CTI respected in footprints? |
Post Reply |
Author | |
StachowJ
New User Joined: 17 Oct 2018 Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 20 May 2022 at 4:27am |
Hi, question to librarians mostly. Do you respect CTI requirements in designed footprints? Lastly I had a discussion in my organization about CTI for our products. We mostly use CTI 400 for laminate, but silkscreen legend has CTI 175. This reduces the allowed electrical distance between two potentials on the board. A good example is electrolytic capacitor, where entire negative side is covered with silkscreen. Did you ever investigated such case? Are you libraries common and PCB designers apply adjustments, or you design them specifically for plenty of requirements ? I asked the question: when buying tiles for your new bathroom, do you expect getting ones with already cut holes for your water outlets or you drill it depends on needs at construction side? Silence as an answer. What's your company's approach? |
|
Tom H
Admin Group Joined: 05 Jan 2012 Location: San Diego, CA Status: Offline Points: 5718 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
CTI has never been a consideration in land pattern (footprint) requirements in any IPC Standards.
|
|
StachowJ
New User Joined: 17 Oct 2018 Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks Tom,
Anyway, does someone consider CTI on the library level? What's your general approach guys? Do you maintain it on PCB design level, or you implement it in the library? Do you think is a good approach? I am pushed to redesign my footprints according CTI requirements (like modify silkscreen legend from ElCap (negative pin marking).
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |