Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Thu, 7 Mar 1996 11:22:04 -0600 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
.int [log in to unmask]
99% of our products don't need anything tighter. But we do have a design
that reads a small current from an ion-chamber that won't work if the fab
and assembly just meets spec. Most of the year is no problem, but in
hot weather water gets under the mask and we see many failures.
I think we need a higher class that can be spec'das a (standard) option
where the need is real.
Larry Sternig
[log in to unmask]
*** Original Author: ipc.ipc.org!ipc.org! 03/07/96 103017
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 10:30:15 -0800
Old-Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
X-Sender: [log in to unmask]
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: [log in to unmask]
From: Keith Lumley <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: SIR and SEC
Resent-Message-ID: <"75BUZ1.0.kq3.TRmFn"@ipc>
Resent-From: [log in to unmask]
X-Mailing-List: <[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/3005
X-Loop: [log in to unmask]
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: [log in to unmask]
I am interested in finding out if many of the board shops, or OEM's
subscribed to Technet are seeing an requirement for SEC and SIR
significantly tighter than the current Bellcore requirement. ie
SEC.......1 micro gramme per sq. cm. NaCl equivelant
SIR.......3000 megohms after HASL
I have seen requests almost an order of magnitude tighter for both
parameters and am wondering if this in response to an industry trend or just
isolated cases. I am interested in finding out where our industry is
heading, in this regard, and if any of the subscribers could suggest why a
customer may need such tight controls.
Keith Lumley, RexCan Circuits
|
|
|