Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/07/19/14:41:38
On Jul 19, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Yvette S. Hirth, CCP, CDP (yvette AT dbtgroup DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> On 07/19/2015 08:31 AM, John Doty wrote:
>
> (snippage)
>> We have a standard for footprint naming that applies to more than 95% of components:
>> http://wiki.geda-project.org/geda:pcb_footprint_naming_conventions.
>
>> That’s the place to start. I think these are what belong in library components.
> (snippage)
>
> hrm. i note that there are dups in the "standard for footprint naming":
>
> > Dual in line packages with up to 22 100 mil spaced pins and 300 mil
> row spacing are called DIPn.
> > Dual in line packages with 24 or more 100 mil spaced pins and 300 mil
> row spacing are called DIPnN.
> > Dual in line packages with 100 mil spaced pins and 400 mil row
> spacing are called DIPnH.
> > Dual in line packages with 24 or more 100 mil spaced pins and 600 mil
> row spacing are called DIPn.
> > Shrink dual in line packages with up to 24 70 mil spaced pins and 300
> mil row spacing are called SDIPn.
> > Shrink dual in line packages with more than 24 70 mil spaced pins and
> 400 mil row spacing are called SDIPn.
>
> so "DIPn" refers to inline packages that have both 300mil row spacing
Only if they have less than 24 pins.
> and 600mil row spacing,
Only if they have more than 22 pins.
> and "SDIPn" refers to inline packages with 300mil row spacing
Only if they have less than 26 pins.
> and 400mil row spacing.
Only if they have more than 24 pins.
>
> shouldn't they (diff DIP packages with diff row spacing) be unique?
They are unique, just not in the way you expect. It’s a minor short cut, based, I suppose, on the idea that the longer DIP packages tend to be wider. Make those DIPn, make the exceptions DIPnN. I wouldn’t have done it that way, but it’s what we’ve had for years, and it’s not terrible.
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com
- Raw text -