Closed descampsa closed 7 years ago
Hi!
thanks for the contribution. There are two things that would be great if you could still change:
Best, JAN
ad 2) again ... thinking about this, maybe it's worthwile to make two versions: One with VIAs and one without (like the one you have, just the PAD renamed) ...
... and one more thing: To remain in the LIB's convention, could you make it ETSSOP with an upper-case E and add a 1EP or _ThermalPad somewhere in the filename?
Thanks, JAN
Thanks for the quick response ... could you also add the 1EP to the file-/footprintname?
Also the 3D model name should be the same as the footprint's name, so could you fix that? If the 3D model does not exist yet, you could simply create it by copying the matching SSOP-20 3D model and rename it accoridngly and add that into a second PR ... I can pull both then ;-)
Best, JAN
Hey JAN,
Thanks for your comments, i have fixed 1) and 3), and capitalized the name. As for 2), i don't think the vias should belong to the footprints. You don't always put vias on the pads, and you don't always put the same number of vias.
Ok, i will add the 3D model, then, if it is ok for you like that. Do you prefer that i squash all the commits into one to have a cleaner history?
Oops, i just noticed that the courtyard were corect, i thought i was in 0,05mm grid when i 'fixed' them, but i was in 0,1mm. According to KLC 6.6, the silcscreen should not be taken into account in the courtyard margin, only pads and body. I agree that silkscreen should be inside courtyard, but this was already the case, so i think courtyard was correct, and i have reverted this change.
Copied from TSSOP version, pad dimension comes from Allegro A4963 datasheet.