Title: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: doub on December 26, 2013, 08:56:16 pm
Post by: doub on December 26, 2013, 08:56:16 pm
Following good reviews from this forum I decided to try the Smart-Prototyping website to produce some PCBs for a new iteration long-lived project of mine. Here is what happened.
2013-10-17
The board is designed with EAGLE. It's very small, so I assembled several copy of them into a 10cm x 10cm panel using some scripts of mine. Also I don't have a decent soldering iron, so I decided to order one of their cheap Atten ones. Here is the order:
This adds up to $60.02, shipping (to the UK) is $38.26, total is $98.28.
2013-10-28
I receive an email telling me the order has been shipped on the 24th of october.
2013-10-30
I'm surprised to receive my order, shipping was very fast. That's the good point. But there are several problems with the order.
First the soldering iron. It was shipped with an australian, non-detachable, power plug. So I can't use it in the UK. And I can't return it because of some export restriction on electronics goods from the UK to China (at least that's what my post office told me). I later managed to replace the power cord (by opening the device and unsoldering and re-soldering another cable), but at that price the crap PCB inside barely survived my rework. It works, let's move on.
The PCBs are very well packaged, it looks good from the outside. Once opened, I have shiny new PCBs perfectly well routed around my different sub-boards, with the breaking tabs, the tooling tabs and holes, everything.
But I notice all the holes are plated, even those that shouldn't be (those defined as holes and not vias in EAGLE, and that don't connect to any trace on top or bottom). So the tooling holes are too small for me to insert the pins they were designed for (I have one of these (http://http://www.hoektronics.com/2012/10/27/super-simple-smt-stencil8/)). Also the holes along the breaking tabs (I used this scheme (http://http://blogs.mentor.com/tom-hausherr/)) are plated, so they are too stiff to break properly, and they leave some metal cylinders on the PCB edge when I break them.
Finally the stencil. First impression, it's big. But the two faces of the PCB are squeezed against each other at the center, I would have appreciated more space between them. But something looks off, something is missing. I realize my tooling holes are missing, so once again I cannot use the stencil with my Stencil8 fixture. Since the holes were supposed to be generated by my panelizing scripts, I double and triple check the Gerber files with several different tools. The 2.5mm holes are present in the paste files. After a more in-depth inspection, I realize many pads are different from my Gerber files. I'm starting to wonder if they really used it, or somehow re-generated it from the copper files.
So largely disappointed I send them a message through their website.
2013-10-31
I receive the following message:
This reply is not late at all, contrary to the following ones. I send them the following pictures. First a render of the board with my grbv tool:
(http://http://piratery.net/temp/jvuarand-panel-20131017T2248-stencil-problem/render-top-board-1600.png)
Then I modified the tool to render what the stencil should look like:
(http://http://piratery.net/temp/jvuarand-panel-20131017T2248-stencil-problem/render-top-stencil-1600.png)
And then a picture of the actual stencil, from a similar angle:
(http://http://piratery.net/temp/jvuarand-panel-20131017T2248-stencil-problem/picture-top-stencil-1600-annotated.jpg)
2013-11-10
No news for 10 days, I send Cherry another message. I get the following reply the next day, with a copy to some guy from noa-labs.com (which I assume is the company they sub-contract the PCB manufacturing to):
2013-12-02
Three more weeks without answer. I send Cherry yet another message. Next day again I get the following answer:
So I check again the tooling holes in my paste Gerber files, and they are there, so I send another email to complain about it.
The following day the guy from Noa Labs sends the following answer:
I immediately send them an email asking whether they will refund or replace the stencil.
2013-12-26
It's been more than three weeks now. No word from them. I've sent them a second unanswered email. I just realized typing this post that Cherry offered a stencil replacement in one of her earlier emails, but I guess they're not very willing to do it even though they admitted the mistake.
Also regarding the plating of non-via holes, EAGLE puts them on different layers. It is possible to change the CAM export file so that only vias (and through hole pads) are exported to the Excellon file, and the holes are exported only to the mechanical Gerber (this is already done because EAGLE also draws the hole borders in the Dimension layer). I've told them to modify the EAGLE export script they offer on their webpage, but as of today it still hasn't been updated.
