TECHNET Archives

September 2005

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Scott B. Westheimer" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Scott B. Westheimer
Date:
Fri, 16 Sep 2005 09:37:34 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (77 lines)
My first trip to China I visited a factory that made communication systems
used in mines. While there I saw 100s of operators reworking gold contacts
by peeling off the fingers and riffeting gold ribbon onto the boards. This
was being done because the fingers were not matching up with the plug in
connectors. There stated yields were 100%. What you asked is not common
practice at a good shop and that is why I have always looked at first pass
yields. I would no think that they monitor those numbers. It is not uncommon
to do some rework on inner layers by picking off extraneous copper but if it
is the norm it tells me that process control is weak.

Scott B. Westheimer

 ----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack C. Olson" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:48 AM
Subject: [TN] Bare-Board Inner-Layer Fab Quality


> This is a question for anyone who is intimately familiar with bare-board
> fabrication.
>
> I've recently returned from a trip to China and Taiwan to visit five fab
> vendors.
> During one of the tours, I noticed people doing a lot of rework on inner
> layers,
> scraping metal flecks off with screwdrivers and scrubbing crud off of
> conductors
> with this black (alcohol?) stuff. I asked the tour guide what their
> inner-layer
> yield was, and he said 99.5%
>
> huh?
>
> Is that how people do it? I've only been on maybe two board tours in the
> states
> in the last couple of years, and that issue never came up. So maybe that's
> just the
> way it is done, but what BUGS me about it is they don't record how many
> repairs
> they are doing on each layer, and it looked like different operators had
> different
> criteria for what constitutes a reject, and by claming such a high yield
> no one
> ever looks at the process right before it that is putting all the crud and
> metal flecks
> on the layers to begin with!
>
> Jack (the "I thought I'd seen everything" guy)
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 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
-----------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2