On 1/18/21 2:04 PM, Jim Brain wrote: > On 1/18/2021 6:19 AM, Gerrit Heitsch wrote: >> On 1/18/21 1:03 PM, silverdr_at_wfmh.org.pl wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 2021-01-17, at 12:58, Gerrit Heitsch <gerrit_at_laosinh.s.bawue.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 1/17/21 12:34 PM, Istvan Hegedus wrote: >>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>> Ok I send you a PM. Note however that I need the 48 pin one. 40 pin >>>>> one is >>>>> good for 8501 replacement. >>>> >>>> You should also be able to use 2 x 24pin type. I have done that with >>>> sockets when replacing the TED socket on 264 systems. >>> >>> Surface mounted? TH is fine but I wouldn't trust the SM variant not >>> to be a potential POF without the reinforcement coming from the two >>> being bound as a single socket. There are sizeable forces at play >>> when inserting/removing. >> >> It's still 2 rows of 12 pins which are bound together per 24 pin type. >> And then 2 of those. >> >> I think that should work. >> >> Gerrit >> >> > I think he and I misunderstood your idea as suggesting a 1x24 (one side) > SMT header as opposed to using 2 2x12 SMT headers. I agree that that wouldn't be stable. GerritReceived on 2021-01-18 16:00:02
Archive generated by hypermail 2.3.0.