annular ring issue

tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 15.42.32 UTC+1 skrev Ed Lee:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 6:06:28 AM UTC-8, legg wrote: 
> > On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 08:49:37 -0000 (UTC), 
> > DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: 
> > 
> > >legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in 
> > >news:0r3kogdjcqndrm0a9...@4ax.com: 
> > > 
> > >> It's not something that you ignore to save cost on drill bits 
> > >> at fab. 
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > No layout we ever did had any concerns over hole counts or sizes much 
> > >less their cost during getting the job done. 
> > > 
> > > The boards I have seen even from cheap quick fabs are pretty dang 
> > >tight, and the price points don't mention drill bits, so I am guessing 
> > >the fab houses are better at poking them in instead of just diving and 
> > >driving and are getting better tool life. Doesn't FR-4 drill easier if 
> > >it is hot? Or it is glass fibers either way, so doesn't matter I 
> > >guess... wear is inevitable and quick. 
> > I've yet to see a fab house claim that - 'we generally prefer to 
> > remove (annular rings)' in their documentation, or to offer price 
> > points on this as an option. 
> > 
> > If your artwork calls for them, and you're paying for them, then 
> > they better be there.
> I don't get it. If they see a pad that is going to be drilled, they can just flash a donut, instead of a pancake (breakfast time now). Why would it cost extra wear on drill bit?

if you drill through a donut there's no exposed copper inside the via and the donut is pointless

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 7:33:30 AM UTC-8, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 15.42.32 UTC+1 skrev Ed Lee: 
> > On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 6:06:28 AM UTC-8, legg wrote: 
> > > On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 08:49:37 -0000 (UTC), 
> > > DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: 
> > > 
> > > >legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in 
> > > >news:0r3kogdjcqndrm0a9...@4ax.com: 
> > > > 
> > > >> It's not something that you ignore to save cost on drill bits 
> > > >> at fab. 
> > > >> 
> > > > 
> > > > No layout we ever did had any concerns over hole counts or sizes much 
> > > >less their cost during getting the job done. 
> > > > 
> > > > The boards I have seen even from cheap quick fabs are pretty dang 
> > > >tight, and the price points don't mention drill bits, so I am guessing 
> > > >the fab houses are better at poking them in instead of just diving and 
> > > >driving and are getting better tool life. Doesn't FR-4 drill easier if 
> > > >it is hot? Or it is glass fibers either way, so doesn't matter I 
> > > >guess... wear is inevitable and quick. 
> > > I've yet to see a fab house claim that - 'we generally prefer to 
> > > remove (annular rings)' in their documentation, or to offer price 
> > > points on this as an option. 
> > > 
> > > If your artwork calls for them, and you're paying for them, then 
> > > they better be there. 
> > I don't get it. If they see a pad that is going to be drilled, they can just flash a donut, instead of a pancake (breakfast time now). Why would it cost extra wear on drill bit?
> if you drill through a donut there's no exposed copper inside the via and the donut is pointless

Donut in some layers and pancake in others.  If the customer order a donut, don't serve pancake and take a bite in the middle.

On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 08:08:25 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

