 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0tFqBn-0000GlC; Wed, 15 Nov 95 16:20 CST |
| Old-Return-Path: |
<miso!zycon.com!dmitchel> |
| Date: |
Wed, 15 Nov 95 12:34:16 PST |
| Precedence: |
list |
| X-Loop: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 15: |
17:41 1996 |
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"OLqwD.0.agL.YUcgm"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Resent-From: |
|
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Based on the temperature rise times, hot oil reflow should be less
stressful than HASL.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: HASL vs. Hot Oil Reflow
Author: [log in to unmask] at corp
Date: 11/15/95 11:42 AM
I am interested in receiving data/information comparing the thermal
stress on boards during the SMOBC/HASL process versus Selective
Strip/Hot Oil Reflow Process. Especially in regards to boards over .125
thick.
Also thoughts on whether one process is less streesful than the other.
|
|
|
