Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 23 Feb 2000 13:24:08 EST |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In a message dated 02/23/2000 3:09:10 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
>
> This is the main reason why SIR testing is, in many cases, useless to
> qualify a flux: you qualify it under lab conditions, totally ignoring
> the fact that its behavious will alter in practice due to it mixing with
> external contaminants not present on your test vehicles.
>
SIR USELESS? Gasp!! Burn the Heretic!!!!!!!!!!
SIR can be useful, even as a lab tool, you just have to use the right
combination of materials, processes, environment and data interpretation. I
would agree that we have a long way to go before our existing methods are a
good and true measure of field performance.
Doug Pauls
##############################################################
TechNet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
##############################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the body:
To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TECHNET <your full name>
To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TECHNET
##############################################################
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information.
If you need assistance - contact Gayatri Sardeshpande at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700 ext.5365
##############################################################
|
|
|