Unfortunately/fortunately, depending upon your perspective, fabricators are responsible for DfCM review.  This is my invented acronym for Design for Conformant Manufacturability; which means that the fabricator's front-end must not only be experts at the performance specifications, but ALSO the customer's interpretation of the specs and what they might agree to as AABUS.

Similar haloing issues have been a hot topic since laminate starting getting more brittle.  6012 has discussed at length, and come to an impasse because the "correct" answer is for the design activity and fabricator to sit together and iron it out  (AABUS).

There was a heated discussion about whether or not the fabricator should be responsible for reverse engineering the design, for the purpose of the risk assessment w.r.t. DfCM (this is what Pete is suggesting).  While this might be the most efficient solution, IMO it is inappropriate.

If I were the buyer, I would assume that there is haloing under the land, but accept this condition if there wasn't a biased node under that land (which there doesn't appear to be).

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jose A Rios
Sent: 2011/12/15 12:09 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] haloing

wondering how others interpret the applicability of 6012c 3.3.1 (and its
6018 equivalent) with respect to haloing, for designs that have metal to the edge of a pwb, as shown below?? conductor to conductor spacing is highly compliant, distance from the solder feature to the first halo along the edge is less than 4 mils.


to me 3.3.1 has a context where metal is away from the board edge by design, unlike the attached image.....
 
Joey Rios
PWB & Process Quality Eng'r
Endicott Interconnect Technologies
1093 Clark St.
Endicott, NY 13760
Office: 607-755-5896

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] ______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________