IPC-600-6012 Archives

September 2008

IPC-600-6012@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:
Chris Mahanna <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)
Date:
Tue, 9 Sep 2008 21:57:21 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (89 lines)
Pete,

I'm sure that the intent was/is to differentiate by 13949 "grouped" designators, e.g. GF,GI,GX/GY.

Practically, IMO it doesn't make much sense anymore to link rework/MIR/DVW to periodic testing and material type.
Nowadays rework simulation causes no failures because we use benign direct heat irons; The very few MIR failures seem to be due to cleanliness prior to lamination, and DWV breakdown because of design below 3.5 mil.
That said, you can still have old-school MIR/DWV failures, so I'm sure that it will remain in the spec. somewhere.

My strawman input for the new qualification program includes, (but not limited to)
For the qual routine: a "Telecordia" SIR scheme, Extended fast profile thermal cycling (HATS and/or IST and/or L/L).  For periodic testing: Cleanliness using a standard vehicle and I.C.. Maybe tensile and elongation?
And of course: multiple convection reflows, dielectric tolerances, and hi-pot testing are certainly linked to lot acceptance testing.

Chris


Chris Mahanna
President, Technical Manager
Robisan Laboratory Inc.
6502 E. 21st Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46219
317-353-6249







-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Scott Bowles
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Quality Conformance Testing IPC-6012 Para. 4.3

Pete,

Actually section 4.3.1 states "of each type of material processed..."  See the following:

4.3.1 Coupon Selection - Two sets of test coupons of the most complex pattern of each type of material processed during the inspection period shall be selected from lots that have passed acceptance testing.

With that said, what is the definition of "each type of material"?  Is this based on resin system type, e.g., epoxy versus polyimide (which I think was the intent), or each of the various types, e.g., FR406, FR408, IS-410, 370 HR, 4000-12, 4000-13, etc., which would really be impractical.

Regards,
Scott A. Bowles
Director of Engineering and Quality
Hallmark Circuits, Inc.
13500 Danielson Street
Poway, CA 92064

858-513-2200 Phone
858-513-2233 Fax
858-437-7827 Cell


-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:29 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] Quality Conformance Testing IPC-6012 Para. 4.3


All:

IPC 6012 has a requirement for  monthly conformance testing but it does
not state what material should be tested -

Under the military specifications
(MIL-P-55110/MIL-PRF-31032/MIL-P-50884) a manufacture running both
polyimide and epoxy resins would be required to submit samples of both
material types each month unless the requirement is tailored (31032
allows tailoring).

What is the groups opinion? Should this be addressed in some manner - or
is it addressed and I'm missing it?

Thanks,



Pete Menuez
Supplier Quality Manager
L-3 Communications Cincinnati Electronics
7500 Innovation Way
Mason, Ohio 45040
[log in to unmask]

513-573-6401 Voice
513-573-6767 Fax

ATOM RSS1 RSS2