kicad-lib-committers team mailing list archive

[Carl Poirier <carl.poirier.2@xxxxxxxxx>]

OK, here is a small something to begin with.

1. Specific package feature first, not separated by anything.
2. Package name, numbers separated from letters using hyphen (SOT-89 as
well)
3. Variation of package, separated by another hyphen.
4. If it's a manufacturer-specific package, name can be appended, separated
by an underscore.

Every acronym has all of its letters capitalized, obviously. Manufacturer
name depends on how it's written normally. Ex: NEC, Microchip

I'm waiting for comments.

Regards,

Carl

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Carl Poirier <carl.poirier.2@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Simply sending to all, because it is of great interest, the reply from
> Lorenzo which was addressed only to me:
>
> > JEDEC is freely availably, just register.
>
> > IPC is not, I have some of the (paid) relevant standards, but it's
> mostly for the formulas and constant tables. The naming standard for IPC
> (both packages and padstacks) is free, get it here:
>
> > http://landpatterns.ipc.org/IPC-7351BNamingConvention.pdf
>
> > However it's *so* ugly that I think nobody actually uses it except their
> > calculator (made by Mentor AFAIK)
>
> > As the fact 'is JEDEC standard': yes, *most* of the stuff out there
> > follows a JEDEC standard, usually a MS (for SOIC) or MO (for
> > SOT/SSOT/TSOP). Also TO are in wide use. However take care:
> > while the commonly used SOT-23 is actually TO-236 (and with that I mean
> > that *usually* the manufacturer package is compatible with the JEDEC
> > standard), the commonly called SOT-23-5 and SOT-23-6 (the 5 and 6 pin
> > version with the same body) are usually MO-193 *or* MO-178 (hint: the
> > height changes is different...). Also the (JEITA, IIRC) SC packages
> > often are 'compatible' with JEDEC ones: the SC-59 is for most practical
> > purpose a TO-236 (yes, another name for the SOT-23 :D)
>
> > Sadly there are exceptions: for example switchers in DPAKs (or D2PAK,
> > D3PAK) have usually custom packages (like the National/TI TJ7A),
> > Microchip has an 'oversize' SOIC-8 (same land pattern but wider body)
> > and even out of standard TQFP (the C04-110, used for big dsPICs).
>
> > As for the hypen issue: the official name *has* the hypen, but the part
> > before is always alphabetic and the part after is always numeric so
> > there is no risk of confusion. Letter after the number can be the
> > variation code when talking about the package (TO-236AB, for example)
> > but be careful because TO-236H means 'issue H of the TO-236 standard'.
>
> > And, by the way, the official designator is R-PDSO-G (never seen it
> > outside the drawing, of course).
>
> > My convention for hypens is: use it between manufacturer and code, when
> > it's needed for resolving ambiguities and for pinout name variations.
> > So I have TO236-BEC, TYCO-RV3402, BOURNS-SDTM and so on. Otherwise no
> > hypens; example R2512K is a 2512 resistor with kelvin connections.
>
> > That works for me.
>
> > And don't forget about the zero orientation :D (hint: ISO, JEDEC and IPC
> > differs :D)
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 2:44 PM, John Beard <john.j.beard@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>> On 10/03/14 15:10, Carl Poirier wrote:
>> > Let's continue our discussion about this. Lorenzo, do you have access to
>> > the relevant documents?
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Vesa Solonen <vesa.solonen@xxxxxxxx
>> > <mailto:vesa.solonen@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> >
>> >26/02/14 11:00, Kerusey Karyu kirjoitti:
>> >>
>> >> In 25 lutego 2014 19:46 Carl Poirier wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Regarding your last email, do you have any reason why not
>> >>> to put a dash between "SOT" and "23", for example?
>> >>>
>> >
>> >The most important thing to consider when deciding is JEDEC standard. It
>> >seems they say with dash.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't know if this standard is the one you are looking for, but
>> JEDEC Publication Number 95, Section 1.6 "Outline Classification"
>> might be along the right lines when talking about a JEDEC Outline
>> Number:
>>
>> > 1.6 a) Outlines are designated with two letters (DO, TO, MO, UO, CO)
>> > followed by sequential numbers (e.g., DO-35, TO-220, MO-16).
>> >
>> > 1.6 b) Two letters follow the number to designate which member of
>> > the family of variation (e.g., DO-OO1AA, TO-226AB, MO-069AE). Often
>> > the only differentiation between variations is the lead count.
>>
>> JEDEC Standard 30 (I looked at Rev. F), section 3.1 describes a
>> "descriptive designation", as opposed to the outline number.
>>
>> >
>> > 3.1 General:
>> >
>> > ...a mandatory field (shown below) consisting of a three-letter basic
>> > package designator that indicates the package outline style and
>> > terminal position or form, preceded by a field to indicate the
>> > package-body material. This mandatory package designator may be
>> > extended, through the use user-selected fields, to provide
>> > additional package information such specific package features,
>> > package differentiators, terminal count, and supplemental
>> > information separated from the descriptive designator by a slash (/).
>>
>> An example is "TS-PDSO2-44(50)/5.3x10.2-1.27". It doesn't say
>> anything about the presence or not of a hyphen between "DSO" and
>> "2". However, the examples in Table C.1 of JESD30F uses "SOT89" as an
>> example. This is the only descriptive designator in the table
>> without a hyphen (others include T-PQFP-44).
>>
>> We also don't see the hyphenation used in section 3.1 in everyday
>> usage of packages like TSSOPs, where TS is a "specific package
>> feature" (thin shink, see table 3) and "SOP" is the "package
>> designator" (table 1), rather we see a hyphen in between TS and the rest.
>>
>> So it seems to me that JESD30 and JEDEC PN 70 don't fully define the
>> question that you're asking re hyphenation, and aren't even totally
>> consistent with their own examples. Moreover, SOT may be a bad
>> example to use, as it is unique in not having a hyphen in the
>> examples table.
>>
>> Sorry to not have a cut-and-dry answer!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>>
>> --
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers
>> Post to     : kicad-lib-committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
>