Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts

Having mounted at least a few million parts recently, stay with 0603's or even 0805's unless you need the space savings. The 0603's have some sort of

3 digit number on them usually to help identify the value, and 0805 and larger have enough room for 4 digits so 1% resistors are not written with something cryptic. Some people prefer to use larger parts, even 1206's to make the product bigger! See below - People often don't like to pay 10k+ for a device that makes a altoids can look huge!

Reliability might even be a little better with the larger parts due to the larger solder joints, and apparently more current noise can be produced with

0402 resistors due to the higher current density.

I don't even bother looking at Digikey for production prices. I can buy a typical 5,000 piece reel of 0603 resistors from $5 to $10 CND.

Something's wrong then. We just placed about 110,000 (110k) 0402's and ended up with about 10 tombstones - and most of these were attributed to poor placement accuracy (I need to do / get done a calibration for the placement heads on our main chip shooter if I ever get time, as 1 or 2 (out of 12) of them are out about 2 to 4 hundredths of a mm (0.02 - 0.04 mm)). It's amazing that good pick and place machines can place parts accurately at the speeds they run - ours (turret design) places most part sizes one at a time at 0.15 seconds per part with (when calibrated) a 3 sigma variance of 0.08 mm! On our newer assembly line, the fine pitch placer is accurate to 0.025 mm @ 3 sigma!

We do notice that there seems to be a lot more mispicks with 0402's. We typically assume 1 to 3 percent part wastage due to mispicks for larger parts in a larger production, but I think some 0402's approach 5% or more.

One other thing is that 0402's require fairly new machinery - 0603's can be mounted with much older machinery (there are machines that are over 20 years old that will still mount 0603's very reliably at reasonable speeds). Using parts no smaller then 0603's and SOT 23's allows the use of old equipment, and thus possibly offers a shorter manufacturing lead time or possibly a cheaper production as the machines have been paid for.

0603's and bigger are also much easier to inspect visually.

Good choices!

1206's still have there uses too (other then dissipation / voltage / capacity reasons) - they are good for making it bigger! People see things like cell phones getting cheaper as they get smaller and then costing nothing, as long as you sign up for a basic contract, so they start to associate smaller = much cheaper! How can you, in most cases charge 10 - 20K for a product with a surface area of a couple of inches!? Repair / rework / modifications are easier for the people unskilled in micro soldering with large parts.

Yes, they will be around for a long time yet!

The QFN's are not a problem - I just mounted over 900 of them yesterday, and only had a couple of failures, all of which were on the same panel, which was due to that particular board shifting during the solder paste printing process (didn't use the post print inspection, as the lot was small and the process is generally very reliable). Reworking them is also fairly easy. You do have to be careful when you design the footprints though. DFN's also have very little problems. I've never worked with a chipscale package, but they seem to be like miniature BGA's - which are not too bad to mount either, as long as the proper gear is available.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff L
Loading thread data ...

Well, I bet you've ordered at least a box at least once in your life, if you've ever had a 14" carriage line printer. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

and

leg

twice

I have never seen this problem, and have produced a lot of boards with a large variety of parts. Ever see 1206's, 0603's, 0402's, a few 2220 caps, QFN's fine pitch QFP's and BGA's all on the same board? Or fine pitch BGA's with all 1206's? We just did a fairly complex board with 0.4 mm pitch parts (those are not nice), tons of 0.5 mm pitch parts including large QFP's, SOIC's, DPAK's, littered with 1206's a few 0805's and some 0603's. It's all in designing the footprints and solder paste stencil correctly.

See comments in other post! 1206's are about 1.5 to 2 times as expensive as an 0603. Don't use Digikey prices for production prices. 1210's are for specialty purposes, eg voltage / wattage / capacity issues.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff L

If enough care is taken, yes, it can work well. Most of my boards are also rather mixed. The extreme was a board with 0603 on there but also a DIP because the LM331 doesn't come any other way.

I know but Digikey price ratios for reel qties are usually a pretty good indicator when weighing one technology against another. Sometimes they even beat distributor "pre-haggling" prices.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

default

BGA

discrete

everything

some

formatting link
Id=11373&contentId=4139

People want their Cell Phones, camera's, Ipods and PDA's smaller and smaller, with ever increasing features and always lower cost, this is the result.

As you noticed, the uBGA's and CSP's are an option! The parts are almost always available in more traditional style packaging. QFN's and DFN's are easy as long as everything is designed correctly. They are easy to put down in production along with placing them manually. Although I haven't mounted a CSP, BGA's pose little problems also if done right, but you need a way to reflow them if done manually.

If you look at low cost things like PC motherboards, they don't use the smallest technology possible - they use what works best. They don't use CSP's and micro BGA's unless there is a very good need for them. Notice that for the most part they use 0603's! Even some consumer stuff even to this day still uses through hole. Look at a typical TV main board or a stereo board.

Reply to
Jeff L

I know what you mean - after working with a bunch of 0402's, I sometimes confuse 0603's with them!

So, there is nothing wrong with using larger parts - the suppliers keep pushing smaller is better (I think to push sales of new assembly equipment, and to cover the investment costs of the production of smaller components). I see no benefit in going smaller unless there is no room. I do however see lots of problems in going smaller. Mostly reliability concerns and production costs (especially hidden ones - ie change this resistor for this mod now takes 5x longer and may be less reliable).

That's nasty!

