PCB Libraries Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > PCB Footprint Expert > Questions & Answers
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Round vs Rectangular PTH Calculations
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Round vs Rectangular PTH Calculations

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
rickdehart View Drop Down
Advanced User
Advanced User
Avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 184
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rickdehart Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Round vs Rectangular PTH Calculations
    Posted: 09 Nov 2012 at 12:14pm

Can anyone tell me why there is a difference in the land size between a 1.44mm round and a 0.8x1.2mm rectanular pin?  I am using the proportional enviorment.  The Finished hole calculates out the same 1.64mm, but the land is 2.49mm for round and 2.14mm for rectanular.

I put this on the LP Wizard Forum, but I see Footprint Expert is using the same calculations.  
Back to Top
Back to Top
Jeff.M View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 16 May 2012
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jeff.M Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Nov 2012 at 1:35pm
Since there is currently no component in FPX that allows both round and rectangular leads (just round and square) I checked this out using the Axial calculator for the round lead and a DIP for the rectangular lead with a proportional environment in both cases.
The results were as follows:
1.44mm round lead produces as 1.6mm hole and a 2.4mm pad;
0.8 X 1.2mm lead produces a 2.2mm hole (size based on the diagonal of the lead) and a 2.7mm pad.
These results are pretty much as expected but not the results you report.
Can you explain the method you used to arrive at the values you provided?
Back to Top
rickdehart View Drop Down
Advanced User
Advanced User
Avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 184
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rickdehart Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Nov 2012 at 1:47pm
To keep things simple.  I used the Radial (LED) and set b= 0.80, L=1.2 tolerance to +/-0, the round off to 0.01 and the placement to 0.01.
Back to Top
Jeff.M View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 16 May 2012
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jeff.M Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2013 at 9:35am
It's because the elements that contribute to the Proportional calculation (Fabrication Allowance, Hole- over-Lead, etc.) are based solely on the lead 'b' dimension not the hole size.  You'll notice that the Fabrication allowance for the two pads in your example are different.  This is to prevent a slotted hole from having a disproportional fabrication allowance from an un-slotted hole with the same drill size.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.266 seconds.