-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reconsider the dual footprint MCU #21
Comments
Alternatively, go full QFN to gain more board space for additional features proposed in other tickets. Just a thought! You could easily go either way. |
I guess the QFP has advantages as well, it's easier to solder and check the quality after reflow or do rework, and it offers more pins for more features. |
Thanks for the thought @Magpie-81! Here's some of my thoughts on this:
|
@sphawes So is this a won't fix? Just clearing out some old GitHub notifications here and I noticed this is still open. |
Version Number
1.0.1
Bugfix or Enhancement
Enhancement
Description
Removing the QFN-32 package for the STM32F031K6U6 option would help to clean up the layout around the MCU.
I understand that the recent supply chain disruptions made us more aware that it's nice to have options, but i would think it's not too hard to recompile the photon firmware for another chip in the same LQFP-48 package, like the next step up in the line (STM32F051C6) or find another fitting chip for that footprint.
Having both footprints overlap requires you to be specific when ordering paste stencils as well, as you don't want the QFN pads covered in paste when you place the bigger QFP package on top, or you run quite a high risk that the solder might bridge and create shortcircuits under the package. Or the QFP package starts to float away uncontrolled and needs manual rework after reflow.
Suggested Solution
Reconsider removing the QFN-32 footprint.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: