Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | (Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees) |
Date: | Wed, 25 Aug 2010 07:40:03 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
you cant see enough electroless in a microsection to measure it, even at
500 or 1000x unless you're really 'globbing it on'.
if you're counting on eless to meet the wrap requirement, thats a loosing
proposition. at least for 'medium-build' eless chemistry setups.
in the event a 'high-build' eless application is employed, and the deposit
is measurable, i dont see why you cant count it toward meeting the wrap
requirement....
Joey Rios
PWB & Process Quality Eng'r
Endicott Interconnect Technologies
1093 Clark St.
Endicott, NY 13760
Office: 607-755-5896
Chris Mahanna <[log in to unmask]>
Sent by: IPC-600-6012 <[log in to unmask]>
08/24/2010 08:52 PM
Please respond to
"(Combined Forum of D-33a and 7-31a Subcommittees)" <[log in to unmask]>
To
[log in to unmask]
cc
Subject
[IPC-600-6012] wrap and electroless
another opinion poll, of sorts:
With even the most discriminating customers allowing 0.0002" wrap, and
huge aspect ratios leading to thicker electroless, the assumption that
wrapped electroless counts as wrap becomes more and more important. I
assume that everyone is counting it?
Thanks,
Chris
Chris Mahanna
President, Technical Manager
Robisan Laboratory Inc.
6502 E. 21st Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46219
317-353-6249
______________________________________________________________________
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]
______________________________________________________________________
|
|
|