Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: John Larkin <jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 10:23:41 -0800
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 16:28:11 GMT, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
vasile wrote:
On Mar 14, 12:01 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ok, have to decide whether to default to 0603 or 0402 for resistors and
stuff on a new design. Wow, this time I am not size constrained.
Both are OK for common design. Using 0402 means you haven't too many
BGAs onboard.
No BGA. I don't like them. It's mostly TSSOP and, where I can get away
with it, SO.
I'm growing positively fond of BGAs. An FPGA with a few hundred I/Os
can be liberating. On-chip resources (a bazillion gates, multipliers,
LVDS transceivers, clock managers, dual-port ram) are great, and
internal interconnects are free, saving a lot of pins as compared to
splitting up the functions into several smaller chips... it's like
getting a blank check.
Our production yield on soldering BGAs thus far is still 100%, which
is a lot better than for fine-pitch leaded parts. And we save a lot of
inspection time, since we can't inspect them!
John
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- References:
- Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Joerg
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: vasile
- Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- From: Joerg
- Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- Prev by Date: Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- Next by Date: AC/DC problem
- Previous by thread: Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- Next by thread: Re: Future: 0603 versus 0402 parts
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|