TECHNET Archives

1996

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Received:
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0u7SZl-00009vC; Thu, 11 Apr 96 15:02 CDT
Encoding:
11 Text
Old-Return-Path:
Date:
Thu, 11 Apr 96 13:05:40 PST
Precedence:
list
X-Loop:
Resent-Sender:
TechNet-request [log in to unmask]
X-Status:
Status:
O
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/3400
TO:
Return-Path:
<TechNet-request>
From [log in to unmask] Thu Apr 11 15:
10:41 1996
Resent-Message-ID:
<"rxRDM1.0.9fA.WLMRn"@ipc>
Subject:
From:
Resent-From:
Message-Id:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (14 lines)
     We've been using SHADOW, Electrochemicals direct metalization process 
     with great success for over a year now.  I'm interested in: who else 
     is using it; what % solids the SHADOW bath itself is running at; 
     smallest hole; and aspect ratio being plated.  Our numbers are 
     3.5-4.3% solids; 10 mil holes; 7:1 hole aspect ratio.  
     
     Sometimes the SHADOW deposit builds up on the corners of the hole.  
     The small holes are very hard for the airknife to clear the Shadow out 
     of the hole.  We're tempted to push the limits of the % solids to 
     below the 3.5%.  I thought I heard some people already doing this.  
     True?  Thanks for your consideration.  



ATOM RSS1 RSS2