PCB Libraries Forum https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/ Tue, 19 May 2026 04:42:12 +0000 Tue, 19 May 2026 03:48:35 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 12.07 30 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/RSS_topic_feed.asp <![CDATA[PCB Libraries Forum]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/forum_images/PCBLForumLogo.gif https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/ <![CDATA[General Discussion : IPC-7352 incorrect table content?]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/ipc7352-incorrect-table-content_topic3645_post14537.html#14537 Author: eCADLER_94
Subject: IPC-7352 incorrect table content?
Posted: 19 May 2026 at 3:48am

Hello,
I believe that table 3-6 "Leadless Components with Concave/Castellated Termination" cannot be correct. Let's take the Nominal column, here the Toe would be 0.15mm and the Heel 0.45mm.
In my opinion, it doesn't make much sense to pull the pad that far back. Also confusing is the note "to find Z dim" next to the Heel(JH). The formula for Z (overall length of land pattern) is:
Z = Lmax +2xJt
This therefore has nothing to do with the Heel.
In my opinion, the table values of Toe and Heel are swapped.
Do you see it that way too?"



Best regards
Johannes
]]> Tue, 19 May 2026 03:48:35 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/ipc7352-incorrect-table-content_topic3645_post14537.html#14537 <![CDATA[Version History : Footprint Expert 26.05 Released!!]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/footprint-expert-26-05-released_topic3644_post14535.html#14535 Author: Nick B
Subject: Footprint Expert 26.05 Released!!
Posted: 17 May 2026 at 11:16pm

Version 26.05 was just released!!

Fixes & Enhancements:

  • FP Designer:
    • Removed through-hole pin terminal leads in the viewer display
    • When group moving pads on the component outline, the silkscreen wasn't trimming
  • Options:
    • Terminals:
      • Inward L-Lead: updated the 'heel' solder joint goals to match the documentation
      • Outward L-Lead: fine-tuned the Side solder joint goals
      • BGA updated the Courtyard Excess. The original settings were too robust. 
    • Thermal Pad:
      • Can't change the 'Minimum Pattern to Pad Edge Space' to 0.00
      • Changed the paste mask maximum percentage from 99% to 100%
    • Changing the pad shape for Pin 1 and selecting the 'Change all Pin 1 shape - Yes' did not work properly
  • Calculators:
    • CAPAE & Crystal - update the dimensions to accommodate Min/Max to be the same value
    • SOT23 Form Factor - updated the dropdown and the official Footprint Naming Convention document
    • SOD - fixed an issue with SOD footprints not loading due to adding the non-polarized version 
  • Library Editor: 
    • Library Manager was showing the wrong row count in the task bar after adding a new blank row or rows
    • Importing an fpx into another fpx file can sometimes throw an exception
  • CAD Tool Interfaces:
    • Pantheon - units in millimeters is not getting written to the output script file

]]> Sun, 17 May 2026 23:16:08 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/footprint-expert-26-05-released_topic3644_post14535.html#14535 <![CDATA[Questions & Answers : Collapsing vs: Non-Collapsing BGA Balls]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/collapsing-vs-noncollapsing-bga-balls_topic1868_post14531.html#14531 Author: Tom H
Subject: Collapsing vs: Non-Collapsing BGA Balls
Posted: 12 May 2026 at 8:01am

The Non-Collapsing BGA calculator is used on fine pitch parts when you can't fanout all the pins in the PCB layout and you're only fanout option is via-in-pad. 

Non-Collapsing BGA pads are bigger then collapsing BGA pads to allow an annular ring for the drilling process. 

Also, if you need to solder mask define the BGA pad to pass drop tests, the solder mask will help with the pad attachment to the prepreg. During drop tests, the ball to pad joint will withstand a drop test, but a non solder mask defined pad could rip away from the prepreg causing the device to malfunction. 


]]> Tue, 12 May 2026 08:01:54 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/collapsing-vs-noncollapsing-bga-balls_topic1868_post14531.html#14531 <![CDATA[Questions & Answers : Collapsing vs: Non-Collapsing BGA Balls]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/collapsing-vs-noncollapsing-bga-balls_topic1868_post14530.html#14530 Author: m.elsayed
Subject: Collapsing vs: Non-Collapsing BGA Balls
Posted: 11 May 2026 at 8:29pm

Is the information on collapsing or non collapsing be mentioned in supplier datasheets?

Or does it just depend on the pin pitch value only?

Also is the pitch value found in IPC-7352 standard?

]]> Mon, 11 May 2026 20:29:25 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/collapsing-vs-noncollapsing-bga-balls_topic1868_post14530.html#14530 <![CDATA[Product Suggestions : Adding Footprint Naming Convention Twice]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/adding-footprint-naming-convention-twice_topic3528_post14529.html#14529 Author: Tom H
Subject: Adding Footprint Naming Convention Twice
Posted: 10 May 2026 at 2:18pm

The PCB Libraries Naming Convention includes IPC-7352 for through-hole. 

IPC-7351B naming convention for Surface Mount is very close to IPC-7352. 

IPC-7352 naming convention for surface mount was enhanced to include Thermal Pad, Terminal Lead and BGA Ball Diameter data. 

I would not use IPC-7351B for anything, including the mathematical model, solder joint goals, and naming conventions. 7351B is 16 years old and obsolete. 

]]> Sun, 10 May 2026 14:18:10 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/adding-footprint-naming-convention-twice_topic3528_post14529.html#14529 <![CDATA[Product Suggestions : Adding Footprint Naming Convention Twice]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/adding-footprint-naming-convention-twice_topic3528_post14528.html#14528 Author: m.elsayed
Subject: Adding Footprint Naming Convention Twice
Posted: 10 May 2026 at 8:35am

When I check PCB Libraries Naming Convention, what IPC standard naming will be applied for through-hole parts?

]]> Sun, 10 May 2026 08:35:16 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/adding-footprint-naming-convention-twice_topic3528_post14528.html#14528 <![CDATA[Footprints / Land Patterns : Trimming heels under the component body]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/trimming-heels-under-the-component-body_topic12_post14522.html#14522 Author: Tom H
Subject: Trimming heels under the component body
Posted: 27 Apr 2026 at 8:32am

The link is for a paper that I wrote when I was employed by Mentor Graphics in 2010. 

Siemens took it down. 

Minimum Trim Standoff:

  • Only affects Gullwing Leads the A1 dimension
  • Dieter Bergman said pad trimming is not an IPC-7351 Standard
  • IPC J-STD-001 says that pads under low profile parts with A1 dimension is 0.00 should be trimmed for plastic body packages
  • The default setting is 0.03 meaning that any A1 dimension less than 0.03 will get trimmed
  • The trimming is to the Nominal Package Body dimension
  • Many people turn it off by entering a value of 0.00
  • Some people tone it down to 0.01 so that it only affects part with A1 being 0.00
  • The main reason for customers who requested this feature was to compensate for component manufacturers to limit their ‘L’ tolerance. In most 1.27 mm pitch SOICs, the ‘L’ dimension is min 0.41 and max 1.27. The tolerance is +/-0.43.
  • Today, component manufacturers have a maximum ‘L’ tolerance of +/- 0.25 and a nominal tolerance of +/- 0.15.
  • See the attached TI Case Code D0008A. the ‘L’ tolerance is +/- 0.43 which is too robust so Texas Instruments Recommended Pattern trims the pad from going under the package.

Summary: if the ‘L’ tolerance is +/- 0.15 there’s no needfor trimming. Even component manufacturers don’t use their ‘L’ tolerance fortheir pad stack calculation. A ‘L’ tolerance of 0.43 is way too robust, but inthe 1980s and 1990s the ‘L’ tolerance was +/- 0.43 but today it’s +/- 0.15. Thelarge ‘L’ tolerance is the only reason for Minimum Trim Standoff Height.

I hope this explains the issue.



]]> Mon, 27 Apr 2026 08:32:08 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/trimming-heels-under-the-component-body_topic12_post14522.html#14522 <![CDATA[Footprints / Land Patterns : Trimming heels under the component body]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/trimming-heels-under-the-component-body_topic12_post14521.html#14521 Author: m.elsayed
Subject: Trimming heels under the component body
Posted: 27 Apr 2026 at 4:59am

Thanks, 

I have touched this point and try use the explanation here to understand point, however I notice the below link doesn't work. 

Can provide working link please to check it's content.

http://communities.mentor.com/mgcx/servlet/JiveServlet/download/28883-8838/PCB%20Design%20Optimization%20Starts%20in%20the%20CAD%20Library.pdf

]]> Mon, 27 Apr 2026 04:59:32 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/trimming-heels-under-the-component-body_topic12_post14521.html#14521 <![CDATA[General Discussion : Which PCB Design Software is the Best?]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/which-pcb-design-software-is-the-best_topic3020_post14519.html#14519 Author: Digitalmonk
Subject: Which PCB Design Software is the Best?
Posted: 22 Apr 2026 at 4:26am

There is no single “best” PCB design software—it really depends on your project requirements and experience level. 

For beginners, tools like KiCad are great because they are free and easy to use. 

For advanced and complex designs, solutions like Altium Designer or OrCAD are more suitable. 

Also, choosing the right tools is important when working on Embedded Software Development services, as hardware and software integration plays a key role.

]]> Wed, 22 Apr 2026 04:26:15 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/which-pcb-design-software-is-the-best_topic3020_post14519.html#14519 <![CDATA[Version History : Footprint Expert 26.04 Released!!]]> https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/footprint-expert-26-04-released_topic3641_post14518.html#14518 Author: Nick B
Subject: Footprint Expert 26.04 Released!!
Posted: 21 Apr 2026 at 2:41pm

Version 26.04 was just released!!

Fixes & Enhancements:

  • FP Designer:
    • Creating a surface mount Bottom Side pad with solder mask, the Pad Stack Name did not include the solder mask
    • When selecting a Bottom Side SMD pad that was placed, the program opened the wrong properties dialog box
    • Fixed an issue with courtyard excess for Bottom Side SMD pad stacks
    • Added a new feature for adding lead zero's for A01 - A09
    • Updated the ODA Pad Stack Naming Convention Documentation
    • Fixed an issue with pan and zoom. When adding pins, sometimes the program locked up
  • Library Editor:
    • New feature for adding New Rows and Copy/Paste an existing row into the new rows without the Part Number
      • When all the cell data is the same except the part numbers are different
    • Saving footprint rotation in FPX was removed. The footprint rotation now follows the Master Options.
    • Cleaned up the user interface editing functions including Undo/Redo
    • When updating a Row, the program didn't ask to update the Physical Description
    • When columns were deleted and a new FPX file was imported with the same column header, the additional columns were not added
  • Calculators:
    • Surface Mount:
      • LCC - 2-Sided version:
      • The heel did not follow the solder joint goals in Options
      • The pin 1 polarity dot was missing
    • Through-hole: 
      • SIP - Single-Inline-Package:
      • No silkscreen trimming for offset pads
      • Footprint Name wasn't getting the correct pin pitch 
    • All component families can now move to FP Designer
  • Options:
    • Through-hole Rounded Square pad shape did not follow the Option settings when assigned to the 'Default Pad Shape'


]]> Tue, 21 Apr 2026 14:41:49 +0000 https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/footprint-expert-26-04-released_topic3641_post14518.html#14518