Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Re\:\s+Using\s+Surface\-Mount\s+Devices\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Re\:\s+Using\s+Surface\-Mount\s+Devices\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] Re: Using Surface-Mount Devices (score: 1): Author: Dave Haupt <emailw8nf@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:56:56 -0700 (PDT); WSPs aren't that bad. We've done a few solder-bumped WSPs, with 20mil (0.5mm) center-to-center spacing on the pads. There are rumours that industry is going to head towards 0.4mm and even 0.35mm, but; /archives//html/Amps/2003-09/msg00136.html (9,084 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Re: Using Surface-Mount Devices (score: 1): Author: peter.chadwick@zarlink.com; Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:26:28 +0200; We're using 10 mil (.25mm) spacing on a 40 'pin' WSP package. Not my choice, but there..... I'm beginning to think that moving to octal tube sockets was pushing it a bit far! 73 Peter G3RZP _________; /archives//html/Amps/2003-09/msg00141.html (7,179 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]