The Phoenix Contact connector 1828692 (277-14121-ND) (F) has the pin numbers in the diagram and footprint in reverse order. It does not match the pin 1 marking on the connector itself, and would result in Pin 1 connecting to Pin 4 on the mating connectors (1766259, 277-6080-ND). The mating connector (M) has the correct pin order according to the pin 1 marking on the connector.
Hi patrick.joyce,
Welcome to the TechForum.
Are you saying that you have the 1828692 (277-14121-ND) connector itself, and that it’s pin 1 marking does line up with the pin 1 marking of the mating 1766259 (277-6080-ND)?
That is what I would hope would be the case.
I’m not certain to which diagram you are referring, but both the 1828692 Footprints and Models link diagrams from our website and the drawing document found directly from the Phoenix Contact product detail page for the 1828692 (see drawing pdf below) agree with each other.
pxc_1828692_04_01_GIC-2-5-4-G-7-62_FAM-1.pdf (142.3 KB)
Pin 1 indication from Phoenix Contact drawing for the 1828692:
Drawing of mating connector, the 1766259:
I believe that Phoenix made an error in their drawing and that the footprint model found from our product detail page was likely generated from that erred Phoenix diagram.
I took a look at a wire-mount version of essentially the same connector, the 1766259 (277-6080-ND) and its drawing has the pinout one would expect, with pin 1 mating up to pin 1 of the 1766259. So this confirms in my mind that the pinout in the drawings for the 1828692 are indeed wrong.
Drawing of the 1766259:
I will see if I can get in contact with the appropriate people to get this corrected.
Addendum:
I checked a few other similar parts from Phoenix and they all seem to follow the same standard as in the case we are discussing above. It seems to just be how they label that type of board-mount plug in their drawings, even though that means that pin 1 of the mating connector will not mate with pin 1 of the connector in question.
I checked a few other vendors we carry who make comparable products, and I found that their solution is to not assign a pin 1 at all on the board-mounted plug with female contacts. For some of them, they still assigned a pin one on the mating side connector with male pins, while others omitted any pin 1 reference on either connector.
In conclusion, it appears that for board-mounted terminal block-style plugs with female contacts, one should ignore any reference to pin 1 at all from their respective diagrams, if pin 1 is specified at all, and just make note of the physical orientation of the contacts when mated.
Hi patrick.joyce,
See my addendum above. I can’t explain why they label pin 1 as they do in their drawings, but it appears to be the norm for Phoenix drawings to do it this way despite the fact the pin 1’s will not mate together with that standard.
Strange that they mark them contrary to the numbering. I think I had found a contrary example on Friday, but no sense trying to find it now. Perhaps I was mistaken.
Oh well, thanks anyway.
It seems like that might increase the risk of someone following the markings on board and connector, and putting the connector on the wrong side of the board.
I don’t disagree. I don’t understand it. That’s why I thought it was an error at first rather than standard procedure.
Thanks for alerting us to this, as it’s something to be noted when dealing with these parts in the future.