TECHNET Archives

August 2015

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:
Ed Popielarski <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Ed Popielarski <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:13:28 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
One caveat of laser depaneling is edge charring. This could have an effect on the internal planes located that close to the edge.

Ed Popielarski
Engineering Manager


                               970 NE 21st Ct.
                              Oak Harbor, Wa. 98277

                              Ph: 360-675-1322
                              Fx: 206-624-0695
                              Cl: 949-581-6601



       “It's one kind of victory to slay a beast, move a mountain, and cross a chasm, but it's another kind altogether to realize that the beast, the mountain, and the chasm were of your own design.”
https://maps.google.com/maps/myplaces?hl=en&ll=48.315753,-122.643578&spn=0.011188,0.033023&ctz=420&t=m&z=16&iwloc=A


-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ahne Oosterhof
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2015 10:13 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] PCB length/width tolerance

The only solution I see is laser depaneling. With that method you can meet either one of the specs, but regrettably not necessarily both.

Ahne.


-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bob Lazzara
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 7:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] PCB length/width tolerance

Scott, thanks for furthering the conversation.

I have a client (OEM) who wants us (Board House) to fabricate a copper plane to within +/- 0.002" of the PCB edge of FR-4 laminate.
I replied that the edge, per his print, allows a tolerance of +/- 0.005", making one tolerance incompatible with the other.

He replied that he'd simply change the print tolerance for the PCB length and width to  +/- 0.002".
When I replied that composite materials would neither punch nor CNC machine to that tolerance, he asked what the IPC comments were for board size tolerances.

That seemed an easy-enough task. After-all, circuit board size tolerance is about as basic or fundamental as it gets for design and fabrication considerations. But in the absence of actual values from the IPC (such as those defined for hole size dia.) anyone can ask for anything on a print.

Given that the IPC has geometric dimensioning and tolerance comments on virtually all other PCB features (machined, imaged or otherwise) I found the absence of same for board size tolerance surprising.

So I figured I overlooked it, and asked for help.

Thanks again -

Robert "Bob" Lazzara, CIT
Tel: (603) 318-3075

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Scott A. Bowles
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 10:07 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] PCB length/width tolerance

Bob,

Maybe you can clarify what is driving your question.  You state that the  .016" seems liberal (and I agree) but this is our subjective opinion. Are you asking from a design/OEM perspective or manufacturing/supplier perspective? Section 3.4 of IPC-6012 states the printed board shall meet the dimensional requirements specified in the procurement documentation. However, if there truly isn't any requirement specified then you default to the applicable design series specifications. I would think it is very rare for a drawing to have no requirements, to not even have the "Unless Otherwise Specified" title block tolerances on sheet 1, which typically default to something along the values of three place decimals  .005", two-place decimals  .010".

From a design perspective, IPC-2222A, paragraph 5.4.1 states the tolerances specified on the drawing shall accommodate the dimensions and tolerances of the mating part.

I suggest clarifying the requirement before manufacturing product.

Regards,
Scott


______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2