Jack

Although I'm not directly concerned, I read this paper and come to the
direct conclusion that the semiconductor industry are trying to weasel
out of their responsibilities.

"Twenty years ago, solderability problems were much more common than
today and certain metallurgical problems worsened over time, to the
extent that quality or reliability could have been compromised." These
guys are saying that the solderability of semiconductor packages - of
ALL types - will remain perfect: "The three year rule was adopted for
commercial procurement but is now irrelevant because of the
technological advances that the industry has made in the intervening
years.". I strongly dispute this assertion. It may be true that the
solderability of components has generally improved for fresh components
but it is not true that it will remain so for more than three years. Do
you know of any bare board fab shop that will guarantee the
solderability of all their products indefinitely?

The way I see this is that more emphasis will need to be placed on
goods-in testing of semiconductors for solderability and, perhaps, other
criteria, by the OEM, increasing his overheads, while the semiconductor
manufacturers rub their hands all the way to the bank, having weaseled
themselves out of their normal quality responsibilities.

On the other hand, I can see the difficulties that may be enegndered by
purchasers specifying dates. The easiest way of overcoming the problem,
IMHO, is for the semiconductor blokes to implement a substantial
surcharge on date-specific orders. This would have the double advantage
of encouraging assemblers not to specify dates except where they
consider it essential, for any reason, and it would cover the cost of
the extra hassle at the other end. Notwithstanding, I believe that if
the suppliers ship old packages, they should be prepared to cover the
extra cost to the assemblers if they do not meet full expectations of
quality, including solderability, cleanability, moisture absorption,
etc. This may also encourage them to ensure that very old inventory is
systematically replaced, because the cost of such guarantees would
probably exceed the value of most products.

Just some thoughts...

Best regards,

Brian

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------