Category Archives: Laying It Out

Off-grid thoughts from a burned-out designer turned editor.

New Zuken Tool Offers Look, and Questions, for Future

Posted on by
Reply

SANTA CLARA, CA – What role will artificial intelligence truly play in electronics design, and what will the impact be on hardware engineers?

Zuken took a step toward answering that question today with its announcement at PCB West of a new AI-based tool for printed circuit place-and-route. Yet the first public mention of AIPR for CR-8000 – the actual rollout will come in the first quarter next year – poses not only a dramatic vision for a highly automated future of design but a host of new questions as well.

The new tool itself is an extension of Design Force, Zuken’s layout, routing and verification tool within the CR-8000 platform. It’s AI, explained Kyle Miller, Ph.D., who architected the engine, involves all three basic types of machine learning: supervised, unsupervised and reinforcement. AIPR stands for Autonomous Intelligent Place and Route, and like previously announced AI-based CAD tools, it starts with routing. The “Basic Brain” performs so-called smart routing by means of exposure to Zuken’s database of PCB designs built in CR-8000. Over time, it mimics human routing, with channels organized in logical ways. Smart placement is next, at an undisclosed time.

According to Bob Potock, vice president of sales and marketing, Zuken will add IPC-2581 capability as part of the next-generation Dynamic Brain, allowing designs from other ECAD systems to be incorporated and learned.

The first two stages are working up to Autonomous Brain, a goal-based utility that the product designers, including Miller, say will use text-based inferencing whereby it detects descriptions of different parts of boards. According to Miller, four functionality levels will be used to inform local and planning decisions.

The system, notes Steve Watt, manager of PCB engineer, can learn from both good and bad designs. “The brain can be untaught if it is sent a dirty design,” he said. Zuken has tested it on about 100 designs, most of the high-speed, digital variety.

Adds Miller: “PCBs are complex. They involve numerical data, geometrical data, the layers in the board, text, constraints … Autonomous Brain is multi-modal; it combines all of these data and extracts the designer’s intent.”

With designers in high demand due to the aging out of many veterans and the length of time and amount of knowledge it takes to develop expertise, some of the concerns about AI replacing humans are eased. But can AI-based tools be realistically used in anything but local environments? Zuken is still working through the issues of cloud-based system, as users point to security concerns. (Miller will be among a group of experts tackling this issue on a free panel session titled AI in Electronics: What Can We Expect? on Sept. 20 at PCB West.)

And how are time-based licenses affected? Miller indicated it takes about five days to learn to use AIPR. But once mastered, Zuken tests showed it eliminated autorouter setup time, and cut autorouting time to 30 sec. from 15 min. Potock noted the conundrum of issuing licenses for products that, on paper, reduce the time of use from hours or days to mere seconds. At this time, it appears Zuken will make AIPR available as a perpetual license.

Given the broad industry resistance to using autorouters, it remains to be seen how tools like AIPR (and others, which are coming right behind) will be integrated into general industry use. That said, the trend in board design is away from the traditional dedicated specialist, toward layout and placement being a small function of engineers’ overall responsibilities. That shift may finally tilt the field toward automation, and if Zuken’s vision is correct, even near-complete abdication to the machine.

Zuken will exhibit AIPR at the PCB West exhibition on Sept. 20 (show hours are 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.) at the Santa Clara (CA) Convention Center. A webinar is planned for November.

So Long, Mate!

Posted on by

Sad news: Andy Kowalewski, a longtime friend and speaker at PCB West, passed away Feb. 4.

Andy was hugely popular among his PCB design industry colleagues. He was instrumental in forging the IPC Designer Council ties between Australia and the US. And his knowledge was only surpassed by his charm and never-ending kindness.

He will be missed.

Conductor Sizing Software: How Much is Knowledge Worth?

Posted on by

My name is Mike Jouppi and I am the sole owner of a software application for sizing electrical traces in Printed Circuit Boards.  A description of the application is here.  

TraceSizingCalculator_rev1Download

I would like to sell this software application and all of the material that went into creating it.  My company has developed 68 design charts.  It also has the capability to create charts for any technology and tools to import the results into the software application.

The electronics design community has started to recognize the importance of the pre-design phase of conductor sizing.  Altium has incorporated IPC-2152 for trace sizing and has training on the topic.  There are many calculators on the Web that are applying IPC-2152 design charts.

Unfortunately, very few understand the physics behind what they are employing as a tool and continue to add confusion to the electronics design community.

If you are interested in contacting me for a conversation on this topic and having a discussion about purchasing my company’s software, my email and phone number are provided below.

Mike Jouppi

Thermal Management LLC

303-359-3280

www.thermalman.com

Done Deal

Posted on by

The Printed Circuit Engineering Association (PCEA) today announced it has closed the acquisition of the functional assets of UP Media Group Inc., including its industry leading publications and trade shows.

