Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0u1a7O-00006kC; Tue, 26 Mar 96 08:53 CST |
From [log in to unmask] Thu Mar 28 09: |
39:28 1996 |
Old-Return-Path: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:57:29 -0500 |
Precedence: |
list |
X-Loop: |
|
Resent-Sender: |
|
X-Status: |
|
Status: |
O |
X-Mailing-List: |
|
TO: |
|
Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
Resent-Message-ID: |
<"6niGK2.0.WY7.IJ0Mn"@ipc> |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Resent-From: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Good Day all,
In reading the responses in this area, I realize that I made a mistake in my
submitted calculation. I had indicated that we use length x width x 1.1. If
I had my brain turned on, I would have taken BOTH sides of the board into
account. Our actual formula for use is: length x width x 2 x 1.1. This
takes into account both sides of the laminate surface, with an additional 10%
for components. Yes, it is not as accurate as knowing the actual surface
area, but it works well as an approximation. I have been in the position of
doing actual calculations, and it can be a real headache if the individual is
nitpicky (Webster will forgive me): lead surface areas, surface areas on top
of DIPs, sides of LCCs, undersides of PLCCs, transformer outlines. Hand me
the Tylenol.....
Doug Pauls
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|