Plated slot

Hello!

I’m trying to design a board with a DC connector, which needs some plated slot, not really “hole shaped”, since the leg of the components are not “circular”. I think is common for this type of components.

I have attached a screenshot of the package view in Eagle: I added the plated slot in the milling level (the blue one), with the shape they need to be, but I am not sure (at all :smiley: ) that this is the correct way of doing, and will not generate problems with gerber and production.


[attachment=0]DC-plug-plated-slots.png[/attachment]


Can you please help me with an example if possible? I'm kind of noooob in the PCB art!

Thank you very much for your support.
Gionata ![DC-plug-plated-slots.png|1016x790](upload://mNqezjR3Mry1F9FaclyqXnV3XS0.png)

Hello Gion,



Thought I would give it a shot, I haven’t tried it myself personally but this looks ok. If you use the Seeed Fusion Gerber CAM file then any information in the milling layer is exported to the outline layer or Gerber mechanical layer. You can confirm that it has been generated correctly by checking the mechanical layer a Gerber viewer.



Another note, it would help if you remove the drill hole as well just so the engineers know which one to follow. Usually, they will follow the milling slots if it is obvious you need it, but it is better to remove any doubt.



Seeed Fusion Eagle CAM file:

<LINK_TEXT text=“http://support.seeedstudio.com/knowledg … from-eagle”>http://support.seeedstudio.com/knowledgebase/articles/1176949-how-to-generate-gerber-and-drill-files-from-eagle</LINK_TEXT>

Hello Carmer,



thanks for your answer. What do you mean with:



How should I do it in Eagle? The pad itself cannot be removed (it’s connection point of course)…



This is the GML mechanical layer in a gerber viewer:


[attachment=0]dc_jack.png[/attachment]


Do you think it's ok?
I have the same concerns about the micro USB connector below the DC jack: the cutout in this case is just "outlined", not filled. Is it good anyway?? Or do I have to modify the package of that device?

Thank you very much!
Gionata ![dc_jack.png|609x815](upload://e8HHfN5sOrAERP6BUf5lNqVYPvg.png)

Yup, that looks ok. The only thing I would mention is that the outline is probably better since it defines the boarder of the slot better. The engineers will follow it so that the slot does not extend past the center of this line. If the shape is filled, then there is room for doubt.



Regarding the other point, if there is both a drill hole and a milling slot overlapping on the same point, then the CAM engineers may be unsure as to which one you want them to follow. Drill or Mill? So, if you remove the drill holes from the drill (44) and hole (45) layers then this should remove the holes from the Gerber files. The pad can be left alone, there’s no problem with that.

OK so I have removed the filled polygon, so that only the line remains for the cutout.



I’m sorry but I cannot understand how to remove the holes without removing also the pad… the layer 44 and 45 are not “editable” in Eagle. I think they are just the result of the component you place, along with their holes and drills.



Now this is what I get from YOUR gerber viewr online:


[attachment=1]holes2.png[/attachment]


This is the TXT file, where the holes are generated from the CAM job, and the mechanical layer

[attachment=0]holes3.png[/attachment]
[size=150]

They should be ok, BUT THE LAST TIME I ORDERED A BOARD LIKE THIS IT WAS WRONG.[/size]


I already ordered a board with this gerber from you and what I got was wrong! Holes instead of drills. So I don’t want to do the same mistake again.



Thank you very much for you support.





P.S. I have emailed also fusion@seeed.cc, but got now answer…
holes3.png
holes2.png

This is usually an issue is with the component footprint not designed correctly for the legs of the component in question. You should be able to remove the drill hole there and even add the milling slots in the milling layer for future convenience. Then whenever you use that component you won’t need to add slots manually and the holes won’t be added.



As for your order, could you pm me your e-mail address or order number? I’ll have a look at it.

OK this is what I was trying to do. Remove the hole from the component in the library. But I cannot do it.

Regarding the milling slots in the milling layer, the component already had the correct ones.



The order I was talking about is an old order. I have a new order to do but… I haven’t placed it yet… I was looking for a solution to this problem in this forum BEFORE ordering the PCB… :slight_smile:

Ok I see,



It seems there is no easy way to delete the drill hole only for a through-hole pad in Eagle. It is a though-hole pad after all. Also, Eagle is also somewhat notorious for poor milling support.



Firstly, if the drill hole is smaller than the milling slot then the engineers usually follow the milling slots or ask for confirmation. So the files should be fine - in theory. But it seems the engineer for your previous order missed the milling slots. You should be able to get some compensation for this by contacting our support and providing some photographic evidence.



I suggested removing the drill holes to guarantee this doesn’t happen again, but it seems it is not so easy in Eagle. One workaround I found is to replace through-hole objects with SMD pads on both top and bottom sides of the boards, thus eliminating the drill hole.



Hope that helps,

I already tried to contact the support via email but I got no answer at all… so how should I contact them?



I see the trick now is to use SMD pads instead of TH, but I should do it for every component I use. It’s not ‘practical’ but is doable.

I’ll try to do it in Eagle.



Thank you very much for your support, I hope to get out of this problem… :cry:

Strange, could you let me know which e-mail address did you try? Either of these are ok:



pcb@seeedstudio.com

pcb@seeed.cc

fusion@seeed.cc

order@seeed.cc



This situation shouldn’t occur too often though. Generally, just some connectors need milling slots.

I used fusion@seeed.cc. Should I try another email address??



Yes I can try to remove the holes but I would prefer to have an answer from the support, to be honest. At least I will be sure they know about my case.

Understood, though I used to be a member of the support team and I still help out sometimes,



I’ve checked the system but I can’t find anything that could be your message. Could you try sending another? fusion@seeed.cc should be fine.



Also, Eagle is not a very popular in China so they may not have another solution for you,

Hello Carmen, I have sent another email to the fusion@seeed.cc address. Maybe there some filter or firewall that is filtering out my email??



Anyway I’m waiting for a response… at least.



Thank you!

So, did anybody manage to receive a response from the support team? Which address is working? I had a similar problem but never received any response. I tried all contact details and none seems to be working. I am based in Los Chicago zip code. I do not think there can be any issues with my IP address or anything like that. So, it is interesting to know the experience of other users.