 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0uC72e-00004HC; Wed, 24 Apr 96 11:03 CDT |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 24 Apr 96 10:44:10 EST |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"hpIKb2.0.2QK.S3bVn"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 17: |
08:17 1996 |
| X-Loop: |
|
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
David,
Thanks for the file info on Alloy 42. Most of the info is related
to the solderability of the leads. I had heard that the Alloy 42
leads were not as pliable as standard copper leads, thus intro-
ducing a possible failure mechanism on (thin) cards prone to more
warp and/or twist. ie:cracking at the interface
Any comments from our component/assembly/reliability guru's?
marko
Is anyone using components (such as TSOP,etc.) that have alloy 42
leads on thin card PCMCIA's? I have heard that reliability may
be an issue (less compliancy) due to handling/assembly/encasement
flexure. Solder joint cracking is said to be evident in reliability
testing... Thanks
marko
|
|
|
