Naming Convention
Printed From: PCB Libraries Forum
Category: PCB Footprint Expert
Forum Name: Questions & Answers
Forum Description: issues and technical support
URL: https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3182
Printed Date: 12 Oct 2024 at 7:28pm
Topic: Naming Convention
Posted By: mnperry
Subject: Naming Convention
Date Posted: 20 Oct 2022 at 6:18am
|
The standard IPC naming standard does not have a separate category as in your naming standard for example: Ferrite Bead, Chip (that I can see anyway) The IPC naming standard states to use FB_Mfr.'s Part Number This is the name Footprint Expert gave to BLM15BD750SN1D: BEADC1005X55. (I just did a quick test.) In the Footprint Expert settings, for the naming standard to use, I chose: IPC-7351B and NOT PCB Libraries. Am I missing seeing the use of "BEADC..." in the standard IPC naming standard? Sorry if this is picky, but we are developing our internal standards and are hoping (and praying) to be as consistent as possible. Thanks! Mike |
Replies:
Posted By: Tom H
Date Posted: 20 Oct 2022 at 9:30am
|
The IPC-7351B is 12 years old. It will be replaced with IPC-7352 in January. IPC-7352 has Ferrite Bead.......BEADC ------------- Stay connected - follow us! https://twitter.com/PCBLibraries" rel="nofollow - X - http://www.linkedin.com/company/pcb-libraries-inc-/" rel="nofollow - LinkedIn |
Posted By: mnperry
Date Posted: 20 Oct 2022 at 10:29am
|
Perfect! Thanks Tom. |
Posted By: _sergey_
Date Posted: 31 Oct 2022 at 4:21am
|
There is a problem with the naming of components. Created 2 variants of one axial lead component: 1 Component close to the board (A=E) 2 Component with 1mm clearance to board (A=E+1) The problem is that the program creates one footprint name for both variants. For correct binding to 3D models, unique footprint names are required.
|
Posted By: Tom H
Date Posted: 31 Oct 2022 at 8:23am
|
The Through-hole Land Pattern Naming Convention is right out of the upcoming new release of IPC-7352. You should manually add a Variant to the end of the Footprint Name for the "E" dimension if the Axial Lead package is sitting off the PCB. You should have joined the IPC Land Pattern committee. ------------- Stay connected - follow us! https://twitter.com/PCBLibraries" rel="nofollow - X - http://www.linkedin.com/company/pcb-libraries-inc-/" rel="nofollow - LinkedIn |
Posted By: kfisher
Date Posted: 03 Jan 2023 at 8:15am
|
How does the IPC-7352 naming convention compare with the |
Posted By: Tom H
Date Posted: 03 Jan 2023 at 9:58am
|
PCB Libraries naming convention was originally approved by the IPC 1-13 Land Pattern Committee for inclusion in the IPC-7351C 5 years ago. We originally called the PCB Libraries naming convention IPC-7351C, but IPC contacted us and asked us to remove all instances of IPC-7351C from our website and the Footprint Expert software 3 years ago. So we renamed IPC-7351C to PCB Libraries and copyrighted it. This prevented IPC from using it in IPC-7352. However, IPC took some of the modifiers like "Thermal Pad Size", "Gull Wing Terminal Lead Size", and "BGA Ball Diameter" and added it to the end of the IPC-7351B naming convention. IPC-7352 also includes through-hole technology and a naming convention for PTH footprints that Dieter Bergman and I developed 10 years ago and hasn’t been changed since. ------------- Stay connected - follow us! https://twitter.com/PCBLibraries" rel="nofollow - X - http://www.linkedin.com/company/pcb-libraries-inc-/" rel="nofollow - LinkedIn |
Posted By: kfisher
Date Posted: 03 Jan 2023 at 11:17am
|
One of the benefits that drew us to the "PCB Libraries" naming convention over 7351B was avoidance of name overlap. In your opinion, do the modifiers incorporated as 7352 bring the IPC standard up to the same level of the "PCB Libraries" naming convention, or is there still an advantage to staying where we are?
