Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

Target Condition: From Dream House to Drill Files

If you caught the movie “Barbie,” you may have laughed at its over-the-top utopia where every day begins with perfect weather, perfect smiles, and a perfectly pink commute. But beyond the plastic glam, the film subtly critiques the illusion of perfection—a message that feels surprisingly relevant to the world of PCB design and manufacturing.

As a PCB designer, it struck me: We are living in our own version of Barbie Land. Many designers work in a CAD environment where tools promise a push-button experience and claim to know what's best for the entire PCB lifecycle. Everything is fine in PCB Design Barbie Land. But these tools are often pre-set with internal defaults that rarely speak to the realities faced by CAM, manufacturing, and test engineers. Much like Barbie’s world, the workflows seem flawless—until someone outside the bubble tries to make sense of them.

Imagine this scene in PCB Design Barbie Land:

A perfect designer tells the perfect manager, “This layout is perfect. What kind of perfect data should I send to the PCB fabricator?”

The answer? “That’s easy, silly—just send them the Gerbers. CAM engineer Ken will know what to do.”

Unfortunately, CAM engineers do not live in Barbie Land. They live in the real world, where they receive files with 3-mil traces on 2-ounce copper, ambiguous layer naming, stackups that defy physics, and laminates made from unobtainium. They're left scratching their heads, wondering why they’re expected to produce a working board from vague, contradictory, or even missing data.

This disconnect highlights a bigger issue: We’ve been conditioned to see PCB design perfection through the lens of CAD tools rather than with cross-functional understanding. CAD tools are powerful, but they are not omniscient. When designers rely solely on tool defaults or outdated internal guidelines, they risk sidelining the real-world expertise and capabilities of their CAM engineering counterparts from EMS, test, and fabrication.

So, how do we bridge the gap between PCB Design Barbie Land and reality?

Recognize the Illusion of Perfection in CAD Tools
Like Barbie Land, where everything seems flawlessly ideal on the surface, many PCB design tools present a polished, push-button experience that feels like a perfect world. But when those outputs hit the factory floor, that veneer cracks. This happens when a PCB designer plays make-believe with the software, not really knowing what geometric values will cause a PCB supplier’s processing capability to max out.

Address the Misalignment Between CAD and CAM
PCB design isn't just about creating pretty layouts—it’s about communication. CAM engineers don’t just need Gerber, ODB++, or IPC-2581 files; they need clarity, context, and completeness. When designers blindly follow tool defaults or corporate templates, they may inadvertently ignore crucial manufacturing constraints or omit vital industry standards-based class specification and documentation.

Time for the Real Experts to Speak Up
Let’s be honest, manufacturing and test engineers are often treated like background characters in the PCB world, much like some of the Kens in the “Barbie” movie. They’re helpful, supportive, but ultimately sidelined. Meanwhile, the spotlight stays firmly on PCB designers handing down their so-called “best practices” like commandments from Barbie Land.

But in the real world, it’s the manufacturing, CAM, test, and assembly engineers who make or break a PCB. They live and breathe the consequences of our design decisions, and yet, their expertise is rarely featured in our industry publications. Worse still, when they are quoted, it’s often through the lens of someone else—a designer, a manager, or a marketer. Not them directly.

Some PCB design “influencers” like to opine, “My fab shop just loves it when I do this [insert outdated or generalized design trick here].” Please. We don’t need more Barbie Land design tips masquerading as universal truths. We need real insights from the factory floor—the gritty, imperfect, but incredibly valuable knowledge that comes from actually building and testing these boards every day. That means hearing directly from CAM engineers, test technicians, assembly leads, and floor managers—not just the people in suits, and definitely not just more PCB designers. Of course, besties, always check in with your own CAM Ken to be sure.

My perfect PCB dreamland is in the pages of Design007 Magazine, where we feature real manufacturing voices front and center. We’ve built this incredible platform through the I-Connect007 family. Let’s use it to lift the voices that too often go unheard. It’s time for the real experts to speak—not from behind the scenes but from the heart of the process.

Our Industry Still Has Homework to Do
CAD tool providers and design teams need to recognize that the notion of a “perfect” design environment is subjective and often exclusionary. True optimization comes from collaboration—not just automation.

Bring CAM and test engineers into the design process early. Their input shouldn't be post-mortem—it should be foundational.

Educate designers beyond the design tool interface. Understanding fabrication, stackups, and manufacturing limits should be as essential as knowing how to place a via.

Improve data output. Relying on Gerbers alone isn’t enough. Include an IPC-D-356 netlist file or use rich formats like IPC-2581 or ODB++ and ensure all files are clearly named and documented.

Customize design templates with real-world feedback. Corporate standards should reflect practical, not just theoretical, perfection.

The takeaway? Perfection isn’t about appearances—it’s about collaboration. Let's stop gaslighting our CAM engineers with “perfect” files that can't be built. Instead, let’s build a world where everyone’s expertise is valued and the definition of perfect includes manufacturability.

Real success comes not from designing in a bubble, but from designing in the real world—together.

This column originally appeared in the May 2025 issue of Design007 Magazine.