 
| Received: |
by ipchq.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0sQLD3-0000GpC; Mon, 26 Jun 95 15:56 CDT |
| Old-Return-Path: |
<miso!smtplink.dsccc.com!jbaumgar> |
| Date: |
Mon, 26 Jun 95 14:03:28 CST |
| Precedence: |
list |
| X-Loop: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"B8tYs1.0.9R9.7ynxl"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Resent-From: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 14: |
19:54 1996 |
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Bellcore TR-NWT-000078 in paragraph 6.2.1.2.4 recommends that
non-functional pads exist on every conductor layer. Yet all CAM
systems have a non-functional pad removal function. Some board
manufacturers use this functional automatically Most board shops, I
think, would like to use this function.
My question:
Does there exist a statistically significant study on the reliability
of boards that do not have the non-functional pads? If so, is this
study published?
Regards,
Jamie Baumgart, DSC Communications
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|