The deal, which was announced during the PCB West conference and exhibition last October, includes the annual PCB West and PCB East trade shows; PRINTED CIRCUIT DESIGN & FAB (PCD&F) and CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY magazine; the PCB UPdate digital newsletter; the PCB Chat podcast series; the PCB2Day workshops and webinars; and Printed Circuit University, the dedicated online training platform.

Printed Circuit Engineering Association (PCEA) (pcea.net) is a nonprofit association that promotes printed circuit engineering as a profession and encourages, facilitates, and promotes the exchange of information and integration of new design concepts through communications, seminars, workshops, and professional certification through a network of local and regional PCEA-affiliated groups. PCEA serves the global PCB community through print, digital and online products, as well as live and virtual events. Membership is free to individuals in the electronics industry.

All in on Altium?

Posted on by

Autodesk’s bid — declined, so far — for Altium took me by surprise. In retrospect, it probably shouldn’t have.

As I’ve noted many times, I fully expect Altium to be acquired. It’s just I was looking more in the direction of Dassault and PTC, the big mechanical CAD (MCAD) players. I should kept Autodesk in my field of view, especially after it acquired Eagle five years ago. I think I was lulled to sleep, as that was a small acquisition and Autodesk hasn’t made much of a push since to burrow into the ECAD space.

The proposal was hefty, valuing Altium at $3.91 billion. That’s not much lower than Siemens paid for the considerably larger and more profitable Mentor Graphics in 2107. Yet Altium thinks it can do better.

It just might. Autodesk’s bid prices each Altium share at AU$38.50, a 41.5% premium over Altium’s closing price on Jun. 4 and a premium of over 47.4% to the one-month volume-weighted average price. Prior to the offering, however, Altium’s stock had peaked at a 52-week high of AU$39.34 in last October. So at $38.50, Autodesk was actually underbidding a bit.

An Autodesk-Altium merger wouldn’t change the face of the ECAD industry immediately. Altium would still run neck-and-neck with Zuken for third place in revenues behind Cadence and Mentor. But it would give Altium the backing of a industry leader in 3-D CAD, and accelerate the inevitable MCAD-ECAD merger.

New Semi Group Needs to Talk Bigger Goals than Just Subsidies

Posted on by

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.” ? Rahm Emanuel

Indeed.

In the wake of the latest components inventory crisis, the lobbyists are out in full-force trolling for subsidies for the semiconductor industry.

And if the usual suspects weren’t enough, many of the blue chip (no pun intended) companies that make up the Semiconductor Industry Association and SEMI this week launched yet another industry organization, the Semiconductors in America Coalition. the group supports the allocation of $50 billion by the US government (read: taxpayers) to fund advanced semiconductor manufacturing. The announcement came at almost the same time – coincidence? – IBM reported successful development of 2nm process using a 300mm wafer.

That prompted a longtime friend and industry observer to suggest, “rather than spending money directly, the US and state governments offer the same deal to the supply chain as a whole as do the South Korean, Chinese, and Taiwanese governments. A holistic response is needed. Maybe a carrot to keep 2nm tech onshore.

“We need to bring a number of critical technologies back; chips, packaging, HDI, transposers and even certain components,” he went on.

“Apple has been using black solder mask for decades now to prevent piracy and it has worked. Their keiritsu approach works. Keeping key technologies within the kimono, as the Japanese say, and bringing those key industrial components back, would help to reaffirm North American industrial security and protect our supply chain.”

I can see where he’s coming from, but Apple really doesn’t have the scale of the other communications and computing OEMs; it’s share of the worldwide smartphone market is about 15%, and it has only 8% of the PC market. It’s probably not the model to emulate in that regard. More interesting is its recent decision to go full bore with its own M1 processor, which is made by TMSC.

I know Samsung and TMSC are also working on (close to?) 2nm. I don’t think IBM alone has the scale anymore to be a difference-maker, which is where the other fabs need to step up. They all smell an opportunity, and it’s hard to blame them for trying to get their hands on “free” money.

What I haven’t seen is an overarching policy proposed by the various trade groups/lobbyists promoting onshore wafer production. It seems more piecemeal to me, with new associations stacked atop legacy ones, all promoting the same message (subsidies) but with no promise of tangible returns.

I’m not against government subsidies for critical tech – and semi is absolutely one of those – but it seems to me they should start with a goal and then fill in the rest (processes, funding, etc.).

Sans a clear objective, the game plan will not only be expensive and a hard sell, but doomed to break down.

US Semiconductor Independence Comes a Little Late for EI

Posted on by

“Rebuilding the US packaging industry would not only insulate chip companies and their customers from political risk, it could also help them break free of the long cycles involved in creating new chips, said Tony Levi, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Southern California.”

Reading that, I can’t help but think of Endicott Interconnect Technology and what might have been.

It must have been 15 years ago when I toured EI, the one-time IBM campus where bare board fabrication, assembly and chip packaging all took place. So self-contained was the operation, in fact, they had their own laminate treater.

