Lostgallifreyan wrote in news:Xns98D4B00F60E8zoodlewurdle@140.99.99.130:
Sorry, I misread as "there is no minimum thickness"... Not sure why. Wishful thinking, I guess.
Lostgallifreyan wrote in news:Xns98D4B00F60E8zoodlewurdle@140.99.99.130:
Sorry, I misread as "there is no minimum thickness"... Not sure why. Wishful thinking, I guess.
"Lostgallifreyan" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:Xns98D4D2EAC7F8zoodlewurdle@140.99.99.130... | Lostgallifreyan wrote in | news:Xns98D4B00F60E8zoodlewurdle@140.99.99.130: | | >> LEDs need to be wired/bounded on the substrate - so there is a | >> minimum thickness. | >>
| >
| > Exactly. This is why I can't figure out why obdurate convention stops | > the panels being made thinner, unless it be to do with space needed | > for a diffuse light spread. | >
| >
I've seen 3.5mm or so.
- Henry
--
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.