TECHNET Archives

October 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:
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Eva J <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:01:21 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (98 lines)
Bob,
We 100% inspect all product (low volume, high mix, complex designs, class 2
and 3) received from various contract manufacturers and we consistently
identify defects that the contract manufacturer's AOI and X-Ray missed
(Examples: component cant, component damage, laminate issues, solder
volume, missing components, solder balls violating minimum electrical
clearance, head in pillow...........). There is no substitute for the
trained eye.

Eva J


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Ioan Tempea <[log in to unmask]
> wrote:

> Bob,
>
> For class 3 boards of that complexity you cannot rely on visual inspection
> to weed out 100% of the quality problems! What you want is visual + AOI +
> X-Ray and also functional test. No functional test, no certainty that
> you've caught everything. On top of it, testing has to have a proper
> coverage.
> Then, you'll need some screening, like thermal shock or burn-in, in order
> to catch infant mortality issues that get away even after having done all
> the above.
>
> And this will, eventually, ensure good quality, which means good
> workmanship. But things don't have to stop here either, as you have no idea
> about the long term reliability of the product, which is intimately related
> to design (Werner would have had many things to say here).
> So you'll need to wrap it up with proper ESS screening.
>
> But now that I'm done ranting, I see your mandate is to perform inspection
> only. Maybe you could get away with the reliability part, but I don't
> believe you can commit to properly fulfilling your mandate without
> functional test and infant mortality screening. Believe me, I've been down
> that path. 4000 parts and this complexity means that, if you judge based on
> DPMO, there is at least one defect on each board. Try and find it!
>
> To end on a sweeter note, of course you could commit to the task, if not
> you, somebody else will, but make sure the contract has provisions that
> will allow your company to fight the endless spiral of customer returns.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ioan Tempea
>
> This e-mail, and any attachments, are intended solely for the use of the
> intended recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged, proprietary
> and/or confidential information. Any use, disclosure, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachments for any purposes
> that have not been specifically authorized by the sender is strictly
> prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately
> notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete all copies and
> attachments.
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] De la part de Bob Wettermann
> Envoyé : Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:16 PM
> À : [log in to unmask]
> Objet : [TN] Inspecting Class 3 Assemblies
>
> Dear Technetters:
>
> I think these things come in bunches.
>
> We are being asked to perform contract inspection of Class 3 medical PCBs.
> I would categorize this board as "high complexity" with BGAs, UHDI
> connectors, 0201s and about 4,000 parts. There are 100+ boards.
>
> Obviously performing this manually will would take many hours and based on
> previous experience, be only 80% effective using a single set of eyes.
>
> So my question for those of you building IPC-A-610 Class 3 product for
> mil, aerospace or medical is how do you insure that class 3 solder joint
> and other inspection criteria are met? The AOI we have will not do the
> trick!
> The leadless devices and BGAs we will inspect via XRAY. Other ideas for
> doing this "offline"?
>
> Bob W/BEST
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2