i got complaint from my PCB manufacturer about my design files, this is second time they complaint about this problem
they said some PADS are filled with traces or polygons, they need to rework my Gerber every time
i uploaded two pictures they sent to me below, in which they show the problem in official kicad phoenix connectors footprint, in thier software it shows pads:0, traces 247 , that is the problem
sorry for late reply,
kicad v5.1.5
for teardrop i used external plugin :from NilujePerchut/
U1 - edited pad size of official kicad footprint TQFP for hand soldering / low quality pick and place machine
U2,U3,U4 - digikey footprint
they complain on J2,J3,j4 (circled in picture), which are kicad official footprint, untouched i didnât edited that. pls check i uploaded the files
Do you mind telling us who the PCB company is? Otherâs may have experience with them. Also, I poked around a couple random phoenix footprints and saw nothing unusual. Can you specify which ones? Also, a screen shot of:
Quite normal especially for through hole connectors (there we typically have a rectangular pad to indicate pin 1 and oval pads for all others)
In this case take a look at the MSTB series connectors in connector_phoenix.
Looks perfectly normal to me.
While not supported out of the box there are extensions to add them. However, the use of such an extension might make gerbers strange so if this is indeed how teardrops were added then this detail might be important.
Actually, I didnât pay much attention to the THT footprints.
But U1-U4 silk doesnât look normal to me, especially the angled pin 1 indicators.
SMT IC FP rect pads arenât normal and I donât think we have tiny silk marks at the ends of SMT cap and resistor footprints.
That being said, itâs all pretty much guesswork as long as the OP only gives us these two âscreenshotsâ.
U1 - edited pad size of official kicad footprint TQFP for hand soldering / low quality pick and place machine
U2,U3,U4 - digikey footprint
they complain on J2,J3,j4 (circled in picture), which are kicad official footprint, untouched i didnât edited that. pls check i uploaded the files
sorry for late reply, i updated the question with your information
i canât put company name here, i need to ask their permission, they are long time supplier for our company,
Otherâs may have experience with them
yes, he said every time if someone send design file from kicad, he need to rework, some times he reworked all pad from that pcb, he said he donât see problem like this in orcad or eagle , he said he wonât complain the customer because customer simply switch PCB manufacturer
If KiCad is really the one to blame it would be everyoneâs interest to get this fixed. Could you ask for an exact technical explanation from the manufacturer?
they said some PADS are filled with traces or polygons
We need more information about this. I have a hunch about this, but why do other manufacturers accept this without a hickup if itâs problematic?
Maybe they expect flashes for all pads, for some reason.
I would also like to know if they accept âextended X2â format and if it could help. It may include some metadata for pads.
EDIT: Also, if my memory serves me correctly, older versions of KiCad generated gerbers so that rounded corners, both in pads and in zones, were made with polygon + bunch of lines. Rounded pads had a rounded polygon and something which looked like traces on top of the border of the pad. I canât see that in v5.1.6, though.
The shapes highlighted in your screenshots are not available as primitives in Gerber. So the question is how you represent them.
Plenty of CAD systems output âpainted padsâ. The shape is made up with a jumble of traces. This is a paid for the fabricator as he must reassemble the pads from the jumble. Fabricators hate painted pads. They are evil. If KiCad Gerbers were to contain painted pads then your fabricator is right to complain. However, AFAIK, KiCad does not paint pads.
KiCad outputs these shapes as a single polygon. Nice and clean. And indeed, in X2 these polygons are clearly identified as SMD pads. Completely unequivocal. I do not see what there is to complain about. If you fabricator has a problem with this, the problem is with his software, not with KiCad.
This would be much easier if we could have an actual problematic gerber file to look into. And, as I said, the exact technical explanation from the manufacturer.
