TECHNET Archives

February 1997

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Old-Return-Path:
Date:
17 Feb 1997 08:46:40 -0500
Precedence:
list
Resent-From:
From [log in to unmask] Tue Feb 18 12:
53:29 1997
Resent-Sender:
TechNet-request [log in to unmask]
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Status:
O
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/10295
TO:
"IPC TECHNICAL FORUM" <[log in to unmask]>
Return-Path:
<TechNet-request>
X-Status:
Resent-Message-ID:
<"MCZda3.0.Nj6.e162p"@ipc>
Subject:
From:
"Don Browne" <[log in to unmask]>
X-Loop:
Received:
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0vwTLV-0000SBC; Mon, 17 Feb 97 07:43 CST
X-Mailer:
Mail*Link SMTP-QM 4.0.0
Message-Id:
Parts/Attachments:
Message Body (23 lines)
                                                                    11:23 AM
  OFFICE MEMO                                                 Time:
                      Subject:
                      Des: Jumpers per IPC-A-610                    2/14/97
                                                              Date:


To creators/maintaining committees for IPC-A-610:
IPC-A-610, in paragraph 9.3.1.5 states that jumper wires "For Class 3 assemblies wire should meet the requirements of MIL-W-81822." However, this wire specification is exclusively for solderless wrap applications. We have found that in using it in the manner specified for adding jumper wires per IPC-A-610, soldering, that the insulation melts when subjecting it to the heat of normal soldering. Not too unexpected for a "solderless" wire! Now, admittedly, there are a large number of different insulation materials available in the various slash sheets of this specfication, but why would a solderless wrap specification be called for here which is not in every case specific for soldering? Is there a revision forthcoming that will rectify this? If not, consider this to be a vote for a correction in the next revision, since we have a contract that specifically requires IPC-A-610 and this paragraph has caused us considerable problems. 
Replies to "[log in to unmask]" will be appreciated.

***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To subscribe/unsubscribe send a message <to: [log in to unmask]>   *
* with <subject: subscribe/unsubscribe> and no text in the body.          *
***************************************************************************
* If you are having a problem with the IPC TechNet forum please contact   *
* Dmitriy Sklyar at 847-509-9700 ext. 311 or email at [log in to unmask]      *
***************************************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2