Component library finder
One part number, every CAD library source and every distributor — correctly formed, in one action. Plus what to check before you trust the model.
Searching for
—
—
CAD models — symbol, footprint, 3D
Stock, pricing and lifecycle
These open each distributor's own search. Live figures on this page would need an authenticated Octopart/Nexar key and a server to hold it — and you would then be reading our cached copy rather than theirs.
Datasheet and documentation
Before you trust the model
- Pad geometry against the manufacturer's recommended land pattern, not against a generic IPC calculation. Where the datasheet publishes a recommendation it wins — the vendor knows things about their part's warpage and solder volume that a package drawing does not carry.
- Pin numbering for your exact package variant. The same die in LQFP and QFN has different pin numbers, and a model tagged with the base part number may be for either. This is the error that survives review and destroys a prototype.
- Pin 1 orientation against the datasheet drawing, not against the model's own silkscreen marker. Then check the 3D model is rotated to match.
- Thermal pad and its via array present on any pad-cooled package, with the vias actually connected to a plane that can spread the heat.
- Courtyard sized for your assembly process — IPC-7351 density level A, B or C. A model built at nominal density on a board your assembler builds at high density will cause placement warnings or worse.
- Solder mask and paste apertures checked, particularly on fine-pitch and QFN parts where a 1:1 paste aperture floats the package.
- Silkscreen clear of pads. Cosmetic until it is on a pad, at which point it is a solderability problem.
- Symbol matches the actual pin function table, including multi-function pins and any NC pins the datasheet says must be grounded.
Why part numbers do not match
Distributor suffixes are not part of the part number
Distributors append ordering codes for packaging and handling. Digi-Key uses
-ND, with CT-ND for cut tape, DKR-ND for
digi-reel and a quantity break in the middle. Mouser prefixes a vendor code such as
511-. Manufacturers add their own reel and tape suffixes —
TR, T/R, -REEL7, -E2,
-2K.
None of those change the silicon or the footprint, and none of them help a CAD library search. Stripping them is mechanical, which is why this tool does it for you and then searches both forms.
The suffix you must not strip
The package code is part of the identity. STM32F407VGT6 and
STM32F407VGH6 are the same die in LQFP100 and UFBGA176 — different
footprints, different pin numbers, entirely different boards. This tool keeps
anything that looks like a package code and only removes what looks like packaging
and ordering.
If in doubt, work from the manufacturer's ordering-information table rather than from a search result. It is the only place the decode is authoritative.
Why the model still might be wrong
Third-party models are generated by reading datasheet drawings, and a drawing can be ambiguous, superseded, or simply misread. The failure mode is not that models are bad — most are fine — it is that the ones that are wrong look exactly like the ones that are right. The only defence is checking against the datasheet, which takes a few minutes and saves a spin.
If you have to draw it
- Work from the recommended land pattern, not the package outline.
- Where none is published, calculate to IPC-7351B at the density level your assembler uses.
- Set the courtyard from the same standard, not by eye.
- Model the 3D body at nominal, and check maximum against neighbouring parts and the enclosure.
- Have someone who did not draw it check it against the datasheet.
Design guidance, not a manufacturing instruction. Verify every result against your fabricator's stack-up and the applicable standard before release. Closed-form models are approximations; the fab's field solver and process window are the authority.
Questions
What people ask about this
Why does this open searches instead of showing the models here?
Because the honest options are a link or a lie. None of these services publish an open API that a static page may call — SnapMagic and Ultra Librarian require an account, and Octopart pricing needs an authenticated Nexar key with a per-query cost. We could put a server in the middle and cache results, but then you would be reading our stale copy of their data instead of theirs. What this does instead is normalise the part number, work out who makes it, and open every source correctly formed in one action. That is the part that wastes your time; the click is not.
What does the part-number cleaning actually do?
Distributors append their own packaging and ordering suffixes, and those suffixes usually return nothing on a CAD library search. A Digi-Key number like 497-6063-1-ND is not a manufacturer part number at all, and STM32F407VGT6TR will miss where STM32F407VGT6 hits. This strips the reel, tape, cut-tape and distributor codes, keeps the real package suffix — which you must not lose, because it decides the footprint — and searches with both forms so you can see which one landed.
Can I trust a downloaded footprint?
Not without checking it, and this is the part most people skip. Generated models are usually built from an automated reading of the datasheet drawing, and they are usually right — but "usually" is doing a lot of work when the cost of wrong is a respin. The checklist below is what we run against every third-party model before it goes into a design. The two that catch real errors most often are pad geometry against the manufacturer's recommended land pattern rather than a generic IPC calculation, and pin numbering on parts sold in several packages.
Which source is best?
They differ by coverage rather than quality. Ultra Librarian has the broadest catalogue and the most CAD formats. SnapMagic tends to have better 3D models and a cleaner Altium export. Component Search Engine is strong on European passives and connectors. The manufacturer's own page, where they publish one, is the most authoritative and the most likely to be current — always worth checking first for anything from ST, TI, Analog Devices or Würth, all of whom publish good models.
What if nothing has a model?
Then you draw it, and that is not a failure — for anything unusual it is the normal case. Build it from the manufacturer's recommended land pattern in the datasheet, not from the package outline drawing, and if the datasheet gives no recommendation, calculate it to IPC-7351 at a density level that matches your assembly process. Then get it checked by someone who did not draw it.
Library work you would rather not do?
We build and verify component libraries to a documented standard — land patterns from the manufacturer's recommendation, checked 3D, and a naming scheme your team can live with.