TECHNET Archives

1996

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
X400-Content-Type:
P2-1988 ( 22 )
Old-Return-Path:
Date:
12 Jul 1996 09:58:06 -0500
X-Status:
Precedence:
list
Resent-From:
Conversion:
Allowed
Disclose-Recipients:
Prohibited
Resent-Sender:
TechNet-request [log in to unmask]
From [log in to unmask] Fri Jul 12 16:
48:30 1996
Status:
O
Priority:
normal
X-Loop:
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/5177
Content-Return:
Allowed
X400-MTS-Identifier:
[/c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/; 0289731E667FE101-HW-MTA-AZ]
TO:
"[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> (Return requested)
Message-Id:
<0289731E667FE101*/c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/o=AZ-MTA/ou=MSMail/ou=CAS/s=Edwards/g=Ted/i=A/@MHS>
Return-Path:
<TechNet-request>
MIME-Version:
1.0
X400-Recipients:
non-disclosure;
X400-Originator:
Received:
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0ueje6-0000EeC; Fri, 12 Jul 96 09:56 CDT
Resent-Message-ID:
<"GdMRn1.0.ibB.fUcvn"@ipc>
Subject:
From:
"Edwards, Ted A (AZ75)" <[log in to unmask]>
Alternate-Recipient:
Allowed
X400-Received:
by /c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/; converted ( IA5-Text); Relayed; 12 Jul 1996 09:58:06 -0500 by mta HW-MTA-AZ in /c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/; converted ( IA5-Text); Relayed; 12 Jul 1996 09:58:06 -0500
Original-Encoded-Information-Types:
IA5-Text
Content-Identifier:
0289731E667FE101
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)

The Arizona Printed Circuits Association here in Phoenix Arizona had a 
speaker last night at our monthly meeting who was from Lea Ronal and made a 
presentation on this, he seems  quite Knowledgeable on this subject, I would 
suggest you contact him.  His name is David Marks and his phone number is 
516-868-8800. He is in Freeport, N.Y.
 ----------
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: FAB: Electroless Nickel - Immersion Gold
Date: Friday, July 12, 1996 9:17AM

     My company is in the process of evaluating the use of Electroless 
     Nickel - Immersion Gold as a finish, for both SMT and mixed technology 
     PWBs.  Is this a good plating system to evaluate??  Is there any 
     "conventional wisdom" that we're missing?
        Secondly, some questions about the gold deposition.
     1. Is "electroless gold" the same as "immersion gold?"
     2. How thick can we expect the gold to deposit?
     3. Is the gold deposition process a self limiting one?
     4. How much gold is required to adequately keep the nickel solderable?
        Any other comments regarding this topic is appreciated.

***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to:           *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text.        *
***************************************************************************

***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to:           *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text.        *
***************************************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2