PCB Libraries Forum : Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/ Mon, 06 Apr 2026 22:01:00 +0000 Wed, 03 Jul 2013 07:43:30 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 12.07 360 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=965 <![CDATA[PCB Libraries Forum]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/forum_images/PCBLForumLogo.gif https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/ <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : Will be fixed in V2013.07. ]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3825.html#3825 Author: Jeff.M
Subject: 965
Posted: 03 Jul 2013 at 7:43am

Will be fixed in V2013.07.]]> Wed, 03 Jul 2013 07:43:30 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3825.html#3825 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : Ok, I see the problem you&#039;re...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3822.html#3822 Author: Jeff.M
Subject: 965
Posted: 02 Jul 2013 at 9:21pm

Ok, I see the problem you're reporting now.
Thanks for finding this.
I'll post a fix when I have one.
Jeff 
]]> Tue, 02 Jul 2013 21:21:28 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3822.html#3822 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : I just tried repeating the steps...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3821.html#3821 Author: dwaltoneng
Subject: 965
Posted: 02 Jul 2013 at 4:23pm

I just tried repeating the steps listed in the previous post, but this time I saved both of the results to a library. When the components were created, they looked like the screen shots in an earlier post, but when I retrieve them from the library, they both looked the same as the screen shot for "Surface mount pad defined first". This is possibly because the pad stack for the unused through hole pad has been discarded.
If I actually place the central hole, the problem remains.

tst_3 sequence:
Define a rectangular body H=0.4 W=1.5 L=2.1
Define a 1.1 x 0.6 surface mount pad.
Define a non plated through mounting pad with a 2.7mm hole.
Place the hole at 0,0.
Place two of the surface mount pads at 3.6mm centers.

tst_4 sequence:
Define a rectangular body H=0.4 W=1.5 L=2.1
Define a non plated through mounting pad with a 2.7mm hole.
Define a 1.1 x 0.6 surface mount pad.
Place the hole at 0,0.
Place two of the surface mount pads at 3.6mm centers.

uploads/2945/courtyard_test.fpx shows the results of defining the component.
]]> Tue, 02 Jul 2013 16:23:33 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3821.html#3821 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : Jeff.M wrote:I&#039;m having...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3743.html#3743 Author: dwaltoneng
Subject: 965
Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 7:16pm

Originally posted by Jeff.M Jeff.M wrote:

I'm having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here.
I don't see a hole in  pictures provided for this part.  The data sheet is incomplete in that it provides no body details and from what I can do in the way of trying to reproduce the report isn't exposing any problem.  Plus the solder mask as defined is can not be created in the FP designer.
Can you provide a more detailed explanation?
We may need an on-line meeting.
Thanks.

Page 9 of the data sheet http://catalog.osram-os.com/jsp/download.jsp?name=LG_M47K_Pb_free.pdf&url=/media/_en/Graphics/00042011_0.pdf I quoted in my original post does provide body details.
This part is a reverse mounted LED. The entire body of the part sits in a 2.7mm hole.

Please try the following sequence:
Define a rectangular body H=0.4 W=1.5 L=2.1
Define a 1.1 x 0.6 surface mount pad.
Define a non plated through mounting pad with a 2.7mm hole.
Place two of the surface mount pads at 3.6mm centers.

Please reset and try the following sequence:
Define a rectangular body H=0.4 W=1.5 L=2.1
Define a non plated through mounting pad with a 2.7mm hole.
Define a 1.1 x 0.6 surface mount pad.
Place two of the surface mount pads at 3.6mm centers.

The previous two sequences yield different results, even though the through hole pad has not even been placed yet.

]]> Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:16:23 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3743.html#3743 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : I&#039;m having a hard time figuring...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3742.html#3742 Author: Jeff.M
Subject: 965
Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 5:58pm

I'm having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here.
I don't see a hole in  pictures provided for this part.  The data sheet is incomplete in that it provides no body details and from what I can do in the way of trying to reproduce the report isn't exposing any problem.  Plus the solder mask as defined is can not be created in the FP designer.
Can you provide a more detailed explanation?
We may need an on-line meeting.
Thanks.
]]> Mon, 24 Jun 2013 17:58:59 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3742.html#3742 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : Is this behavior expected? ]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3729.html#3729 Author: dwaltoneng
Subject: 965
Posted: 21 Jun 2013 at 4:30pm

Is this behavior expected?
]]> Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:30:39 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3729.html#3729 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : It turns out that it is the order...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3648.html#3648 Author: dwaltoneng
Subject: 965
Posted: 14 Jun 2013 at 3:04pm

It turns out that it is the order that you define pads in that makes the difference. If you define the surface mount pad first, when you place the pad, the courtyard will be adjusted to fit that pad. If you define the large through hole pad before the surface mount pad, when you place the surface mount pad, the courtyard is adjusted as though you placed the through hole pad.
 
Surface mount pad defined first -
 

 
Large through hole pad define first, but not placed
 

]]> Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:04:19 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3648.html#3648 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : In the footprint designer the...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3641.html#3641 Author: Jeff.M
Subject: 965
Posted: 14 Jun 2013 at 7:49am

In the footprint designer the silkscreen can get pushed out to comply with silk-to-pad clearance rules.
 
When this happens the courtyard can also, but not necessarily always, get pushed out to keep the silkscreen inside the courtyard.  
 
If the shape is square or rectangular, this should only happen on a side where the violation occurs.  
 
If you can provide a screen image I may be able to explain further or a correction may be required in the software. 
 
]]> Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:49:41 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3641.html#3641 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : I&#039;m going to have Jeff answer...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3638.html#3638 Author: Tom H
Subject: 965
Posted: 13 Jun 2013 at 8:15pm

I'm going to have Jeff answer this question from a programmers view point. So you'll have to wait until tomorrow for the answer.

 
I hope you're coming to the SMCBA conference in Melbourne in September -
http://www.pcblibraries.com/forum/smcba-conference-melbourne-australia_topic941.html
Hope to see you there!
 
]]> Thu, 13 Jun 2013 20:15:13 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3638.html#3638 <![CDATA[Courtyard Size Versus Padstacks : When I define the component body,...]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3637.html#3637 Author: dwaltoneng
Subject: 965
Posted: 13 Jun 2013 at 8:08pm

When I define the component body, the courtyard and silkscreen are both auto generated. When I add pads, both the courtyard and the silkscreen expand. Why does the amount the courtyard and silkscreen expand depend not only on the pads that have been placed, but also on the pad shapes that have been defined but not yet placed?
]]> Thu, 13 Jun 2013 20:08:53 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/courtyard-size-versus-padstacks_topic965_post3637.html#3637