IPC-600-6012 Archives

August 2010

IPC-600-6012@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
IPC-600-6012<[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:28:07 -0400
Reply-To:
"(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Jose A Rios <[log in to unmask]>
X-cc:
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed; boundary="=_mixed 006574DE85257782_="
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (6 kB) , 5012_24.JPG (322 kB)
thats a plating fold, not a crack. i'd evaluate it as a void, and referee 
per 6012c 3.6.2.2 if it was isolated or the only one in the panel.

Joey Rios
PWB & Process Quality Eng'r
Endicott Interconnect Technologies
1093 Clark St.
Endicott, NY 13760
Office: 607-755-5896



Paul Reid <[log in to unmask]> 
Sent by: IPC-600-6012 <[log in to unmask]>
08/17/2010 02:04 PM
Please respond to
"(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)" <[log in to unmask]>


To
[log in to unmask]
cc

Subject
Re: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll






Here is a corner crack that produced a 10% increase in resistance.

I don't know if the attachment will make it to the forum.

I am CC Chris with this incase it does not get posted.

We are having problems with our email.


Sincerely, 
Paul Reid 

Program Coordinator 
PWB Interconnect Solutions Inc. 
235 Stafford Rd., West, Unit 103 
Nepean, Ontario 
Canada, K2H 9C1 
613 596 4244 ext. 229 
Skype paul_reid_pwb 
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> 


-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Francis
Byle
Sent: August 17, 2010 1:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll

Careful, you'll give Chris a big head...

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brown,
Elaine
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 12:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll

Indeed I am confident enough in Chris's knowledge of 6012 that we would
not be having the 
discussion if it were not visible before microetch, then the
microetching must be done to 
assess whether the separation extends beyond the plane of the foil,
which it does.

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Monarchio,
James
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 12:12 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll

I agree with Matt, you need to determine if there is indeed separation
first and inspection without etching is a good way to do it.

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Byrne,
Matthew J (US SSA)
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 8:54 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll

The possibility of a separation at the knee between plating layers needs
to be evaluated without microetching the cross section mount.  If no
separation is found then no defect should be called out.  Microetching
helps in failure analysis.


Matt Byrne
Manufacturing Engineer, PWB Technology
BAE Systems, Room 795
600 Main St, Johnson City, NY 13790
607-770-2267
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brown,
Elaine
Sent: August 17, 2010 6:27 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll

It is non-conforming for both the crack and the plating separation.
The second picture is not so clear cut.  If indeed the area at the knee
is separation it is rejectable. 
If it is differential microetching, it is not.  Hard to tell from the
photo. 
I do not think we have any criteria for burning. 

Elaine

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris
Mahanna
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 1:19 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: EXTERNAL: [IPC-600-6012] opinion poll

Hi Everyone,

Attached is a picture of a thru-hole corner after thermal stress.  The
plating is pulse.  I believe the corner was 'burnt' because of the
geometry of the (conformant) negative etchback.  All the corners show
burn; some show blisters; only this one cracked.

In your opinion, what are the non-conformance(s) if any?


Thanks

Chris

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
[log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
[log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
[log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

NOTICE:  This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
[log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
[log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
[log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2