 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering ElectronicsKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Electronics Forum / CAD / January 2008component dimensions
Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what is found in the usual manufacturers data base? I know the manufacturers specs are usually quite adequate for board layout but I am making solid models of components that I deal with and would not like them to look funny. Bob >Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what is found >in the usual manufacturers data base? I know the manufacturers specs are >usually quite adequate for board layout but I am making solid models of >components that I deal with and would not like them to look funny. Many manufacturers will also reference the relevant EIA/JEDEC specification. If they do reference it, then they should conform to the specified specification. Also look at http://www.ipc.org/ContentPage.aspx?Pageid=4.6 There are also a few companies that sell 3D models for electronic components. Regards Anton Erasmus >>Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what is >>found [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Regards > Anton Erasmus I do not have an issue with models, just how they are defined dimensionally. http://home.earthlink.net/~sycochkn1/SimpleBalancedReceiver.pdf Bob >>>Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what is >>>found [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >http://home.earthlink.net/~sycochkn1/SimpleBalancedReceiver.pdf Your models look quite nice. What software do you use to do them in ? Regards Anton Erasmus >>>>Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what is >>>>found [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Regards > Anton Erasmus That was done with AutoCAD 2005. I am intending to make an AutoCAD drawing with blocks containing the solids, pad stacks, silkscreen etc. I intend to use polylines for traces. after I generate my Gerber and Excellon files from the DXF I intend to convert from Gerber and Excellon back to DXF and insert the computer generated file back into AutoCad to generate the solid version of the etched layers and vias. Bob >>>>>Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what is >>>>>found [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > >Bob Hi, Bob:- How are you converting between DXF and the Gerber & Excellon files? >>>>>>Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what is >>>>>>found [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > How are you converting between DXF and the Gerber & Excellon files? I am rewriting my old program. I should probably try the old one and modify it. Bob >>>>>>>Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what >>>>>>>is [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > Bob What I do is model all my components up with the SMT or TH pads attached. After placing the component models, I then apply a .gif of the silkscreen and traces to the surface of the board. Looks very nice fully rendered, and keeps the file sizes under control. I've done some samples of manually created models of the traces, and I think applying a graphic of them and the silkscreen looks more realistic. Once I have a real board in hand, I can flatbed scan it and apply the graphic of the real thing. Also, having the pads modeled lets me apply a metallic surface to that part of the model, as they are not covered by soldermask. I use IronCAD which does a nice job with photorealistic rendering. Not familiar with how AutoCAD 2005 works for this... I've also looked for quite some time for a method of converting the gerber data to .dxf or preferably .sat or some other 3D format (adding a slight extrusion to the traces) but have not had much success in finding anything. Protel99se has a "board in 3D" feature, but cannot export the file. Newer versions of the Altium software can export, but I'm not upgrading just to get that feature. This would be faster than working with the graphic images for quick stuff though. Chris >>>>>>>>Are the EIA/JDEC dimensional specifications more complete than what >>>>>>>>is [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] > > Chris Flashes are blocks. The aperture name is defined by the block name. The aperture definition is defined by the name of a block nested in the aperture name block. The location of the flash is defined by the insertion point of the block What appears in your drawing is arbitrary. Traces are polylines. The aperture definition is determined by the width of the polyline. The start and end points of the traces is determined by the vertices of the polyline. The name of the gerber file is defined by the layer name. for gerber RS274D the apertures are defined in a seperate file. for RS274X the apertures are defined in the gerber file and rest of the header information is entered manually. The Excellon file is defined in a similar manner. Component definitions are done manually using blocks made with the aperture blocks. When you insert a component The component model, the top assy, the silkscreen, the solder mask, the pad stack etcb all come with it. What ever is left over is done manually. Bob |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.