Why would anyone want to underfill twice? Was the initial underfill
insufficient? If so, isn't a second underfill a band-aid rather than a
permanent solution to the problem?
What new problems would the second underfill cause?
Karen Tellefsen - Electrical Testing
[log in to unmask]
908-791-3069
From: Bev Christian <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: 08/23/2010 11:19 AM
Subject: [TN] Double underfill
Sent by: TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
Technetters,
I would like your opinions on a theoretical underfill situation. What
would be your comments be if a process group told you that they had
underfilled a component and it was cured and they wanted to add more
underfill to the component?
Bev
RIM
----
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
