Breaking News
Blog

Beginning of the End for SMT Component Markings?

View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 5   >   >>
JayEJay
User Rank
Rookie
Re: It's time to play hardball.
JayEJay   4/7/2014 4:56:36 PM
NO RATINGS
It looks like they have gotten the message. There is an update to the PCN at http://www.ttiinc.com/object/io_1385065304929.html

Duane Benson
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Not just resistors
Duane Benson   2/28/2014 4:02:34 PM
NO RATINGS
These days, component packaging is often based on high volume, mobile devices. The money simply may not be there for multiple form factors (e.g. DIPs and larger SMT packages). The same goes for cost structures. At the high volumes, any fraction of  cent can make a difference.

The specific chip may not be a high volume chip, but that manufacturer (or the package manufacturer) likely sells enough of that package type to be concerned about micro costs. Personally, though, I think the mark every five pins is an awesome idea.

I suspect that cost is really the driving factor behind the removal of markings on SMT components. It's not just the ink. It's a completely separate manufacturing step. That extra step can be a significant part of the component cost.

Max The Magnificent
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Not just resistors
Max The Magnificent   2/28/2014 10:34:40 AM
NO RATINGS
@Etmax: ...why don't high pin count IC's have a mark in the molding every 5 or 10 pins?

Brilliant! Why didn't I think of that?

Etmax
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Not just resistors
Etmax   2/27/2014 8:53:13 PM
NO RATINGS
Absolutely, and while we're at it why don't high pin count IC's have a mark in the molding every 5 or 10 pins? Amortised across the No. of chips that come out of a mold die it would be near zero additional cost

 

cookiejar
User Rank
Manager
It's time to play hardball.
cookiejar   2/27/2014 6:15:59 PM
NO RATINGS
The notion that the blind shall lead the blind is simply unacceptable to me as a customer. 
It's time to take a stand and tightenen up our contract/order wording to explicitly require labeling.
This is an example of penny wise for the component manufacturer and dollar foolish for the customer.
Once orders to the guilty manufacturers dry up, they'll get the message or rightly go belly up.
We must enforce, "The Customer is Always Right."


Wnderer
User Rank
CEO
Re: Slightly off topic, but...
Wnderer   2/27/2014 5:49:20 PM
NO RATINGS
@bk11 Has anyone else wondered why electrolytic caps have the negative pin marked, but tantalums have the positive pin marked?


My understanding is that they mark the case polarity. So they case of the aluminum electrolytic is negative while the case of the tantalum is positive.

RWatkins
User Rank
Rookie
So...buy something besides the "cheapest" brand
RWatkins   2/27/2014 5:44:52 PM
NO RATINGS
I hear and understand about an undocumented change and I have had even Vishay pull something like this on Digi-Key stocked parts, but changing lead diameters on through-hole inductors (they made 'em bigger, great for board designers when the data sheet and the acutal part don't match PHYSICALLY).

I would simply change the supplier of the resistors.  It seems that Visahy Dale, Rohm, Panasonic, and Stackpole are likely to have a substitute for your Yageo part, and the 0603s and larger are going to be marked if my experience is any indicator.

Regarding marking capacitors, tantalums in molded housings are generally marked.  The conformally coated Vishay (orange) tantalums are often not marked, and most ceramics are not marked.  It is my understanding that part of this is the design of the ceramic capacitors and a history with the military from many years ago, when marking the parts actually degraded the reliability of the capacitors because the ceramic was fragile and thin on outer layers.  Today, coating one surface of the ceramic chip and laser marking would seem quite reasonable, but until accepted as the "norm" would likely bring a cost penalty.  For me, the cost penalty does not seem like much since most of what I design only makes at most 10K-20K boards of a type per year, and the costs associated with assembly are often much greater than the cost of purchase for chip passives.  I agree that having all components marked would be a great help in inspection and trouble-shooting.

bk11
User Rank
Manager
Slightly off topic, but...
bk11   2/27/2014 5:29:43 PM
NO RATINGS
Has anyone else wondered why electrolytic caps have the negative pin marked, but tantalums have the positive pin marked?

arodulfo
User Rank
Rookie
Sometimes people gives stupid excuses
arodulfo   2/27/2014 4:15:09 PM
NO RATINGS
Over the years, I have suffered from the same not-marked capacitors pain.

I don't think any reasonable people would buy the environment-protection excuse.

I tend to be cynical and agree with Max: it is just money-saving attitude.

And, besides it all, it is so easy to laser-mark the parts, using no ink in the process...

If anybody has a form to sign for a complete marking in SMT components, please send me a copy...

Max The Magnificent
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Not just resistors
Max The Magnificent   2/27/2014 11:20:29 AM
NO RATINGS
@Etmax: Often I get parts that are not what's on the label and so I now check all parts received before they are loaded on the board.

It just blows my mind that every part isn;t identified in some way -- even the smallest parts would support colored dots -- also it wouldn't be beyond the bounds of possibility to have different colored packaging materials -- one for resistors, one for capacitors, and one for ICs...

Page 1 / 5   >   >>
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
EE Times editor Junko Yoshida grills two executives --Rick Walker, senior product marketing manager for IoT and home automation for CSR, and Jim Reich, CTO and co-founder at Palatehome.
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed