 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0tpL85-00016WC; Wed, 21 Feb 96 14:27 CST |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 21 Feb 96 11:44:11 PST |
| Precedence: |
list |
| X-Loop: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| From [log in to unmask] Mon Feb 26 12: |
32:49 1996 |
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"U-cFG2.0.TJD.Q0uAn"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| Resent-From: |
|
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
The current revision is IPC-A-600E 1995.
Circumferential voids are not allowed for
classes 1, 2 or 3 per 4.1.4 of that specification.
Darren Hitchcock
Merix Corporation
[log in to unmask]
Steve Quinn <[log in to unmask]> 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?
|
| Thanks for the help.
|
| Steve Quinn
| Heurikon Corp
|
|
|
|
|
