DEX eval by free_electron

[BradC]

Monkeh - I fail to understand why you belabour this point.  It's ONLY $49 for the full package!

It may be only $49, but the *advertising* is "free for non-commercial use". If you took that to consumer affairs they'd tear it apart because it's not "free for non-commercial use" but "not actually usable unless you pay for it". It doesn't matter how much you beat on it, if it can't produce an output that is actually usable then it's not "free for non-commercial use", it's not actually usable. Crippleware is a good way to describe it.

It's a small point, but it's all about words. It's not about the cost, it's about the false advertising and mis-labelling.

[ozwolf]

I was able to produce a schematic, board layout, and 3D image with no difficulty.  Then I printed the copper layer image with my laser printer, did the toner transfer thing and etched a board, all at home.  I found it useful, so then I decided to purchase the subscription.  I didn't need the gerber file to send off to a board manufacturer to evaluate the software package.  I really don't get what the problem is.  You can argue about semantics of "free for non-commercial use" if you like.  Producing a gerber file to send the design to a board manufacturer is NOT required to determine if the software is useful to you.

If you are non-commercial, but require gerber output, then stump up with the $49.  It's a bargain.

Ozwolf

[Monkeh]

Never said it was required to determine if the product is worth the cost, especially at this price.

It is, however, required for the free, non-commercial use license to actually be useful.

I am not, never have been, and never will be complaining about the price. Nor will I ever be stumping up $49, $39, or $anything. Iliya ensured that ages ago.

[IconicPCB]

Dismissed

[monksod]

I'd just like to say thank you to Illya for extending the eevblog discount. For some of us, $10 makes all the difference. I've sort of followed this thread a bit and Illya seems to hammer down bugs & even incorporate ideas & suggestions instantly.

[bigmik]

Is the $39 DEX link still active?

I cant connect to http://wwww.pcb.software/purchase/EEVbog

Regards,

Mick

[PA0PBZ]

Is the $39 DEX link still active?

I cant connect to http://wwww.pcb.software/purchase/EEVbog

Regards,

Mick

It connects when you take one 'w' out of wwww. but then it says it can't find a file.
Better wait for Iliya to fix it.

[Iliya]

Is the $39 DEX link still active?

I cant connect to http://wwww.kov.com/purchase/EEVbog

Regards,

Mick

It connects when you take one 'w' out of wwww. but then it says it can't find a file.
Better wait for Iliya to fix it.

The $39 link is http://kov.com/purchase/EEVblog

[Iliya]

Converting a Buried Via to a Blind Via

In the latest version of AutoTRAX I have implemented buried and blind vias. They are all optional and are set using the layers panel. It’s a checkbox at the top of the panel that you check for buried vias. Buried vias are only enabled when you have three or more electrical layers.

As DEX generates vias automatically, it also automatically set up the layer usage for the vias.

I am slightly perplexed that there seems to be a major distinction between blind and buried vias. To me the only difference is that one end of the via is on the top or bottom layer and so is visible. I think of both as effectively optimized vias that do not extend their usage through layers if they are not needed.

Question: is there any requirement to have a via that connects to 2 inner layers also be extended to either the top or bottom layer and so be converted from a buried via to a blind via?

[firewalker]

Some time vias can be used as test points. Also it could be cheaper (?) not to have blind vias.

Alexander.

[Iliya]

I have added an option in the vias properties to extend buried vias to the top or bottom.

Extended

[Iliya]

Some time vias can be used as test points. Also it could be cheaper (?) not to have blind vias.

Alexander.

I've added the option of extending a buried via to either or both board surfaces. Still not sure why anybody would do it but I've added it anyway. Thanks for the feedback.

[Monkeh]

I am slightly perplexed that there seems to be a major distinction between blind and buried vias. To me the only difference is that one end of the via is on the top or bottom layer and so is visible. I think of both as effectively optimized vias that do not extend their usage through layers if they are not needed.

You need to think of them in terms of manufacturing, instead. Then things should become rather clearer.

[Iliya]

I am slightly perplexed that there seems to be a major distinction between blind and buried vias. To me the only difference is that one end of the via is on the top or bottom layer and so is visible. I think of both as effectively optimized vias that do not extend their usage through layers if they are not needed.

You need to think of them in terms of manufacturing, instead. Then things should become rather clearer.

Can you please explain more? Thanks.

[Christopher]

The way you should do test points is not to use vias. Setup a library component with  a square pad with solder mask relief, no solder paste, and set the component in the library to be a testpoint.

