TECHNET Archives

October 2015

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:
Theodore J Tontis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
Date:
Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:09:22 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
IPC is in the process of developing a Design for Excellence standard, IPC-2231.

Ted T.

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Douglas Pauls
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 10:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] IPC-A-610

Dwight,

As a suggestion, if you have DfM guidelines that work, you might make them available to Gary Ferrari, who leads the IPC-2221 and -2222 design standards.  The more we manufacturing people can do to let designers know what causes is pain, the better off we will be.


Doug Pauls
Principal Materials and Process Engineer Rockwell Collins

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Mattix, Dwight <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Edit to add:
> Got a whole 'nother set of design for assembly Mfg Eng guidelines and 
> assembly quality workmanship guidelines to fill gaps (we perceive) in 
> IPC workmanship guidelines.
>
> Back in the basestation days... We had an internal circuit assembly 
> rework and repair document I published that harmonized our allowed 
> repair/rework methods, IPC workmanship and customer (Nortel at the 
> time) rework&repair standards. An interesting Venn diagram problem, that was.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mattix, Dwight
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 7:40 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]; 'Peter G. Houwen' <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: RE: [TN] IPC-A-610
>
> "I couldn't solder it right, it's precluded by your design".
>
>
> Fwiw, It's a pwb fab note. Not an assembly level note.  So, your 
> concern is valid but mute. :)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter G. Houwen
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 7:00 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] IPC-A-610
>
> 'A note "Shall meet IPC Class x ,blah blah, except where precluded by 
> original design" doesn't sound like the correct approach to me - it 
> could unintentionally result in the designer not getting vital 
> feedback from the fabricator and assembler.'
>
> James makes a good point.  It also makes it easy for the assembler to 
> say "I couldn't solder it right, it's precluded by your design".  Much 
> better to add "Except as noted", then make sure it's noted.  Makes for 
> better design discipline and is more likely to get a response from 
> manufacturing if you accidentally missed something.
>
> Pete
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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] ______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2