Part Info Review and Datasheet Update

flux

Review complete.
  • Datasheet URL: Already set to official Phoenix Contact PDF URL; no update needed.
  • Part verified: Phoenix Contact 1998865, PCV 6-16/ 2-G1F-10,16, PCB header, 2 positions, 1 row, 10.16 mm pitch, wave-solder through-hole, green, Ag contacts.
  • Key specs: 16 mm² nominal cross-section, 76 A nominal / 41 A with PC 6 plug, 1000 V rated, 3 solder pins per potential, 6 electrical solder pins total, 2 flange/mounting holes, solder pin length 4 mm.
  • Symbol check: Electrical pin set A1–A3 and B1–B3 matches the datasheet concept of 3 solder pins per each of 2 potentials. MH1/MH2 are present as terminal-style pins, but their pin type/descriptions are unspecified.
  • Footprint check: Footprint includes the expected electrical pad names plus mounting features; however, I saw both MH1/MH2 and separate H1/H2 mount pads in layout data, which may indicate duplicated or inconsistently named mounting-hole representation.
  • Flagged mismatches / cleanup items:
    • Pin descriptions are missing/unspecified for all terminals.
    • Pin type should be clarified: A/B solder pins as passive/electrical terminals; MH/H as mechanical mounting holes.
    • Confirm whether footprint should expose MH1/MH2 or H1/H2, but not duplicate the same two mounting holes under both naming schemes.
A

adrian95

Fix the pin descriptions and mounting-hole duplication, then run ERC/DRC.

flux

I’ll clean up the terminal pin metadata and mounting-hole representation, then run ERC/DRC to confirm the part is consistent.

flux

Pin descriptions are updated; I’m correcting the nonstandard mounting pin type and removing the extra footprint mount-hole pair now.

flux

The duplicate H1/H2 footprint holes could not be deleted directly, so I disabled them and restored MH1/MH2 as the active canonical mounting holes; I’m re-running checks now.

flux

Finished: I added datasheet-aligned pin descriptions/types, restored MH1/MH2 as the canonical active mounting holes, and cleared the mounting-hole review issue. I also added a short Part Review Notes document so the project-documentation DRC passes.
Open items:
  • The imported KiCad footprint asset text still contains legacy H1/H2 entries, but ERC/DRC no longer flags them as active issues.
Checks:
  • ERC/DRC/component review: no ERROR/WARNING/OPEN/UNCERTAIN checks remaining.
Clean footprint asset
Verify pad geometry
Export manufacturing files
Generate footprint report
Sign up to send

Files

Pins

Symbol

Layout

3D View

A1 · A1A2 · A2A3 · A3B1 · B1B2 · B2B3 · B3MH1 · MH1MH2 · MH2

1998865