TECHNET Archives

September 2016

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:
Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:46:14 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
assume you are not going to send few million of satellite to the sky  
and also not send your worker to repair solder joints  in the sky  
(skywalker? )...  yes, it has been done before...visual, x-ray, burn- 
in, electrical testing prior and after, looking for drifting,  
leakage, differential, etc. etc. (He leak test or outgas test plus  
alpha particle, etc. etc.). the design  is fully aware of the  
inspection req.  sort of design for inspection as DFx... at least in  
the good old  days.
         jk
On Sep 19, 2016, at 5:52 PM, Joey Rios wrote:

> Sections 7.5.14, 15 and 16 outlines inspection of hidden solder  
> joints, invoking the use of X-Ray in the Space Addendum. The  
> standard does not explicitly prescribe a sampling extent, so, if an  
> assembly has dozens of the same device, like 50-100 say of such  
> devices (such as a bottom termination component) on a single PWA,  
> is the expectation (J-STD intent) that each of the replicate  
> devices are inspected by X-Ray?? Is that what the industry  
> practices, or is sampling commonly invoked, since the processing of  
> the board is the same for the entire PWA??

ATOM RSS1 RSS2