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.

The market use reflects the general ambivalence. According to Dana Korf, now senior director of technology, US for Victory Giant Technology and a veteran of years of work on data transfer standards, ODB++ makes up about 20% of the overall market, with IPC-2581 garnering a 5% share and Gerber dominating the rest. While the major board fabricator he previously worked for in China implemented IPC-2581 years ago, as have major OEMs such as Cisco and Apple, most haven't followed suit.

Axiom is an electronics manufacturing services company based in Portland, OR. According to Rob Rowland, director of engineering operations, the company encourages IPC-2581, and alternately, Siemens’ ODB++, a position echoed by a major OEM present. Intelligent data files, Axiom says, reduce the amount of time spent on a job by several hours. If that’s widely true, the labor costs alone would make the switch financially viable, without even considering the reduction in human-generated errors.

The fabricators present were more mixed, however, noting they are at the mercy of whichever format is sent by customers. Pushing back, it seems, might encourage customers to find other suppliers.

There are clear functional differences between IPC-2581 and ODB++. They have been noted elsewhere, so I won’t elaborate here other than to point out that like Gerber, ODB++ is controlled by a company, not an association, and as such isn’t a consensus standard. (Some will argue that’s a feature, not a bug.)

Where agreement lies, however, is that the time to move from dumb data formats is now. Korf says his life’s mission is to convince the industry to kick its Gerber habit. “We can completely eliminate netlists,” he exclaims. “Think about that!”

The chapter is conducting a pilot for creating a data transfer process that will help prepare users for future AI needs. Those interested in participating may contact Stephan Schmidt at sschmidt@pcea.net.

‘Labor’ Wants Experts

Readers know we publish the PCD&F PCB Designers Salary Survey each year as a means for professionals to benchmark job demands and compensation.

Our efforts apparently caught the attention of a nongovernmental organization called Occupational Information Network (O*NET), which for the past couple decades has conducted a data collection program on behalf of the US Department of Labor. O*NET is the primary source of occupational information used by job seekers, employers, workforce agencies, and others who use such information in their daily activities.

O*NET is assisting the Labor Department in gathering occupational information for approximately 1,000 occupations. They are looking for volunteers to participate in their latest survey on electronics engineers (except computer, which apparently merits its own segment), which involves completing a set of questionnaires about their work. (View a sample questionnaire here: https://onet.rti.org/pdf/index.cfm.)

The O*NET program serves employers, human resource professionals, job counselors and labor market analysts across the country who depend on occupational information to perform their work. Individuals who are exploring and planning careers also use O*NET information. Part of PCEA’s mission is to advance the careers of professional electronics engineers, and as such, we support efforts to ensure accurate, actionable data are available to our members.

O*NET has asked for our help in locating individuals willing to participate in the survey. These participants usually have five or more years of experience in the field, and may also have experience as a supervisor or educator as well as the expertise to rate the occupation on tasks, knowledge areas, work context factors, and work activities.

Any information provided is kept strictly private and will not be shared with anyone outside the O*NET organization. A random sample of those who volunteer will be invited to complete the questionnaires, and will receive a small monetary compensation and a certificate of appreciation from the US Department of Labor.

If you meet these criteria and are interested in participating, please contact Nicole Glass at RTI International, the O*NET data collection contractor, at nglass@onet.rti.org or 919-865-3440 ext. 108.

P.S. See us this month at PCB Carolina. And visit pceatraining.net for the latest Certified Printed Circuit Designer training schedule.

Mike Buetow is president of PCEA (pcea.net); mike@pcea.net.