I'm sorry, Franklin, you didn't seem to get my point. I'm not saying
that specs and standards are unnecessary, I'm saying that the ignorance
of the people using them WHEN THEY ARE NOT NECESSARY. I'll agree with
your point 1. I'll agree to your point 2, if you add the rider
2. They must be adhered to when they are necessary and justified, period.
When they are used purely as belts and braces to cover the ignorance of
the decider, and for no other reason, then they are not necessary.
Unfortunately, this happens only too often, in my experience. It is
costly and unprofitable, a stick to break over your own back. A modicum
of knowledge and commonsense is much more valuable than a piece of paper
applied totally out of context from its original raison d'être. In the
case I cited, the company in question was making a through-hole board
with not more than 30 components on it, to plug into a PCI slot of a
<$800 computer, to be used in an office. Yet it was cleaned to
MIL-P-28809 standards and conformally coated. The savings were made
simply by switching off the cleaner (they were using a 13949-approved
RMA flux and an expensive solvent cleaner) and the spray booths and
scrapping their ionic tester. It also meant they were able to add a
solvent-incompatible component before soldering, thus avoiding temporary
masking and hand soldering it afterwards. The reason: the "technical"
manager did not have a clue what was really needed.
Brian
Franklin wrote:
> Wow, that was off topic...but since a new one is started let me add this...
>
> 1. Specifications are here to stay, period.
> 2. They must be adhered to, period.
> 3. There are many ways of adhering to most specifications, many ways cost
> more than others, most specifications can be met by applying different, more
> cost effective methods than what is 'traditionaly' performed.
> 4. Instead of cutting back on 'meeting specifications' for non-military
> product, why not develop cost effective processes so that military and
> non-military product are processed in a similar manner at the lowest cost
> possible. From my perspective, the only real difference between the military
> and non-military product are the additional tests required, and those cost's
> are typically passed on to the customer anyway.
>
> Franklin
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Ellis" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 1:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [TN] Visual Acuity
>
>
>
>>Jack
>>
>>Interesting point, but an analogic argument can be applied to all those
>>who apply rigid standards where they are not necessary. If a product,
>>process or whatever does what it should do in an acceptable manner with
>>appropriate aids provided by the employer, then that is good enough. I
>>firmly believe that our industry is plagued by over-specification-itis.
>>This is often engendered by ignorance; a responsible person has no idea
>>what the ramifications of a process or product are so, instead of
>>learning what it does, he covers his ignorance by applying
>>specifications and standards, often irrelevant or far too severe, and
>>costing his employers an arm and a leg in consequence. I see many, many
>>examples of this in this forum, as well as visiting clients. In one
>>company which consulted me, the product was a range of cards for use in
>>ordinary PCs used in an office environment. I saved them ~40% of their
>>production costs and thereby increased their overall gross profitability
>>by ~10% simply by showing them that they did not have to build their
>>products to ultra-reliable military standards -- but it was a hard
>>battle convincing them.
>>
>>I suggest that every manufacturing entity should carefully examine their
>>products and processes for over-specification-itis.
>>
>>Sorry to diverge off-topic.
>>
>>Brian
>>
>>Jack Crawford wrote:
>>
>>>Any related requirements have been or are being removed from IPC
>>>standards. The correct assessment is whether an individual can do the
>>>job they are required to do in an acceptable manner with appropriate
>>>aids that may need to be provided by the employer. For broader
>>>explanation, i.e. avoiding worker discrimination lawsuits, consult your
>>>HR about the Americans with Disabilities Act.
>>>
>>>Jack Crawford
>>>Director, Certification and Assembly Technology
>>>[log in to unmask]
>>>847-790-5393
>>>fax 847-504-2393
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Mary Jane Chism [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>>Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 2:37 PM
>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>Subject: [TN] Visual Acuity
>>>
>>>
>>>Group,
>>>
>>>Is it mentioned anywhere in any of the IPC standards a visual acuity for
>>>solder inspection? Thanks.
>>>
>>>Mary Jane Chism
>>>
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------
>>>Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
>>>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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
>>>[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
>>>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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
>>>information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
>>>ext.5315
>>>-----------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------
>>>Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
>>>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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
>
> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
>
>>>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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information,
> or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
>
>>>-----------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------
>>Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
>>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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
>
> [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
>
>>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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
>
> for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
> 847-509-9700 ext.5315
>
>>-----------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
> 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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
> 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
-----------------------------------------------------
|
