Agreed.
-----Original Message-----
From: Vladimir Igoshev [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 1:35 PM
To: TechNet E-Mail Forum; Stadem, Richard D.
Subject: Re: [TN] x-ray inspection of PTH barrel fill
Absolutely right!!!! That is why I said X-sectionning shouldn't be done based exclusively on the X-ray data.
Regards,
Vladimir
SENTEC Testing Laboratory Inc.
11 Canadian Road, Unit 7.
Scarborough, ON M1R 5G1
Tel: (647) 495-8727
Cell: (416) 899-1882
www.sentec.ca
-----Original Message-----
From: "Stadem, Richard D." <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 18:21:09
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>,
"Stadem, Richard D."
<[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [TN] x-ray inspection of PTH barrel fill
Where is there a requirement to validate wetting to the copper wall? That is inspected at the PWB level as a finish inspection (HASL, IAg ENIG, etc).There is no requirement to verify the IMF or wetting to the hole wall.
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Victor Hernandez
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 11:04 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] x-ray inspection of PTH barrel fill
The x-ray is a tool to highlight anomalies/issue/concerns with PTH vertical solder fill, 50% for Powers and 75% for signals. That need to be flowed with cross section to verify solder wettability to the copper wall.
Victor,
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rivera, Raye
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 10:54 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] x-ray inspection of PTH barrel fill
Greetings all,
I would like to ask the group for an opinion on the following question:
Is it appropriate reject a through-hole solder joint as a defect under IPC-A-610E section 7.3.5.1 (barrel fill < 75%) based on x-ray inspection?
The reason for using x-ray is that the component is in the way and preventing visual inspection of the destination side.
I know that 610 is a visual standard. I see that Section 8.3.12 specifically states that x-ray can be used to identify defects in the special case of BGAs. I find no such statement anywhere in section 7. And the standard is quite specific in calling out exactly what magnification and even lighting should be used for inspection. This leads me to believe that x-ray should NOT be used to identify through-hole defects.
Am I reading too much into this? Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Best regards,
Raye Rivera
QA Manager * Canoga Perkins
20600 Prairie Street * Chatsworth * CA 91311-6008
818-678-3872 * [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]
______________________________________________________________________
|
