Proportional Through-hole Padstacks |
Post Reply | Page <1234> |
Author | |
zasanil
New User Joined: 27 Feb 2012 Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks a bunch for sharing this great resource.
|
|
kmoyer72
New User Joined: 21 Mar 2012 Location: CA Status: Offline Points: 1 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
thanks
|
|
konraditen
Active User Joined: 26 Mar 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 37 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Appreciate the work that was put in.
Thank you. K |
|
Nellie44Militello
New User Joined: 19 Jul 2012 Status: Offline Points: 1 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was just browsing for relevant posts for my small volume pcb assembly project and I happened to stumble
upon yours. thanks for this useful link. it's appreciated. dave
|
|
budnoel
Active User Joined: 16 Mar 2012 Status: Offline Points: 17 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
There doesn't appear to be any differentiation regarding density level in this new chart. Am I missing something? |
|
Tom H
Admin Group Joined: 05 Jan 2012 Location: San Diego, CA Status: Offline Points: 5718 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
The IPC-7251 for through-hole component package land pattern footprints has not been released yet.
I really don't know why IPC is taking so long. PCB Libraries, Inc. developed the Proportional Through-hole Padstack Chart which takes into consideration all 3-Tiers in a single solution. Small hole sizes use the Least Environment for the annular ring. Average hole sizes use the Nominal Environment annular ring and larger hole sizes use the Most Enviroment annular ring. Where as IPC-7251 uses the same annular ring for each environment regardless of how big the hole size is. Example: The IPC-7251 annular ring for Nominal Environment is 10 mil (0.25 mm) regardless if the hole size is 30 mil (0.76 mm) or 98 mil (2.5 mm). The proportional padstack uses a 10 mil (0.25 mm) annular ring for 30 mil (0.76 mm) hole, but the 98 mil (2.5 mm) hole has a 25 mil (0.635 mm) annular ring. PCB Libraries, Inc. position is that large holes require large annular rings for more solder but also to control heat dissipation. So the Proportional Padstack Chart meets or beats IPC-7251 standards. We will release the through-hole component families on August 11 and the user will be able to select from IPC-7251 3-Tier or use the Proportional padstack (which is the PCB Footprint Expert) default. |
|
hawesa
New User Joined: 21 Aug 2012 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 2 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi all,
Could you explain how the VIA padstack dimensions are calculated in the padstack chart?
They appear to follow a different formula to the PTH component Padtacks, unless I'm missing something!
e.g. a Level B padstack with a FHS of 0.4mm has a pad size of 1.00mm whilst in the VIA chart, a 0.4mm hole has a pad size of between 0.65mm and 0.8mm.
I realise there is no solder fillet required on a via but have been tearing what little there is left of my hair out trying to figure out how the VIA pad is calculated and if it is defined anywhere in IPC!
|
|
Tom H
Admin Group Joined: 05 Jan 2012 Location: San Diego, CA Status: Offline Points: 5718 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Vias are not specified in any IPC standard.
A through-hole that needs to support a component lead is totally different than a hole that does not ever have a component lead in it. A through-hole via simply needs to conduct current. |
|
hawesa
New User Joined: 21 Aug 2012 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 2 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I am trying to define a set of standard or default vias to be used by the layout team here and was intending to use the chart as a starting point but I need to understand how the values are calculated. We do not allow any breakout (worst case tangency) so how do we ensure the default vias provide for this?
|
|
jameshead
Expert User Joined: 20 Mar 2012 Location: Oxfordshire, UK Status: Offline Points: 576 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I've brought this up before with Tom. Like Hawesa, I've always used the standard IPC calculations for vias as well, as have a number of designers I've worked with, but then again I've also worked with a handful of designers who've thought the same as Tom.
I tried to clarify it with the IPC and got the answer back that the standard does cover vias as well as through-hole pads but other IPC people I've spoken to have thought the opposite. I think it certainly needs some clarification. I don't know if the IPC have looked at this recently and revised it? Currently I'm sticking with the IPC calculations for vias just for consistancy but I'd be perfectly happy to use the PCB Libraries padstacks for vias if the IPC updated the standard. |
|
Post Reply | Page <1234> |
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 |