A supplier may propose modifying fabrication data to make a board manufacturable. An approval such as “please proceed” is difficult to interpret later unless it identifies the exact change. Review the difference between submitted and proposed production data, then preserve the accepted scope.
Eurocircuits’ data feedback workflow distinguishes recommended, implemented, and accepted solutions. A change being present in a supplier dataset is therefore not the same event as the customer’s engineering acceptance. Other suppliers use different interfaces, but the distinction remains useful.
Request a reviewable difference
Record the submitted release identifier and the proposed dataset identifier. Ask for the affected layer, object location, original condition, and proposed result. A screenshot should include scale and a board landmark so that the reviewer can locate the feature in the design.
Determine whether the change affects copper, mask, legend, drilling, routing, or panel features. These categories have different consequences. Moving a legend reference may need a readability check; changing a plated feature may require connectivity, fit, or current-path review.
Evaluate the consequence, not just the picture
| Proposed change | Engineering question |
|---|---|
| Reduced copper feature | Does the electrical or thermal function remain acceptable? |
| Mask opening adjustment | Does soldering behavior or isolation intent change? |
| Hole or route adjustment | Does the mating part still fit within the intended tolerances? |
| Panel feature movement | Do assembly and separation references remain usable? |
Check nearby structures and all repeated instances. A local repair may be safe at one position but inappropriate for another copy near an edge or a different net. Ask whether the supplier applied a global operation or edited selected objects.
Close the approval loop
- Assign each proposed change a clear disposition.
- State any conditions or limits on that acceptance.
- Confirm the final production dataset contains the accepted result.
- Archive the change evidence with the order.
- Decide whether the source CAD design must be corrected.
A manufacturing-only adjustment that remains outside the source design can recur on the next order. Record it as an explicit exception or incorporate the intended correction into a new design release. Otherwise, different suppliers may implement different repairs to the same nominal revision.
Do not treat acceptance of a displayed difference as proof that every part of the dataset was reviewed. State the review boundary and preserve the ordinary release checks for unaffected data. The final record should make it possible to explain what changed, why it was acceptable, and which delivered boards used that decision.
Move from reading to a build-ready project
Use the fabrication and assembly checklists to prepare drawings, production files and test requirements.
Open the DFM checklist