 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0vLyQ3-0000RYC; Fri, 8 Nov 96 15:24 CST |
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 08 Nov 1996 16:36:16 -0500 |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Fri Nov 8 18: |
17:38 1996 |
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
| X-Status: |
|
| X-Loop: |
|
| Resent-From: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"nPMbb2.0.yQJ.MKwWo"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| X-Mailer: |
Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) |
| Organization: |
CIEEM, RPI |
| Message-ID: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I do not know the reason behind modification of that particular
requirement. However, in my experience, the solder in upper bend
radius usually wicks up from the pad during reflow thereby causing
an insufficient solder condition. This is more critical
than solder in lead bend, which is more a process condition
than a defect. Of course, the question about reliability data
to verify this remains unanswered.
--
Vijay Sankaran (518) 276-2721 [log in to unmask]
Research Associate
Center for Integrated Electronics and Electronics Manufacturing
Renssleaer Polytechnic Institute
Troy, NY 12180
***************************************************************************
* 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. *
***************************************************************************
|
|
|
