Jami,
I have to disagree, there is a higher probability of shorting associated to
QFP parts as compared to BGA's in a high volume situation. I would hate to
see a 1500 pin QFP :-) We remove and replace BGA parts, seemingly without
problems. I think we both agree that every part has it's place in the
world, if you plan on high volume manufacturing.. choose a bga. If you
plan on rework, and low volume... choose a QFP. And of course... mister
bean counter will choose on pricing.
good luck to you in whatever choice you make.
Karl
From: JaMi Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: "(Designers Council Forum)" <[log in to unmask]>,
JaMi Smith <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [DC] BGA vs. QFP
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:47:46 -0700
David / Karl,
This is also a toss up, and depends on the size of the package, type and
quanity of assembly, and other variables.
While BGA's typically provide benifits such as higher pin count for a given
area, one little short and you have to remove the BGA, and it is next to
impossible to individually rework a high density PCB once you have pulled a
BGA (reballing the BGA and preping the pads to accept the BGA again),
whereas cleaning up problems and fixing shorts on a QFP is childs play, and
prototyping is a breeze. Rework, even of large quantities of PCB's, is
possible, even easy, with QFP's and the correct tools (such as my personnel
favorite, an A.P.E. Chipmaster (also great for BGA's)).
Once again, the answer is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
Please don't think that I am anti BGA, because I an not, it's just that one
size does not always fit all.
JaMi Smith
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Bates" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: [DC] BGA vs. QFP
> It's also easier to assemble, with less likelihood of shorting between
the
> conductors (given you use the correct land pattern and spacing of vias
etc.)
> Karl
>
>
> From: David Baldwin <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: "(Designers Council Forum)" <[log in to unmask]>,
> David Baldwin <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [DC] BGA vs. QFP
> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:54:39 -0700
>
> Fellow Designers / Engineers:
>
> I have always believed this blanket statement:
>
> "A BGA will always provide superior performance to a QFP due to the
> powers / grounds being closer to the die, shorter wire bonding, and
> the absence of lead inductance"
>
> Is this a true statement or are there other considerations that I am
> missing?
>
> TIA.
>
> David Baldwin C.I.D.+
> ______________________
> Baldwin Tech Institute LLC
> 1736 S. Nevada Way
> Mesa AZ 85204
> (480) 539-4400
> www.Baldwin-Tech.com
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free 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 DesignerCouncil.
> To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
> DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
> Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
>
> E-mail 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
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free 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 DesignerCouncil.
> To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
> Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
>
E-mail 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
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free 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 DesignerCouncil.
To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases >
E-mail 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
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free 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 DesignerCouncil.
To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail 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
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
