Are not the circuit requirements (power rating, temp derating, etc) a factor when deciding to do something like this. One can't just arbitrarily swap sizes without some consideration as to whether the smaller package will be able to perform with the same results and reliability. Or are the two packages so similar that it does not matter? I am no expert, just wondering.



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

From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Graham Collins

Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 8:23 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: [TN] Passive component downsizing



Hi Nigel



Our purchasing is definitely finding big problems buying passives right 

now, and bigger sizes are more difficult, I would totally agree with 

what you are hearing.



We haven't reached the point of asking customers to respin their board 

designs yet, but it may come. We've recommended to them that they 

seriously consider it and to go down that road if they are making any 

other changes.



Graham Collins

Senior Process Engineer

Sunsel Systems

(902) 444-7867



On 6/26/2018 9:57 AM, Nigel Burtt wrote:

> Hearing from our supply chain that the larger passive case sizes are becoming increasingly difficult to source by virtue of the law of supply and demand driven by smaller form factor high-tech consumer electronics in particular. Certainly we are being told that availability of values ≤1uF & ≥0603 case size MLCCs are becoming a serious issue, which has a ring of truth.

>

> Consideration is being given to fitting some 0402 where appropriate on to existing designs with only 0603 lands, to save mass PCB design changes. Whilst not ideal this might be a short-term solution with suitably limited implementation, but I can think of several downsides to this.

>

> I just wondered if others were being told the same from their purchasing/supply chain and whether a similar approach was being/already had been considered and/or implemented and/or refused and rejected

>

> Thanks...