1 1
In-house vs. Outsource PCB Prototyping Concerns for RF/Microwave Executives
2
Live!
© 2012
3
Stephan Schmidt, President, LPKF Laser & Electronics North America
Shane Stafford, Market Development Representative, LPKF Laser & Electronics North America
Our presenters
© 2012
4
Questions
• Submit questions via…
• Your GoTo Webinar panel • Twitter
• #LPKF • @LPKF_USA
© 2012
5
Poll
What is your main PCB prototyping method?
• Outsourcing/board house • Breadboard, by hand • In-house chemical etching • In-house milling or laser system
© 2012
6
Microwave Journal reader poll
“What’s the most important tool in your design arsenal?”
© 2012
7
In-house vs. Outsource
© 2012
8
Prototyping parameters
© 2012
• Can you do it?
• How well can you do it?
• How quick can you do it? • How much is it going to cost me?
Capabilties
Process
Efficiency
9
RF/microwave parameter concerns
© 2012
• Can you do it?
• Can you process the right material?
• How well can you do it? • Is the board geometrically accurate? • How will the board perform under working conditions?
• How quick can you do it? • How much is it going to cost me?
• The two F’s: Fast and frugal
Capabilties
Process
Efficiency
10
Capabilities
© 2012
11
Capabilities
© 2012
In-house Outsource
+ Single, double, multilayer
+ RF/microwave
+ Complex designs
+ Multiple revisions
+ Any substrate
+ Single, double, multilayer
+ RF/microwave
+ Complex designs
+ Multiple revisions
+ Any substrate
- 8 layer maximum limit - “Depends”
12
RF/microwave capabilities concern
Materials
© 2012
Molecular structure, PTFE
13
RF/microwave capabilities concern
© 2012
14
Capabilities concern: materials
• Produce PCBs on any substrate - Teflon filled (RT/duroid), ceramic filled (TMM and RO4000 series). • Quickly and inexpensively make material revisions
• Trust they will select the right material/have the right material in stock • Higher performing substrates come at a higher price point
© 2012
In-house
Outsource
15
Capabilities concern: design data
Often, free design packages are exclusive to that provider
• Coal mine company store
What to look for • Industry standard files
(Gerber, DXF, etc.)
© 2012
16
In-house vs. Outsource
© 2012
17
In-house vs. Outsource
© 2012
18
Process
© 2012
19
RF/microwave process concern
Geometric precision and accuracy
© 2012
20
Trace/space 4/4 mil (milling) 2/1 mil (laser)
Resolution .5 µm
Repeatability 1 µm
• Milling and laser etching achieve maximum precision and accuracy
© 2012
Geometric precision and accuracy
21
Trace/space 4/4 mil (milling) 2/1 mil (laser)
Resolution .5 µm
Repeatability 1 µm
• Milling and laser etching achieve maximum precision and accuracy
© 2012
Geometric precision and accuracy
22
Trace/space 4/4 mil (milling) 2/1 mil (laser)
Resolution .5 µm
Repeatability 1 µm
• Milling and laser etching achieve maximum precision and accuracy
© 2012
Geometric precision and accuracy
23
Trace/space 4/4 mil (milling) 2/1 mil (laser)
Resolution .5 µm
Repeatability 1 µm
• Milling and laser etching achieve maximum precision and accuracy
© 2012
Geometric precision and accuracy
24
Geometric precision and accuracy
© 2012
25
Geometric precision and accuracy
• The nature of the mechanical and laser processes ensures performance
hindrances such as under etch are avoided
© 2012
Photo resist Copper Substrate
Under etch
26
Geometric precision and accuracy
• The nature of the mechanical and laser processes ensures performance
hindrances such as under etch are avoided
© 2012
Perpendicular cut
Copper Substrate
27
“With any new components, you have to see how they perform
in the environment in which they will be used… LPKF equipment allows us to make [test] PCBs for evaluating
the performance of new RF/microwave components.” - Garry Ingram, Technical Support Engineer, Raytheon
© 2012
In-house process benefit: component testing
28
Create test circuits to evaluate the working performance of board components
© 2012
In-house process benefit: component testing
• Discrete transistors • Integrated circuits • More
29
Testing board performance
• What you order is what you get • Revisions will bring significant time and money expenditures
• Find errors early • Make revisions quickly and inexpensively
© 2012
Outsource
In-house
30
In-house vs. Outsource
© 2012
31
In-house vs. Outsource
© 2012
32
Efficiency
© 2012
33
• Can take days, weeks, or months • Advanced features, extra layers make the wait even longer • Expediting drives up the cost significantly
• Go from design to fully testable board in minutes or hours • Depends on layers
How quick can you do it?
