Re: gEDA-user: RFC --- Land Pattern (Footprint) Names

[Dan McMahill <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

John Luciani wrote:
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> After reading the second point (again) I think it needs to be
> clarified. The point I wanted to make is that footprint names that
> contain only an industry standard body size specification (0805, 0603,
> etc.) are not used.
>
> The footprint names for chip resistors, chip capacitors and chip
> inductors would be:
>
>   resistor footprint  = RESC + body size specification
>   capacitor footprint = CAPC + body size specification
>   inductor footprint  = INDC + body size specification
>
> Three different footprint names for the same body size specification.
>
> I will rewrite the second point when I update the document.


ah, but if you look carefully, for example at CAPC1005M, INDC1005M, and 
RESC1005M, you'll see that the footprints are slightly different.  I 
think this is because the z-dimension is different on these packages 
even though they have the same x and y dimension.  Of course, I still 
think things become messy if different vendors or even different series 
from the same vendor have a different z-dimension.

> On 9/6/05, Dan McMahill <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > John Luciani wrote:
> >
> > >  I have placed a first draft of my land pattern naming convention at
> > > http://www.luciani.org
> > > The naming convention is based on IPC-7351.
> > >
> > > Please send questions, comments, observations either to the list or to
> > > (jluciani) *AT* gmail.com
> > > (as appropriate).
> > >
> > > (* jcl *)
> >
> > sorry for the extremely slow reply John.  In your document, the 2nd
> > issue you mention about IPC-7351 is that for things like 0603 packages,
> > they embed capacitor/resistor/etc into the name.  That's done, I
> > believe, because of the differing heights of those components.
> >
> > -Dan
>
> >