So if you have non-plated holes on your designs, at the very least (if you're prepared to deal with all of the above) modify the export CAM script so that the hole layer doesn't end up in the Excellon TXT file.
2013-10-17
The board is designed with EAGLE. It's very small, so I assembled several copy of them into a 10cm x 10cm panel using some scripts of mine. Also I don't have a decent soldering iron, so I decided to order one of their cheap Atten ones. Here is the order:
Quote
PCB Prototyping
- Quantity: 10
- Max X-Dimension: 10 cm
- Max Y-Dimension: 10 cm
- Layers: 2
- PCB Thickness: 1.6 mm
- Copper Thickness: 1 oz
- Surface Finish: HASL (Hot Air Solder..
- Solder Mask Color: Green
- E-Test Pass: 95%
- Solder Paste Stencil: yes (max. 19x29cm)
- Separated Sub-Boards: no
- Gerber Files: jvuarand-panel-20131..
Soldering Station Atten AT936B
- AC Voltage: 220V
- Power Plug: UK, ...
This adds up to $60.02, shipping (to the UK) is $38.26, total is $98.28.
2013-10-28
I receive an email telling me the order has been shipped on the 24th of october.
2013-10-30
I'm surprised to receive my order, shipping was very fast. That's the good point. But there are several problems with the order.
First the soldering iron. It was shipped with an australian, non-detachable, power plug. So I can't use it in the UK. And I can't return it because of some export restriction on electronics goods from the UK to China (at least that's what my post office told me). I later managed to replace the power cord (by opening the device and unsoldering and re-soldering another cable), but at that price the crap PCB inside barely survived my rework. It works, let's move on.
The PCBs are very well packaged, it looks good from the outside. Once opened, I have shiny new PCBs perfectly well routed around my different sub-boards, with the breaking tabs, the tooling tabs and holes, everything.
But I notice all the holes are plated, even those that shouldn't be (those defined as holes and not vias in EAGLE, and that don't connect to any trace on top or bottom). So the tooling holes are too small for me to insert the pins they were designed for (I have one of these (http://http://www.hoektronics.com/2012/10/27/super-simple-smt-stencil8/)). Also the holes along the breaking tabs (I used this scheme (http://http://blogs.mentor.com/tom-hausherr/)) are plated, so they are too stiff to break properly, and they leave some metal cylinders on the PCB edge when I break them.
Finally the stencil. First impression, it's big. But the two faces of the PCB are squeezed against each other at the center, I would have appreciated more space between them. But something looks off, something is missing. I realize my tooling holes are missing, so once again I cannot use the stencil with my Stencil8 fixture. Since the holes were supposed to be generated by my panelizing scripts, I double and triple check the Gerber files with several different tools. The 2.5mm holes are present in the paste files. After a more in-depth inspection, I realize many pads are different from my Gerber files. I'm starting to wonder if they really used it, or somehow re-generated it from the copper files.
So largely disappointed I send them a message through their website.
2013-10-31
I receive the following message:
Quote
this is Cherry from smart-prototyping team. Sorry for my late reply.
We are sorry for this mistake. We will report this issue to packing department and it will not happen again in the future.
For the stencil, could you please send us a picture of stencil so that we can know more about this issue. If it is indeed mistake from factory, we will redo a stencil
and ship it to you.
Sorry for any inconvenience it may cause and thank you for your feedback so that we can improve our service.
This reply is not late at all, contrary to the following ones. I send them the following pictures. First a render of the board with my grbv tool:
(http://http://piratery.net/temp/jvuarand-panel-20131017T2248-stencil-problem/render-top-board-1600.png)Then I modified the tool to render what the stencil should look like:
(http://http://piratery.net/temp/jvuarand-panel-20131017T2248-stencil-problem/render-top-stencil-1600.png)And then a picture of the actual stencil, from a similar angle:
(http://http://piratery.net/temp/jvuarand-panel-20131017T2248-stencil-problem/picture-top-stencil-1600-annotated.jpg)2013-11-10
No news for 10 days, I send Cherry another message. I get the following reply the next day, with a copy to some guy from noa-labs.com (which I assume is the company they sub-contract the PCB manufacturing to):
Quote
sorry, your last email got trapped on my spam folder. I find it now, I will check it and send you reply soon.
