared across a spectrum of users, from designers to fabricators to assemblers, including the host, Axiom Electronics.
We know the issues: Too often, fabricators and assemblers receive conflicting duplicate and erroneous design data files. More often than not the culprit is Gerber-based data packages, which almost always require modification prior to fabrication or assembly.
So while persistent errors from design to manufacturing are often due to manual entry miscues or otherwise obvious omissions such as a missing solder mask layer or discrepancies within the netlist, the industry by and large continues to put up with the pain instead of migrating to a new format.
CAD as we know it for printed circuit design came into existence in the mid-1960s. And while some industry designers still remember the days (more fondly than I would!) of hand-taping components and traces, then using a camera to produce films for fabrication, it didn’t take too long before computers started taking over.
In 1970, Racal-Redac, which later was acquired by Zuken, released its original PCB, schematic and silicon layout tool. A few years later, Scientific Calculations introduced SCICARDS for generating photoplots from Gerber files. Of course, the dimensions back then were epic in size – pads were 70 mils or more, and lines and spaces were 25 mils.
By 1976, the EDA market was starting to pop with companies, and not just for design. Makoto Kaneko founded Zuken. A trio of professors at the University of Texas – James Truchard, Bill Nowlin and Jeff Kodosky – launched National Instruments. A former Tektronix engineering manager, Doug Campbell, started Polar Instruments.