TECHNET Archives

September 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:
Wed, 12 Sep 2018 14:11:33 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (8 lines)
Wayne,
To clarify this, firstly, my full comment is necessary: "I flag designs that apply a lock washer directly to the PCB."  

A flat washer between the lock washer and PCB is recommended as lock washers tend to tear up the PCB as the copper pad, if present, is generally only 2 maybe 3 mils thick and tends to get torn to varying degrees roughly proportional to the type of lock washer and the applied torque.  And, if there is no pad, the lock washer often tears the FR4.
The other reason for wanting a flat washer is to more evenly distribute the torque load as lock washers, especially split lock washer apply a high percentage of the load to the split.

I am old school, but my preferred stack-up from PCB surface out is FLAT (washer)- LOCK (washer)- NUT.  If using SEMS, then this stackup is FLAT (washer)- LOCK (washer)- SCREW (head).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2