Mydata package libraries

Subscribe to Thread

All - I'm hoping I can get a little feedback here on my pack... - Oct 24, 2006 by BillyD

Hello Billy, We have 6 machines tied to a server. I can s... - Oct 24, 2006 by

Everybody who uses basic "part-type" naming conventions for ... - Oct 24, 2006 by JAX

We have Mydata's as well. What I would like to do is have p... - Oct 24, 2006 by Stephen

Thanks all, for the help. Mydata pretty much parroted what w... - Oct 25, 2006 by BillyD

BillyD

#44673

Mydata package libraries | 24 October, 2006

All - I'm hoping I can get a little feedback here on my package libraries for my Mydata machines. I have four tied to a server right now, and I have several operators that apparently like to make packages, so I have some called 0805-05-A-MY-9-2 and the like. I'm about to blast the entire thing, and start over from scratch. (Why? Because now when a program hits the floor, the operators change all the package assignments, then when a part number is used in a future program, it gets changed back to the original, and the cycle begins anew) Basically, I want the programmers and the operators on the same page. So, we're thinking of minimizing the library to maybe three 0805 packages, etc. (Obviously IC's and BGAs and the like require many options) But not passives. I'll then password protect the libraries. So, what I'm wondering is, what would be a reasonable amount of each style package? have any of you dealt with this before? Advice, thoughts, etc.?

reply »

#44678

Mydata package libraries | 24 October, 2006

Hello Billy,

We have 6 machines tied to a server. I can see where this would be a problem. Basically, the answer is you would need a package for every significantly different package that you are placing. I don't think you can just say 3 0805 packages if you actually have 6 that you place. Basically we have used a naming convention recommended by Mydata that starts with the comp type xLength XWidth-Height (e.g. IND 1.6x.8-.8) This way, the measuments are in the name of the package and is easy to find when creating a new board. We also have only several people who are allowed to create/modify packages. This is something that you need to keep consistant.

Good Luck

Chris

reply »

JAX

#44679

Mydata package libraries | 24 October, 2006

Everybody who uses basic "part-type" naming conventions for machine package codes will have this same issue unless restrictions are placed on who, how, and when the package codes can be altered.

Some alternative methods to solving this problem: 1. Use detailed naming conventions (X, Y, H, Standoff height, Lead type, Lead width, etc...) Downside is confusion of specialized components and max characters allowed for some machines. 2. Use Standardized naming convention (JEDEC Outline designation) Downside is knowing what the part is without a cross-reference list. 3. Use Part Number for package code (Does not require as much process controls as above, unless you have multiple manufacturers for single internal part numbers... although differences should be negligible) Downside is the increased size of your database.

reply »

Stephen

#44682

Mydata package libraries | 24 October, 2006

We have Mydata's as well. What I would like to do is have printouts in a binder. But I'm not sure the easiest way to do this and no one has time. This way you could have an offical shape for a given part number. Some parts might need two like those black or yellow tants.

reply »

BillyD

#44704

Mydata package libraries | 25 October, 2006

Thanks all, for the help. Mydata pretty much parroted what was said here. My biggest issue is too many clowns in the circus tent. Thanks again guys.

reply »