 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0tpIvq-0000E2C; Wed, 21 Feb 96 12:06 CST |
| Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
| Old-Return-Path: |
<holmjo> |
| Date: |
Wed, 21 Feb 1996 12:06:21 -0600 (CST) |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| cc: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Status: |
O |
| From [log in to unmask] Mon Feb 26 12: |
31:25 1996 |
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"ta6w62.0.OvA.XyrAn"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| X-Loop: |
|
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| Message-ID: |
<Pine.3.89.9602211132.C39998-0100000@ipc> |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Feb 1996, Steve Quinn wrote:
> We are wondering what is the latest rev of this spec(IPC-A-600D).
> We have one dated 9-25-89. Specifically we are questioning allowable
> plating voids in through holes. Are circumferential voids acceptable in
> current spec?
>
The latest revision of the IPC-A-600 is revision E which was published
August 1995. Circumferential voids in excess of 90degrees are
nonconforming for all three classes in the copper plating section.
****************************************************
Jon Holmen
Technical Project Manager
IPC
2215 Sanders Road
Northbrook IL 60062-6135
Phone (847) 509-9700 ex329
Fax (847) 509-9798
e-mail [log in to unmask]
URL:http://www.ipc.org
*****************************************************
|
|
|
