IPC-600-6012 Archives

December 2009

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:
Jack Olson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)
Date:
Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:24:27 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
Fabricators,

This is an opportunity to influence the acceptability of your product!

The IPC Standards Development Committee is working on the next
revision to IPC-A-600 (Acceptability of Printed Boards) which is a
visual reference companion to IPC-6012.

One of the items we are currently discussing is the acceptability of
haloing along the board edge. Here is a link to where we stand now:

http://frontdoor.biz/PCBportal/IPC-A-600H213.jpg

The problem is, if the designer violates the recommendation in the
current IPC-2221 design guideline and puts traces or planes too close
to the board outline, with the current wording of "whichever is less"
your boards can be considered rejectable with even a very small
amount of haloing. Even intentional features like edge fingers can
make your boards rejectable.

We aren't sure if we should reword this (and if so, how?)

So the ball is in your court (because unless there is a logical consensus
we probably won't change it).
I'll compile and submit any responses to the next committee meeting.

Jack (aka "the new guy")

ATOM RSS1 RSS2