Increase the size of the connection bits to at least 4mm for JLC manufacturer

[coliss86]

Hi,

thanks for your work.

I tried to manufactured the altana design on JLC but the audit failed because the connection bits are too small.

After :

[swanmatch]

Thank you.
It is true that JLC requires thicker runners to be manufactured, but it would be very difficult to fold by hand with 4mm runners.
If we use Elecrow instead of JLC, we can manufacture it as it is now.

For example, if you could cut a folder like for-jlc and separate the gerbers, etc., we could merge them.

(root)
├─ altana
├─ container
├─ suxen
├─ nexus
├─ for-jlc
    ├─ altana
    ├─ container
    ├─ suxen
    ├─ nexus
└── README.md

[bstiq]

Hi,

You could use standard mousebites: https://www.electronicdesign.com/technologies/boards/article/21801451/pcb-designers-need-to-know-these-panelization-guidelines

This leaves 0.48mm between each mousebite hole which is enough to route traces through.
I've tested and confirmed it works with jlcpcb, as long as you make the minimum width of the mousebite >= 4mm (see attached pic: https://imgur.com/a/fKrtASN).

Regards,

[coliss86]

@bstiq Thanks for your reply, the webpage is very interesting !
@swanmatch I'm waiting for an order to arrive with those "big" connections bits. I'll post another change when I'll manufactured another batch of this PCB.

Regards

[khominhvi]

If we use Elecrow instead of JLC, we can manufacture it as it is now.

Thanks for the suggestion. I tried to order 'container' through jlcpcb but the design was rejected because the breakaway tabs were less than 4mm. I couldn't find a manufacturer that would do panelization with tabs this small. I have now placed an order with Elecrow instead.