PCB Libraries, Inc. | https://www.pcblibraries.com/Forum/footprint-land-pattern-naming-convention_topic29_post1969.html
. The first signs of this transition started appearing in the 1990’s in component manufacturer’s datasheets and the JEDEC component packaging dimensional datasheets, which were once entirely based on Imperial “inch
PCB Libraries, Inc. | https://www.pcblibraries.com/Forum/footprint-land-pattern-naming-convention_topic29_page1.html
: 152 Post Options Post Reply Quote Mattylad Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 05 Oct 2012 at 12:58pm I find that components always need to be created in mm, however for track/gap spacings, track widths etc thou is fine and there are no problems. Using mils (or thou as we use
PCB Libraries, Inc. | https://www.pcblibraries.com/Forum/footprint-land-pattern-naming-convention_topic29_post1986.html
. The first signs of this transition started appearing in the 1990’s in component manufacturer’s datasheets and the JEDEC component packaging dimensional datasheets, which were once entirely based on Imperial “inch
PCB Libraries, Inc. | https://www.pcblibraries.com/Forum/footprint-land-pattern-naming-convention_topic29&OB=DESC_page1.html
: 152 Post Options Post Reply Quote Mattylad Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 05 Oct 2012 at 12:58pm I find that components always need to be created in mm, however for track/gap spacings, track widths etc thou is fine and there are no problems. Using mils (or thou as we use
PCB Libraries, Inc. | https://www.pcblibraries.com/forum/topic29&OB=DESC.html
: 152 Post Options Post Reply Quote Mattylad Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 05 Oct 2012 at 12:58pm I find that components always need to be created in mm, however for track/gap spacings, track widths etc thou is fine and there are no problems. Using mils (or thou as we use
.gif)
