-
- News
- Books
Featured Books
- design007 Magazine
Latest Issues
Current IssueLevel Up Your Design Skills
This month, our contributors discuss the PCB design classes available at IPC APEX EXPO 2024. As they explain, these courses cover everything from the basics of design through avoiding over-constraining high-speed boards, and so much more!
Opportunities and Challenges
In this issue, our expert contributors discuss the many opportunities and challenges in the PCB design community, and what can be done to grow the numbers of PCB designers—and design instructors.
Embedded Design Techniques
Our expert contributors provide the knowledge this month that designers need to be aware of to make intelligent, educated decisions about embedded design. Many design and manufacturing hurdles can trip up designers who are new to this technology.
- Articles
- Columns
Search Console
- Links
- Events
||| MENU - design007 Magazine
Stop Relating Trace Temperature to Current Density
October 1, 2020 | Douglas G. Brooks, PhDEstimated reading time: 1 minute
Many design engineers and even many software suppliers make the significant mistake of equating changes in trace or via temperature with current density. This is incorrect at best and dangerous at worst. There is little if any correlation between temperature and current density. Current and trace dimensions (among other things) are the relevant variables, but current density is not. I hope by the end of this article you will see why. Here are four illustrations that will help you understand this.
1. Current Density Is Not an Independent Measure
We can understand that the change in trace (and via) temperatures are a function of other variables. Thus, we can formulate the following as two possible relationships (all other things equal). Let:
C = current
J = current density
w = trace width
th = trace thickness
?T = change in trace temperature
Then, we can suggest the following:
Equation 1: ?T = fn(C, w, th)
Equation 2: ?T = fn(J, w, th)
Now, the question is, “Are both of these relationships true, or, if not, is either one true?” We know from the extensive experimental evaluations reported in IPC-2152 that Equation 1 is true, so is Equation 2 also true? From Equations 1 and 2, it follows that:
Equation 1a: C = fn(?T, w, th)
Equation 2a: J = fn(?T, w, th)
To read this entire article, which appeared in the September 2020 issue of Design007 Magazine, click here.
Suggested Items
Alternative Manufacturing Inc. Awarded QML Requalification to IPC J-STD-001 and IPC-A-610
04/24/2024 | IPCIPC's Validation Services Program has awarded an IPC J-STD-001 and IPC-A-610 Qualified Manufacturers Listing (QML) requalification to Alternative Manufacturing Inc (AMI).
IPC Design Competition Champion Crowned at IPC APEX EXPO 2024
04/24/2024 | IPCAt IPC APEX EXPO 2024 in Anaheim, California, five competitors squared off to determine who was the best of the best at PCB design.
Big Win for Defense Production Act Budget Allocation in FY24 Budget
04/23/2024 | I-Connect007 Editorial TeamOne year ago, President Biden issued a determination that chips and packaging are critical for national security. Since that time, much work has been done to continue the conversation in Washington, elevating the importance of the entire chips value chain, and including printed circuit boards and substrates, without which chips cannot operate.
Real Time with... IPC APEX EXPO 2024: A Conversation with IPC's CEO: New Venue, Sustainability, and More
04/23/2024 | Real Time with...IPC APEX EXPOBarry Matties hosts Dr. John W. Mitchell, CEO of IPC, on the final day of IPC APEX EXPO 2024. They discuss the new venue in Anaheim and broach a range of topics, from traffic and booth experiences to workforce development, sustainability, and the CHIPS Act. And they offer advice for newcomers as IPC looks forward to an even better show experience next year.
Boeing's Janene Stinson Earns IPC Excellence in Education Award at IPC APEX EXPO 2024
04/22/2024 | IPCThe IPC Excellence in Education award was presented to Janene Stinson, Boeing, at IPC APEX EXPO 2024 in Anaheim, California, in recognition of her significant contributions to workforce development and leadership.