TECHNET Archives

November 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:
Graham Collins <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Graham Collins <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:48:25 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
Good day TechNet
We have a customer asking us to look at implement flying probe testing 
on their products.  We currently do AOI on all, and x-ray and functional 
test on some of their products, we do not have a flying probe machine.

I've got some notions of the benefits and drawbacks of these machines 
but as I have no first hand experience I figure I should ask here for 
opinions.

Assume an entry level machine for the sake of discussion, and without 
significant add-ons.  Top side probes only, probably 4 probes.
Assume a double sided board with 500 components, only passives on the 
bottom side, and fair accessibility.

My questions:
- Claims are that the current crop of machines can be programmed in "a 
few hours", is this realistic?

- Do I need anything from the designer on top of the usual gerber and 
BOM (e.g. a netlist, or other format of data?)

- What kind of run time am I looking at?  I understand with a single 
side machine I will have to run the board twice to get the best coverage 
possible.

Thanks!  Any opinions are appreciated.

-- 
regards,

Graham Collins
Senior Process Engineer
Sunsel Systems
(902) 444-7867 ext 2211



______________________________________________________________________
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