Re: gEDA-user: SOT23

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 10:05:42AM -0800, Steve Meier wrote:
> Ok, pull out JEDEC Publication 95 Book three. Everybody with me and have

Where can I doenload JEDEC Publication 95 Book three ?

Cl<
> 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
>