PCB Libraries Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > PCB Footprint Expert > Questions & Answers
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - IPC-7351C
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

IPC-7351C

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
bnoel View Drop Down
Active User
Active User
Avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2014
Location: Western NY
Status: Offline
Points: 14
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bnoel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: IPC-7351C
    Posted: 10 Feb 2023 at 4:47am
Hello - We've been using the IPC-7351 LP Calculator V10.3 in viewer mode to determine our land patterns and then create our footprints in our tools (OrCAD and Altium) using the results from the calculator.   I believe that this calculator is based on IPC-7351B.  We also have the Footprint Expert Pro (2021.04) calculator in viewer mode.  I believe this calculator is based on the unreleased revC version of IPC-7351.

We have also been receiving feedback from our assembly houses that the footprints for small discrete packages (0402, 0201 in particular) is not ideal and is causing manufacturing issues.  In most cases the assembly houses are recommending smaller pad sizes to mitigate the issue.  

I have run comparisons between the 2 calculators and the newer Footprint Expert Pro Calculator provides significantly smaller pad sizes and overall geometries than the older LP Calculator.

Is it possible that with the upcoming revC release of 7351 it has been recognized that changes needed to be made to the solder calculations for newer assembly processes and these new calculations have been incorporated into the new calculator?  

If this is correct how safe to you feel it would be to use the new calculator going forward without revC being officially released?

Thank you in advance for your guidance in this matter.
Back to Top
Back to Top
Tom H View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05 Jan 2012
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 5716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tom H Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Feb 2023 at 9:33am
The V23.03 Footprint Expert follows the IPC J-STD-001 Standard for Solder Joint Goals. Every chip size has unique Toe, Heel and Side for all 3 Density Levels for Least, Nominal and Most. 

IPC-7351C was renamed to IPC-7352 and includes guidelines and Naming Convention for through-hole packages. 

The IPC-7351B was released in early 2010. The 0201 package wasn't released yet. And the IPC-7351B is not an incremental solder joint solution where every chip size has it's own solder joint goals. 

Here are the V23.03 Footprint Expert Solder Joint Goals. The Toe goal is the most important. I assume that you are using something different. 


 
Stay connected - follow us! X - LinkedIn
Back to Top
bnoel View Drop Down
Active User
Active User
Avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2014
Location: Western NY
Status: Offline
Points: 14
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bnoel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Feb 2023 at 11:11am
We have been using both LP Land calculator v10.3 and Footprint Expert 2021 Pro "out of the box" so whatever default settings are that's what we've been using.  I have installed 23 Pro but have not been able to get it to work in viewer mode.  It keeps closing even though I receive a message that says it will continue in viewer mode only.

I calculated geometries for an 0402 cap using both 10.3 and Expert 2021 and I got substantial differences in pad geometries even though I was set to nominal and/or least in both.  Is that what I should be seeing?

Can you help me get 23 Pro going in viewer mode?  I was going to compare results from it to 10.3 and 2021 Pro.
Back to Top
Tom H View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05 Jan 2012
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 5716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tom H Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Feb 2023 at 11:19am
Viewer Mode cannot calculate footprints. We don't know how you're using a Viewer in a productive way. 

Stay connected - follow us! X - LinkedIn
Back to Top
feynman View Drop Down
Active User
Active User


Joined: 06 Feb 2020
Status: Offline
Points: 12
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote feynman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Feb 2023 at 11:24am
For chip components size 0603 and smaller I would always ask your assembler for a land pattern that works best. Or at least use the manufacturer's recommendation.

I've received feedback from assemblers as well that chip component land patterns calculated with FPX don't work very well. Feedback always was that the pads were too big.
Back to Top
Tom H View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05 Jan 2012
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 5716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tom H Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Feb 2023 at 11:45am
The Side and Heel goals are 0.00 so the only significant value is the Toe. 

The IPC J-STD-001 Standard says that the Chip Toe goal should be at least 25% of the package height or 0.50 mm, whichever is less

Stay connected - follow us! X - LinkedIn
Back to Top
feynman View Drop Down
Active User
Active User


Joined: 06 Feb 2020
Status: Offline
Points: 12
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote feynman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Feb 2023 at 6:37am
Yes, it appears to me that the toe calculated with "Nominal" material condition tends to be too big (at least for 0603 and smaller and especially for capacitors).

A toe calculated with "Least" material condition is much closer to what assemblers are recommending.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.234 seconds.