Skip to main content
15 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Mar 31, 2014 at 23:04 answer added bostoncommon timeline score: 3
Sep 29, 2012 at 14:42 vote accept OrCa
Sep 29, 2012 at 9:01 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackElectronix/status/251969926926041089
Sep 28, 2012 at 14:19 comment added Rocketmagnet SSOP gives you slightly better visibility than QFN, and it's easier to fix shorts, even with a slightly blunt soldering iron.
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:59 comment added stevenvh @Rocket - agreed on SOIC, you can do those blindfolded. They'll have to decide whether it will be SOIC or SSOP, though: SSOP needs the same accuracy as QFP.
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:58 comment added stevenvh @TFD - I don't know about teenagers in New Zealand, but those in Europe are pretty streetwise; you can't fool them that easily with lose change anymore :-(.
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:55 comment added Rocketmagnet SOIC is simple. You don't have to be accurate at all. The chip will self align. With QFN, you have to be a little more accurate, depending on the pitch of the package. It's worth investing in an eye lens.
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:29 comment added TFD Employ teenagers on lose change wages!
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:27 comment added OrCa @Rocketmagnet: By better, do you mean more accurate too? I've only done hand-placement till now, but in Option B, does QFN and SOIC placement have to be very precise at the pre-oven scenario? I guess I'm indirectly asking what kinds of durations you log for the placement phase.
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:25 answer added Lundin timeline score: 5
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:22 comment added Rocketmagnet I would suggest B. We do this in-house, and it's a lot faster and better than A. C can be expensive.
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:18 history edited OrCa CC BY-SA 3.0
added 40 characters in body
Sep 28, 2012 at 13:15 answer added stevenvh timeline score: 8
Sep 28, 2012 at 12:58 review First posts
Oct 3, 2012 at 12:01
Sep 28, 2012 at 12:58 history asked OrCa CC BY-SA 3.0