Skip to main content
10 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 11, 2019 at 10:42 answer added DerStrom8 timeline score: 2
Jun 10, 2019 at 23:03 comment added Ale..chenski Unfortunately it is true that Type-C connector is not for a breadboard-kind DIY technology. .. :-(
Jun 10, 2019 at 21:00 history tweeted twitter.com/StackElectronix/status/1138189307607441409
Jun 10, 2019 at 20:37 comment added VanGo digikey.ca/product-detail/en/amphenol-icc-commercial-products/… is almost exactly identical footprint, but no mention of pattern restricted area.
Jun 10, 2019 at 20:23 comment added VanGo @EE_socal I saw this but it seems that the spacing of their A/B row is alot bigger - I think the best option will be to look for a connector that has greater A/B row spacing.
Jun 10, 2019 at 19:34 comment added EE_socal Maybe this will help: e2e.ti.com/support/interface/f/138/t/…
Jun 10, 2019 at 18:46 answer added Jim Fischer timeline score: 3
Jun 10, 2019 at 18:39 comment added Cursorkeys You could also break out through A1-12. I make that 0.35mm pad-pad spacing, so a 0.1mm trace will fit though and still conform to IPC spacings at USB voltages. 0.1mm traces with ~0.1mm clearance are expensive too though. Not really a lot of good options here as far as I can see. I'd probably contact Molex myself and request advice, absent advice then active-pad seems the best idea to me
Jun 10, 2019 at 17:36 comment added Cursorkeys That is my understanding of 'pattern restricted area', no copper at all. I wouldn't consider soldermask covered vias acceptable, as soldermask should not ever be relied on for electrical insulation IMHO. You can certainly do vias that will fit (my current fab can do down to 0.3mm), but the cost of the board will go up. The other option is via-in-pad/active-pad.
Jun 10, 2019 at 17:18 history asked VanGo CC BY-SA 4.0