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 m0uBM4v-00007kC; Mon, 22 Apr 96 08:54 CDT
Old-Return-Path:
Date:
Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:59:32 -0400
Precedence:
list
Resent-From:
Message-ID:
X-Status:
Status:
O
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/3566
TO:
Return-Path:
<TechNet-request>
Resent-Message-ID:
<"pNmfK3.0.aCK.l-uUn"@ipc>
Subject:
From:
From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 16:
17:28 1996
X-Loop:
Resent-Sender:
TechNet-request [log in to unmask]
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
In a message dated 96-04-19 18:44:38 EDT, you write:

>Hello Jack - we have had good success with perimeter heating via 4 
>     independent nozzles on 20 and 25 mil pitch parts using nitrogen. We 
>     did have to do a considerable amount of process characterization for 
>     our pwa population but the system works well.

I've always wondered, is a 25 mil pitch part a part that is consistently made
so that 25 out of every 1,000,000 are thrown out (pitched)?  It would seem to
me that you would want a lower pitch part to be more economical.  I guess
that must be why the industry is going to 15 mil pitch parts - you throw out
10 less per every million!.

So smart it hurts.



ATOM RSS1 RSS2