I got internal feedback proposing that one possible acceptability criteria may be:

Any separation of wrap plating caused by excess via fill shall be acceptable provided that the separation does not extend beyond the drilled edge of the hole. 

Just food for thought on how to define boundaries...

Nick Koop
Minco Products Inc  

On Feb 25, 2012, at 6:29 AM, "Brad Toone" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> There is a need for adhesion between copper layers.  We bury filled vias in solderable pads all the time.  If the cap plate layers lose contact with the wrap plate layer, then the signal is open.  If I saw this condition in incoming boards, I would reject it for reliability concerns since the separation will likely propogate along the plating line.  There was mention in a previous response about a anular ring type requirement, this would be a good approach.  
> 
> Thanks,
> Brad Toone
> L-3 Communications
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: IPC-600-6012 on behalf of [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Fri 2/24/2012 8:27 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Via Fill on Surface Plate
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't there a chance if the cap becomes dislodged that it could end up causing a short elsewhere on the board, e.g., between fine pitch SMT pads with no solder mask dams?  In general it could also be considered FOD if the pads become dislodged.  I think there is a need for some requirement for copper to copper adhesion.
> 
> Also, there does appear to be copper-to-copper separation to some degree.
> 
> Scott A. Bowles
> Staff Designer - Printed Circuit Designer IV
> CM & Engineering Services
> L3 Fuzing & Ordnance Systems
> 3975 McMann Rd.
> Cincinnati, OH 45245
> Office: 513-943-2483
> Mobile: 513-208-9009
> 
> Confidentiality Notice
> The information transmitted, including any attached data is intended only for the recipient to which it is addressed and may contain confidential material. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail and delete the message from all receiving systems.
> 
> Destination Control Statement - (ITAR) Domestic
> These articles or technical data are controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). They are subject to the export control laws of the U.S. Government. They are not to be placed in the public domain, exported from the U.S., or given to any foreign person in the U.S without the prior, specific written authorization.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Byrne, Matthew J (US SSA)
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 10:11 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Via Fill on Surface Plate
> 
> It does matter if there is contact if it is a BGA via-in-pad.  I think it should have a "contact" requirement of 25 µm, similar to that shown Fig 3-16 from IPC-6012, attached.  But no, I don't know of a specific existing requirement.
> 
> Matt Byrne
> 607-953-9820
> BAE Systems Controls Inc.
> Huron Campus, Building 257
> 1701 North Street, Endicott, NY   13760
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Reid
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 9:11 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [IPC-600-6012] Via Fill on Surface Plate
> 
> Well here is my opinion;
> 
> It does not matter if the cap stays on the barrel of the PTH or not because it is not part of the conductive path. The conductive path is down the copper foil and electroplated part of the PTH. The cap if lifted would not cause and open. Until you stick a solder ball or bury it and put a microvia on a cap it is not part of the circuit. It is not required to have conductivity.
> 
> If you do not worry about trapped contaminants then, from a practical point of view, this should be acceptable.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Paul Reid
> Program Coordinator
> PWB Interconnect Solutions Inc.
> 235 Stafford Rd., West, Unit 103
> Nepean, Ontario Canada, K2H 9C1
> 613 596 4244 ext. 229
> Skype paul_reid_pwb
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IPC-600-6012 [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wendi Boger
> Sent: February 23, 2012 2:37 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [IPC-600-6012] Via Fill on Surface Plate
> 
> Everyone,
> 
>   Can I get your option on the attached pictures.  They show via fill material that has not been sanded as to flush with the surface.  There is no evidence of separation between copper to fill or copper to copper.
> The question is what is the intent of the spec and what criteria should be used to assess.
> 
> Thanks,
> Wendi Boger
> 
> [cid:[log in to unmask]][cid:[log in to unmask]]
> [cid:[log in to unmask]][cid:[log in to unmask]]
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> This communication is for use by the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, proprietary and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, forwarding or copying hereof is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of DDi. If you have received this communication in error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from retaining, distributing, disclosing, or using any information contained herein. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation.
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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] ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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] ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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] ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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]
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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] 
> ______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________