Re: PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- From: Joerg <notthisjoergsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 13:32:11 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
They don't really need the P&P file. It just makes it a little faster to
program the machine.
Thanks, Chris. Maybe the layouter generated the wrong file. Anyhow, since he's traveling now they went ahead and started programming the machine by hand. Over 500 parts...
What's the error rate on "hand" programming?
Reducing sources of errors seems like a good idea to me.
It's surprisingly low. In the late 80's it was all hand-programming and the errors were usually zero. But we do not have a choice here because the layouter can't be reached right now and the stuffed boards must be at the client Monday morning.
It's 80% analog and I'll find a stuffing mistake pretty quickly. The only drag would be that we'd then have to correct it about 40 times.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com
.
- References:
- PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- From: Joerg
- Re: PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- From: Christopher Ott
- Re: PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- From: Joerg
- Re: PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- From: Hal Murray
- PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- Prev by Date: Re: PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- Next by Date: Re: hobby double sided pcb's
- Previous by thread: Re: PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- Next by thread: Re: PADS, ASCII output question: Scale factor?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
