TECHNET Archives

October 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:
Douglas Pauls <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
Date:
Wed, 31 Oct 2012 07:13:18 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (44 lines)
Gonul,
If you truly want to characterize ionic contamination, use ion 
chromatography per IPC-TM-650, method 2.3.28.  Far better than ROSE 
methods, in my opinion.  If you do not have that in house, you might check 
with your local university.

Doug Pauls



From:   Gönül Özden <[log in to unmask]>
To:     <[log in to unmask]>
Date:   10/31/2012 05:20 AM
Subject:        [TN] ionic  contamination measurement
Sent by:        TechNet <[log in to unmask]>



Hello,
 
I need to know which method in ionic contamination measurement will be 
more reliable and convenient for military application static process or 
dynamic process. IPC-TM-650 accept both metodologies. 
Can someone of you have an experience on this issue?

Regards

Gonul Ozden




______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2