TECHNET Archives

March 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:
Larry Dzaugis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Larry Dzaugis <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:22:53 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
X-ray is much quicker than cross section to qualify a process.
Suggest enough cross sections to verify what is being measured by x-ray.

As an EMS, one customer had a requirement for 100% x-ray inspection under a
critical component. EMS purchased 5 in line 5DX machines for this 13 years
ago. This was a life critical a sensor.

Again, can you live with the with a 25% hole fill undetected in the
product?  If the process drifts, how big a deal is it to get back on track,
what happens to the previously run product. Many signal pins won't care,
many environments won't care, what about your pins and your environments
and your price of failure? A colleague had to testify at court when an air
bag did not deploy. Not a 1 time occurrence.

The IPC 610 provides a starting point. Part of the job is determining if it
is sufficient for the work at hand.


______________________________________________________________________
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