The problem with standards, is there are so many to choose from
For reasons that are not clear to me, KiCad has gone with Gerber X2. Maybe it was just the easiest option.
I’d also guess Gerber X2 was defined earlier ?
I was underwhelmed by ODB++, Mentor may claim ‘open’ but then bury the info in a complex directory tree.
IPC-2581 sounds quite new, so maybe it will come in KiCad one day…
it is a long time collaboration between Ucamco & KiCAD
KiCad’s founding creator Jean-Pierre Charras contributed substantially to the specification and its review process, and also worked closely with Gerber’s developer Ucamco to ensure the successful implementation of netlist and component attributes in KiCad’s own Gerber X2 output. The output has been fully verified by Ucamco as conforming perfectly to the specification and a sample file is available on the Ucamco download page.
3 Likes
Here’s a less war-like opinion:
https://www.pcdandf.com/pcdesign/index.php/editorial/menu-features/12532-why-ipc-2581-is-the-cad-data-exchange-format-of-today-and-tomorrow
There is no shortage of those who “sing the praises”, far fewer who have adopted it as their primary form of data exchange.
So many that you were able to name … none.
ODB was released in 1995 and ODB++ in 1997. IPC-2581 in March 2004. Gerber X2 in 2013.
There are plenty of such “opinions” about each of the standards mentioned above. It’s not that IPC-2581 is not a good thing, any of the standards mentioned above would be accepted as at least a step in the right direction. But adoption is extremely slow. Old Gerber is safe but for a fab to support any of the other standards they almost have to support them all, so they do, in so far as they usually just convert them to Gerber.
Interesting, the Altium piece says this
APRIL 12, 2016 There’s been a lot of excitement among PCB Designers and Fabricators over the last year about new PCB design-to-manufacturing hand-off. People tend to fall into one of four camps: Stay with gerber RX-274X (the status quo), stay with / switch to ODB++ (Mentor’s format), adopt the upgraded Gerber X2, or adopt the new IPC-2581 standard.
but maybe they mean the IPC-2581B revision they reference later, seems that rev B was a while coming, if it originated in 2004.
A single file that allows BOM manage/merge does have appeal.
IPC-2581 in March 2004
IPC-2581A in May 2012
IPC-2581B in Sept 2013
IPC-2581C in progress
https://www.multi-circuit-boards.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/support/IPC-2581B.pdf
http://www.magazines007.com/pdf/PCBD-Sept2014.pdf
While I’m at it, some people might be interested in the following magazines.
http://www.magazines007.com/
Is it telling that when I go to the web site of the first manufacturer in the member list (http://www.ipc2581.com/corporate-members/) and open File Upload (http://www.ace-pcb.com/index.php/contact-us/file-upload/) it reads:
Data Format Files Accepted - ODB ++, 274D Gerber, 274X Gerber, IPCD356 Net List, Mentor Neutered Net List, HPGL, DXF, PDF, TIFF, DWG, NC Drill, Excellon.
Do you notice something missing?
Can we just agree that there are 3 competing new standards and that it will most likely stay that way?
(Standards don’t go away. Especially not if companies are behind said standards.)
So lets get this thread to a close for now. It seems at least one kicad dev is working on implementing this export format. (The bug is marked as “In Progress”)
At the earliest it can be added to version 6 which is at least two years away. (It might be in nightly builds a bit earlier.)
If you want this format to be part of kicad then ask the devs how you can help them. (I guess they could use testers once the implementation is far enough.)
Don’t get me wrong, I would love to be able to use ipc-2581. But what’s critical for KiCad users is the manufacturer support. I don’t see much of it amongst the potential manufacturers. With “potential” I mean those used by the large part of KiCad user base - hobbyists and small companies - which means cheap. We choose the manufacturer by price, speed, quality etc., not by file formats. Everyone accepts gerbers anyways. Ipc-2581 would be plus, not a requirement.
Even then ipc-2581 would be beneficial because the customer could get rid of the problematic multiple-files-multiple-formats-check-everything-twice-make-mistakes-communicate-with-manufacturer cycle. I would love to see it supported. But as the things are right now, even if KiCad would support it, I couldn’t use it.
Why is everyone always so quick to want to shut down a, so far, polite discussion and yet others rage on for 90+ posts?
The fabs used by the average KiCad user still have trouble with interpreting Gerber correctly.
Meeting some standard can be expensive, purchasing the standard documents, maybe having to join a body and even certification costs.
Not with this standard, if I can interpret correctly what is said in http://www.ipc2581.com/join-associate/.
Hmm. Even corporate membership is free. They must be desperate for market share.
1 Like
What is the latest status of the IPC-2581 export? Has any work been done? Is there a planned release date?
Thanks. Who are the ‘cheap’ manufacturers that do not support IPC-2581?
Pretty much everyone you find if you try to find a cheap(ish) manufacturer. Can you point even one exception? For example from the list in https://pcbshopper.com/ ? I haven’t gone through them but I have visited several manufacturers’ websites and don’t remember seeing ipc-2581 mentioned.