DESIGNERCOUNCIL Archives

1996

DesignerCouncil@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Danny Gross)
Date:
Wed, 18 Sep 96 10:34:50 PDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
Max,

We also are sensitive to EMI problems and are aware of the problems
caused by excessive anti-pad sizes, namely reducing the integrity
of the ground and power planes.  

There is a IPC spec concerning
clearance area in planes in IPC-D-275 section 5.3.2.4.
According to this spec, there is a .010" minimum clearance between
the edge of the land and the plane.  A fabrication allowance should
be added to this also.  For us, we use a .035" via pad with a .018"
finished drill size.  If we were to follow this spec, we should have a 
.020" clearance using the Level C fabrication allowance.  This would
translate to a anti-pad of .075", (pad size + .040" for .020" clearance).

Having said this, we don't follow the spec.  We use a much smaller anti-pad, .055" 
which gives us a .010" clearance.  I have asked our board fabricators about
this reduced clearance and they told me this is not a problem.

Hope this helps.

Danny Gross
PCB Designer
E-Mu Systems, Inc.
Scotts Valley, CA

****************************************************************************
* The mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05      *
**************************************************************************** 
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to:            *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text. *
****************************************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2