Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 19 Apr 2018 09:42:28 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="UTF-8" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi Wayne - etchback isn't necessary for acceptable PTH reliability for some
products and product use environments so that may not be a contributing
issue. With that being said, I like etchback as it always makes the inner
connections better/more robust and in some product use environments having
etchback is necessary for long term product life. One question we haven't
asked as a group is " was etchback required in the fabrication
requirements?"
Dave
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 9:11 AM, Wayne Showers <[log in to unmask]
> wrote:
> The real problem is that this PCB has no etchback, positive or negative
> (PCBs are defective). As far as resin recession, yes the processing
> probably caused the separation, but once again, the PCB has no etchback.
>
> I would send that cross-section image to the PCB supplier and asked them
> if this is typical. I suspect that they will realize it is a trap and
> either offer a crazy answer or admit that their is no etchback and offer to
> re-run/replace the PCBs.
>
|
|
|