TECHNET Archives

December 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:
"Stadem, Richard D." <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Stadem, Richard D.
Date:
Thu, 26 Dec 2013 14:01:07 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
I was not talking about a solderability issue, but a lack of any wetting to the bottom of the part.

-----Original Message-----
From: Vladimir Igoshev. PhD [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 11:35 AM
To: Stadem, Richard D.
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] IPC-A-610E, Voids in Thermal exposed pad of QFNs

Hello Richard,

I might be wrong but I don't think one can call a "slit" or a gap between a surface and solder a void. the situation you refer to is rather a solderability issue with a QFN pad, but not voiding one.

And if that is the case then, yes, you are absolutely right it's not detectable by X-ray. however, if it's a solderability issue then  it should spread over the affected batch, not just one QFN and it's always the best practice to qualify (by X-sectioning) any new batch of any or at least the most vulnerable components.

--
Best regards,

Vladimir Igoshev. PhD                          mailto:[log in to unmask]

SENTEC Testing Laboratory Inc.
11 Canadian Road, Unit 7.
Scarborough, ON M1R 5G1
Tel: (416) 899-1882
Fax: (905) 882-8812
www.sentec.ca

______________________________________________________________________
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