Joey,
There is no black/white answer.  I personally would be confident is spinning the situation any way that behooves you, as long as you believe the product suits your customer's needs.

When we see 6015 or 6016 we throw a fit (or commotion)  until somebody gives us unambiguous marching orders, because you never know what conformance issues you'll find.

Chris

Chris Mahanna
Robisan Laboratory

-----Original Message-----
From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jose A Rios
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 12:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] bga workmanship criteria for 6015 designs

Wondering how some of you would evaluate workmanship of round surface mount lands (BGA's, non-wirebond) for designs calling out fabrication and inspection per IPC 6015 only , and the User does not know what AABUS means....
The closest thing I come to is IPC 6015 paragraph 3.5.3.2, however it's not written in a 'round' context and the boundaries of the edge vs internal area are not explicitely stated. 
Do I then go to 6012, 3.5.4.2.2 ??? 

Joey Rios
PWB & Process Quality Eng'r
Endicott Interconnect Technologies
1093 Clark St.
Endicott, NY 13760
Office: 607-755-5896

______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________