IPC-600-6012 Archives

August 2010

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:
"Dupriest, Don" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)
Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:46:38 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (111 lines)
Yea, got to agree with Gary also.  That interpretation kind of reminds me of my favorite on "foreign matter" inclusions; Oh "... why that it is not foreign; we know where it came from... so it's acceptable!"    Just some specification humor for the end the day.  

C. D. (Don) Dupriest
Lockheed Martin - MFC
Advanced Manufacturing Technology
member of:
Production Technical Excellence Staff 
Ph. 972/603-7724 fax: 972/603-9052
Email: [log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gary Ferrari
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 5:36 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Non-Functional Land Registration and Annular Inspection

  Mike,

I would not classify a non-functional pad as extraneous copper. The pad 
is electrically connected to the circuit net, through the via, and is a 
design wanted feature, however small it may be. Extraneous copper is 
defined as "unwanted" metal that remains on the base material after 
chemical processing.

Regards,

Gary


On 8/17/2010 6:06 PM, Mike Hill wrote:
> Randy,
>
> The smaller non-functional pad should be considered as extraneous copper which are allowed per paragraph 3.12 as long as they do not affect functional integrity.
>
> Mike Hill
> Quality Manager
> Colonial Circuits, Inc.
>
> -----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]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>


______________________________________________________________________
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