I once resoldered my entire old laptop's motherboard (P2 233) littered with

0201's with a 1/8" chisle tip soldering iron! This fixed the intermittant problem when you twisted it a bit.
Reply to
Jeff L

relatively

able to

production: a

components,

only

wearing

ok.

What! no extra's? I just saved 0.03 buy not ordering a few extra parts, but now have to wait 2-3 days and $8 shipping, and spend 20 minutes of cost for ordering / receiving / paperwork / book keeping for that little resistor that went flying across the room!

Rule of thumb, always have at least 10 extra passive components and 1 or 2 extra of everything else, unless it's not a problem to have the project delayed. 10% extra of the small parts / passives is generally something we try to stick to, along with a few of the bigger / expensive components.

formatting link

formatting link

Reply to
Jeff L

This is something that is of some importance - there are not that many extra

8x2 feeders kicking around from years of production like the common 8x4 feeders. Extra feeders are expensive, typically in the $1,000 plus range for new ones (72 mm feeders are about $7,000), and each different part type needs a feeder. 8x2 feeders are very hard to find used, and if used, they may be worn out / need calibration, since 0402's and smaller need more precise pickup points.

An example is we have around 400 - 500 8x4 feeders, about 75 8x2 feeders, and about 200 of the other larger sizes.

This is a big problem when you push dielectrics to their max! Y type caps suffer horrendously from this.

Also 0306, 0508 and 0612 caps are way better at reducing stray inductance anyway!

Reply to
Jeff L

Well, my current project is space limited, which pushed me into 0603 and tssop sizes, but even then I didn't need to go to 0402s. The 0603 is big enough for my talon to grab, and I can get pretty much everything (caps, resistors, LCL filters, LEDs, ferrites) all in the one size.

FYI my current project puts an embedded linux system, five MCUs, four bidirectional EMI filters with line boosters, 14 24VAC line switches,

27 LEDs, and a switching power supply... on a 3.5 by 5.5 board.
formatting link

Well, I just do my own boards one at a time, so most of that doesn't affect me. But, I've not yet successfully removed and *reused* an

01005 chip. They just vanish in the solder. 0402 is probably as small as I'll ever go for my boards, the 0201 can be done but they're small enough to not be worth the hassle in general.

No, it's challenging!

formatting link

The feedback seems to be split evenly between "Yeah, I could do it" and "Hey, where'd that cap go?"

Reply to
DJ Delorie

caps,

BGA's

parts

all

It's common to use dip parts and SMT!

as

I used similar tactics when designing in components. I really like it when companies include a unit price @ say 1 k on their website - it really helps when making that part decision. TI has won a few design ins from me, just from this alone.

We typically only get that with new suppliers! they quickly learn, or we don't do business with them. It's typically a problem with the smaller suppliers, or the brokers that are trying become distributors.

There are a few cases however where in "low volumes" Digikey can't be beat. Digikey excels at the prototype and low volume stuff, but for anything of any volume, it's expensive.

Reply to
Jeff L

leg

It relays to the surface tension of the solder - the rounded corners reduce the area that the solder's surface tension can pull from, while still keeping the pad at a reasonable length for placement tolerances and solder volume.

Reply to
Jeff L

OK, here it is:

formatting link

This footprint is for the cal-chip GMC (0603 and 0402) and CHQ (0603) types, which may be different from what you're using, as the height alters the fillet angle.

I know the 0603 pad layout is closer to what you might expect from some of the older EIA recommendations, but it seems to work.

Frank Raffaeli

formatting link

Reply to
Frank Raffaeli

Nice looking board!

Likely doable with hot air.

:-)

Reply to
Jeff L

I am wondering about long term problems in RoHS countries with all that fine pitch. Whiskers and all that. I've asked in a German NG a couple times but got no hard answers. However, a rumor buzzes around that there might be a fine-pitch exemption coming. I guess that would give the small parts biz a big boost if the exemption materializes.

[...]
--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

and

leg

twice

better

seem

use

occasional

Thanks!

Reply to
Jeff L

and

twice

seem

reduce

solder

Interesting - I'm not old enough for the pre cad days! Although I did start making boards with a sharpie as a resist pen.

90 deg corners on thin lines are a problem due to under etching of the photoresist, and rounded has always been better for RF, at least for traces.

Already saw them, thanks!

Reply to
Jeff L

Yeah but I try to avoid it. It increases labor costs.

So when do car dealers learn? We wore one of them down in a four-hour haggling marathon, the next one said that he'd blame me if he develops ulcers now. Guess what, after a while it was kind of fun.

I am designing for clients and after the proto run they usually hand it off to a contract assembler in China who then also buys the huge quantities.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

Thanks. If this fixes tombstoning then a lot of guys will owe you a beer.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

Hope it helps someone. Keep in mind it's mainly for the tombstoning issue I was having with the cal-chip parts.

The beer would be sweet, but I'm planning on drinking my monthly quota tonight. (That means two) If they had better beer in Austin, TX, it might be more.

Frank

Reply to
Frank Raffaeli

Round is always better, not just for surface tension but also for RF performance and for reliability. Tears and cracks tend to start at sharp corners). In the old "spaghetti days" all traces were round. Then, some people considered that as cheap because CAD systems did everything in 45 or 90 degrees. Pathetic.

BTW, Frank just posted the pad geometry (Thanks, Frank!).

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

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.