PCB Libraries Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > PCB Footprint Expert > Questions & Answers
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Specified vs calculated nominal sizes
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Specified vs calculated nominal sizes

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
JJonas View Drop Down
Advanced User
Advanced User


Joined: 21 Apr 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 113
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJonas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Specified vs calculated nominal sizes
    Posted: 13 Apr 2015 at 3:54am
Usually lower and upper deviations from nominal sizes are specified to be the same. However, that is not always the case. For example, nominal size can be specified to be 1.0 with lower deviation of -0.1 and upper deviation of +0.3. In this case your application recalculates nominal size to 1.1. This issue becomes relevant in case I select silkscreen outline to be drawn to nominal body size - I expect to have manufacturer specified width and length, not recalculated ones. What is also affected is 3D models.

Why have you chose to recalculate manufacturer specified nominal sizes?
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: 5718
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tom H Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Apr 2015 at 7:00am
The Tolerance Deviation of -0.10 mm to +0.30 mm does not play into the mathematical model of the IPC-7351 land pattern calculation for the resulting pad size. You can enter -0.10 mm to +0.30 mm or +/- 0.20 mm and get the same results.
 
Also, it makes no difference if a component manufacturer only provides Nominal package dimensions. There still is a minimum of 0.10 mm +/- tolerance on every dimension. No manufacturer can produce component packages that are 100% perfect every time. i.e.: no one should ever put 0.00 for a tolerance.
 
We've been creating land pattern calculators since 2001 and while we really appreciate users to challenge the standard to find flaws or suggest a better solution. We know that some mfr. tolerances are uneven and you can put them in the calculator uneven, but the program will make them even.
 
Maybe this is something we need to look into for the V2016 Library Expert rewrite. The code is getting old and we need to create a brand new tool to make it look like 2016 to work with Windows 10 coming this October.
 
 
 
Stay connected - follow us! X - LinkedIn
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.328 seconds.