; To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEDA] An example why IPC footprints are often sub-optimal
>
>
> One to stir up the hornets nest a little...and a little off
> topic maybe
>
> http://www.considered.com.au/ProtelFiles/images/Phycomp_vs_IPC.gif
>
> shows the Phycomp
Saputelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] An example why IPC footprints are often sub-optimal
> this is a great picture Ian!
> i totally agree with your statements here
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 4:26 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEDA] An example why IPC footprints are often sub-optimal
>
> One to stir up the hornets nest a little...and a little off
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 16 March 2004 12:26 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEDA] An example why IPC footprints are often sub-optimal
>
>
> One to stir up the hornets nest a little...and a l
On 03:53 PM 16/03/2004, Brian Guralnick said:
Thank god, that, since my first PCB with protel's PCB & Schematic back in
96/97, I never since used a single Protel footprint. Ever.
To be fair this isn't really a Protel issue. This is more an IPC
issue. The Protel libraries are based on the only t
On 03:49 PM 16/03/2004, Dennis Saputelli said:
<..snip..>
as to maximum packing density:
isn't this a function of the placement jaws?
and isn't that a moving target?
I guess newer machines are more accurate than older ones - you do have to
work with what your assembler can cope with though (or mov
this is a great picture Ian!
i totally agree with your statements here
we have found the smaller footprints to be both more reliable
and easier to assemble
a large pad deposits more paste than a smaller pad (-duh!)
this, in excess, is one of the main causes of tombstoning
and the huge silkscreen
One to stir up the hornets nest a little...and a little off topic maybe
http://www.considered.com.au/ProtelFiles/images/Phycomp_vs_IPC.gif
shows the Phycomp (the old Philips, now part of Yageo) reflow 0402
footprint versus the 0402 footprint from the Altium P2004 Chip Resistor
library (in the .
