TECHNET Archives

March 2018

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:
SALA GABRIELE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, SALA GABRIELE <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 5 Mar 2018 21:02:08 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (119 lines)
Hi Dave,

that's fine

Many thanks

Best Regards
Gabriele

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Per conto di David Hillman
Inviato: lunedì 5 marzo 2018 20:50
A: [log in to unmask]
Oggetto: Re: [TN] Bottom Termination Components (BTC) Voiding Limits

Hi Gabriele - the IPC BTC Voids task group  is coordinating with the
IPC-7093 specification committee so that both specifications are in sync.
Just as the JSTD-001 has the BGA void requirements and the IPC-7095 specification contains the BGA void design aspect/assessment guidance, the
JSTD-001 and the IPC-7093 specification will have a similar relationship for BTC voiding.

Dave

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 11:26 AM, SALA GABRIELE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Many Thanks Dave,
>
> are the BTC Task Group  (5-21h ? ) doing same void limits assessment 
> for the coming  IPC-7093 A Review ?
>
> Best Regards
> Gabriele
>
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Per conto di David Hillman
> Inviato: domenica 4 marzo 2018 01:54
> A: [log in to unmask]
> Oggetto: Re: [TN] Bottom Termination Components (BTC) Voiding Limits
>
> Hi Wayne - you have good timing with your question as I can give you 
> the latest info from the IPC committee meeting last week. The JSTD-001 
> committee had a comment submitted asking for void criteria for BTCs.  
> A small task group with global representation from several industry 
> product segments was formed to review the issue. We reviewed the issue 
> with data resources from consortia, IPC and SMTA resources.  We had 
> one very specific
> conclusion: Any void criteria that would be put into the JSTD-001 
> specification would be addressing solder joint integrity only. Many 
> BTCs have either thermal or electrical functional needs which is a 
> design issue that should be addressed during the product design phase.  
> Here is what the task team responded back to the JSTD-001 committee with:
>
> "The JSTD-001 QFN Void Criteria task group recommends that a "request 
> for data" be issued as a review of the current available industry data 
> was found to not be sufficient to establish a data based maximum void 
> criteria for solder joint integrity. The voiding criteria requirements 
> pertaining to the functionality of a QFN or other Bottom Terminated Components (i.e.
> thermal or electrical performance) are a design function and not part 
> of the IPC-JSTD-001 specification scope. The "request for data" 
> responses should be sent to the QFN Void Criteria task group by 
> October 31st, 2018 so that they can be reviewed prior to the 2019 IPC 
> JSTD 001 APEX committee meeting. The  JSTD-001 QFN Void Criteria task 
> group will provide a void criteria recommendation to the IPC JSTD 001 
> committee based on the data submissions at the  2019 IPC JSTD 001 committee meeting."
>
> The void number you listed - especially the 25% - have little to no 
> technical data justification in terms of solder joint integrity.The
> JSTD-001 BTC Void task group is looking for DOE/test/investigation 
> data and there will be a recommendation to the JSTD-001 committee for 
> review at the
> 2019 committee APEX meeting. I understand that seems like a long time 
> but any criterial that is put into the JSTD-001 specification must be 
> done based on data as those requirements results in costs to the industry.
>
> A number of OEMs verbally committed to providing BTC void data to the
> JSTD-001 BTC Void task group so I am confident the issue will be 
> resolved within the year. If anyone has  data they would like  to 
> submit to the task group, please send it to me and I'll make sure it 
> is included in the data review.
>
> Let me know if you have any additional questions.
>
>
> Dave Hillman
> IPC JSTD-001 BTC task group lead
> Rockwell Collins
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Wayne Showers < 
> [log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > I do not know of an IPC criteria on this.  I have seen 25% (The BGA
> > criteria) cited, but this is not, to my knowledge accurate.
> > The limits I have used in the past are 50% Coverage with no void 
> > exceeding 15% in the center and no more than 10% anywhere else.
> > I also used a 70% Coverage and 10% Void criteria for a very heat 
> > sensitive application.
> >
> > Question 1: Is there now a citable IPC criteria? and if NO, Question
> > 2: What are some of this groups recommended criteria?
> >
> > Thanks and Regards, Wayne Showers, NPI/Technical Manager, 4Front 
> > Solutions
> >
>
>
> ---
> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast 
> antivirus.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>


---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

ATOM RSS1 RSS2