Then in the software press a button to export an Excel list of all components setup as testpoints with x, y locations (from a specified origin), the type of testpont and names.

This would be a very useful feature to go on your future todo list.

(disclaimer: I am a test engineer)

[Monkeh]

I am slightly perplexed that there seems to be a major distinction between blind and buried vias. To me the only difference is that one end of the via is on the top or bottom layer and so is visible. I think of both as effectively optimized vias that do not extend their usage through layers if they are not needed.

You need to think of them in terms of manufacturing, instead. Then things should become rather clearer.

Can you please explain more? Thanks.

When the PCB is manufactured any holes which do not pass all the way through must be drilled and plated prior to laminating the board. >2 layer boards are laminations of one or more cores (double-sided copper clad fibreglass sheets, very solid) with sheets of 'prepreg' (heat-activated resin bound fibreglass matting) and copper foil. Only cores can be drilled and plated prior to lamination.

The 6-layer stackup in your screenshots is highly unlikely and would require numberous additional steps. It cannot be done after lamination, and it would require multiple drilling, plating, and lamination steps. This is.. not normal.

Nobody's going to use that feature. I suspect very few will use any blind or buried vias at all.

This will give you a quick introduction to a 4-layer fabrication process:

[ozwolf]

Nobody's going to use that feature. I suspect very few will use any blind or buried vias at all.

There are absolutely a ton of features/facilities in MS Word, Excel and other popular software packages that are offered but rarely used.  I'm very sure that all of us have had an experience where we wanted to do "something" and were pleased that the software author had the foresight to create/include that feature.

I'm very pleased that Iliya responded to the request by a user and provided the facility.  This may be the feature that you may need one day, not today.  How great will it be that it's already been provided.

Ozwolf

[Monkeh]

Nobody's going to use that feature. I suspect very few will use any blind or buried vias at all.

There are absolutely a ton of features/facilities in MS Word, Excel and other popular software packages that are offered but rarely used.  I'm very sure that all of us have had an experience where we wanted to do "something" and were pleased that the software author had the foresight to create/include that feature.

I'm very pleased that Iliya responded to the request by a user and provided the facility.  This may be the feature that you may need one day, not today.  How great will it be that it's already been provided.

Ozwolf

I'm curious who asked for it. You could save ten times the cost of DEX by not getting such an odd stackup made.

[IconicPCB]

Monkeh,

While a typical enthusiast might not use blind and buried vias, they ( the vias ) are never the less an essential feature in high density designs.

Multilayer production does call for many more steps than conventional double sided work especially if it involves blind and buried features or embedded resistors and or capacitors.

I have fabricated ( physically made ) multi layer boards in Rogers material incorporating cavity structures. A demanding but not an impossible task.

I therefore welcome Dex' ability to produce blind and buried vias as a natural extension of its capabilities.

[Monkeh]

It's not the blind and buried ones I'm talking about, it's the 'oh, I'm just going to randomly turn a buried via into a blind via through x number of layers for the hell of it' option which makes little sense.

Especially when you could just have proper stack and via control.

[ozwolf]

Surely that's the board designer's responsibility?

[Monkeh]

Let's reword it..

Why do we need an option to 'extend' a buried via to the surface instead of just defining a blind via connecting the desired layers?

A few more points..

DEX sets up vias automatically? Does it have a sane method to tell it 'no, you can't do a buried or blind via' on a board wide scale?

And how exactly do we do buried vias on 3 layers?

[IconicPCB]

Design is an iterative process.

Extending versus pre-specifying is a valid choice.

[Iliya]

It's not the blind and buried ones I'm talking about, it's the 'oh, I'm just going to randomly turn a buried via into a blind via through x number of layers for the hell of it' option which makes little sense.

Especially when you could just have proper stack and via control.

It's not random, it's a deliberate choice by the designer to do so and it's not 'for the hell of it', again it is a deliberate choice. You don't have to do it! So, if you don't check the option then it works perfectly as you wanted; what can be wrong with that?

[Monkeh]

It's not the blind and buried ones I'm talking about, it's the 'oh, I'm just going to randomly turn a buried via into a blind via through x number of layers for the hell of it' option which makes little sense.

Especially when you could just have proper stack and via control.

It's not random, it's a deliberate choice by the designer to do so and it's not 'for the hell of it', again it is a deliberate choice. You don't have to do it! So, if you don't check the option then it works perfectly as you wanted; what can be wrong with that?

And again I ask, why would you want this checkbox when you can simply specify the via to connect to the appropriate layers?

It makes no sense. It's also likely to end up costing a small fortune to have made.