 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0txL77-00006EC; Thu, 14 Mar 96 16:03 CST |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Thu, 14 Mar 1996 16:06:05 -0600 |
| Precedence: |
list |
| X-Loop: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Fri Mar 15 08: |
36:39 1996 |
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"_D0QD2.0.eZ7.bU9In"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| Resent-From: |
|
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I am looking for some input regarding SIP component mounting. To be
more specific, in the opinion and/or expertise of the group, which
method provide a more robust mechanical design:
1) unsupported holes with a full lead clinch for all leads
or,
2) supported holes with clinch pad ?
Any studies or tests that have been performed would be helpful.
the board laminate is polyimide, the leads are Cu w/Sn60Pb40 dip coat
2.54mm center-to-center. the board is multilayer .062".
DDrake
SSDS
|
|
|
