Hi Jack, long time...

   I used them long ago and we never had issues with either pad configuration. Seems that I remember that IPC or someone did a study to see if the "U" shape really made a difference and the answer back then was not really. Seeing some of the other posts/replies, I'd say you can toss a coin and not lose, in my case though, the coin would land on its edge... :-/ Anyway, I just remember the MELF really did mean, as Richard mentioned, Most End up Lying on the Floor. Your mileage may very.... Good Luck. And nice to see your name on here again.



Scott Decker – Staff Engineer, PCB Design Services CID+ – Electronic Systems Center

UTC AEROSPACE SYSTEMS

3445 S. 5th Street, Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85040 U.S.A.

Tel: 602 308 5957  FAX: 602 243 2347

KE7MWT  AKA:PadMasterson

[log in to unmask]   www.utcaerospacesystems.com



CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING: This message may contain proprietary and/or privileged information of

UTC Aerospace Systems and its affiliated companies. If you are not the intended recipient please 1) do not disclose, copy,

distribute or use this message or its contents, 2) advise the sender by return e-mail, and 3) delete all copies (including all

attachments) from your computer. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated.

This Document Does Not Contain Export Controlled Technology Or Technical Data.





-----Original Message-----

From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jack Olson

Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 9:56 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: [External] [TN] MELF land shapes



I am using MELF components on my current design, which I haven't seen much this century.

But I remember way back when we used "U-shaped" land shapes.



I notice the current Land Pattern standard (IPC-7351) recommends rectangular, but at least one person has suggested using U-shaped "just in case".

I generally resist that kind of philosophy unless there is science behind it.

Is anyone using U-shaped pads anymore?

(Is anyone using MELFs anymore? smile)