TECHNET Archives

February 2008

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:
Ioan Tempea <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Ioan Tempea <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 12 Feb 2008 10:11:25 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
Dear Technos,

 

What is in your experience the minimum Cu-to-Cu clearance on the bottom
side that would eliminate shorts at wave?

 

Of course there are many shades of the question, like "it depends" on
whether via-to-via or annular ring-to-annular ring of pin hole (since
longer pins mean bigger clearance requirements), or it depends again on
RoHS vs. SnPb.

 

So, any figures that would eliminate the need for robber pads?

 

Or why not, could anybody elaborate on the good DfA practices for wave
soldering?

 

Thanks,

 

Ioan


---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0
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