Talk:Via (electronics)

Untitled
Maybe add diagrams and pictures for all three (standard, buried, and blind) Matejhowell 15:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * diagrams added M adler (talk) 18:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I would like to sugest a link to this site: http://www.micromultek.com.br/RigidCircuit/microvia.asp It contains a good ilustration to several tipes os vias. -- Akira - Cleber Akira Nakandakare 21:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

How about adding the definition that "via" is derived from (it's an acronym. . . ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.249.47.163 (talk) 16:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Vertical interconnect what?
I suspect that "vertical interconnect access" was made up after the event, as I can't find any corroboration of it that isn't an obvious copy of Wikipedia. Why make up a clunky, redundant acronym like that when there is a perfectly good Latin word via (way) that it is more likely to be derived from? --Heron (talk) 12:48, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * That addition to the page appeared in early 2010. Google searches reveal earlier-dated references for "vertical interconnect access". That doesn't rule out that it is a backronym, but it demonstrably predates this Wikipedia page.192.139.122.42 (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Current capacity diagram
I have just removed the following from the article inserted by User:Binarysequence: I have several problems with this, but most importantly I am disputing the accuracy.
 * It is not made clear which plots are for current capacity and which are for resistance. I am assuming that the orange and blue plots are for resistance based on the slope of the curve.
 * That means the red and green plots are for current capacity. Both of these have a discontinuity in the slope where it goes negative.  There needs to be some explanation why a monotonically decreasing resistance does not have a monotonically increasing current capacity.  There are several other places where the curves depart from the expected smoothness but less dramatically.  I suspect these are all artifacts of not taking sufficient data points.
 * Some small formatting issues:
 * Via should not be in all caps. It is a normal uncapitalised noun in running text.
 * The text "using Saturn PCB v5.8 by EEVblog" would be better in the Source field of the image page rather than the title of the diagram. By the way, if this came from a blog then that is probably not a reliable source.
 * We have "decC" instead of "degC" in two places. There should be a space in there as "deg C".
 * Writing the resistance units as "mOhms" is incorrect, both because of capitalisation and mixed abbreviation full word. It should either be "mΩ" or "milliohm"
 * Providing the algorithm used to generate these plots on the file's page would be extremely useful. This would allow other editors to produce a more accurate plot in the preferred SVG format.  Spinning  Spark  13:07, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

— It looks like the above issues were dealt with, and the diagram returned. Additional concerns:


 * The text doesn't mention the diagram. This is particularly confusing because the text does mention a diagram "on the right", that actually lines up with this instead of the earlier diagram it is talking about.
 * Either the legend should mention units (Amperes?) or the title should mention abbreviations (R and A) -- it takes some previous knowledge to realize that "Current capacity" would be abbreviated "A".

JimJJewett (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:59, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Article scope
Both integrated circuit and circuit board vias are covered by the article. The only similarity between these types are function: connecting things on different levels. Everything else is different once the details are considered. Perhaps there should be a separate article for vias in ICs and those in circuit boards? 99Electrons (talk) 05:06, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, User:99Electrons, there are such substantial differences in implementation and manufacturing that circuit board and chip level vias deserve separate articles. ArticCynda (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:21, 14 July 2022 (UTC)