Hi Phil,
I have always looked at it this way. The IPC-A-6XX documents are picture
books of acceptance criteria. 
The IPC-6012 is like the J-STD-001. It has requirements for process control
that really can't be observed, as well as requirements for coupons that are
used to confirm things that are only revealed by destructive testing. 
Guy

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nutting, Phil
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 2:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] bare board acceptability, IPC-600 versus IPC 6012

A vendor has found a conflict in one of our control documents.

The question from our vendor;

In Section 4 (Construction Requirements), points 1 and 2 appear to be
somewhat in conflict.  We had ordered the boards under IPC-A-600 Class 2
before we received your document.  However, your specification says that
while the boards will be accepted under IPC-A-600 Class 2, they need to be
manufactured under IPC-6012 Class 2.  The IPC-6012 is a much tighter
standard requiring test coupons, microsectioning and such.  They (and
therefore we) are asking for confirmation that the 6012 manufacturing
requirement is needed since the acceptance criteria is the less stringent
standard.

The text from our document;


4.     Construction Requirements

1.... Acceptance of finished Printed Boards shall be in accordance with
IPC-A-600, Class 2.

2.... Fabricate PCB in accordance with IPC-6012, Class 2 and use customer
supplied data files when specified.

We have never micro-sectioned our boards nor used test coupons because they
are very low volume, sometimes as few as five boards per order.  Also we
still use a lot of thru-hole boards and the few surface mount boards are
typically only 2 or 4 layer.

Our mix of boards go from control boards with 15 volt logic to multiplier
boards that can see up to 180 kV.  This specific order is for 180 kV
multiplier boards 0.06 inch thick, two layer with component silk screens, no
solder mask and tin/lead HASL.

In scanning through the two IPC documents I'm having trouble figuring out
how to match them up for comparison.

They just need clarification and I need to fix my document.  Your wisdom is
greatly appreciated.

Phil Nutting  |  HVP Development Engineer   |  Excelitas Technologies Corp

Lab: +1 978.224.4332   |  Office: +1 978.224.4152
35 Congress St, Salem, MA  01970 USA
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
www.excelitas.com<http://www.excelitas.com/>


[Excelitas R_emailsig]


Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
________________________________
This email message and any attachments are confidential and proprietary to
Excelitas Technologies Corp. If you are not the intended recipient of this
message, please inform the sender by replying to this email or sending a
message to the sender and destroy the message and any attachments. Thank
you.


______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________