Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 5 Dec 2012 23:29:45 +0100 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
In-Reply-To: |
<4980102F729F42E3BF34449B3A78AE0A@stephenPC> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="windows-1252" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Be sure it's not a scratch, caused by improper handling. If it's not a
scratch, I bet it may be something I saw years and years back: tinned
conductors under the solder mask. Sounds crazy, but we got repaired boards
with that failure.
Inge
On 5 December 2012 17:49, Steve Gregory <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> Hi Mordechai,
>
> I have not seen anything like this before. I’ve posted your pictures so
> everyone else can see:
>
> http://stevezeva.homestead.com/Pad_Wrinkle.jpg
>
> http://stevezeva.homestead.com/Via_Xsection.jpg
>
> Could you share what the overall stack-up of this board was supposed to be
> and what prepreg thickness was used?
>
> Steve
>
> From: Mordechai Kirshenbaum
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 3:16 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: A PCB defect that is not specified by IPC
>
>
> Hi Steve
>
> On routine visual inspection of an income PCB board we found a type of the
> defect
> that is not specified in any of the IPC standards (e.g IPC-A-600
> Acceptability of Printed Boards).
>
> It looks like wrinkles on pads and conductors (see fig 1 in the
> attached file). We suspected that it was caused
> by thick copper conductor on the second layer (under the outer layer).
>
> We measured the copper and the dielectric thickness between the outer and
> the second layers
> and found that the copper thickness on the 2nd layer was relatively high
> (70 micro-meter), and the
> dielectric thickness lower than specified (only 50 microns).
>
> Have you seen similar defect?
> What is the reliability impact?
> Is it acceptable for class 3?
>
> Best regards
> Mordechai Kirshenbaum
> MOD, Israel
>
> P.S. please feel free to post this question on the technet forum.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
|
|
|