TECHNET Archives

January 2012

TechNet@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:
"Post, Scott E" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Post, Scott E
Date:
Wed, 4 Jan 2012 12:01:16 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (75 lines)
I'm not a fan of monkeying with a properly running process to reduce something that doesn't effect reliability.

Scott Post
Staff Manufacturing Engineer
P.O.U. 0000-001E-0CTC
2151 E. Lincoln Road
Kokomo, Indiana    46904-9005
765-451-2983 (Phone)
765-451-0287 (FAX)

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lum Wee Mei
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 8:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] Solder voids in BGA balls

Dear TechNet Buddies,

My colleague was performing BGA x-ray inspection to 20pcs of the PCBA, each of them has a BGA on the board. She observed that all the BGA solder balls have high number of multiple solder voids of various sizes within each of them. The estimated summation of the solder voids from each ball ranges from 20 - 25%. As the voids are within the acceptable value of 25%, process manager wanted QC to consider the workmanship as process indicator.

My colleague approached me for advice and being a QC, I decided to consider them as reject base on :

(a)    When consulted, Process Manager is not able to determine whether such extensive solder voids will have any impact on the PCBA reliability.

(b)   Though the solder voids size/summation are within the 25%, this value are observed on every BGA's solder balls, across all the 20 BGAs.

(c)    The PCBAs are Class 3 and to be used on mission critical application.

Before QC decision to reject them was communicated, the process engineer recall 5 of the PCBA to perform another round of reflow.

Questions :

1.       Should the above solder voids workmanship be considered as "process indicator" or "reject"?

2.       Is there disposition for workmanship that is classified as "process indicator" such as rework or replacement? For me, it should not.

3.       Since the process engineer recall 5 of them to perform another round of reflow, does it not mean he also concur that the workmanship is not acceptable?

I am a self-learned QC, so any sharing on this matter will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks and regards,
~wee mei~


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0
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
For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
**************************************************************************************** Note: If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to 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 us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. ****************************************************************************************

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0
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
For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2