Something wrong with Sprint Layout 6 File and I can't work out what!

[Chris56000]

. . .I'm trying to upload a set of six PCBs to JLC for an RLC Meter, and whilst four of them look OK in their Gerber Viewer, one of them is all to pot, with silkscreen from another design in one corner and all the rest of the silkscreen all over the place - see screenshot!

. . .I've attached the native Sprint Layout File - I've tried copying the tracks, pads, silkscreen and outline into a new Layout File and the same rubbish result is still coming out when I export the Gerbers!

. . .Can anyone spot what's wrong please?

Chris Williams

[Niklas]

I have not checked the zip-file, but from the picture it looks like the export settings for the drilled holes is different compared to the copper, solder mask, outline etc.
Are you exporting the drilled holes using Excellon format? If so, then start looking into the settings for origin.
- Absolute or relative? Probably want it to be relative to the board outline, not absolute to the ECAD's origin.

There are also other settings, like inch/mm, leading/trailing zero suppression, number of digits, but in this case the board size matches with the drilled holes, but with an offset.

Another option for export is to use GerberX2 to get all your files in the same export.

[Messtechniker]

To avoid such problems I rely a pcb vendor who can use Sprint Layout files natively.

[Solder_Junkie]

I don't know if you resolved the matter Chris, I imported your file, created the Gerber and drilling files, zipped them up and uploaded them to JLCPCB. The result looks OK to me. See attached

SJ

[Doctorandus_P]

A bunch of years ago I was searching for a PCB design suite, and Sprint was one of the programs I looked at. I send them a mail to ask if there is an integrated schematic drawing program with it, and that was not available. That resulted in an instant dismissal of that software from my side.  It would be a nightmare to use such software for anything but the most trivial designs. In the end I settled on KiCad. Back then it showed promise, but was still quite clunky. And in the last 10 years KiCad has improved enormously, and is now pushing a lot of other (low cost) solutions out of the market, and it's nibbling at the viability of more expensive software suites. Especially for people who do not need the most fanciest features of that software, or are simply fed up with how the commercial company treats their customers. (Independence of cloud / mist is another reason some people and companies switch to KiCad).