1 Sample of Moonman’s DFM/CE Book

12.13 PANELIZATION AND DE-PANELIZING

This sub-section is about de-panelization. Though seemingly not a very exciting subject, I find
nearly as many questions asked about it as most others. Not only that, most all designers with
whom I've worked nearly always ask questions, or make wrong assumptions, about panelizing
during the design phase. This is interesting because there are so many other complex and much
more important questions that should be asked - or are there?

Of course, before one can de-panelize, one must panelize. The biggest problem in this relatively
simple step is to work concurrently with board suppliers and assemblers. The issue becomes who
to work with first - the board shop or the assembly house? The answer is very simple. You work
with both starting with the board shop. However, at nearly the same time (just after receiving the
fabricator's input), you work concurrently with the assembly house to compare notes, so to speak.

Each has its panelization and de-panelization requirements - most often for different reasons not
always understood or communicated - one to the other. Very often, the two capabilities do not talk
concurrently with one another. Therefore, the designer needs to get them together or, at the very
least, make objective decisions based on input from each.

Board shops need, so they meet your ever-increasing need for lower cost product, to place as
many boards up on, say, an 18" x 24" panel as possible. Assembly capabilities must have distinct
requirements met as being able to use panels that fit their PnP and other processes. What to do?
Just do it, but do it right!

Because everyone has a point of view and distinct needs, this becomes another important
compromise issue. Again, compromise is what's all about. Making the right decisions at the design
level, using DFM/CE, ensures most negative compromise effects are minimized and acceptable
product is assured.

This whole book is about compromise concerning what goes into very complicated processes and
process management effects. I mean we've discussed hole to pad relationships, component to
edge relationships, solder and soldering requirements, and about a zillion other things affecting a
design choices and product quality/reliability. Panelization is no different.

When consulting with PCB design "experts," I mostly find very talented, well-educated folks never
having set foot in a board shop or even an assembly capability. Therefore, many are left to make
assumptions - something any good engineer never does. So, let's eliminate assumption making
and the problems attendant to it. Besides, even though it is a benefit, design types needn't visit
such capabilities as long as they have the ability to communicate effectively with experts in their
fields - using DFM/CE principles as set forth in this book.

A good designer, working within a well-managed business organization, has most all tools required
to design PCB's. Though it's a never-ending struggle to keep up with all design tool upgrades, the
important tools must be justified and brought on-board. Another important DFM/CE tool, used to
better manage processes, is a good CAM package.

POD DFM/CE - REVISION 3

2 Sample of Moonman’s DFM/CE Book

Valor procedures are detailed in this book's Part 1. Another good package is Innoveda's CAM 350.
Each has very good panelization capabilities. One just costs one hell of a lot more, but does one
hell of a lot more. The following image shows the panelization menu, among others:

Just as most designers have learned they cannot rely totally on their CAD software's auto-route
capability, most understand they simply cannot panelize by just doing it. They must work
concurrently with their suppliers to do it right.

As for the de-paneling process, it is important to understand available options and compromises.
These options and compromises are very important. I have reduced many to ONE for MLB's
supporting complex SMT assemblies.

As I've said many times before, I cannot tolerate pizza cutters when used, on MY MLB's, with fine
pitch or numerous chip devices - especially close to board edges. Too much damage occurs with
"V" scoring and breaking apart panels with this process. This is true of any such crude attempts to
excise, or singulate, individual boards from the panels to which they once belonged.

I have no de-paneling procedures or process photos here, but there is much evidence supporting
my position and I have worked with several process developers concerning this process. Also, I've
witnessed many hours, over several years, of this type de-paneling process and have observed not
one single failure - when the process is properly managed. Simply, buy or find a contract
manufacturer having routing capabilities if you are faced with such a situation. Most everyone is, of
course.

If assembling only small quantities, use designs with pre-routed slots and obtain an under or over
table router capable of finishing the job. Sears even sells them but remember proper tooling, setup,
router-bit selection, installation, and care to change bits when even slightly worn. This certainly
includes drills as well.

POD DFM/CE - REVISION 3

3 Sample of Moonman’s DFM/CE Book

Keep in mind, with routing, there are no second operations required as hand operations to clean up
rough edges left by the pizza cutter or snap a-part activities in the de-panelizing process. There are
no filing or other routing operations required.

Most importantly, there are no second operations required to repair, rework, or otherwise correct
busted devices and solder joint terminations - notwithstanding possible expensive damage to MLB
structures. These factors alone are enough to chill one's blood and make a believer out of
everyone ever having experienced this garbage.

Routing, with vacuum cleaning and ESD capabilities, is a very smooth operation, as I have
demonstrated and used many times before. This depends on how well the process is managed.
This means what equipment is used, how well it is maintained, and how well the router bits are
managed.

You all know what multiple-up panels look like. The following two images show them (note the
small "starter" slot (in the blue circle) used to facilitate final PCBA routing. The third image is from
IPC-2221 depicting fiducial location requirements concurrent with panelization design.

Following them is an image depicting "V" groove dimensional and physical requirements. However,
this image cannot be duplicated as manufacturable because no router-bit can configure such
grooves (only variations) - NO DFM/CE HERE. Discuss concurrently with your qualified board shop
for master drawing and note requirements. After that are photos of typical routing machines
suitable for use in an assembly environment but without required enclosures. Laser routers also
are available but I have no experience with them.

POD DFM/CE - REVISION 3

4 Sample of Moonman’s DFM/CE Book

X-OUTS
We cannot forget this important facet. X-Outs always are a factor in PCB fabrication and assembly.
They affect profitability for both. They also may be process indicators concerning PCB fabrication
capabilities. After all, yields for both fab and assembly are adversely affected when too many are
found.

The first image in the foregoing series shows only one. However, it is part of a four-up panel. One
in four isn't that good. What is? Try one in twenty or fifty depending on board density and
complexity.

Fortunately, the image shown was representative of only one in about forty. With this company, we
demanded high first pass yields from our suppliers and our assembly operations. Some folks don't
get it, as CE is a very important factor in this equation. It starts with DFM and the supplier
evaluation and qualification processes. It all ends up at PnP, etc.

SUMMARY

There is little mechanical shock involved in the routing process provided, again, the process is well
managed. There is much, no matter conditions, associated with snapping or pizza cutting panels.
That's all I have to say about that.

POD DFM/CE - REVISION 3