TECHNET Archives

December 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:
Charlie McMahon <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Charlie McMahon <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:24:56 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (86 lines)
Hello Paul:



The notion of a successful testing protocol is based on determining an
empirical standard that can be repeated by all with the same result at the
end. In this case, the initial goal of the discussion on how to determine
the qualification of lead free capable manufacturers was how to ensure that
the laminate would withstand the demands of lead free temperatures. To
achieve that goal requires more than one discipline. I agree that coupons by
themselves or solder-sample boards by themselves are not enough. That is why
a step ladder approach from laminate manufacture thru design, lay-out,
material specification, component choice thru assembly test and field use
now must be part of a co-operative engineering approach.



I agree with the statement Mr. Paul Reid made in which he said: "I think the
best bet is to invoke reliability testing using coupons fabricated with the
materials of interest by fabricators of interest. Then you "baseline" your
fabricators and select the materials that meets your needs best"



I suggested earlier coupons/full boards should be come part of our new
process but it must include an approach where the specification discussions
include fabricators and assemblers in the same room at the same time with
the customer we hope to serve to set these "baselines".



This is where I have found resistance. In providing rigid and flex boards
for over 20 years, there has been little interest in an approach where you
design in quality and process. Why?, the cost is front loaded and the
pay-back is in the future. That cost/benefit strategy has been of little to
no interest.

As Werner proposed earlier, should we not work towards this baseline
protocol in a combined effort that would result in a process specification
embraced by the pcb fab/assembly industry.



Our process controls must respond to this L-F paradigm shift to be
competitive

in the world market. We must be prepared by accepting this change thru
promoting a co-operative engineering model.



Thank you to all for this expertise on this subject matter.



Charlie McMahon

McMahon Sales Company

P.O. Box 1024

Windham, New Hampshire  03087

Tel: 603-432-3111

Fax: 603-432-6854

Cell: 603-401-4646

e-mail: [log in to unmask]






---------------------------------------------------
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