Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 2, 2020. It is now read-only.

SOT-143 footprint #2381

Open
matianfu opened this issue Aug 6, 2020 · 6 comments · May be fixed by #2415
Open

SOT-143 footprint #2381

matianfu opened this issue Aug 6, 2020 · 6 comments · May be fixed by #2415
Labels
Enhancement Improves existing footprint in the library

Comments

@matianfu
Copy link

matianfu commented Aug 6, 2020

I have check several documents for this package, including:

Apparently, the sot-143 footprint in current KiCAD library is way too large. It is for wave soldering, not for reflow. Furthermore, Pad for pin 1 is misplaced. The edge is not well aligned. There is no reason to do so.

@chschlue chschlue added Bug Fix footprint existing in the library Enhancement Improves existing footprint in the library and removed Bug Fix footprint existing in the library labels Aug 6, 2020
@chschlue
Copy link
Contributor

chschlue commented Aug 6, 2020

Are you willing to submit a fix?

@matianfu
Copy link
Author

matianfu commented Aug 6, 2020

I don't know if there is a standard? Including:

  1. the line width of silkscreen, fab, and courtyard.
  2. the fab and courtyard enlargement compared with the physical size and occupied area provided by the manufacturer.

Is there any agreement on those value? If so, I am happy to try it. :)

Also, the 3D model seems inappropriate for this package. All three documents listed in the first post agrees that the maximum distance between pin edges are no more than 2.5mm. But the SOT-143.wrl model seems to be at least 2.8mm width. I think this should be fixed either.

@chschlue
Copy link
Contributor

chschlue commented Aug 6, 2020

Short answer: you can use the line widths of the existing FP, they're fine; fab should be the nominal body outline while courtyard should be 0.25mm from fab and copper.
Long answer: https://kicad-pcb.org/libraries/klc/

If anything is unclear, feel free to ask.

@perigoso
Copy link
Contributor

I was working on this because i needed this package, i added a suffix to the originals _WaveSolder but it seems it's not done anywhere else, should we keep the old footprints? under what name? maybe specify the pad sizes

@chschlue
Copy link
Contributor

If there is demand (is SMT wave soldering still a thing?), I guess it would be fine to add _WaveSolder footprints.

@perigoso
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think it's relevant anymore, we don't have wave solder footprints for anything else, I'll submit the PR without them.

@perigoso perigoso linked a pull request Aug 25, 2020 that will close this issue
@cpresser cpresser linked a pull request Sep 17, 2020 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Enhancement Improves existing footprint in the library
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants