TECHNET Archives

1995

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Received:
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0t8Y82-0000GnC; Thu, 26 Oct 95 14:38 CDT
Old-Return-Path:
<miso!ccmail.dsccc.com!bwooldri>
Date:
Thu, 26 Oct 95 13:26:21 CST
Precedence:
list
X-Loop:
Resent-Sender:
X-Status:
Status:
O
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/105
From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 15:
13:10 1996
TO:
Return-Path:
Resent-Message-ID:
<"bHKE91.0.T0N.dE-Zm"@ipc>
Subject:
From:
"BWOOLDRI" <[log in to unmask]>
Resent-From:
Message-Id:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (48 lines)
There should be a lot of the same information in these two 
documents.  The J/STD-001 is the engineering requirements 
document while the A-610 is the minimum acceptable criteria for 
those requirements shown pictorially.  Take a look at the A-610 
foreword on page vi.  This defines the documents relationship to 
each other.

If you are standardizing your assembly design or processing 
standards use the J/STD-001.  If you are standardizing your 
assembly workmanship acceptability standards, ie. is it 
acceptable or nonconforming product at some inspection point, use 
the A-610.

Hope this is helpful.

Bruce Wooldridge
DSC Communications Inc.
IPC-A-610 Task Group Vice Chairman
214/519-6170
[log in to unmask]

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: IPC-A-610  vs  ANSI/J-STD-001
Author:  [log in to unmask] at SMTPLINK
Date:    10/24/95 04:52 PM






We are in the process of standardizing our assembly standards 
for pwa's.

Should we be referencing IPC-A-610 or ANSI/J-STD-001 
or both.

There is a lot of duplication between the two.

Thanks

dshea@sentry






ATOM RSS1 RSS2