Re: FPGATED prototype

From: Gerrit Heitsch <*gerrit_at_laosinh.s.bawue.de*> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 14:59:56 +0100 Message-ID: <d95a924b-d80f-28d3-e455-cafffe508ae3_at_laosinh.s.bawue.de> · gerrit_at_laosinh.s.bawue.de

On 1/18/21 2:39 PM, silverdr_at_wfmh.org.pl wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 2021-01-18, at 14:04, Jim Brain <brain_at_jbrain.com> 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
> 
> Right. That's what I thought. And it reminded me when I was looking for alternatives to the ridiculously expensive SMT sockets on BeamRacer and for a moment thought of using the 2x20 (separate - one side) but quickly dropped the idea.
> 
>>   as opposed to using 2 2x12 SMT headers.
> 
> Right. Do they fully keep the raster when lined-up?

IC sockets do, I have yet to find one that doesn't. So I would expect 
these headers to do that as well.

  Gerrit