TECHNET Archives

February 2020

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:
Yuan-chia Joyce Koo <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Yuan-chia Joyce Koo <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:41:34 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
42% is rather high for non-functional - are you sure it is not some  
kind of shielding for high speed?  or enhanced thermal transfer?   
without X-ray image of internal package, hard to say (you might dig  
out from the device provider's patent or application notes - if you  
don't have designer's contact number ;-).
jk
On Feb 24, 2020, at 12:01 PM, <[log in to unmask]>  
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Fellow TechNetters,
>
>    Is there an industry standard/guideline for the number of  
> sacrificial solder bumps versus total solder bump count.   For  
> instance, 64 sacrificial and 88 active bumps for a total of 152  
> bumps (42%)?
> In advance I thank you for your timely response in this matter.
>
> Victor,

ATOM RSS1 RSS2