TECHNET Archives

November 2006

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:
stephengregory5849 <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, stephengregory5849 <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 29 Nov 2006 13:55:50 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (177 lines)
Hi Chuck!

I understand that fab houses shouldn't cover costs when an assembler trashes
a board through their assembly processes, but what about when a fab house
gives you crap to begin with? I've posted (with pictures) many times about
fabs that we got that were expected to be good, but as we started assemble
the boards or after we had them assembled, we found that the fab was trash.

The one instance that sticks out in my mind was when we were building boards
for a major defense company that were assemblies that went into an AWACS
aircraft. We had built about 400 assemblies and shipped them when we
discovered that there were vias in the fab that had little or no copper
plated inside the barrels! It was only a fluke that we discovered this as I
had a crosssection done on a bare fab for no particular reason. The fabs
passed bare board testing and post assembly testing because the vias were
filled with silver conductive epoxy. The boards were supposed to be built
according to -6012. When we informed the fab vendor of what we discovered,
we asked to see the cross-sections that they had performed on the previous
lots of fabs that they built for us...they couldn't produce any
cross-sections for us.

To make a long story short, we recalled everything that we had built and
started over from scratch with a different fab vendor...and ate the costs
for everything that we had built. The fab vendor wasn't willing to cover any
of our manufacturing costs, but was willing to give us new boards...yeah
right. Like we would really want anymore fabs from them. It was decided that
after you figured in lawyers fees and everything that it would take to prove
our case in court, it would be a wash. So we decided to cut our losses and
start over again.

Our customer wasn't too happy but they were grateful that we found the
problem when we did before any of the assemblies made their way into an
aircraft...

This is just one of many cases that I have experienced like this from
various fab houses...

All I can say is buyer beware.

-Steve Gregory-

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Brummer" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: [TN] FW: Delamination pics (IS410)


> Steve,
>
> The reason the fabs can't cover the cost of your parts and labor is
> because everyone wants multilayer boards at pennies per square inch.  No
> possibility of covering warrantee costs as you add 10x the board cost when
> you blister the boards assembling them.  If one bad job eats the profit
> from 100 the fabs will be out of business in a week.  Maybe the designers
> should spec materials that can handle the heat instead of FR-4 with the
> cheapest oxide.
>
> just my opinion.
>
> Chuck Brummer
> 3M Manufacturing Engineer
> 8357 Canoga Ave.
> Canoga Park, CA 91304-2605
> (818) 734-4930
>
>
>
>
> stephen gregory <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent by: TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
> 11/29/2006 09:11 AM
> Please respond to
> TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>; Please respond to
> stephen gregory <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> To
> [log in to unmask]
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [TN] FW: Delamination pics (IS410)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Good Morning to you Gloria!
>
>  I've got your Word doc. file with the pictures posted at:
>
>  http://www.stevezeva.homestead.com/files/dELAM.doc
>
>  Looking at the pictures, I'm assuming that each page shows images from a
> different area. It's worth noting that the delamination appears to be at
> the same layer, or am I wrong about that?
>
>  What is your fab vendor saying about this problem?
>
>  What I'm about to say isn't trying to slam all board houses, but in all
> the years that I've been working in this business, I've found that almost
> never will a board house fairly compensate a company after they've found a
> problem with a fab after it's been built. Most of the time they've said
> they will give us new boards, but won't compensate us for the labor and
> materials in the assembly, and I think that sucks.
>
>  Looking at all the pictures you've sent us, I definitely think it's a
> fab problem, not any of your assembly processes, and I would be leery of
> shipping any product that is using these fabs.
>
>  But that's just my opinion...
>
>  -Steve Gregory-
>
> Gloria Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>                Good Morning Steve,
>
>  We had a micro section completed on the delaminating area of the boards
> here that we are finding that same issue with.  Thought I would share them
> as well.  I know that I cannot send them to the forum so if you can post
> them like you did the others and share them also please do.
>
>  Thanks
>
>    Gloria Brown
>  phone 906-932-5970  ext. 26
>  fax  906-932-9822
>  [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
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 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