Bravo Rene, Geber merge needs to merge also aperture tables and dealing with offsets and units and excellon requires new zigzag sequence ordering beside a new and common tool table for all input designs. I already experienced a (German) contract etcher what refused my design oders merged to a single multi panel. Same pcb order as single boards with setup fee for each - no problem. Some etchers also do not have have puls currents to add galvanized copper why they have to mix the panels for similar percentage copper use to avoid mountains of copper. They refuse customers for that reason
I would also like to unpack the “sorry you’re too dim to figure out how to rename a file” statement:
I am a student. I am trying to learn. I humbly requested assistance with furthering my knowledge in the field of design and engineering; and you call me dim?
I’m sure that given your level of experience (albeit that I don’t like to speculate), that this may seem like a stupid question. But it is a daunting task to me and considering that you’ve never walked a day in my shoes and therefore have no point of reference; perhaps you should look at exercising some constraint and tolerance, moving forward. Because the knowledge that I could gain from a simple thread such as this, could be shared with others. Others might learn, and others might grow and be inspired to become engineers and further the knowledge in this field of study.
But to ridicule someone, for simply asking a question seems counterproductive and makes you quite a small thinker.
Was it strictly necessary?
Are you sure you addressed this to the right person?
It was meant to be addressed to @halachal, twas no directed at you good sir. Thank you for your kind assistance.I really do appreciate the input:grinning:
Out of curiosity, did you check out the Hackaday article posted by Rene? Was the PCB Panelizer software mentioned in that article helpful?
Here’s another Hackaday thread with practical information. I’m the one who got it to work under Linux, mentioned in the thread. (The software is written in C# and can be run under Mono.) However I only used it to combine two copies of the same board. OPs problem is harder.
1 Like
I’ve used the panelizer from http://blog.thisisnotrocketscience.nl/projects/pcb-panelizer/ a few times now. I use it specifically to put a reference frame for stencil alignment on a board - i.e. two (or more) different board layouts on one (mini) panel. There are footprints on the ‘frame’ which are drill holes WITH a paste layer. These appear as ‘holes’ in the stencil which I can align with the pcb using metal dowel pins. Very simple example boards -
It needs a bit of tweaking with filenames but otherwise works well. I have only managed to get it running in Windows (I use a Mac but I have a Virtual Box Windows environment). I have not tried using Mono.
2 Likes
He’s cooling off for a day. Longer next time.
1 Like
You need to pause and take some deep breaths…
Merge of Gerber files has some fish-hooks.
Open any Gerber file, and you may start to grasp what those could be.
You have to manage X,Y,DCODE info, and avoid any conflicts in all 3 of those.
If you cannot import to a specific XY, your varsity friends will have to all agree on an absolute origin for each design, and they need to export/plot in origin relative mode.
ie you can work around a XY offset merge, which leaves DCODES to map.
I’m not sure you can all agree on DCODES, as those usually assign automatically/invisibly.
I fired up GerbV and tried quick import of differing gerbers…
( I tested using gerbv version 2.6A Compiled on Jul 13 2016 at 20:44:13 Windows build
There is no XY import offset, so as mentioned above, you need to generate each PCB where it will finally merge to.
GerbV does have a vital
File.Export.RS-274X Merge(Gerber) that says
export (merge visible gerber layers) to a RS-274X (Gerber) file.
and that does take two+ loaded files, on 2+ layers, and create a single gerber.
It seems to also manage DCODE issues, but you should carefully check that, by Import files, Export merged, and then load merged-single file again and query a few line widths on each design.
eg I query one item by select, right mouse Display Properties to get this
Object type: Line
Exposure: On
Aperture used: D83
Aperture type: circle
Diameter: 8
Start: (8963.7, -659.4)
Stop: (9026.7, -596.4)
Length: 89.0955 (sum: 335.672)
Layer name: <unnamed layer>
Net label: <unlabeled net>
In file: TestGerbV_Merge2.gbr
Do a quick test pass, of one layer, and if that look ok, take more care on the XY allocates, and do all layers.
