IPC-600-6012 Archives

July 2010

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:
From:
Scott Bowles <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)
Date:
Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:02:24 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (65 lines)
Brian,

Most of the points the other individuals have made have merit but we believe it does matter and the way to verify compliance is by the supplier providing a copper foil material cert for the material used.  The thicker foils typically have higher peel values and this may be important and matter to you.  We agree it is a common practice for suppliers to perform what you call a "back etch", we call it "copper reduction", in order to start with a copper foil thickness that meets the drawing requirements and then reduce the thickness to make the product more manufacturable.  The end result is the finished copper thickness must meet the requirements of Table 3-12 per IPC-6012C (It was Table 3-8 in IPC-6012B).    

Best regards,

Scott A. Bowles
Director of Engineering and Quality
Hallmark Circuits, Inc.
13500 Danielson Street
Poway, CA 92064

858 513-2200 Office x8848
858 513-2233 Fax
858 437-7827 Cell


Notice:  This e-mail is intended solely for use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. This communication may also contain data subject to U.S. export laws. If so, that data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulation cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, absent the express prior approval of the U.S. Department of State. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy the e-mail message and any physical copies made of the communication. Thank you. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Brian D. Madsen [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2010 2:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] Fw: Outerlayer copper foil thickness for HDI designs

Hello Colleagues,

I recently received a question for which I need an interpretation of IPC
6012.

The background:
A product with a HDI design specified 3/8 oz (12um) outerlayer (external)
copper foil on the drawing.  We think the PCB supplier started with foil
that was within the 6012 specified foil thickness (+/- 10%), but the
supplier next performs a back etch process on the copper prior to laser
drilling.  The etch process reduced the foil thickness to ~4 um.  The PCB
supplier then plated copper up to our specification limits, which resulted
in a total copper thickness that meets the end copper requirement per
6012.  I did not find any reference in 6016 to copper foil/layer
thickness, so I am still referring to 6012 table 3-8 for this topic.

The questions:
1) Does the second column in 6012 table 3-8 ("Absolute Cu Min.") apply
only to the starting foil thickness, or does it apply to the thickness of
the copper foil layer in the end PCB (visible in cross-section)?
2) If this back etch process is standard prior to laser drilling, how can
I verify the original foil thickness is within specification?

Thanks and best regards,

Brian Madsen

Continental Automotive

______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2