>John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
>news:cjgjogl0s2mafou1skkameuar69bi6pn3q@4ax.com: 
>
>> On Mon, 8 Nov 2021 22:36:08 -0000 (UTC),
>> DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
>> 
>>>jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
>>>news:iuniog9c6pjb5l152mhhpr1fsgl5cvn99m@4ax.com: 
>>>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I'm planning a 4 or 6 layer board with all 2 oz copper and thin
>>>> FR4 dielectrics.
>>>> 
>>>> Given a thru-hole multi-row connector (like a 3x32 DIN) I want
>>>> to ground some pins. The grounded pins would hit an inner ground
>>>> plane flood-over, namely no thermals. Clearly annular rings on
>>>> the pad stack wouldn't matter on those layers; it's all copper.
>>>> 
>>>> But where other pins aren't grounded, I want miminal loss of
>>>> copper on the ground plane. So I'd prefer no annular ring, just
>>>> a plated hole with the voltage clearance between the drill and
>>>> the circular cutout of the ground pour.
>>>> 
>>>> Does that sound OK?
>>>> 
>>>> Of course it will be hard to solder.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>
>>>  You could tighten the hole to pin tolerance such that it grabs
>>>  the 
>>>pin, almost needing to be driven in with a slight force, then
>>>apply the reflow heat to the pin, very carefully as you add the
>>>solde to the base, having been wetted by a flux pen.
>> 
>> What I specifically want now is maximum ground plane flooding, so
>> pins that pass through but don't connect to the plane should have
>> no annular ring, just a plated drill and a minimal clearance to
>> the plane.
>> 
>> 0.025 square posts, maybe 38 mil drill, plated hole, and maybe a 6
>> mil insulating clearance around the drill, on the ground plane.
>> That maximizes thermal conductivity of the grounded pins.
>> 
>> Lasse's paper suggests that
>> 
>> 1/3 of PCB houses always remove unconnected annular rings
>> 1/3 of PCB houses never remove unconnected annular rings
>> 1/3 of PCB houses don't answer surveys.
>> 
>> 
>>>
>>>  That is for hand soldering.  For a reflow thing a crimped pin
>>>  will 
>>>resist 'fall through', and the tighter hole with ensure good
>>>reflow throughout the hole.  With lead free being hotter though I
>>>would mask them and hand solder later, because the thermal mass of
>>>those pins can bake out those plated through attachments real
>>>fast. 
>>>
>>>  I would like a rating on my comments, John.  I used to teach 
>>>soldering..  hand soldering.
>> 
>> Sounds good. We'll probably try to use our spiffy new selective
>> solder machine. One little board will have about 220 pins into 4
>> layers of 2 oz copper without thermal spokes... hard to solder by
>> hand. 
>> 
>> Just possibly one could drop little toroidal solder preforms onto
>> the pins and run through an oven.
>> 
>> I worked for an outfit that did NASA soldering, for the S1B
>> moonshot booster. I designed some boards, and they let me do a
>> couple of NASA solder joints myself, just so I could say I did it.
>> 
>
>  I had "NASA Certifiable" soldering skills, and way way back at one 
>place, I could solder a joint and the fillet would be right down at 
>the circuit board, abrely there berely visible, on both sides.  
>Perfecyt joints, minimum solder.  My stuff looked like it was done by 
>a machine.  Even my SMD stuff can look better than machine.  I used 
>11 mil (IIRC) stencils on a PCB layout from General Instrument for 
>their first HDTV processing boards back in like '96 was it...  Any 
>way, the paste up made solder joints that were perfect, but still a 
>little fatter than I do by hand.  But if you get too thin on the 
>stencil, the rubber wiping face cups the deposits.  It is really hard 
>to dial in if one is trying to minimalize the joint sizes.  And then 
>there is the flux choice thing.
>
>  Between a former boss' vast knowledge and experience and the fab 
>house he used for our HV stuff, he was able to always make sure they 
>did not modify anything. We had boards with a break line where the 
>mask ends to get better potting media adhesion down in the HV 
>multiplier section

We made our own boards. Etched them in the bathroom.



-- 

Father Brown's figure remained quite dark and still; 
but in that instant he had lost his head. His head was
always most valuable when he had lost it.



  

tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 15.06.28 UTC+1 skrev legg:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 08:49:37 -0000 (UTC), 
> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: 
> 
> >legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in 
> >news:0r3kogdjcqndrm0a9...@4ax.com: 
> > 
> >> It's not something that you ignore to save cost on drill bits 
> >> at fab. 
> >> 
> > 
> > No layout we ever did had any concerns over hole counts or sizes much 
> >less their cost during getting the job done. 
> > 
> > The boards I have seen even from cheap quick fabs are pretty dang 
> >tight, and the price points don't mention drill bits, so I am guessing 
> >the fab houses are better at poking them in instead of just diving and 
> >driving and are getting better tool life. Doesn't FR-4 drill easier if 
> >it is hot? Or it is glass fibers either way, so doesn't matter I 
> >guess... wear is inevitable and quick.
> I've yet to see a fab house claim that - 'we generally prefer to 
> remove (annular rings)' in their documentation, or to offer price 
> points on this as an option. 
> 

5 minutes of googling find several pcb manufacturers that say removing 
non-functional pads on inner layers are standard procedure in their cam processing

