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:
Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:24:33 -0400
Reply-To:
"(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Chris Mahanna <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version:
1.0
In-Reply-To:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (73 lines)
Hi Randy,

As you know, but I'll type up for the sake of the 6012 listserv, 1-10c discussed this topic ad nauseam.  We strongly believe that the true 601X requirements are for drill to image registration,  while annular ring is simply one of several ways to measure it.  Moreover, in some increasingly common cases it not even an appropriate way to measure it.
The A/B-R script is designed to assess using drill to image tolerances.  The R features are designed as electrical test antipads, and the C features have calculated lands that don't even necessarily exist on the actual product.
The concept behind the C feature lands has been used by fabricators successfully for years.  However, to be honest, probably in a "don't ask, don't tell" scenario, as no one really wants to get into coupon design verification.  IMO such rejiggering of the coupon land sizes is "representative of the product" for the first order intent of registration assessment.

Currently 6012 doesn't give a canned "get out of jail free" card.  So, if your assessing actual boards against 6012 black-and-white, you've got an AABUS issue.

Chris Mahanna
Robisan Lab

 

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Reed, Randy
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 4:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] Non-Functional Land Registration and Annular Inspection

IPC-6012 has no guidance on the management of non-functional lands (that
I can find) concerning registration and annular ring limits.

 

The scenario causing problems is designs where the non-functional pad
size is smaller than the functional pad size.  I am not trying to debate
whether this is a good design practice.

 

What is the intent of IPC-6012?  Should boards with registration and/or
annular ring failures on non-functional lands, with the smaller pad
size, be considered non compliant?

 

Randy

 

Randy Reed, CQE

Reliability Lab

Viasystems Group Inc.

[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> 

 

503.992.4421-direct  l   503.545.0150-cell

 


The information contained in this communication and its attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify [log in to unmask] and delete the communication without retaining any copies. Thank you.
Translations of this available:
Traduction disponible chez:
Traducciones disponibles en:
Vertalingen beschikbaar bij:
http://www.viasystems.com/dynamic_page.asp 
____________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
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