TECHNET Archives

September 2014

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:
Yuan-chia Joyce Koo <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Yuan-chia Joyce Koo <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 27 Sep 2014 08:32:54 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (81 lines)
Thanks.  I guess you get what you pay for.  Hopefully, jim know what  
he is getting by design.
regards,
        jk
On Sep 27, 2014, at 3:55 AM, Ramon Essers | ETECH-trainingen wrote:

> The metal appearance on the termination depends on the production  
> process (cheap process) of the chip component (termination). This  
> is a really cheap component, which i can see, with a major  
> tollerance. If you want to know more about the different processes  
> how a chip (termination) is made, than please send me an email and  
> i will provide you a .pdf file explaining the different processes.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Ramon Essers
> ETECH-trainingen
>
> (Send on The road with iPhone)
>
>> Op 27 sep. 2014 om 03:24 heeft Yuan-chia Joyce Koo  
>> <[log in to unmask]> het volgende geschreven:
>>
>> something is not right.  the metal termination should be the only  
>> one that is wet to the solder, not the ink or protective layer of  
>> the resistor material.  those are non-wettable to the solder (if  
>> the material selection were done correctly).  however, the silk  
>> screen if not cure properly, you might change the surface  
>> characteristic of the material.  The metal termination also showed  
>> somewhat layer appearance - a bit strange.  I would cross section  
>> and check the underline metallization and see if it is extremely  
>> thin or fragmented.  that just me... curious... is it 01005 or  
>> 0201?  my 1.8 cents.
>>            jk
>>> On Sep 26, 2014, at 3:20 PM, David Hillman wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jim - I don't think that that extra bit of solder is going to  
>>> cause any
>>> solder joint integrity issues and is a low risk for corrosion/ 
>>> dendrite
>>> issues but clearly the vendor had a process issue which is going  
>>> to and is
>>> causing you process issues. Depending on the size of the  
>>> population, I
>>> would consider replacing the parts depending on the product use  
>>> environment
>>> and expected longevity of the product.
>>>
>>> Dave Hillman
>>> Rockwell Collins
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Jim West <Jim.West@nsgr- 
>>>> na.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The solder is directly on top of the silkscreen marking.  The  
>>>> solder
>>>> covering the resistor terminations is part of the chip  
>>>> manufacturing
>>>> process.  A little sloppy and something that I have not come  
>>>> across before.
>>>>
>>>> Other thoughts?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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