Lol..You are 100% correct my friend. As most of the strange requests I get,
they come from the customer's customer. Like when they change from a UR
coating to parylene but forget to change the thickness requirement. Not
pretty putting parylene down to 3 mils thick!!
Lloyd Duso
Diamond-MT
Plant Manager
(814) 535-3505
www.Diamond-mt.com
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Steve Gregory <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Yep Lloyd, but let me clarify, not my requirement, the customers... [?]
>
> Steve
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:12 PM, lduso - Diamond-MT.com <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Exactly my point....neither is coating boards to 20 mils thick with SR
>> conformal coating, but yet we get told to do just that. Isn't that right
>> Mr.Gregory?...lol
>>
>> Lloyd Duso
>> Diamond-MT
>> Plant Manager
>> (814) 535-3505
>> www.Diamond-mt.com
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:01 PM, SALA GABRIELE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> > even not in the HDBK-830
>> >
>> > Gabriele
>> >
>> > -----Messaggio originale-----
>> > Da: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Per conto di Guy Ramsey
>> > Inviato: mercoledì 4 marzo 2015 20.26
>> > A: [log in to unmask]
>> > Oggetto: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> >
>> > Beware of false knowledge. It is more dangerous than ignorance.
>> > This is not in the J-STD-001F, or IPC-CC-830B.
>> >
>> > Guy
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of lduso -
>> Diamond-MT.com
>> > Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 12:26 PM
>> > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> >
>> > All I can add is this: As coating application contractor we have had
>> > hundreds of customers over the years and thousands of part numbers.
>> > Everything from NASA Maven to paintball gun CCA's. In all that I think I
>> > had
>> > two part numbers in 8 years that the customer required the edge to be
>> > coated. One claimed that the reason was to seal the edge of the board
>> and
>> > the other said it was because there was copper extremely close the edge.
>> >
>> > As everyone has said, it's something worked out between us and the
>> > customer.
>> > The funniest part is that they all claim it is in accordance with the
>> IPC.
>> >
>> > Lloyd Duso
>> > Diamond-MT
>> > Plant Manager
>> > (814) 535-3505
>> > www.Diamond-mt.com
>> >
>> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Richard Kraszewski <
>> > [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks to all for the great insights & discussion on this topic.
>> > >
>> > > Rich Kraszewski
>> > > PLEXUS
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gregg Owens
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:19 AM
>> > > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > >
>> > > I vote great minds! :)
>> > >
>> > > Gregg
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Stadem, Richard D. [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:36 AM
>> > > To: TechNet E-Mail Forum; Gregg Owens
>> > > Subject: RE: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > >
>> > > Gregg, I posted almost the same thing and sent it before I saw your
>> > > posting. Great minds think alike, or something like that, I guess!
>> > > dean
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gregg Owens
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:31 AM
>> > > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > >
>> > > Standards do not necessarily define every possible condition,
>> > > exemplified by this thread's conversations. I am sure the standard
>> > > committee members for conformal coating need to take note of this
>> > > condition and come to some conclusion in future editions of the
>> > > standard. The problem becomes "it depends" is sometimes the right
>> answer
>> > for some criteria in IPC standards.
>> > > That is where the standards state: AABUS (as agreed to between user
>> > > and supplier (manufacturer)).
>> > >
>> > > We live in a complex world where decisions making becomes convoluted
>> > > between user (customer) and manufacturer. Some users depend on the
>> > > manufacturer's experience for best industry practices because they may
>> > > know very little about electronics manufacturing processes let alone
>> > > end-use implications of those processes (e.g. whether or not to
>> > > conformally coat a board, what type of coating to use and coverage
>> > requirements).
>> > >
>> > > I live in a bubble where engineering resides with production and
>> > > communication is very near seamless. So such issues can effectively
>> > > and efficiently discussed and quickly and effectively decided upon. In
>> > > the real world of contract manufacturers this rarely exists.
>> > >
>> > > If life were easy, most of use would not be needed.
>> > >
>> > > Gregg
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dale Ritzen
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:07 AM
>> > > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > >
>> > > Seriously folks... is this a real or imaginary problem? We have seen
>> > > both "yes" and "no" opinions over the last several days. Is anyone
>> > > basing their opinions on a specific standard that states what
>> > > conditions require the PCB edges to be coated, or is it simply a
>> > > matter of the customer specifying that requirement on their S.O.W. for
>> > > the product? Are manufacturers to second guess the customer about the
>> > > places the product will be used and the environmental conditions it
>> > > will be placed in that might warrant coating of the PCB edges, or does
>> > > that really matter anymore with the state of the art PCB manufacturing
>> > > processes - regardless of the condition of the material left on the
>> > > edges (with the possible exception of PCBs made of Polyimide
>> materials)?
>> > >
>> > > So far we have seen opinions - not quotes from any standard that
>> > > covers this. Does that exist, or is it something that the IPC
>> > > technical committees need to look into for further definition? Sounds
>> > > to me like it needs some definition in a standard so we all have
>> > something
>> > to march to...