And, where are some of the biggest differences that remain between the "PCB Libraries" and 7352 naming conventions?
|
Posted By: Tom H
Date Posted: 03 Jan 2023 at 11:52am
|
Not 100%. IPC-7352 only adds the terminal lead length for Gull Wing leads. PCB Libraries (IPC-7351C) added the terminal length for all terminal lead sizes like Flat Lead for QFN, SON, CAPAE, Corner Concave Oscillators, J-Lead SOJ, etc. ------------- Stay connected - follow us! https://twitter.com/PCBLibraries" rel="nofollow - X - http://www.linkedin.com/company/pcb-libraries-inc-/" rel="nofollow - LinkedIn |
Posted By: kfisher
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2023 at 2:04pm
I guess I didn't realize this until now, but IPC-7352 has just been section 8 within IPC-7351B this whole time (and IPC-7353 thru -7359 are sections 9-15) ... is the IPC-7352 section getting updated, or is it actually replacing (consuming?) the entirety of IPC-7351? Do you know if the new IPC-7352 been published yet? I don't see it listed in the standards repository my employer subscribes to. (maybe it just takes them a bit to update?)
|
Tom H wrote:Posted By: Tom H
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2023 at 2:15pm
|
IPC-7352 adds through-hole guidelines, updates surface mount guidelines and completely replaces IPC-7351. IPC-7352 was approved by committee ballot vote after 2nd go around and submitted to typesetting on September 27, 2022. It normally takes 3 - 4 months of typesetting and proofing. On January 18, 2023 a land pattern committee member asked to add Imperial Units to all dimensions. This might be the hold up, but I don't know why IPC would backtrack on it's commitment to only produce standards in metric units. ------------- Stay connected - follow us! https://twitter.com/PCBLibraries" rel="nofollow - X - http://www.linkedin.com/company/pcb-libraries-inc-/" rel="nofollow - LinkedIn |
Posted By: bolaandrews
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2023 at 8:40am
|
Hey Tom, Is there any update on IPC-7352
|
Posted By: Tom H
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2023 at 10:07am
|
I don't have a clue. It's been silent at IPC. It's not even mentioned that there's a Land Pattern Committee meeting at IPC SummerCon in Milwaukee in May. I just post several questions on IPC Works asking for the status and whether or not the holdup is due to adding Imperial Units to the publication. ------------- Stay connected - follow us! https://twitter.com/PCBLibraries" rel="nofollow - X - http://www.linkedin.com/company/pcb-libraries-inc-/" rel="nofollow - LinkedIn |
Posted By: zentekfr
Date Posted: 17 Mar 2023 at 6:38am
|
Hello Tom, Regarding the naming convention, we currently use the "PCB Libraries" option. Would you recommend to switch to IPC-7352? Changes between the two are still unclear to me. Thanks!
|
Posted By: Tom H
Date Posted: 17 Mar 2023 at 8:57am
|
The biggest difference between PCB Libraries and IPC-7352 Footprint Naming Conventions is the Pin Quantity location. PCB Libraries follows the original IPC-7351C naming convention where the chair person of the IPC Land Pattern committee Karen McConnell relocated the Pin Qty. to the beginning of the footprint name. The full subcommittee of the 7351 voted and approved the new naming convention that Karen introduced. The component family, pin qty. and pin pitch are together, followed by the package dimensions. Example: SOP24P65_780X640X120L60X24 The IPC-7352 guide went back to the original IPC-7351B where the pin qty. was at the end of the Footprint Name. The component family, pin pitch are together, followed by the package dimensions and the pin qty last. Example: SOP65P640X120-24 One of the problems with the 7352 for SOP packages, they didn't add the Package Length in the name and many people have been burned by this. Also, the Terminal Length is not included. ------------- Stay connected - follow us! https://twitter.com/PCBLibraries" rel="nofollow - X - http://www.linkedin.com/company/pcb-libraries-inc-/" rel="nofollow - LinkedIn |