Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 25 Sep 2015 23:08:47 +0100 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
<BACD2ED7E9C04D46808E09C273164BE5@MikePC> |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
So what you are all saying is that if joints break they are a fail, but if
they don't they are not a pass.
ON SMT boards of course the pads will usually come off before the solder
breaks. There are some papers by such as Dage on predictive mechanical
testing but I am not wholly convinced.
--
Best Wishes
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joyce Koo
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 2:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Component solder reliability
DFR need a lot more. here is the flavor
http://www.dfrsolutions.com/software/see-what-sherlock-can-do-for-you-2/
> It depends.
>
> There are SO many factors affecting initial joint strength, pad size being
> just one. The perfect pad size, in the wrong place, with the wrong solder
> or poor processing can make a very weak joint.
>
> And still, it's no measure of reliability. Poor solder joints are more
> likely to be weak. Poor solder joints are more likely to be less
> reliable. But poor older joints could pass an initial pull test and still
> propagate cracks and fail later in life.
>
> Peter
>
______________________________________________________________________
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]
______________________________________________________________________
|
|
|