I agree, there are issues.  What about parts that have always been
compliant, and will continue to be used on SnPb (because we have products
that we will never change from SnPb) as well as being used on new Pbfree
products.  Ex. an inductor with a Pt/Pd/Ag finish. a gold connector. etc.
Would you change their part number?  Would you store some in two locations
(SnPb product stock and Pbfree product stock)?
We are going to try to implement a boolean type of indicator (checkbox) in
our database that we can use to sort with - Pbfree parts will be checked
off.  Any new parts we bring in that are PbFree we will make new part #'s
for, but I doubt we will change any existing ones.  We haven't figured out
how we will tackle storage, yet.

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Nutting [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: February 8, 2005 9:40 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [LF] Putting new part numbers on RoHS components - was Re:
[LF] marking PWAs as lead-free


Your point is good.  However, our system is such that to change the
underlying parts on a BOM requires an ECO (Engineering Change Order) and
data entry, not to mention new parts to buy and double the bins in the
stockroom.  There has to be some form of traceability to know the
history of your changes.

There is no easy way out of this mess.  We have to face the fact that
this is going to be an enormous task and we will make implementation
mistakes.  We are humans and we are prone to making mistakes... not that
I would <grin>.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could go home on Friday night running tin/lead
and start Monday morning lead-free.

Just my opinion.

Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: Leadfree [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Camille Good
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 5:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [LF] Putting new part numbers on RoHS components - was Re: [LF]
marking PWAs as lead-free

From my limited knowledge:

Against adding new part numbers - A LOT of extra
paperwork and hassle as you go through all your old
part numbers.

For adding new part numbers - It becomes a LOT easier
to make sure an assembly is RoHS-compliant.  Just look
at the BOM and make sure that none of the old-style
part numbers are on the supposedly RoHS-compliant BOM.



     My experience with people is that simpler systems
lead to less opportunities for mistakes,
misunderstandings or forgotten steps.  But making a
system simple (in this instance) for manufacturing
means a LOT more work on the data-entry side.
     So, it is really a philosophical decision.  Which
are you most worried about occurring, a mistake which
will put a non-RoHS compliant part on a supposedly
RoHS-compliant assembly, or extra costs, personnel
time, overhead, opportunity costs, etc. from the
duplicate parts numbers being put in the system?
     If you know that your system is rock-solid,
mistakes on BOMs are rare if ever, your personnel are
all well-trained about which parts to take from which
bins and it is generally unlikely that a non-RoHS
compliant part will be put in a
should-be-RoHS-compliant assembly and you are in a
low-margin or very competitive segment of the market
where extra data-entry and -tracking personnel are not
really affordable, then you might get by with only
having new part numbers for non-backwards-compatible
parts.
     But if you know you are going to have both leaded
and lead-free assemblies being built in the same
factory for quite some time and you have any worries
about human error causing non-RoHS-compliant parts (or
worse, leaded solder!) to be used in a
supposedly-RoHS-compliant product or assembly line,
then a whole different set of part numbers for ALL
RoHS-compliant components is probably the way to go.
That way, personnel training is simpler - assemblers
know if it's used on the RoHS line then it had better
come from a bin of parts with the new part numbers,
receiving and purchasing know that any component that
goes in bins with the new part numbers had better be
RoHS-compliant, and if there is a question about a
particular assembly being RoHS-compliant it is easy to
scan through the BOM and make sure all the components
have the new part numbers.

-Camille
Portland, Oregon

--- Moshe <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> For an OEM,what are the pros and cons of adding new
> part numbers for all RoHS components .vs. adding new
> part numbers only for
> components which are not backward compatible ?
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Leadfee Mail List provided as a 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 Leadfree
To temporarily stop/(start) delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings 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 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------