TECHNET Archives

February 2022

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:
Wayne Thayer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Wayne Thayer <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 9 Feb 2022 10:44:54 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
Greetings-

The only way I've been able to keep parts moving in this environment of
part shortages and 72 week lead times is by constantly finding substitutes.

The least appetizing substitute option is offshore brokers. We are revising
our counterfeit detection strategy for minimizing cost/benefit (and time).
My inclination is to do careful visual inspections, especially labels and
lead finish, followed by solvent testing and a simulated Pb-free soldering
profile on samples of the lot. I also compare the decapsulated die faces
with known genuine parts.

Is anybody else working this issue? Our old corporate document suggests XRF
and x-ray inspection, but I'm not seeing the value in those. XRF is a great
way to see if your system is Pb-free, but I'm more interested in whether
the leads were soldered to previously which a thorough visual inspection
should find.

Thanks,

Wayne Thayer

ATOM RSS1 RSS2