Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> It seems the only way to deal with them is to create each footprint from
> scratch eachtime I have to use one. Nearly eachtime I try to use an
> existing footprint things turn out wrong.
> There seems to be nearly no standardization in these things. Each chip
> manufac
Well, there is a fair amount of standardization. Far from perfect but
some exits. Devices which use JEDEC packages seem pretty good, few
exceptions where you have to watch out for pin number. But JEDEC doesn't
cover every available package.
I have been working on a spread sheet where I try to capt
On Jul 31, 2008, at 1:14 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote:
>> It seems the only way to deal with them is to create each
>> footprint from
>> scratch eachtime I have to use one. Nearly eachtime I try to use an
>> existing footprint things turn out wrong.
>
> We -all- feel your pain.
Yep. The one that
On Thursday 31 July 2008 17:29:52 Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> It seems the only way to deal with them is to create each footprint from
> scratch eachtime I have to use one. Nearly eachtime I try to use an
> existing footprint things turn out wrong.
We -all- feel your pain.
It seems the only way to deal with them is to create each footprint from
scratch eachtime I have to use one. Nearly eachtime I try to use an
existing footprint things turn out wrong.
There seems to be nearly no standardization in these things. Each chip
manufacturer gives them a different name, pcb
5 matches
Mail list logo
