Hi Eldar, The problem I have is that different standards have different orientations. Even IPC now have "Orientation Level A", which is what is described in 7351B, and another one where Pin 1 is in what the EIA packaging standards call "Quadrant 3" (bottom left). The EIA specification in turn specifies a different orientation for Pin1 depending on the SMT package. To make things worse, some manufacturers provide the same part in different orientations on tape. So while I can specify that the given orientations are according to IPC-7351B, to help users determine the orientation without ambiguity, it is good to have the Pin1 location in the position file as well.
- Cirilo On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Eldar Khayrullin <eldar.khayrul...@mail.ru> wrote: > Look at IPC 7351 - 16 ZERO COMPONENT ORIENTATIONS and Figure 16-1. > > В Вторник, 14 июн. 2016 в 6:53 , Cirilo Bernardo < > cirilo.berna...@gmail.com> написал: > > Hi folks, > > Some assembly houses prefer to have a Pad1 location in addition > to the part centroid location; this makes the orientation of the > component unambiguous and can help in cases where the user's > footprint doesn't align with the tape orientation of a component. > Would this be a useful addition to the placement file or are there > any objections to it? > > - Cirilo > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