Addit1: You will also need to import/export(merge) excellon Drill files, of course 
Addit2: I also find a download link for Windows build, GerbV 2.7.0 (Jan2019), & DXF version here
( Does not seem much different to 2.6a in the merge areas )
Most manufacturers do an electrical test, this can be using the netlist as a reference. Merging netlists from two different packges will be “interesting”
You can shift a layer in gerbv after import. so its not mandatory to export original gerber with an offset.
I’ve used this trick couple of times in my learning days… using freeware pin limited version of diptrace. split my schematic in two parts; routed individually with jumper footprint for tracks to be combined; exported individual gerbers; exported merged gerber from gerbv… works great till date…
only issue OP can face is with the excellon/drill file… some cad tools export with drill table and some don’t… D codes will vary…
Ah, yes, under Layer.EditLayer.Translation, you can dX,dY. I missed that in my quick test.
However, with many layers to manage, on many boards, I think it’s better for the OP’s friends to set the origins
once on each of their boards, then all subsequent plots and merges will be correct.
I think GerbV lacks a means to move Excellon, making original origin more important. ?
I agree, my response to @dchisholm was sarcastic and immature, and I apologise. I got defensive because the content of his comment implied that my time constraints were insignificant. I’m sorry.
Thank you all for the tremendous help and support! There is a ton of input here and I’ll get right into trying these solutions. I’ll revert back as soon as I have some results. THANK YOU ALL!
What a wonderful community of designers and a very interesting spectrum of personalities behind the brilliant minds that make this forum entertaining and educational!
The answer by @dchisholm is consistent with his particular sense of humor.
I would assume that he did not want to imply that your constraints are insignificant. I read it as “be prepared to offer something in return for an extension / increased price tag”.
If it is indeed a project that is part of education then the price might be a slightly reduced number of “points” or the need to do some extra additional work. (It would be highly unethical if your educator really would let this slide by you doing him a personal favor of any kind)
In any case the main price to pay will be to own up to the mistake(s) made. To your friends, your coworkers, your professor, your sponsor, … Who ever is impacted by you starting too late. (No matter what happens such an important task as preparing an order should never be left for the last day. At least a dry run should be ready long before the deadline especially if you never did such a task before.)
One of my professors had a saying: “Experience is realizing earlier that you started too late”
3 Likes
There is one other factor that does not seem to have been addressed in the discussion
What design tools, other than kicad, we’re used for the layouts? There may be scope to load the designs as sublayouts into a suitable layout editor after which the final Gerber’s can be exported, depending on the board formats
I know that it’s off topic here, but depending on the number of boards to be manufactured, an “order pooling” service would be the right choice here? If the quantity is small, and the designs are in “popular” technology (number of layers, substrate type etc) it might be the best option here; you can save on shipping costs, but the unit price should be much lower than having individually manufactured boards (even if 2 designs combined into one, which the PCB manufacturers do not actually like and tend to charge more). Just my $0,02.
1 Like
Even pooling service calculate setup price per design file and can use the film only once why they have average high initial prices for each board. We frequently deal with situations like this. Here is typical multi panel with average sizes of 0,4x0,6m what makes sense if you order your boards quantities in square meters. Doing so, requries close agreements with the pcb etchers representative who has to inform you about the used raw material sizes and approve used panel dimensions. Many manufacturers not only dislike and reject those customers, they are simple not able to etch custom multi panels. The reason is, that puls plating power supplies for galvanizing are extremly expensive. Those supplies are switching supplies paralleled with syncronized phase shifted circuits. DC Output is typically 1V with kiloamperes. Appropriate puls patterns control copper distribution for galvanizing from 18um to 35um. To ensure quality, many manufacturers have to add copper pattern zones to their production panels between the user board outlines what needs to be trashed when panel finished. Thats the reason from want not to can not.
nevertheless there are several manufacturers who process such designs without bellyache and typical customers of them are small pooling services. They start their business like SheldonNice with pooling the designs “for a couple of varsity friends”. Friends become customers and pooling service grants directly online access to feed drilling machines and etching lines. If bussines grows, they consider running own production lines an a new pcb manufacturer is born. For Europe, many of the manufacturers disapeared for last decades instead doing the shocking investments for new production equippment. If not, many changed to be only pooling service without production (and cutomers do not recognize)
1 Like