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] 
______________________________________________________________________