TECHNET Archives

1996

TechNet@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:
Jack Olson <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 09 Jul 1996 16:25:25 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
As I was browsing through some previous discussions, I came across the 
following question (yeah, I'm quoting myself). It was regarding the use 
of Figure 3-4 in IPC-D-275 to determine an appropriate trace width based 
on current.

> As an example, say I need 5amps and 20 degrees over ambient is a safe
> assumption. The chart gives ABOUT 100 square mils, which corresponds to
> ABOUT a 75mil trace width on the 1oz copper curve.
> OK, how many of you use 75mils? How safe is this number? 

Many of you responded (THANK YOU) but one issue was never brought up and 
I am still curious about it. 

According to IPC-RB-275 Table 7, a conductor width can be reduced 20% by 
a nick or scratch for a length of 0.5 inches and still be acceptable, 
plating thickness can vary (as well as the 1oz copper stock), traces can 
be over-etched, etc.
 
So does the chart indicate that I should use 75mil aperture in my CAD 
system, or is my goal to take all factors into account and try to ensure 
the END RESULT is 75 mils minimum?  

Am I splitting hairs?						Jack

***************************************************************************
* TechNet 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