On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 09:23:16 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
<langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

>tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 15.06.28 UTC+1 skrev legg:
>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 08:49:37 -0000 (UTC), 
>> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: 
>> 
>> >legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in 
>> >news:0r3kogdjcqndrm0a9...@4ax.com: 
>> > 
>> >> It's not something that you ignore to save cost on drill bits 
>> >> at fab. 
>> >> 
>> > 
>> > No layout we ever did had any concerns over hole counts or sizes much 
>> >less their cost during getting the job done. 
>> > 
>> > The boards I have seen even from cheap quick fabs are pretty dang 
>> >tight, and the price points don't mention drill bits, so I am guessing 
>> >the fab houses are better at poking them in instead of just diving and 
>> >driving and are getting better tool life. Doesn't FR-4 drill easier if 
>> >it is hot? Or it is glass fibers either way, so doesn't matter I 
>> >guess... wear is inevitable and quick.
>> I've yet to see a fab house claim that - 'we generally prefer to 
>> remove (annular rings)' in their documentation, or to offer price 
>> points on this as an option. 
>> 
>
>5 minutes of googling find several pcb manufacturers that say removing 
>non-functional pads on inner layers are standard procedure in their cam processing
>
>
Well, perhaps I'm out of date. Of the first 24 PCB mfring links in 
my portable's bookmarks, only two were still in business. No annular 
ring references on their site. Ditto with such vendors as JLCPCB.

Googling 'removing non-functional pads on inner layers' got me 
group discussions or software vendors (on a single html page), 
neither of which are very reliable sources for hard-nosed info 
on pcb fab.

Would probably have had better luck in Mandarin or Cantonese. . .
Perhaps you could supply links to the info you found so easily.
Not sure I'd add them to my bookmarks, but they would serve 
better than dead links.

I have a 30+years library in paper and electronic format that 
I'd usually consult, but can't reach before Thursday PM.
In real designs, putting signal traces through power connectors, 
or vice versa, is just a symptom of bad planning.

RL

tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 21.44.35 UTC+1 skrev legg:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 09:23:16 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen 
> <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote: 
> 
> >tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 15.06.28 UTC+1 skrev legg: 
> >> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 08:49:37 -0000 (UTC), 
> >> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: 
> >> 
> >> >legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in 
> >> >news:0r3kogdjcqndrm0a9...@4ax.com: 
> >> > 
> >> >> It's not something that you ignore to save cost on drill bits 
> >> >> at fab. 
> >> >> 
> >> > 
> >> > No layout we ever did had any concerns over hole counts or sizes much 
> >> >less their cost during getting the job done. 
> >> > 
> >> > The boards I have seen even from cheap quick fabs are pretty dang 
> >> >tight, and the price points don't mention drill bits, so I am guessing 
> >> >the fab houses are better at poking them in instead of just diving and 
> >> >driving and are getting better tool life. Doesn't FR-4 drill easier if 
> >> >it is hot? Or it is glass fibers either way, so doesn't matter I 
> >> >guess... wear is inevitable and quick. 
> >> I've yet to see a fab house claim that - 'we generally prefer to 
> >> remove (annular rings)' in their documentation, or to offer price 
> >> points on this as an option. 
> >> 
> > 
> >5 minutes of googling find several pcb manufacturers that say removing 
> >non-functional pads on inner layers are standard procedure in their cam processing 
> > 
> >
> Well, perhaps I'm out of date. Of the first 24 PCB mfring links in 
> my portable's bookmarks, only two were still in business. No annular 
> ring references on their site. Ditto with such vendors as JLCPCB. 
> 
> Googling 'removing non-functional pads on inner layers' got me 
> group discussions or software vendors (on a single html page), 
> neither of which are very reliable sources for hard-nosed info 
> on pcb fab. 
> 
> Would probably have had better luck in Mandarin or Cantonese. . . 
> Perhaps you could supply links to the info you found so easily. 
> Not sure I'd add them to my bookmarks, but they would serve 
> better than dead links. 
> 
> I have a 30+years library in paper and electronic format that 
> I'd usually consult, but can't reach before Thursday PM. 
> In real designs, putting signal traces through power connectors, 
> or vice versa, is just a symptom of bad planning. 

