All the notes are to supplement the standards.

Have there been any efforts to standardize note options? I know it's
something I've done almost everywhere I've worked.

Regards,
Stephen Golemme
Manufacturing Engineer
650-214-5647
x.company

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Jose A Rios <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Neither UL markings nor stackup markings are IPC requirements. Again go to
> 6012D section 3.3.5; its outlined there.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 30, 2017, at 4:11 PM, Stadem, Richard D <[log in to unmask]<
> mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> It doesn't necessarily have to be. Fabrication drawing notes, and notes on
> the assembly drawing normally take precedence over industry standards, as
> they are product-specific.
> The fab drawing and the assembly drawing are the "Bible" thou shalt go by
> if there is a conflict. The exception to the order of precedence is
> generally something in the contract.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 2:13 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [TN] IPC Standard, bare board vendor markings
>
> Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
>
> Is this statement supported (referenced) in an IPC/Industry Standard?
>
> Victor,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steve Golemme
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 2:07 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [TN] IPC Standard, bare board vendor markings
>
> We deal with power boards and sealing surfaces. The note I've had success
> with is:
>
> SUPPLIER SHALL MARK STACKUP AND DATE CODE, SUPPLIER NAME AND/OR TRADEMARK,
> AND UL FLAMMABILITY RATING IN NON-CONDUCTIVE INDELIBLE INK (COLOR WHITE OR
> BLACK). SUPPLIER SHALL NOT ADD ANY TEXT OR MARKING IN COPPER.
>
> Stephen Golemme
> Manufacturing Engineer, Makani
> 650-214-5647
> solveforx.com/makani<http://solveforx.com/makani>
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Jose A Rios <[log in to unmask]<mailto:
> [log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Silk screen (or etched metal) are acceptable forms of marking.
> Requirements for marking are basically legibility and traceability
> (you basically have to be able to match the conformance coupons to the
> boards they represent), by some method of serialization, which shall
> include date code. UL marking is not an IPC requirement, if required
> the board user must specify it. When using etched metal as marking, it
> shall not violate min spacing to board conductors (same with
> conductive inks). See 6012D 3.3.5 and its subsections.
>
>
> 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]> <mailto:
> [log in to unmask]>
> (617)324-6272
>
>
>
> On Nov 30, 2017, at 2:42 PM, [log in to unmask]<mailto:
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Fellow TechNetters:
>
> IPC-1066 covers Lead free markings/Symbols/:Labels, etc.   Which IPC
> Standard covers bare board vendor logo/UL Rating/markings/production
> date/REV and layer counts.   Is silk screening printing of information
> acceptable beside etch from original external copper foil.
>
> Victor,
>