TECHNET Archives

1996

TechNet@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:
Date:
Tue, 05 Nov 1996 17:35:46 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
Bryan K. Douglas wrote:
> 
> With quick survey of large (10" x 20") printed board assembly (PBA), we
> found that major issues include equipment capabilities, scrap and rework
> costs, design complexity, and warp.
> 
> Assuming SMT, DSR, and press in connectors would be used on this type of
> assembly, are there other major gotcha's related to large PBA?  Are there
> examples of boards this size in telecommunications transmission or
> switching equipment?

	We see lots of large PBA's in comms and other markets.  They cer-
	tainly pose the challenges you list, and I echo the other replies
	but I'd like to add to the list.

	Stencil vs PWB registration becomes increasingly difficult, so
	expect problems as your attach pitch decreases; compensation of
	both overall and feature size become exponentially more critical.

	As board size increases and rise times decrease, a larger
	percentage of connections become topology critical.

	As connections lengthen, propogation delays and DC series resis-
	tance become genuine components to be dealt with.

	Use high Tg laminate, to limit damage due to reworks and accomodate
	higher-energy oven profiling.

	Increasing escapes in bare-board and ICT as the sheer quantity of
	probes needed burden each system.  Not funny is the tug-of-war
	between increasing need for fault coverage and difficulty achieving
	it.

	Power up is a real burden on almost *any* power system, either in
	situ or at ICT.  On board, your power system is also tough; to
	keep supply from fading 1 1/2 feet and 5-800 loads away from the
	power entry.  Not to mention getting that much power onto the PWB.

	Someone once said that continued integration would eliminate the
	BUT (big, ugly, thick) board.  I believe we have simply increased
	the functional block size to match capabilities.  I still enjoy
	the large board genre, nothing quite takes my design breath away
	like starting a 10000 net board.  There are also few "breaths of
	fresh air" that compare to the sigh that accompanies finishing
	one.

	No wonder I'm balding.

	Good luck, and best regards,
-- 
 
      Jeff Seeger                             Applied CAD Knowledge Inc
      Chief Technical Officer                      Tyngsboro, MA  01879
      [log in to unmask]                               508 649 9800

***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to:           *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text.        *
***************************************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2