EI was where the HyperBGA and CoreEZ high-speed flip-chip BGA packages were invented, as well as custom laminates for semiconductor packages. The engineering talent was second to none. They really could do it all.

What they never mastered, however, was the right scale. Agreements to license their products went nowhere. The layout complicated process flow: I remember having to duck to avoid banging my head as I would my way through the partially subterranean assembly facility. Dwindling revenues coupled with the high cost of doing business in New York ultimately scuttled the company, and the assets were sold to TTM in 2019.

With today’s emphasis from President Biden on down on rebuilding the US semiconductor industry, however, one can’t help but wonder whether EI was the right idea, just 20 years ahead of its time.

Passive Demand Anything But Passive

Posted on by

The component distributor TTI has released its first quarter market report and the outlook is ominous: 28 passive electronic component types have increasing lead times, while 24 saw price increases. Tantalum molded chip cap lead times are now up to 32 weeks.

Lead times for most connectors remain stable, although prices are climbing. The exception is TE, whose lead times are climbing.

Memory supplies are also generally getting tighter.

With some component manufacturers now requesting 18 month forecasts, the risk for double-bookings is on the rise. Beware! Someone always gets stuck holding the bag of chips.

https://www.futureelectronics.com/resources/market-conditions-report/memory

‘We are Stronger by What Unites Us’: An Open Letter from PCEA and SMTA

Posted on by

My name is Stephen V. Chavez CID+ and I serve as the President of the newly formed Printed Circuit Engineering Association (PCEA). PCEA is a trade association for professionals in the electronics industry. There are several other trade associations, some large or small, some old or new that currently exist. We seek to affiliate in a cooperative manner with each one. I have observed that we all attempt to serve the greater good in the electronics industry. Each group has evolved, grown and hopefully we all seek to coexist.

I know at the PCEA many individuals are involved and have historically been involved with IPC, SMT, IEEE, and many other associations. We have served and continue to serve in each other’s ranks. In particular I have the distinguished privilege to serve as an IPC-CID+ Master Instructor. I also serve as a volunteer on some of the IPC standard committees. I am honored for the privilege to serve in their ranks.

A recent column [Ed. note: Because the column was not in PCD&F/CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY, we are not linking to it here.] I read takes issue with the efforts of IPC in our industry, and while well-intended, I do not recognize the picture it paints. Among other things, the author suggests a lack of contact between IPC and the American educational system. In fact, IPC has a robust college outreach program across the US, and dedicated staff to support it. Keep in mind, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic has slowed many good efforts to engage with engineers and future engineers worldwide, and this is no exception.

Moreover, in my opinion the best path to take is to volunteer our time – as we in the PCEA are doing – to educate our colleagues, the newer members of our industry, and the future
ones. Note the emphasis on the word “our.” IPC is a reflection of ourselves. Its staff, like
that of PCEA’s and many other associations and professional societies, comes from industry. We are all evolving and attempting to serve the industry at large in so many ways. It is a tribute to IPC that it has successfully navigated the changing industry so well over 60 years, and we all owe them a debt of gratitude and allegiance for so many of their great achievements. I once communicated a perspective about the IPC that bears repeating, “IPC is not a Them, rather, it is an Us!”

SMTA – Tanya Martin, Global Executive Director
SMTA has been fortunate to be serving the global electronics manufacturing and design
industry since 1984. We support professionals by facilitating access to national and international communities of experts, as well as accumulated research and training materials from those dedicated to advancing the industry. Some of our most important work is done within our local chapters (national and international) in connecting professionals for education, training, and fellowship. We have invested great resources into the college and university programs and support many SMTA student chapters around the US to be a bridge between industry and academia.

SMTA and PCEA both agree that IPC along with other trade organizations such as SMTA, IEEE, EIPC, others including the newly formed PCEA can coexist and collectively make this industry better. Each of us has the potential to serve the participants. Many of those participants are involved with several trade associations. We have seen IPC successfully reach into the community, academia, professional development, government advocacy, standards development, engineering, manufacturing, OEM business, contract manufacturing and the list can go on… The same thing can be said about the other trade associations. We believe we are all better served by our common welfare and the things that unite us are bigger than the things that divide us. We at the newly formed PCEA are ardent supporters of the IPC and their mission within the industry. We seek to affiliate and be proponents of their mission to serve the electronics industry. We encourage everyone to respect them not for their perfection but for the general overall benefit that our industry receives on so many fronts.

If faced with the question of whether to be givers or takers to the industry, we choose “givers.” Like all the trade associations, IPC is organic and adaptable, addressing the needs of those they serve the best they can. We are grateful and support their mission!

Stephen V. Chavez CID+
Chairman, PCEA
Collaborate, Inspire and Educate
Cell (602)369?3349
[email protected]
www.pce?a.org