For Paul:
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Reid [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:01 PM
To: Chris Mahanna
Cc: John Perry
Subject: FW: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll
Hi Chris,
When I post to 6012 the email gets rejected.
Could you review this email and post it for me.
In the mean time I will contact John Perry and ask him to fix the email
problem.
Sincerely,
Paul Reid
Program Coordinator
PWB Interconnect Solutions Inc.
235 Stafford Rd., West, Unit 103
Nepean, Ontario
Canada, K2H 9C1
613 596 4244 ext. 229
Skype paul_reid_pwb
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Reid
Sent: August 16, 2010 1:58 PM
To: '(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)'
Subject: RE: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll
Hi Chris,
I would describe this section as a vertical section rotated in a way
that the drilled hole is horizontal. The plating would be described as
"laminar" plating, with five distinct layers. There is no evidence of
significant negative etch back in the sample. There is evidence of hole
wall separation at the knee of the hole. A crack is observed propagating
horizontally from the corner of the dielectric, through the first
electrolytic copper layer parallel to the plane of the dielectric. This
type of crack is observed in lead free assembly and rework. The crack
propagates between the first and second electrolytic copper layers.
There is no separation between the surface foil and the electrolytic
copper layer one.
I believe this is non-conforming in that there is a separation between
layers of electrolytic copper plating. You are allowed a separation
between the foil and the barrel but not a separation within the copper
plating.
Sincerely,
Paul Reid
Program Coordinator
PWB Interconnect Solutions Inc.
235 Stafford Rd., West, Unit 103
Nepean, Ontario
Canada, K2H 9C1
613 596 4244 ext. 229
Skype paul_reid_pwb
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris
Mahanna
Sent: August 16, 2010 1:19 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll
Hi Everyone,
Attached is a picture of a thru-hole corner after thermal stress. The
plating is pulse. I believe the corner was 'burnt' because of the
geometry of the (conformant) negative etchback. All the corners show
burn; some show blisters; only this one cracked.
In your opinion, what are the non-conformance(s) if any?
Thanks
Chris
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
[log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
|
