TECHNET Archives

January 2013

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:
"Whittaker, Dewey (EHCOE)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Whittaker, Dewey (EHCOE)
Date:
Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:40:10 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
Not to coat over the issue, but originally if the assembly was not going to be conformal coated, you would seal the cut/ends with epoxy. If you were going to conformal coat and all else being equal you would not need to epoxy first.
Dewey

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Vargas, Stephen M
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 2:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] PCB Etch Cut

Good Afternoon:

A question regarding IPC-7711/7721, section 4.3.1 (Conductor Cut, Surface Conductors), details (in Outline section) that cut areas "are sealed with epoxy" and later detail (in Procedure) to "coat the area with epoxy if needed". Seems like a partial contradiction. Any thoughts? Class dependant? End use dependant? Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Steve Vargas


______________________________________________________________________
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