TECHNET Archives

May 2018

TechNet@IPC.ORG
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
[log in to unmask]
Date:
Tue, 1 May 2018 09:16:40 -0500
Reply-To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Wayne Showers <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Interpretation of IPC-4552A (ENIG Thickness)
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
From:
Wayne Showers <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (7 lines) 
Jose, thank you.

Your interpretation is consistent with mine, so I feel very good about my prior and current stance.
Order of precedence:
* Technical Data
* IPC-4552A with an eye towards acceptance keeping an eye out for excessive variation in plating, thin spots and skip plating using 0.4 micron as a hard stop.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2