DESIGNERCOUNCIL Archives

1996

DesignerCouncil@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Received:
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0uZkuH-0000CmC; Fri, 28 Jun 96 16:16 CDT
Old-Return-Path:
Date:
Fri, 28 Jun 1996 17:24:13 -0400
Precedence:
list
Resent-From:
Resent-Sender:
DesignerCouncil-request [log in to unmask]
X-Status:
Status:
O
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/1805
TO:
Return-Path:
<DesignerCouncil-request>
Resent-Message-ID:
<"sqYvN.0.EQA.0l4rn"@ipc>
Subject:
From [log in to unmask] Fri Jun 28 16:
30:15 1996
Original-From:
Tom Kavendek <[log in to unmask]>
X-Loop:
From:
Message-Id:
<199606282124.RAA01809@electron>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
Scott,
You fail to mention trace widths. The thinner the trace, especially
on the outer layers of the board, the more you pay also. (due to yields)
Can you get the remaining 4% routed on the outers?
Is this board just a prototype, or mid-range volume, or large qty production?
These are also factors in the decision.

I was given some basic cost ratios which I'll pass along.
	All std mat'l FR4 180tg
	DSR	1.0
	4 lay	1.7
	6 lay	2.6
	8 lay	3.5
	10 lay	4.5
	12 lay	5.3

I haven't tested these ratios but have used them for estimating.
If this board is large qty prod. or well-defined (meaning it's been through a
revision or is basically known circuitry) then the decision to go to 4 layers
might be a consideration - but the 6 layer would be a better choice from the
quality standpoint - Here's where we all talk about "the cost of quality"...

Tom Kavendek
Lucent Technologies
Bell Labs



ATOM RSS1 RSS2