Werner, 

As I stated in my previous posting, for customer concerns we cycle to the
number of minimum cycles to ascertain conformance to requirements, however,
we do agree and recognize the need to cycle to failure for internal
reliability assessments. 

Dave

____________________
>Dave,
>You do not really disagree with me when I said in a general technical sense:
>"Unfortunately, there is no 'acceptable number of cycles' either in
>air-to-air and one liquid-liquid thermocycling nor IST". While customers
>"specify a minimum number of cycles", this may be based on specific
>identified needs or "on customer bias"--however, 'the customer is always
>right'. This does NOT, however, translate into some generally applicable
>'acceptable number of cycles' or specification for any test. 
>Cycling to failure is always preferred, since only that provides adequate
>information for reliability estimation. 
>
>Werner Engelmaier
>Engelmaier Associates, Inc.
>Electronic Packaging, Interconnection and Reliability Consulting
>23 Gunther Street
>Mendham, NJ  07945  USA
>Phone & Fax: 201-543-2747
>E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
>
>***************************************************************************
>* 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.        *
***************************************************************************