Grr! The worst assumptions....

Apr 08, 2017 27 Replies

I was the perp's system-integrator and software guy on one of those, but it was a 144-pin PLCC that he mirrored. Fortunately not me -- but I've done smaller ones in my time.

Tim Wescott Control systems, embedded software and circuit design I'm looking for work! See my website if you're interested http://www.wescottdesign.com

That's actually a good reason to be an analog designer -- fewer pins to swizzle when you screw up a package!!

Tim Wescott Control systems, embedded software and circuit design I'm looking for work! See my website if you're interested http://www.wescottdesign.com

Yes, I've kludged it, and any I intended to get the board made by a fabricator once it's finalised, since I find they're less likely to develop dry joints. Still, it annoys.

Sylvia.

Always triple-check the package. I do, and I still screw things up from time to time.

Tim Wescott Control systems, embedded software and circuit design I'm looking for work! See my website if you're interested http://www.wescottdesign.com

The 22pin 0.3in package was a late innovation called a skinny-dip. Showed up late for (mainly) memory or programmable logic.

Conventional 22pin is 0.4in.

There should be a mech dwg on the spec sheet, or a page of drawings in the print catalog. One of the shortcomings of data sheets that were digitized from print.

RL

RL

Is that .031" thick PCB?

Do you hand-solder or reflow it?

We have an obsolete +5V Altera CPLD that we are considering that method but it's a 68-pin QFP footprint.

Thanks,

Is that the comparator with diodes across the input?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required