TECHNET Archives

November 2004

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:
Steve Gregory <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
Date:
Mon, 1 Nov 2004 20:01:45 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (46 lines)
Hi All!!

I've been getting into a number of debates about "Process Indicators" as
described in the IPC-610...mostly with our inspectors. I know their hearts are
in the right place, but it seems that many times they will reject the
assemblies with "Process Indicators" back to our operators to touch them  up, so that
they look more like the "Target Condition", to be more cosmetically  pleasing.

I've tried to explain things as best I can, but find that sometimes our
operators are touching up way more solder joints than they need too...they're
being "trained", as it were, by our inspectors. The operators know that if
something isn't "pretty" enough, it's going to come back to them...so they're
putting more labor into product than they should.

I'm trying to find some way, any way, to be able to show our inspectors  that
to touch-up something because it doesn't look like the target condition,
doesn't mean one is making things any better...I understand that beauty is in
the eye of beholder.

There was some talk in the past about the Intermetallic Layer being
thickened during subsequent reflow cycles, and causing fractures, but  Werner said
that he's never seen a failure because of a thick Intermetallic  layer.

Process Indicators may happen as spelled out in the -610, sometimes not  only
because of the assembly process, but because of the design, or other  factors.

I look at Process Indicators as a "Flag" to investigate whether or not the
issues can be addressed and resolved properly, if they can't be resolved, then
it's not a defect. Am I wrong about this?

As always, TIA!

-Steve Gregory-



---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2