You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If I remember correctly we originally opted for this to allow plateless hotswap to work decently without wobbling, and then mistakingly used the footprint for both HS and solder.
It is tested and works (although the switches will afterwards probably sit loosely in 1.9mm hole PCBs if you remove them from ours). I am considering to keep it for hotswap, but switch to the recommended hole sizes for solder footprints as those do not need the mechanical stability of tight legs.
On the other hand I feel reluctant to change something tested and working. I will order a testing PCB with my next PCB order (with footprints with 1.7mm, 1.8mm and 1.9mm) and decide after comparing them side-by-side.
Thank you for explaining your reasoning! Now I too need to order a test PCB and compare various hole sizes for both the side posts and the middle one :-)
In marbastlib Choc v1 footprints, the diameter of the holes for the smaller mounting pins is 1.7 mm., while Kailh recommends 1.9 mm.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: