1
\$\begingroup\$

I have settled on this component for our spin dials: https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/cts-electrocomponents/292V1X24A/12091626

Problem is, in fusion pcb my pads nearly touch, while the holes are listed as 29.92126 mil, and we have 50 mil between pTH. I get a pad to pad clearance DRC violation. It has a super slim clearance. Any risk in reducing the pad diameter from 42 mil to 30 or 40 ish? Would that be the right solution? Or am I expected to change something in DRC? Looking at the supplied land pattern I get this: enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ What setting do you have for "Restring" in the Eagle DRC? The annulus for the pads will be the larger of the setting for "Pads Top/Bottom" and the value in the library. Related. \$\endgroup\$
    – Tom Carpenter
    Commented Dec 14, 2023 at 18:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ That is what I ended up doing. In fusion 360 there is no way to have a single side annulus ring on a through hole component. My supplier can do as little as 5.9 mil rings, so I lowered it. Thanks. \$\endgroup\$
    – Wes Ellgass
    Commented Dec 14, 2023 at 21:38

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4
\$\begingroup\$

One sneaky way to fix this is to place the annulus rings alternating between the top and bottom layers on alternate pins. You do have to take care if soldering by hand but there has not ever been a problem in our system when wave-soldering.

In other words, pins 1 & 3 have absolute minimum annulus rings on the top layer, pins 2 & 4 have the absolute minimum annulus rings on the bottom layer. For me, absolute minimum annulus ring is 10 to 15 mils.

\$\endgroup\$
0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.