>> > >
>> > > IMHO,
>> > > Dale Ritzen, ASQ CQA
>> > > Quality Manager / ISO Management Representative
>> > > ___________________________ Austin Manufacturing Services
>> > > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > > _____________________________________________________________________
>> > > This email and any attachments are only for use by the intended
>> > > recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged, confidential,
>> > > proprietary or otherwise private information. Any unauthorized use,
>> > > reproduction, dissemination, distribution or other disclosure of the
>> > > contents of this e-mail or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If
>> > > you have received this email in error, please notify the sender
>> > > immediately and delete the original.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yuan-chia Joyce
>> > > Koo
>> > > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 5:20 PM
>> > > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > >
>> > > also there are cut off edges of the PWB like using shear... really bad
>> > > with all the fiber glass stick out.... there is not enough coating can
>> > > fix that... (don't laugh, those are real surprise you get from far)...
>> > > jk
>> > > On Mar 2, 2015, at 10:04 AM, Stadem, Richard D. wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > You lost me on that post, Wayne.
>> > > > Not sure what you are trying to describe when you talk about
>> > > > drilling thousands of overlapping holes as a method of routing out a
>> > PWB?
>> > > > The edge-coating being discussed was conformal coating, not plating
>> > > > of the edges?
>> > > > Sorry if I am slow on the uptick today.
>> > > > dean
>> > > >
>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wayne Thayer
>> > > > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 8:44 AM
>> > > > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > > >
>> > > > I feel the need to point out the obvious:
>> > > >
>> > > > -Suppose we singulated a board by using a pcb drill, drilling
>> > > > thousands of overlapping holes. It's hard to keep drills sharp, so
>> > > > let's assume we just swap out bits after the same number of "hits"
>> > > > that we deem the bit good for via hole drilling. Now how 'bout we
>> > > > coat the exposed edge with plated metal, just to make sure that if
>> > > > there's a problem with the drilling/routing process, we have a real
>> > > > good chance of making a short.
>> > > >
>> > > > Any reason that should be dis-allowed? Try calculating the exposed
>> > > > area on the edge vs. all of the via circumferences you've got!
>> > > >
>> > > > Therefore, it's ridiculous to specify coating of routed board edges,
>> > > > which if anything, have less potential to damage fiber bundles than
>> > > > a drill. Snapped areas are a different category because
>> > > > drilling/milling has a limited capability to damage the laminate.
>> > > >
>> > > > Wayne
>> > > >
>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stadem,
>> Richard D.
>> > > > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 9:26 AM
>> > > > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > > >
>> > > > Rich,
>> > > > In addition to what Dr. Pauls has detailed below, I also want to
>> > > > point out that whether or not any specification "recommends" or
>> > > > "does not recommend"
>> > > > coverage on certain areas of components and PWBs, it is the assembly
>> > > > drawing which has historically taken precedence over all standards
>> > > > when it comes to defining conformal coating coverage.
>> > > > This is because every assembly and PWB has different design
>> > > > requirements and it would be too difficult to document all of the
>> > > > exceptions to the different rules for each type.
>> > > > Many circuit boards are simply blanked out on a press, leaving
>> > > > exposed fiberglass edges, but these are also typically high-volume,
>> > > > low-reliability PWBs used only for consumer electronics. All other
>> > > > PWBs are typically routed or laser cut, and as Doug stated those are
>> > > > typically sealed by the singulation process. Depending on the type
>> > > > of PWB material, the method of singulation, and the application,
>> > > > there may be no need to coat the edges.
>> > > > Or there might be, but then one would expect this to be detailed as
>> > > > part of the assembly requirements on the drawing.
>> > > >
>> > > > dean
>> > > >
>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Douglas Pauls
>> > > > Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 8:07 PM
>> > > > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's
>> > > >
>> > > > Rich,
>> > > > MIL-I-46058 is simply a materials qualification document. It does
>> > > > not address the coating of board edges. I would disagree with
>> > > > Graham and I do not believe that conformal coating edges of boards
>> > > > is a value added process. Most boards in high performance
>> > > > electronics have routed edges.
>> > > > The routing process tends to smear the resin over the glass
>> > > > reinforcement, sealing the edges. And since most design standards
>> > > > do not allow internal circuitry closer than 25 mils from the edge of
>> > > > the boards, water or external contaminants would have to penetrate
>> > > > 25 mils of epoxy resin to get to circuitry. If the edges of the
>> > > > boards were sheared or snapped, where the resin did not seal the
>> > > > ends, then perhaps the sealing would be justified. I can say that
>> > > > Rockwell has coated some board edges and left other edges free.
>> > > > We have no field failure, ever, that can be traced to lack of
>> > > > coating the board edges.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Doug Pauls
>> > > > Principal Materials and Process Engineer Rockwell Collins
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Richard Kraszewski <
>> > > > [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Does anyone recall which MIL document calls out the requirement
>> > > >> to cover the PCB edges of assemblies?
>> > > >> I have been led to believe that one exists but that more than
>> > > >> likely it is not MIL-I-46058C.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Any thoughts??
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Rich Kraszewski
>> > > >> Plexus
>> > > >>
>> > > >> ___________________________________________________________________
>> > > >> __
>> > > >> _
>> > > >> 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]
>> > > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > >
>> > > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > > 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]
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> >
>> >
>> > ---
>> > Questa e-mail è priva di virus e malware perché è attiva la protezione
>> > avast! Antivirus.
>> > http://www.avast.com
>> >
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > 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 and any attachments are only for use by the intended
> recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged, confidential, proprietary
> or otherwise private information. Any unauthorized use, reproduction,
> dissemination, distribution or other disclosure of the contents of this
> e-mail or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the
> original.
>
______________________________________________________________________
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]
______________________________________________________________________
|
