TECHNET Archives

June 2000

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:
Pat Kane <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Mon, 5 Jun 2000 12:59:12 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
Ralph

In determining your acceptance of x-outs, consider these points:

1.  The cost probably will be higher if you say "NO X-outs allowed."
2.  If you allow x-outs, and you are building surface mount assemblies, can
your pick and place equipment build the array and not place on the x-outs?
3.  IF you allow x-outs, ask the fabricator to package the arrays with x-outs
separately from those arrays with no x-outs.  This will help maintain
throughput at P/P
4.  Solder paste reflowed on x-outs (no components) make good tools to
investigate solder coverage, solderability, and for use as inspection guides
to easily see silk-screen on dense assemblies.

my two cents worth

Pat Kane
CSL

##############################################################
TechNet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
##############################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the body:
To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE TECHNET <your full name>
To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF TECHNET
##############################################################
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information.
If you need assistance - contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700 ext.5315
##############################################################

ATOM RSS1 RSS2