Your point is well taken. But, I feel a little less cynical. Most of what I
have learned about electronic manufacturing has been in response to a
standard requirement. Sometimes the standards saved our butt. Sometimes we
chose to ignore a requirement and got burned. Sometimes we discovered they
were obsolete or irrelevant.

The standards are not the timeless inspired word of God. They reflect the
best efforts of groups of men with mixed motivation, varied backgrounds and
knowledge with limited resources. Certainly proper application of industry
consensus standards requires knowledge and experience. Improper application
results in waste. My personal experience matches Brian's. But I've seen the
door swing both ways, where people ignore a standard requirement because
they didn't know why the requirement existed and then face a mountain of
field returns and rework.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ryan Grant
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 4:18 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] Visual Acuity
>
> O.K., now I have to repeat a joke my boss told me the other day.
>
> They did a study where they put a bunch of monkeys in a cage
> with a pole running up the center and a bunch of bananas
> attached to the top.  Whenever one of the monkeys would start
> climbing the pole to get the bananas, the other monkeys would
> get sprayed with cold water.  Very quickly the monkeys
> associated one monkey climbing the pole with the cold water,
> so whenever one of the monkeys would try to climb the pole,
> the other monkeys would pull him down the beat him.
>
> Then the researchers changed one monkey out of the cage, AND
> they stopped spraying the monkeys with water.  The new
> monkey, of course would try to climb the pole and of course
> the other monkeys would pull him down the beat him before
> they got sprayed with water.  Slowly the researchers replaced
> the monkeys one by one and of course each new monkey would
> try to climb the pole to get the bananas, and the other
> monkeys would pull him down and beat him. Eventually, all the
> original monkeys who had been sprayed with cold water were
> replaced with new monkeys who had never been sprayed with
> cold water.  However, all of the monkeys had learned to pull
> any monkey down from the pole and beat him whenever he tried
> to climb the pole to get the bananas, never knowing WHY they
> beating that monkey for climbing the pole.
>
> And thus we have corporate specs and standards.
>
> Ryan Grant
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian Ellis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 8:17 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] Visual Acuity
>
>
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 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
-----------------------------------------------------