[SI-LIST] Re: Layout service recommendations

,
        Can't help but add a couple more comments to this most
        interesting thread.

        - I'm glad so many respondents have stressed the need for
        clear and concise notes.  This makes a huge difference, I
        wish more of our customers took the time to do this.

        - On the other hand it can be difficult if the engineer
        has tried to envision too much.  Often manufacturability,
        testing and other physical issues need to be addressed and
        may compromise pre-conceived notions.  I view these realms
        as those of the physical designer (layout person) with full
        understanding that overall function (and therefore final
        say) rests with the authoring engineer.  Too often an en-
        gineer working without benefit of these insights may have
        made a "structural premise" that causes a great deal of
        downstream difficulty, and the physical designer may get
        shot for daring to suggest a solution trying to encompass
        the rest of the stake holders.  An experienced physical
        designer can be a great resource if involved early enough;
        visualization of the life of your board is what they are
        supposed to be good at.

        - I think there is merit in choosing a shop that provides
        finished product, there are many lessons learned the hard
        way in that realm.  Even if you don't procure your first
        article from them, the shop that builds what it designs is
        going to have more insight into the hard and soft costs of
        mistakes.

        - Concurrent engineering can be a real saver.  IMHO this is
        the way to reduce time-to-market, rather than trying to do
        a rush job through the physical design.  Starting with less
        than complete info, but limiting the value added to it in
        effort to match its maturation, is an efficient way to get
        the time "in the critical window" reduced.  Unfortunately CE
        that is not adequately managed can lead to real doses of what
        we call "negative progress".

        - Location is what you make of it.  We have clients who come
        half-way around the globe to live with us, and others who do
        not drive the 15 minutes distance - they're happy with their
        viewer, frequent board files, and periodic contact.

        - Lastly, as a long standing player in the physical design
        of challenging boards, it is somewhat discouraging to hear a
        general mood of some respondents (hearing between the lines)
        on how they may have been poorly served in the past.  I hope
        that continuous improvement, a spirit of corroboration, and
        the works of the IPC Designer's Council in certifying phys-
        ical designers can over time make a difference.

        Cheers,
-- 
 
      Jeff Seeger                         Applied CAD Knowledge Inc
      Chief Technical Officer                  Tyngsboro, MA  01879
      jseeger "at" appliedcad "dot" com                978 649 9800
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field

or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list

For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field

List archives are viewable at:     
                http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages 
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
                http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu

Other related posts: