Re: gEDA-user: SOT23

[Steve Meier <smeier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ok, pull out JEDEC Publication 95 Book three. Everybody with me and have
their copy handy ;) 

The following part matches the JEDEC specification for MO-178 which is a
version of SOT23-5

http://cache.national.com/ds/LP/LP3985.pdf

I prefer the JEDEC-95 specification for packages because.... components
which reference them have the correct dimensions and pin numbering.

The JEDEC standard JEP-95 may be viewed on line at www.jedec.org
To reach the JEP-95 pdf files you need to register for free.

I am curious to know which SOT23-5 packages differ from the MO-178
standard. Can some one post an example.

Thanks,

Steve Meier


On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 07:07, Daniel J Wisehart wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 January 2005 05:39, Dan McMahill wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 12:14:40AM -0800, Matt Ettus wrote:
> > > Is there a SOT23-5 footprint somewhere in PCB?  And does anyone have a
> > > mapping between SOTxx and SCxx numbers?
> >
> > There are some SOT and SC footprints in ~geda.  Especially with these,
> > you really really really (I can't stress it enough) want to verify
> > the footprint before using them.  This is because I know of at least
> > 2 different ways the pins on a SOT23-3 are numbered by different
> > vendors.
> 
> I agree with that.  We used the SOT23-5 footprint and it was wrong for our 
> part, so we had to glue the parts on upside down on our prototype. :-(
> 
> Regards,
> Daniel