Component package mismatch - replace or work around?

On the left are the two voltage regulators I want to replace. On the right (above the diodes) is what I received. I could run quick little wires from the legs to the proper holes. Or I could order replacements, paying closer attention to package size. Thoughts?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3161.jpg
    IMG_3161.jpg
    483.7 KB · Views: 117
The TO-202 is obsolete but has the same pin-out as the TO-220. The distance from mounting hole center to the ends of the leads is nominally 1/16 inch longer in the TO-202. This is probably not enough to matter and I would try to fit a TO-220 in your application. The replacement device in your picture appears to be a surface mounted type, not something I would force fit.
 
Account Closed
Joined 2018
On the left are the two voltage regulators I want to replace. On the right (above the diodes) is what I received. I could run quick little wires from the legs to the proper holes. Or I could order replacements, paying closer attention to package size. Thoughts?

Are both regulators bad?.... checked output voltages?
Where'd ya get those creepy regulators?
EPray?
Toss them.
Mouser, etc, sells proper ones with longer leads.
 
This is the part I ordered: LM317T/LF01 Texas Instruments | Mouser

Attached is aa picture of what I received, zoomed with boosted detail.

It's a Texas Instruments LM317, purportedly in a TO-220-3 package. The data sheet confirms that the LM317T P+ device marking corresponds to the LM317T/LF01 part that I ordered, and that it is supposed to be a TO-220 package.

From what I can tell from the datasheet, it seems I was sent a LM317MDT/NOPB, which is the TO-252 package, and should be marked LM317MDT. I guess this is a marking error on the part of TI? I'll file a return with Mouser and get the correct part.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3163.jpeg
    IMG_3163.jpeg
    871.5 KB · Views: 79
They've obviously cocked up.
Speak to them and they'll investigate and resupply

As far as I can tell, the error is on the part of Texas Instruments. The markings *on the chip* indicate it is the TO-220 version, despite it obviously not being such. Mouser simply entered it into their system as what it was marked as. Now I wonder, is there a whole run of these that are mislabeled, or just a handful? And I suppose I'll have to order a different brand so I don't get the same thing again.
 
No, that's a TO-220 package. Or a TO-262 with a tab? TO-252 has no mounting hole and it's smaller.

It's just a TO-220 designed for surface mount AFAICT. You can just bolt it in place and extend the leads with some wire.
 

Attachments

  • to252.png
    to252.png
    89.3 KB · Views: 74
Last edited:
No, that's a TO-220 package. Or a TO-262 with a tab? TO-252 has no mounting hole and it's smaller.

It's just a TO-220 designed for surface mount AFAICT. You can just bolt it in place and extend the leads with some wire.

How the heck would I have been able to identify that given their datasheet? (see Addendum-Page 1): https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm317-n.pdf

I'm a bit puzzled, because I can't find a part spec for a TO-220 package with short leads *or* a TO-262 with a tab. Maybe that explains how this came to exist? It's a frankenstein product that was never supposed to be?
 
This is the part I ordered: LM317T/LF01 Texas Instruments | Mouser

Attached is aa picture of what I received, zoomed with boosted detail.

It's a Texas Instruments LM317, purportedly in a TO-220-3 package. The data sheet confirms that the LM317T P+ device marking corresponds to the LM317T/LF01 part that I ordered, and that it is supposed to be a TO-220 package.

From what I can tell from the datasheet, it seems I was sent a LM317MDT/NOPB, which is the TO-252 package, and should be marked LM317MDT. I guess this is a marking error on the part of TI? I'll file a return with Mouser and get the correct part.

That isn't a TI part according to the photo. I think Mouser sent the wrong one in this case.

This is a TI LM317.
 

Attachments

  • Texas_Instruments-LM317KCT-image.jpg
    Texas_Instruments-LM317KCT-image.jpg
    9.1 KB · Views: 58
On page 44 of the LM317-n datasheet is the drawing for the part Mouser sent you. This is the package for the LM317T/LF01 as listed in the addendum on the datasheet page 38. I think you got what you ordered although the picture on the Mouser site is misleading in that it shows a TO-220 with full lead length. LM317T/NOPB is what you really wanted but they are out of stock. Buy the LM317TG made by onsemi instead.
 
Mouser clearly cocked up , photo is wrong and description (TO220-3) is wrong (based on what you recieved) - if all the website detail is right then you should have recieved TO220

An LF01 is supposed to be a TO220 case style (see p38), that's what mouser have described it as , the pic shows it as a TO220, the datasheet (p38) says an LF01 variant is a TO220


they've mispicked, or the stock is wrong. They should (and will) sort it.
 
Ordering can be a nightmare.
I bought some 470uf 35v capacitors.
When they came they were 6v3 !
The search didnt work properly when I tried again not just giving 35v as I asked.

I bought some 1meg resistors from Farnell.
I built up my pcb and it didnt work.
A multi meter check quickly found the 1 meg was 390r !
All they will do is replace the wrong components, the fact I spent half an hour finding the problem then another 15 minutes removing and replacing the components is irrelevant. Thats why you have to sign up to accepting their terms and conditions.
 
If they do re-supply the wrong components then they still have the problem....


Thats why you have to sign up to accepting their terms and conditions.
You don't have to accept any supposed nonsense that you have to accept a simple mispick or an error with their stock. :p
They will either resupply on the chance it was a mispick, or (more likely) they will instigate a stock check and investigation, and resupply once they have clarified what's gone wrong.


They (like all distributors) take all stock problems seriously.