2013-12-02
Three more weeks without answer. I send Cherry yet another message. Next day again I get the following answer:
Quote
sorry for late reply. We were discussing with factory about the default rule in stencil fabrication. Factory made the change to stencil with reasons.
- For those weird pad shape. It is in fact for avoiding the solder beads, when pad is bigger then 0805. This is why factory made such pad shape.
- For cross in pad, there is default rule in stencil fabrication that the stencil pad will be reduced to 60% - 70% of the pin pad(this is for avoiding short trouble caused by overflowing solder). If the bottom of QFN QFP grounded pad is bigger than 1.5MM, there will be cross, minimum width of the cross is 0.3MM (if grounded pads are already small, such as 1.0mm, pad can be made 100% out)
- For tooling hole, when using the drill there will not be the plated. When using pad and via then will have the plated. If you would like to keep the hole in the stencil , you should have made the hole also in the solder paste layer.
These are default rules in stencil fabrication. We will update rules to our website soon.
So I check again the tooling holes in my paste Gerber files, and they are there, so I send another email to complain about it.
The following day the guy from Noa Labs sends the following answer:
Quote
For the solder paste, you file is totally fine, this is our mistake for forgot to make the locating hole on the stencil.
Sorry about this.
For the future this will not happen again.
I immediately send them an email asking whether they will refund or replace the stencil.
2013-12-26
It's been more than three weeks now. No word from them. I've sent them a second unanswered email. I just realized typing this post that Cherry offered a stencil replacement in one of her earlier emails, but I guess they're not very willing to do it even though they admitted the mistake.
Also regarding the plating of non-via holes, EAGLE puts them on different layers. It is possible to change the CAM export file so that only vias (and through hole pads) are exported to the Excellon file, and the holes are exported only to the mechanical Gerber (this is already done because EAGLE also draws the hole borders in the Dimension layer). I've told them to modify the EAGLE export script they offer on their webpage, but as of today it still hasn't been updated.
So if you have non-plated holes on your designs, at the very least (if you're prepared to deal with all of the above) modify the export CAM script so that the hole layer doesn't end up in the Excellon TXT file.
Title: Re: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: Taniwha on December 26, 2013, 11:16:51 pm
Post by: Taniwha on December 26, 2013, 11:16:51 pm
so first of all what you got for the soldering iron was probably a Chinese plug (not specifically an Aussie one, they are actually subtly different and aren't always quite interchangeable) changing plugs on stuff bought from China seems to be normal, I do it all the time and expect it. Grab a set of side cutters, cut off the old one and replace it with one from the hardware store.
I've also bought stencils from Smart-Prototypes - the thing about them is that they are really really cheap (half the price of Seeed et al), it's why I buy from them - most of the issues you have are not things I've had problems with since I make those changes to my designs anyway - for example I break up large heat-sink pads into smaller ones (so I can tent heat/power conducting vias).
However I've had exactly the same problem you've had when I tried to add locating pins to my design - they disappeared likely because I'd put them over holes in the underlying board - I suspect it means one needs to have to call this out in the fab instructions.
Probably there's a standard set of things that the stencil house does that all their customers are used to, that they expect, we're one step removed here, going through a middle man (Smart Prototyping), plus a language barrier - better to be up front and tell them what you want - I learned something here for next time I try that trick
I've also bought stencils from Smart-Prototypes - the thing about them is that they are really really cheap (half the price of Seeed et al), it's why I buy from them - most of the issues you have are not things I've had problems with since I make those changes to my designs anyway - for example I break up large heat-sink pads into smaller ones (so I can tent heat/power conducting vias).
However I've had exactly the same problem you've had when I tried to add locating pins to my design - they disappeared likely because I'd put them over holes in the underlying board - I suspect it means one needs to have to call this out in the fab instructions.
