IPC-600-6012 Archives

August 2006

IPC-600-6012@IPC.ORG
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: Inspection of Solder Resist
From:
"Menuez, Pete (IE) @ CIN" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)
Date:
Fri, 4 Aug 2006 11:18:12 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines) 
Your question is, as I read it, that you have a concern that a condition is mentioned in 610 but not in 600.  I don't think the cracking condition as your picture shows is addressed in either specification.

The criteria for cracking (in 610) appears under the "Wrinkling / Cracking" paragraph 10.5.1.1.  While the 'acceptable' pictures show SMOBC boards the reject pictures shows and refers to solder mask on tin lead.  Also, the criteria for acceptance is "no evidence of cracking of the solder resist after the soldering and cleaning operations. This is an indication that the soldering operation will do something to the board. Taken as a whole,(in my humble opinion), this paragraph is describing soldermask on tin/lead reflow.

I don't think 600/610 are out of sync in this particular case.

Now, is your board rejectable?  I don't see any base laminate so my question is, are these truly cracks or are they a cosmetic appearance? I have seen similar phenomena where the entire panel looks like fish scales but when examined in cross section the soldermask was reduced but it was not a crack.  If they are cracks I would reject them under the Workmanship clause of IPC 600.  If they are not cracks (purely cosmetic) I would accept this lot and use the opportunity to establish guidelines with the supplier that this condition is not acceptable for future orders. - you know the as agreed between user and supplier (ABUS)

Just my 2 cents worth.

Pete







-----Original Message-----
From: Knapp, Clarence W. [ mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 5:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] Inspection of Solder Resist


I just run into a problem between IPC-A-600 and IPC-A-610. In the IPC
600 Solder Resist cracking is not addressed with the waves and wrinkles
so it is not inspected for and generally ignored. However, IPC-A-610
states that crack of the resist is a rejection. The enclosed picture is
an example of the crack on bare board.
 <<DSCN2423.JPG>>

Clarence W Knapp
M&P Engineering
Ph 818 715 2478
Fx 818 719 7769
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2