IPC Component ID

Subscribe to Thread

While attempting to use the IPC-SM-782, land pattern calcul... - Mar 28, 2000 by

Michael: "C1005" stands for Capacitor 0402. For the package... - Mar 29, 2000 by Wolfgang Busko

Micheal: Correct me if I am mistaken, but I think you have ... - Mar 29, 2000 by Marc

Thank you Wolfgang. And now I would like to ask the rest of... - Mar 29, 2000 by

Michael Parker

#4559

IPC Component ID | 28 March, 2000

While attempting to use the IPC-SM-782, land pattern calculator, I came across the term Component ID. (for example - "C1005") I am not sure what this is. I wanted to verify the IPC recommended land pattern for a Chip Capacitor with 0603 size. Can anyone educate me on the various component ID's and how to translate them to package size?

Thank you

Michael Parker

reply »

Wolfgang Busko

#4560

Re: IPC Component ID | 29 March, 2000

Michael: "C1005" stands for Capacitor 0402. For the package 0603 you need to choose "C1608". This is out of IPC-SM-782. I don�t know where it�s coming from we also deal with 0603 or 0805. IPC uses RLP-numbers (Registered Land Pattern Number) to identify parts and landpatterns, it would be interesting if there�s a crossreference somewhere available for download or online access.

Hope there�re more answers to this

Wolfgang

reply »

Marc

#4561

Re: IPC Component ID | 29 March, 2000

Micheal: Correct me if I am mistaken, but I think you have stumbled onto the age old battle between metric and imperial representations of component packaging. I have to deal with this every day as my machines are metric and the designers use imperial. Imperial is usualyy in thousands of an inch, and the conversion to metric is * 0.0254 , and visa versa.e.g. 20 thou is approx 0.5mil.

0603 is 60 thou by 30 thou

Hope I helped

Marc

reply »

Michael Parker

#4562

Re: IPC Component ID | 29 March, 2000

Thank you Wolfgang. And now I would like to ask the rest of the world to help fill in the blanks. Anybody have more to add? Is there a cross-reference available to download, as Wolfgang has hoped?

reply »