TECHNET Archives

January 2019

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:
"lduso - Diamond-MT.com" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, lduso - Diamond-MT.com
Date:
Thu, 10 Jan 2019 17:15:14 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
The most common method is to call them out to be masked but with no
dimensions so we go with 1/4" or 5/16". Often, when I ask if a dimension is
needed, they say to just ensure the bore is free. Next most common would be
specific dimensional masking. I often get this from aerospace customers.
The "newbies" to coating will often call out an exotic dimension that
cannot be masked with a common sized, easily available tape-dot. Which
substantially adds cost to have them custom cut. Functionally, if nothing
metallic will be exposed, it doesn't matter how big it is.

Lloyd Duso
Diamond-MT
(814) 535-3505
www.Diamond-mt.com


On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 4:36 PM Jack Olson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Is it more common to conformal coat unplated mounting holes?
> or designate a clearance diameter on the assembly drawing?
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2