Probably there's a standard set of things that the stencil house does that all their customers are used to, that they expect, we're one step removed here, going through a middle man (Smart Prototyping), plus a language barrier - better to be up front and tell them what you want - I learned something here for next time I try that trick
Title: Re: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: Sleepwalker3 on December 27, 2013, 09:07:54 am
Post by: Sleepwalker3 on December 27, 2013, 09:07:54 am
Doub, I would suggest the simplest and easiest thing to do would be to buy a cheap travel adaptor to convert Aus to UK. They aren't expensive, I had them when I lived in the UK years ago - Certainly much easier and quicker than mucking around changing plugs or leads! Thanks for letting us know about these, might save others problems. Let us know how you go with the rest of it.
Title: Re: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: Elpis on February 18, 2014, 06:05:03 pm
Post by: Elpis on February 18, 2014, 06:05:03 pm
Hi doub!
I was reading your post (once more) a few minutes ago. It seems that smart-protottyping is not allowing to do panel like design. They only allow to separate the PCBs with silkscreen not with v-grouing or routing at least with the regular price.
It seems that you have create your own PCB panel and you have set the Separated Sub-Boards to No!
Do smart-prototyping accept this?
I was reading your post (once more) a few minutes ago. It seems that smart-protottyping is not allowing to do panel like design. They only allow to separate the PCBs with silkscreen not with v-grouing or routing at least with the regular price.
It seems that you have create your own PCB panel and you have set the Separated Sub-Boards to No!
Do smart-prototyping accept this?
Title: Re: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: JuKu on February 19, 2014, 10:30:41 am
Post by: JuKu on February 19, 2014, 10:30:41 am
You should get exactly what you ordered. That said:
- The weird pad shape might be a good idea, but should have been done to all big pads or none. And even then, they should have suggested that to you, not done it without asking.
- The cross is actually a good idea, preventing the spatula pressing in to the opening, which might mean trouble when the spatula meets the edge on the other side. Carefully controlling the amount of paste that ends up on pads is also crucial for good yield in manufacturing. Again, they should have given you just a suggestion. I have no issue for a factory getting back to me saying "This might cause a problem, are you sure?", but the assumption is that you have done your decisions, and the data your supplied is the result. If they don't ask, you should get what you ordered.
- Omitting the tooling holes is a big mistake. If they used any other data than the past mask layer, they process is a failure. Non-masked holes in the corner of a PCB, far from any other features is a location aid, and any stencil fabricator worth anything knows that. Besides, did I already say you should get precisely what you ordered? And if they used any other data than what is on your paste mask layer, they fail. "..our mistake for forgot to make the locating hole on the stencil.." WTF? Are they saying they make the stencils manually? With a chisel maybe?
- And what are the features on the right side in your photo? Yours or theirs? (If theirs, it implies you did not have a say to the size of the stencil, and there are something else than you ordered on yours. Who else did get your data?)
In short, thanks for the heads-up.
- The weird pad shape might be a good idea, but should have been done to all big pads or none. And even then, they should have suggested that to you, not done it without asking.
- The cross is actually a good idea, preventing the spatula pressing in to the opening, which might mean trouble when the spatula meets the edge on the other side. Carefully controlling the amount of paste that ends up on pads is also crucial for good yield in manufacturing. Again, they should have given you just a suggestion. I have no issue for a factory getting back to me saying "This might cause a problem, are you sure?", but the assumption is that you have done your decisions, and the data your supplied is the result. If they don't ask, you should get what you ordered.
- Omitting the tooling holes is a big mistake. If they used any other data than the past mask layer, they process is a failure. Non-masked holes in the corner of a PCB, far from any other features is a location aid, and any stencil fabricator worth anything knows that. Besides, did I already say you should get precisely what you ordered? And if they used any other data than what is on your paste mask layer, they fail. "..our mistake for forgot to make the locating hole on the stencil.." WTF? Are they saying they make the stencils manually? With a chisel maybe?
- And what are the features on the right side in your photo? Yours or theirs? (If theirs, it implies you did not have a say to the size of the stencil, and there are something else than you ordered on yours. Who else did get your data?)
In short, thanks for the heads-up.
