Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:14:06 +0000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Yes there is a difference. Wicking is the presence of plated copper along glass fiber paths evident by x-section (as examined after microetch). There could be glass fractured pathways that aren’t part of the wicking evaluation. If your customer wants a more in-depth fractured glass evaluation, as part of acceptance testing or CAF (beyond just wicking measurements), they would have to specify it in the procurement documentation, as it is not a part of 6012/A600 acceptance testing.
José (Joey) Ríos, Sr QA Engineer
Mission Assurance Manager
Kavli Institute for Astrophysics & Space Research
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
(617)324-6272
> On Jul 27, 2017, at 10:21 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> Fellow TechNetters:
>
> I am searching for a clarification on the above stated IPC Standard. Is there a distinction between wicking and fractures glass rods/laminate. Is wicking always accompanied by coper plating? In my experience CAF only requires a laminate integrity anomaly to start the process of migration. All comments/discussions welcomed.
>
> Victor,
|
|
|