 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0uqkHv-0000NOC; Wed, 14 Aug 96 13:03 CDT |
| Encoding: |
27 Text |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Tue, 13 Aug 96 13:03:05 PST |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Wed Aug 14 14: |
28:30 1996 |
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
<DesignerCouncil-request> |
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"ZFcEG2.0.w48.kJX4o"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| X-Loop: |
|
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
From a performance standpoint, see the article in the August issue of
Printed Circuit Design. Another resource is the editor of Printed
Circuit Fabrication, Bill Foran. He can be reached at 770-942-1303.
Pete
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Via reliability
Author: [log in to unmask] at Internet
Date: 8/12/96 11:21 PM
I'm looking for documentation showing reliability of vias on PCBs. I know
an EE that still believes vias are a weak point on a board, so I need to
show proof of the reliability of using vias.
Thanks in advance.
Greg C.
****************************************************************************
* The mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
****************************************************************************
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to: *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text. *
****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
* The mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
****************************************************************************
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to: *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text. *
****************************************************************************
|
|
|
