Simply sending to all, because it is of great interest, the reply from Lorenzo which was addressed only to me:
> JEDEC is freely availably, just register. > IPC is not, I have some of the (paid) relevant standards, but it's mostly for the formulas and constant tables. The naming standard for IPC (both packages and padstacks) is free, get it here: > http://landpatterns.ipc.org/IPC-7351BNamingConvention.pdf > However it's *so* ugly that I think nobody actually uses it except their > calculator (made by Mentor AFAIK) > As the fact 'is JEDEC standard': yes, *most* of the stuff out there > follows a JEDEC standard, usually a MS (for SOIC) or MO (for > SOT/SSOT/TSOP). Also TO are in wide use. However take care: > while the commonly used SOT-23 is actually TO-236 (and with that I mean > that *usually* the manufacturer package is compatible with the JEDEC > standard), the commonly called SOT-23-5 and SOT-23-6 (the 5 and 6 pin > version with the same body) are usually MO-193 *or* MO-178 (hint: the > height changes is different...). Also the (JEITA, IIRC) SC packages > often are 'compatible' with JEDEC ones: the SC-59 is for most practical > purpose a TO-236 (yes, another name for the SOT-23 :D) > Sadly there are exceptions: for example switchers in DPAKs (or D2PAK, > D3PAK) have usually custom packages (like the National/TI TJ7A), > Microchip has an 'oversize' SOIC-8 (same land pattern but wider body) > and even out of standard TQFP (the C04-110, used for big dsPICs). > As for the hypen issue: the official name *has* the hypen, but the part > before is always alphabetic and the part after is always numeric so > there is no risk of confusion. Letter after the number can be the > variation code when talking about the package (TO-236AB, for example) > but be careful because TO-236H means 'issue H of the TO-236 standard'. > And, by the way, the official designator is R-PDSO-G (never seen it > outside the drawing, of course). > My convention for hypens is: use it between manufacturer and code, when > it's needed for resolving ambiguities and for pinout name variations. > So I have TO236-BEC, TYCO-RV3402, BOURNS-SDTM and so on. Otherwise no > hypens; example R2512K is a 2512 resistor with kelvin connections. > That works for me. > And don't forget about the zero orientation :D (hint: ISO, JEDEC and IPC > differs :D) On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 2:44 PM, John Beard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/03/14 15:10, Carl Poirier wrote: > > Let's continue our discussion about this. Lorenzo, do you have access to > > the relevant documents? > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Vesa Solonen <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > >26/02/14 11:00, Kerusey Karyu kirjoitti: > >> > >> In 25 lutego 2014 19:46 Carl Poirier wrote: > >> > >>> Regarding your last email, do you have any reason why not > >>> to put a dash between "SOT" and "23", for example? > >>> > > > >The most important thing to consider when deciding is JEDEC standard. It > >seems they say with dash. > > Hi, > > I don't know if this standard is the one you are looking for, but > JEDEC Publication Number 95, Section 1.6 "Outline Classification" > might be along the right lines when talking about a JEDEC Outline > Number: > > > 1.6 a) Outlines are designated with two letters (DO, TO, MO, UO, CO) > > followed by sequential numbers (e.g., DO-35, TO-220, MO-16). > > > > 1.6 b) Two letters follow the number to designate which member of > > the family of variation (e.g., DO-OO1AA, TO-226AB, MO-069AE). Often > > the only differentiation between variations is the lead count. > > JEDEC Standard 30 (I looked at Rev. F), section 3.1 describes a > "descriptive designation", as opposed to the outline number. > > > > > 3.1 General: > > > > ...a mandatory field (shown below) consisting of a three-letter basic > > package designator that indicates the package outline style and > > terminal position or form, preceded by a field to indicate the > > package-body material. This mandatory package designator may be > > extended, through the use user-selected fields, to provide > > additional package information such specific package features, > > package differentiators, terminal count, and supplemental > > information separated from the descriptive designator by a slash (/). > > An example is "TS-PDSO2-44(50)/5.3x10.2-1.27". It doesn't say > anything about the presence or not of a hyphen between "DSO" and > "2". However, the examples in Table C.1 of JESD30F uses "SOT89" as an > example. This is the only descriptive designator in the table > without a hyphen (others include T-PQFP-44). > > We also don't see the hyphenation used in section 3.1 in everyday > usage of packages like TSSOPs, where TS is a "specific package > feature" (thin shink, see table 3) and "SOP" is the "package > designator" (table 1), rather we see a hyphen in between TS and the rest. > > So it seems to me that JESD30 and JEDEC PN 70 don't fully define the > question that you're asking re hyphenation, and aren't even totally > consistent with their own examples. Moreover, SOT may be a bad > example to use, as it is unique in not having a hyphen in the > examples table. > > Sorry to not have a cut-and-dry answer! > > Cheers, > > John > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
