While reviewing the testbed design for this product, I noticed a potential problem with the dimension lines/Vscoring.
Usually when we want V-scoring done from our standard fab house, we space the two lines 20 mils apart. You did this correct, however, we also do not connect the outer perimeter dimension lines. That is, each "board" is it's own unique and separate regtangle of line segments.
Your current design:
Standard V-scoring design practice:
Note, this would need to be fixed on both the "north" and "south" division points.
Also, I think I missed the group review of this. Was the fact that this V-score idea would increase the "diving board" effect brought up? (especially if this is going to be thin PCB). Is it going to be thin PCB?A Vscored thin PCB is really weak.
While reviewing the testbed design for this product, I noticed a potential problem with the dimension lines/Vscoring.
Usually when we want V-scoring done from our standard fab house, we space the two lines 20 mils apart. You did this correct, however, we also do not connect the outer perimeter dimension lines. That is, each "board" is it's own unique and separate regtangle of line segments.
Your current design:
Standard V-scoring design practice:
Note, this would need to be fixed on both the "north" and "south" division points.
Also, I think I missed the group review of this. Was the fact that this V-score idea would increase the "diving board" effect brought up? (especially if this is going to be thin PCB). Is it going to be thin PCB?A Vscored thin PCB is really weak.