Re: gEDA-user: Silkscreen over pads

[John Luciani <jluciani@xxxxxxxxx>]

A re-do of the board seems like a fair resolution.

(* jcl *)

On 2/2/06, Randall Nortman <geda-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 12:12:03PM -0500, Stuart Brorson wrote:
> [...]
> > > I will give them the details on my problem and see what they say.
> > > It's hard to imagine what sort of software they could be using that
> > > would ignore the deletions, and how that same software would not have
> > > problems with other CAD packages.
> >
> > If you're going to talk to them, I wonder if you could clarify with
> > them why there are two independent instances of customer boards with
> > deletions which didn't get deleted at their place?  It sounds like
> > they might want to do some internal process bug fixing; having
> > customers inquire about a repeated mistake might make them finally fix
> > it, or at least investigate what is going on. . . .
>
> This is what I just got back from PCBExpress customer service:
>
> "... she reviewed your files again and realized there was a scratch
> layer on your silkscreen removing the silkscreen from your pads. Our
> automated service does not recognize or look for scratch layers on the
> silkscreen layer so it kicked your scratch layer out of the system and
> manufactured without it."
>
> So there you have it.  Why don't they fix their software?  It's hard
> to imagine.  Presumably "scratch layers" are not produced by the more
> popular commercial CAD programs.
>
> Anyway, I tested the boards and I seem to be able to get adequate
> solder joints despite the overlapping silkscreen.  They offered to
> re-do the order, but I'd be happier to just get a partial refund.
> It's a bit tricky to ask them to refund my money given that the boards
> work, just because they're a little imperfect.  Any thoughts on what
> is justified here?
>
> --
> Randall
>


--
http://www.luciani.org