-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Giesler
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 12:58 PM
To: Mary Jane Chism; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: [TN] Via holes damaged
Group,
What is the industry standard for probing vias then? Is industry
changing to a less aggressive probe due to this new spec, 10.2.9.3? Has
anyone else questioned this? The issue is we sometimes use a fairly
aggressive probe to reduce the amount of false calls/failures at ICT.
These probes can leave marks as shown in 10.2.9.3. How is industry
dealing with this?
Ross Giesler
Kimball Electronics Design Services
Strategic Initiatives Engineer
Phone: (812) 634-4505
Cell: (812) 661-7601
Fax: (812) 634-4700
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary Jane Chism
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:52 AM
To: Ross Giesler
Subject: FW: [TN] Via holes damaged
-----Original Message-----
From: Franklin D Asbell [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 4:14 PM
To: Mary Jane Chism
Subject: RE: [TN] Via holes damaged
Mary,
You indeed have a defect...
1. Surface finish damaged exposing substrate/copper 2. Looks like metal
overhanging into hole.
Solder mask damage probably exposing fibers (which of itself is not a
problem but due to the length of the damage it would be a defect) 3.
Consider the annular ring a trace (which in all respects it is), from
this image you have an 'open' as well as damage to the pad/hole wall
interface...another reason for a reject.
It really does not look like a test probe damage, more like physical
damage from a hand tool, or mechanical...I would ask someone at test
what they used on it for repair???
Franklin
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary Jane Chism [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 3:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]
Cc: Ross Giesler
Subject: FW: [TN] Via holes damaged
Please see information below from the engineer who is working on this
issue and also the attachment.
Thanks.
Mary Jane Chism
-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Giesler
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 2:15 PM
To: Mary Jane Chism; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: [TN] Via holes damaged
Group,
This issue is related to Section 10.2.9.3. As you can see from Page 1
of the attachment, IPC states that damage to a conductor or land is a
defect Class 1, 2, or 3. This is not in Rev C.
If you refer to the picture on Page 2, it was taken from a production
unit. As you can see, 3 vias have damage that we believe came from our
ICT test probes.
Is this a defect according to the new IPC A 610 D? The picture in
section 10.2.9.3 looks like it was caused by a ICT probe also.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Ross Giesler
Kimball Electronics Design Services
Strategic Initiatives Engineer
Phone: (812) 634-4505
Cell: (812) 661-7601
Fax: (812) 634-4700
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary Jane Chism
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 1:56 PM
To: Ross Giesler
Subject: FW: [TN] Via holes damaged
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Franklin D Asbell
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 9:31 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Via holes damaged
What are you considering damage?
If the probe is merely indenting the metal this may not be considered
'damage'.
If the probe is piercing the finish, exposing copper then inspect it
according to exposed copper, if it is exposing glass, inspect it to
exposed glass, if it is lifting the pad, inspect to lifted pads, if it
is damaging the hole wall, copper separation, reduced hole size, etc etc
etc then inspect to such.
Franklin
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mary Jane Chism
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 9:25 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] Via holes damaged
Group,
I have a question on via holes damaged by test probes. We have a
situation where some of the annular ring of the vias used for test
points are being damaged. I have looked in the IPC-A-610 Rev. D and
also IPC-A-600 Rev. G, but am not finding what I need or am not looking
in the right place. If anyone knows of the requirements of what is
acceptable or a defect for this type of condition, please let me know.
Thanks.
Mary Jane
Mary Jane Chism
Technical Trainer/ Learning Center
Kimball Electronics Group
email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Phone: 812-634-4462
Fax: 812-634-4501
---------------------------------------------------
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 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
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
847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
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 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
|
