 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0v3Pgp-0000PoC; Wed, 18 Sep 96 11:41 CDT |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 18 Sep 96 11:44:00 EST |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"SxgIP.0.Wt9.vO2Go"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| X-Loop: |
|
| Message-Id: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Wed Sep 18 11: |
55:46 1996 |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
J-STD-001 contains a list of Solder contamination limits and
notes following the list. I would like to hear some expert
opinions about the meaning of the notes. MIL-STD-2000A's
list and J-STD-001'S list are the same. Do both documents
limit "going out of the box" to develop a dross inhibitor?
Is there truly an "other column" for insignificant
contaminants that would not show up on samples for solder
contaminants? Where does the dross blanket draw the line,
on oil? If dross and lead oxides are in the pot, and a
method could be used to prevent this or make a significant
reduction, it would seem like from a continuous improvement
stand point it should be done/tested. I would appreciate
very much responses from J-STD-001 Authors and solder
experts. Thank you in advance. Mail can be sent direct via
Internet by sending it to [log in to unmask]
***************************************************************************
* TechNet 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. *
***************************************************************************
|
|
|