https://www.eurocircuits.com/frontend-data-preparation/
https://www.4pcb.com/pcb-cam-based-quoting/
https://pcbprime.com/pcb-tips/cam-tooling-guidelines/

On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 13:00:17 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
<langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

>tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 21.44.35 UTC+1 skrev legg:
>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 09:23:16 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen 
>> <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote: 
>> 
>> >tirsdag den 9. november 2021 kl. 15.06.28 UTC+1 skrev legg: 
>> >> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 08:49:37 -0000 (UTC), 
>> >> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: 
>> >> 
>> >> >legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in 
>> >> >news:0r3kogdjcqndrm0a9...@4ax.com: 
>> >> > 
>> >> >> It's not something that you ignore to save cost on drill bits 
>> >> >> at fab. 
>> >> >> 
>> >> > 
>> >> > No layout we ever did had any concerns over hole counts or sizes much 
>> >> >less their cost during getting the job done. 
>> >> > 
>> >> > The boards I have seen even from cheap quick fabs are pretty dang 
>> >> >tight, and the price points don't mention drill bits, so I am guessing 
>> >> >the fab houses are better at poking them in instead of just diving and 
>> >> >driving and are getting better tool life. Doesn't FR-4 drill easier if 
>> >> >it is hot? Or it is glass fibers either way, so doesn't matter I 
>> >> >guess... wear is inevitable and quick. 
>> >> I've yet to see a fab house claim that - 'we generally prefer to 
>> >> remove (annular rings)' in their documentation, or to offer price 
>> >> points on this as an option. 
>> >> 
>> > 
>> >5 minutes of googling find several pcb manufacturers that say removing 
>> >non-functional pads on inner layers are standard procedure in their cam processing 
>> > 
>> >
>> Well, perhaps I'm out of date. Of the first 24 PCB mfring links in 
>> my portable's bookmarks, only two were still in business. No annular 
>> ring references on their site. Ditto with such vendors as JLCPCB. 
>> 
>> Googling 'removing non-functional pads on inner layers' got me 
>> group discussions or software vendors (on a single html page), 
>> neither of which are very reliable sources for hard-nosed info 
>> on pcb fab. 
>> 
>> Would probably have had better luck in Mandarin or Cantonese. . . 
>> Perhaps you could supply links to the info you found so easily. 
>> Not sure I'd add them to my bookmarks, but they would serve 
>> better than dead links. 
>> 
>> I have a 30+years library in paper and electronic format that 
>> I'd usually consult, but can't reach before Thursday PM. 
>> In real designs, putting signal traces through power connectors, 
>> or vice versa, is just a symptom of bad planning. 
>
>https://www.eurocircuits.com/frontend-data-preparation/
>https://www.4pcb.com/pcb-cam-based-quoting/
>https://pcbprime.com/pcb-tips/cam-tooling-guidelines/
>

It appears that all of these manufacturers anticipate board 
quantities to be too small to justify set-up charges and 
dedicated production runs. . . .similar to JLCPCB or DKRed.

Board designs for volume mfring are normally panellized, with 
tooling holes and features specific to the end assembly and test 
environment, NOT for the convenience of pcb fab.
 
A PCB fabricator mods gerbers at their own risk. . . .

RL

"Lasse Langwadt Christensen" <langwadt@fonz.dk> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:70a19dca-ef5a-4376-92b0-965bae5a6324n@googlegroups.com...
> mandag den 8. november 2021 kl. 18.44.30 UTC+1 skrev 
> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com:
>> I'm planning a 4 or 6 layer board with all 2 oz copper and thin FR4
>> dielectrics.
>>
>> Given a thru-hole multi-row connector (like a 3x32 DIN) I want to
>> ground some pins. The grounded pins would hit an inner ground plane
>> flood-over, namely no thermals. Clearly annular rings on the pad stack
>> wouldn't matter on those layers; it's all copper.
>>
>> But where other pins aren't grounded, I want miminal loss of copper on
>> the ground plane. So I'd prefer no annular ring, just a plated hole
>> with the voltage clearance between the drill and the circular cutout
>> of the ground pour.
>>
>> Does that sound OK?
>
> technical term, "non-functional pad"
>
> https://www.dfrsolutions.com/hubfs/DfR_Solutions_Website/Resources-Archived/White-Papers/Reliability/Non-Functional-Pads-Should-they-Stay-or-Should-they-Go.pdf
>
>
>

