TECHNET Archives

April 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:
Wayne Showers <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Wayne Showers <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 19 Apr 2018 10:30:52 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (5 lines)
Dave - Agreed, I am very much used to Class 3 PCBs, so I immediately notice when etchback is not present.  I did look at the image in more depth after my initial email and noticed that there is a straight wall with evidence of voiding and irregular plating behind the wall.  So it looks like the desmear step was poor at best.  Normally I would send this to ST&S (Gerard O'Brien) for a professional look (I know PCBs well enough to be dangerous but not always correct).

The desmear doesn't look very good.  This may be a point of contention, but is the first concern,
The second concern is as you stated, is etchback required, if so, then this is hard failure mode.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2