Mail Archives: geda-help/2017/05/29/04:58:04
I have the problem, that i have to justify the dimensions of footprint.
I must quote a normative.
The IPC is the first that i know and that i can use.
My QA guy ask my for such a standard.
Am Mon, 29 May 2017 05:08:39 +0200 (CEST)
schrieb gedah AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu:
> On Mon, 29 May 2017, Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via
> geda-help AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>
> > Smilie (smilie AT posteo DOT de) [via geda-help AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> >> We can add some SMD-Footprints to the standard library in
> >> accordance to the IPC.
> > ..
> >> And more Easy is the including of some standard footprints
> >> "IPC0603", "IPC0805","IPC2220"....
> >>
> >> What you think about.
> >
> > Footprints are an interesting topic. The thing is, many people want
> > to make small variations on standardized footprints, myself
> > included.
> >
> > There are different reasons to do so, one is to simplify hand
> > assembly, another is to adjust for board fab parameters.
>
> That's just a set of optional parameters in the parametric footprint
> model; the stock parametrics for pcb-rnd supports that for most
> footprints. For example in a so() footprint the main parameters
> are the number of pins and row spacing, but a lot of detailed
> parameters are optionally accessible, like pad_thickness=xx,
> pad_clearance=xx.
>
> > I think a new data model for (among other things) footprints which
> > includes such parameters would be useful, and I would love to spend
> > a month or two working on that, but I'm not able to do so at the
> > moment. :\
>
> Slightly related: we did a feature request poll among active pcb-rnd
> users a few months ago. The most popular features, the winners were:
> ediatable mask/paste layers and new footprint model. (We are going to
> release the implementation for the former in a few days.) I've
> already allocated a month of pure coding for the new footprint model.
> Will announce details soon, on geda-user@.
>
> Regards,
>
> Igor2
- Raw text -