But removing the pads usually does not give you more copper for the plane; 
the area of the annular ring on inner layers is also needed for drill 
"wander" and positional tolerances (unless your inner pads were large to 
begin with)

Chris

onsdag den 10. november 2021 kl. 13.56.33 UTC+1 skrev Chris B:
> "Lasse Langwadt Christensen" <lang...@fonz.dk> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
> news:70a19dca-ef5a-4376...@googlegroups.com...
> > mandag den 8. november 2021 kl. 18.44.30 UTC+1 skrev 
> > jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com: 
> >> I'm planning a 4 or 6 layer board with all 2 oz copper and thin FR4 
> >> dielectrics. 
> >> 
> >> Given a thru-hole multi-row connector (like a 3x32 DIN) I want to 
> >> ground some pins. The grounded pins would hit an inner ground plane 
> >> flood-over, namely no thermals. Clearly annular rings on the pad stack 
> >> wouldn't matter on those layers; it's all copper. 
> >> 
> >> But where other pins aren't grounded, I want miminal loss of copper on 
> >> the ground plane. So I'd prefer no annular ring, just a plated hole 
> >> with the voltage clearance between the drill and the circular cutout 
> >> of the ground pour. 
> >> 
> >> Does that sound OK? 
> > 
> > technical term, "non-functional pad" 
> > 
> > https://www.dfrsolutions.com/hubfs/DfR_Solutions_Website/Resources-Archived/White-Papers/Reliability/Non-Functional-Pads-Should-they-Stay-or-Should-they-Go.pdf 
> > 
> > 
> >
> But removing the pads usually does not give you more copper for the plane; 
> the area of the annular ring on inner layers is also needed for drill 
> "wander" and positional tolerances (unless your inner pads were large to 
> begin with) 

you don't get any extra space if you remove them in postprocessing,
but you might if you design for it

On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:06:34 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
<langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

>onsdag den 10. november 2021 kl. 13.56.33 UTC+1 skrev Chris B:
>> "Lasse Langwadt Christensen" <lang...@fonz.dk> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
>> news:70a19dca-ef5a-4376...@googlegroups.com...
>> > mandag den 8. november 2021 kl. 18.44.30 UTC+1 skrev 
>> > jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com: 
>> >> I'm planning a 4 or 6 layer board with all 2 oz copper and thin FR4 
>> >> dielectrics. 
>> >> 
>> >> Given a thru-hole multi-row connector (like a 3x32 DIN) I want to 
>> >> ground some pins. The grounded pins would hit an inner ground plane 
>> >> flood-over, namely no thermals. Clearly annular rings on the pad stack 
>> >> wouldn't matter on those layers; it's all copper. 
>> >> 
>> >> But where other pins aren't grounded, I want miminal loss of copper on 
>> >> the ground plane. So I'd prefer no annular ring, just a plated hole 
>> >> with the voltage clearance between the drill and the circular cutout 
>> >> of the ground pour. 
>> >> 
>> >> Does that sound OK? 
>> > 
>> > technical term, "non-functional pad" 
>> > 
>> > https://www.dfrsolutions.com/hubfs/DfR_Solutions_Website/Resources-Archived/White-Papers/Reliability/Non-Functional-Pads-Should-they-Stay-or-Should-they-Go.pdf 
>> > 
>> > 
>> >
>> But removing the pads usually does not give you more copper for the plane; 
>> the area of the annular ring on inner layers is also needed for drill 
>> "wander" and positional tolerances (unless your inner pads were large to 
>> begin with) 
>
>you don't get any extra space if you remove them in postprocessing,
>but you might if you design for it
>
>
>

I want some software that will predict sheet resistance (electrical or
thermal, they are equivalent) for simple arbitrary shapes. 

Does anybody have suggestions? I could write one, but the graphical
entry is the hard part. ATLC uses a bitmap from Paint, which I guess I
could figure out.

When I was in school, some time ago, we cut teledeltos paper,
conductive stuff, and measured it.

-- 

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts, 
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon