X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-help-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-help AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 10:57:30 +0200
From: "Smilie (smilie AT posteo DOT de) [via geda-help AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-help AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-help AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-help] Thank you verry much, next Idea - IPC proof
Message-ID: <20170529105730.72ab2144@debian>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1705290458510.27212@igor2priv>
References: <20170515111111 DOT 1ba62f47 AT debian>
	<CAJZxidAk2Ur3B1Hox5_iWJGXiLyYZZXikJnnjxUt_kXUL==CQg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20170516163211 DOT 2d920db6 AT debian>
	<CAJZxidDBoc+HdL9VvCSfuytMTO+g=kLiicJ6HrJSeuo-BCQDgw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20170529010708 DOT 29be8939 AT debian>
	<20170529022113 DOT GB12397 AT stuge DOT se>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1705290458510 DOT 27212 AT igor2priv>
Organization: Individuum auf blauem Planet
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: geda-help AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-help AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

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