Grunde,
Bleary eyed in Taiwan............
This is the correct response.
One microsecond after this info is removed, questions will arise requiring it to be added back.
Gerry
> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:23:27 +0000
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] IPC-6012C Total Cu thickness
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Those tables are very educative when explaining to QA and design people why final copper thickness is what it is in relation to base copper and class and should be left well alone in my opinion, they are not that difficult to understand if you know a bit about PCB manufacture.
> At least over here people in the industry is getting more removed from PCB manufacture since so many factories has closed down and production gone to far east, so to have the standards actually explaining stuff like that and not simply stating requirements is not a bad thing.
>
> Rgds
> Grunde
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Reuven Rokah
> Sent: 11.desember 2013 21:07
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] IPC-6012C Total Cu thickness
>
> Can I have the draft for comments?
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Louis Hart <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Raye, although not a guru, please allow me to comment.
> >
> > Jason and Reuven I agree with. Further, I have put among the 6012
> > committee comments a request to simplify those tables for inner and
> > outer copper thickness. Most of those columns can be eliminated, I
> > believe, allowing for easier interpretation by those charged with acceptance.
> >
> > IPC will circulate a draft of 6012 rev D after 1 Jan 2014 for industry
> > review. I have already submitted some 20 requests for what I see as
> > improvements. Louis Hart
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rivera, Raye
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 12:13 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: [TN] IPC-6012C Total Cu thickness
> >
> > Hello technet gurus,
> >
> > I have a question regarding total copper thickness for external conductors.
> >
> > 3.6.2.13 states only a requirement for total conductor thickness, that
> > is foil + plating, and references table 3-12 for the appropriate
> > values. There is no requirement for the foil thickness.
> > Table 3-12 also has a column with heading:
> >
> > Absolute Cu Min. (IPC-4562 less 10% reduction)
> >
> > Does that column heading constitute a requirement? Would using a copper
> > foil less than the stated minimum constitute a rejectable condition
> > even if total copper thickness meets requirements?
> >
> > Engineering states that they only care about the total thickness from
> > a functional point of view.
> >
> > I ask this because I have a difference of opinion with a colleague on
> > the interpretation of the standard.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Raye Rivera
> >
> > QA Manager * Canoga Perkins
> > 20600 Prairie Street * Chatsworth * CA 91311-6008
> > 818-678-3872 * [log in to unmask]<mailto:[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]
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best Regards,
>
> *Reuven Rokah*
>
> Mobile: 972-52-6012018
> Tel: 972-3-9360688
> Fax: 076-5100674
> <http://www.rokah-technologies.com/>[log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]
> www.rokah-technologies.com
>
>
> This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary of Rokah Technologies. If you have received this transmission in error, please inform me by e-mail, phone or fax, and then please delete all of the original files and all other copies exist.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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]
______________________________________________________________________
|