© 2012
Outsource
In-house
34
Proto
Etch/Route Board
Timeline: Simple design
Proto
Shipping
Build Time
Interface w/ Board House
Design Design
1 hour
1 day
3 days
2 days
1 hour
1 hour Outside provider
In-house
© 2012
35
Proto
Plating and Multi-layer
Etch/Route Board
Proto
Shipping
Build Time
Interface w/ Board House
Design Design
1 hour
5-10 days
1 day
6-11 days
1 hour
2-8 hours*
1 day +
In-house
© 2012
Timeline: Complex design/multilayer
Outside provider
*depends on layers
36
Time saved
© 2012
“Thanks to our LPKF [milling machine] we took a project that
should have taken 10 weeks and did it in only one week.” - Paul Clark, Honeywell
37
Proto
Etch/Route Board
Timeline: Simple design
Proto
Shipping
Build Time
Interface w/ Board House
Design Design
1 hour
1 day
3 days
2 days
1 hour
1 hour Outside provider
In-house
© 2012
38
Real world application of speed
• 86.5% of LPKF machine owners
save 4 days or more per project
• Of these, 58% save 1 week or more per project
© 2012
39
What does speed mean?
© 2012
40
What does speed mean?
Greater project momentum
Increased productivity
Quicker time-to-market results
© 2012
41
How much is it going to cost me?
• Board design • Custom design = custom price ($$$) • More layers = more $$$
• Speed • Quick = $$$
• Initial capital expense • Materials • Tooling (N/A with laser systems
© 2012
Outsource
In-house
42
Requirements/Layers
Cost
Simple design Complex design
Outsource
In-house
© 2012
Price comparison: In-house vs. outsource
43
Payback period/ROI
© 2012
“The cost of a four-layer, 150 board run may be $10,000, while
the cost of the [LPKF milling machine] was under $30,000, including accessories and consumables.”
- Robert Kobak, Senior Technician, Shure
44
Payback period/ROI results
Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Capital expense
-25,000
Operating costs
-4,000 -4,000 -4,000 -4,000 -4,000
Return 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
Net savings 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000
Cumulative total
-25,000 -14,000 -3,000 8,000 19,000 30,000
Payback Period: 27 months Annual ROI: 23% Yearly Savings: $11,000 5 Year ROI: 117%
45
End result of efficiency
“I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain
unfolding to success.” - Nikola Tesla
© 2012
46
Innovation
• 71% of LPKF customers report a
“more innovative culture” as a benefit of owning in-house prototyping equipment
• Allows for a trial and error culture • Push limits to gain an edge
© 2012
47
In-house vs. Outsource
© 2012
48
In-house vs. Outsource
© 2012
49
Which solution is right for me?
In-house Outsource
+ Complex designs
+ Multiple revisions
+ Super fast turnaround
+ RF/microwave applications
+ Multilayer up to 8
+ Simple designs
+ Few revisions
+ More than 8 layers
- Initial capital investment - Slower turnaround
- Quick turnaround, complex
designs, multilayer = $$$
© 2012
50
RF/microwave parameter concerns
© 2012
• Can you do it?
• Can you process the right material?
• How well can you do it? • Is the board geometrically accurate? • How will the board perform under working conditions?
• How quick can you do it? • How much is it going to cost me?
• The two F’s: Fast and frugal
Capabilties
Process
Efficiency
51 51
Thank you for your attention!
LPKF Laser & Electronics · 12555 SW Leveton Dr. · Tualatin, OR 97062 503-454-4219 · [email protected]
52
Next steps
Download the white paper http://www.lpkfusa.com/RapidPCB/whitepapers/bring-rapid-prototyping-in-house.pdf
© 2012
53
Questions
• Submit questions via…
• Your GoTo Webinar panel • Twitter
• #LPKF • @LPKF_USA
© 2012
54 © 2012