IPC-600-6012 Archives

December 2013

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:
Jose A Rios <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)
Date:
Fri, 6 Dec 2013 10:39:41 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (5 kB) , 6494_M_003.jpg (1 MB) , 6494_2_1 mod.jpg (1 MB) , 6494_M_002.jpg (1 MB)
hi paul, in my opinion, what you have here is an artifact of drilling; not 
a base material or lamination defect, which is how crazing is defined. 
this artifact may only be visible in darkfield, normal lighting may not 
reveal it.
this artifact is further enhanced if etchback is used. its a wicking path 
that didnt plate up because its too deep.
wicking acceptance criteria is defined for the plated part, not the 
invisible path that remains....

this would pass group a (lot conformance), but may not perform well if caf 
tested.

Joey Rios
PWB & Process Quality Eng'r
i3 Electronics
1093 Clark St.
Endicott, NY 13760
Office: 607-755-5896; Cell: 607-206-3642



From:   Paul Reid <[log in to unmask]>
To:     <[log in to unmask]>, 
Date:   12/06/2013 10:21 AM
Subject:        Re: [IPC-600-6012] Crazing
Sent by:        IPC-600-6012 <[log in to unmask]>



Hi Russ,

I'll try with this email. I think that IPC strips all attachments however.

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] 

 


-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Russ 
Shepherd
Sent: December 6, 2013 9:42 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Crazing

Hi Paul,

Can you attach the photo to this email string?

Sincerely,
 
Russ Shepherd
Vice President of Operations
MICROTEK LABORATORIES


-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Reid
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 5:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Crazing

Hi Russ,

Maybe you can help. How do I post pictures to the IPC site?

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] 

 


-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Russ 
Shepherd
Sent: December 5, 2013 4:27 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Crazing

Crazing is an externally observable characteristic.  If you see crazing in 
a microsection it would fall under laminate defects, such as delamination, 
laminate voids or cracks.

If you have a photo of the condition it might make it easier to comment 
on.

Sincerely,
 
Russ Shepherd
Vice President of Operations
MICROTEK LABORATORIES


-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Whittaker, 
Dewey (EHCOE)
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:13 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Crazing

Was the observation as received or after thermal stress?
Dewey

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Reid
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 2:06 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] Crazing

I was just on a conference call where we found crazing (a separation 
between glass fibers and the epoxy system), in a microsection. The 
fabricator stated that this had to be evaluated looking at a board 
macroscopically and could not be evaluated microscopically. 

 

Crazing is called out in IPC-A- 600 in section 2, paragraph 2.3.2 page 18, 
which is "Externally Observable Characteristics". In A-600 there is 
picture of a microsection showing the defect but it states that a 
microsection is not required.

 

In IPC 6012-2010 crazing is call out in 3.3.2.2, page 12, which states (I 
am paraphrasing), "Crazing shall not violate greater than 50% of the 
distance between adjacent conductors..." The document then refers to IPC A 
600.

 

What is your take on their argument that crazing should not be evaluated 
microscopically as per IPC? 

 

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] 

 


______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________[attachment 
"6494_M_003.jpg" deleted by Jose A Rios/Endicott/EIT] [attachment 
"6494_2_1 mod.jpg" deleted by Jose A Rios/Endicott/EIT] [attachment 
"6494_M_002.jpg" deleted by Jose A Rios/Endicott/EIT] 


______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2