Title: Re: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: doub on February 24, 2014, 12:27:08 pm
Post by: doub on February 24, 2014, 12:27:08 pm
[quote author="Elpis"]It seems that you have create your own PCB panel and you have set the Separated Sub-Boards to No![/quote]
That's what I did. I wanted to make sure they wouldn't break the different sub-boards apart, since I need them as a panel to apply the solder paste.
Yes.
[quote author="JuKu"]You should get exactly what you ordered.[/quote]
That's what I expected, but maybe they deal with so many noobs sending invalid data that they had to take some measures.
That's the other side of my PCB. It's a bit too close to my taste, especially given the large empty space all around, but it worked alright. Next time I order a double-sided PCB I'll try to merge the top and bottom paste layers myself, with appropriate spacing aligned with my tooling block (so that I can eventually apply paste to one top and one bottom at the same time).
That's what I did. I wanted to make sure they wouldn't break the different sub-boards apart, since I need them as a panel to apply the solder paste.
Quote
Do smart-prototyping accept this?
Yes.
[quote author="JuKu"]You should get exactly what you ordered.[/quote]
That's what I expected, but maybe they deal with so many noobs sending invalid data that they had to take some measures.
Quote
- And what are the features on the right side in your photo? Yours or theirs? (If theirs, it implies you did not have a say to the size of the stencil, and there are something else than you ordered on yours. Who else did get your data?)
That's the other side of my PCB. It's a bit too close to my taste, especially given the large empty space all around, but it worked alright. Next time I order a double-sided PCB I'll try to merge the top and bottom paste layers myself, with appropriate spacing aligned with my tooling block (so that I can eventually apply paste to one top and one bottom at the same time).
Title: Re: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: heyallen on May 15, 2014, 09:32:05 am
Post by: heyallen on May 15, 2014, 09:32:05 am
Did you ever get a satisfactory run of boards from them, or any resolution on this issue at all?
I'm considering sending a very small batch of boards out, but starting to be wary of most of the fab houses, based on the different experiences posted here!
I'm considering sending a very small batch of boards out, but starting to be wary of most of the fab houses, based on the different experiences posted here!
Title: Re: My experience with Smart-Prototyping
Post by: doub on May 15, 2014, 01:01:12 pm
Post by: doub on May 15, 2014, 01:01:12 pm
I ran another board earlier this year, and it turned out fine. I was very explicit in the readme file, and I put all the non-plated hole in the GML file rather than the Excellon file, and they ended up non-plated. I tried a 1mm thickness, and my breaking tabs break really nicely.
My only real concerns regard the stencil. Once again I believe they modified it. I have very small transistors (IIRC they are SOT-723) with relatively tight paste masks, but they ended up so small the paste wouldn't go through the holes. Also the tooling holes were present this time, but they were too tight for my tooling pins so I had to manually enlarge them (I don't have a drill, so I had to botched it with a pair of pliers). So in the end I believe they shrunk all my pads in the stencil (even though EAGLE already outputs paste pads smaller than the copper and soldermask pads). It may be a consequence of the fabrication process, but next time I'll explicitly tell them not to adjust the stencil pads.
Also the cost of shipping stencils is quite high, and this time I had to pay import duty (it's a bit random here in the UK when receiving stuff from China). But I believe they now propose frame-less stencils, which is much cheaper to ship, and is perfect for me since I don't need the frame.
My only real concerns regard the stencil. Once again I believe they modified it. I have very small transistors (IIRC they are SOT-723) with relatively tight paste masks, but they ended up so small the paste wouldn't go through the holes. Also the tooling holes were present this time, but they were too tight for my tooling pins so I had to manually enlarge them (I don't have a drill, so I had to botched it with a pair of pliers). So in the end I believe they shrunk all my pads in the stencil (even though EAGLE already outputs paste pads smaller than the copper and soldermask pads). It may be a consequence of the fabrication process, but next time I'll explicitly tell them not to adjust the stencil pads.
Also the cost of shipping stencils is quite high, and this time I had to pay import duty (it's a bit random here in the UK when receiving stuff from China). But I believe they now propose frame-less stencils, which is much cheaper to ship, and is perfect for me since I don't need the frame.