Consider doing your own. I tend to do them myself because they are better than almost all the public domain footprints.
For example, I always use small filled triangles as pin 1 markers because they are superior to round circles. A triangle points to the pin 1, it is clearly distinguishable from vias, fly vomit or a spec of dust, it is much more discernible even when it is tiny for those with marginal eyesight, and reduces ambiguity in a dense circuit layout. I see no justification why many engineers prefer the antiquated circles, other than the "that's the way we always have done it" mentality or lack of experience maybe.
Another thing is I use rounded rectangles for pads on QFICs, TSSOPs, QFN's etc because sharp corners can promote the growth of dendrites when not conformally coated. I also find often the component manufacturer's recommended footprint is not great, so I tend to adjust them as appropriate. I generally follow QPC standards, but often deviate for good reasons.
Speaking of footprints, large QFICs should be oriented at 45 degrees to how the paste will be squeegeed onto the footprint. This is to increase yields by reducing voids caused by paste starvation due to paste that might be a bit old or other reasons. I have done this in many products, including very high volume products (ie: >100,000 build quantities) with great results.
I always aim to use the component's correct 3D model. I never use extruded 3D models in Altium. Besides the obvious, another advantage is the 3D model double checks my pin spacing, size and location. For 3D models, the manufacturer's website is the first port of call, followed by Octopart, 3D Content Central, SnapEDA etc. For some components, I have had to email the manufacturer to get the 3D model, but that is rare. I have had to make my own step files on occasion, but I avoid it because of the time it takes because and I am no proficient at complicated mechanical CAD.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
