TECHNET Archives

February 1997

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
X400-Content-Type:
P2-1988 ( 22 )
Old-Return-Path:
Date:
19 Feb 1997 14:11:00 -0600
Precedence:
list
Resent-From:
Conversion:
Allowed
Disclose-Recipients:
Prohibited
Resent-Sender:
TechNet-request [log in to unmask]
X-Status:
Status:
O
Priority:
normal
X-Loop:
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/10384
Content-Return:
Allowed
X400-MTS-Identifier:
[/c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/; 016D8330B5E5414B-HW-MTA-AZ]
TO:
"[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> (Return requested)
X400-Originator:
Original-Encoded-Information-Types:
IA5-Text
Received:
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0vxIDI-0000lIC; Wed, 19 Feb 97 14:02 CST
X400-Recipients:
non-disclosure;
Alternate-Recipient:
Allowed
Message-Id:
<016D8330B5E5414B*/c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/o=AZ-MTA/ou=MSMail/ou=CAS/s=Edwards/g=Ted/i=A/@MHS>
Resent-Message-ID:
<"ULF-w3.0.Ac6.smr2p"@ipc>
Subject:
From:
"Edwards, Ted A (AZ75)" <[log in to unmask]>
From [log in to unmask] Wed Feb 19 14:
05:21 1997
X400-Received:
by mta HW-MTA-AZ in /c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/; converted ( IA5-Text); Relayed; 19 Feb 1997 14:11:00 -0600 by /c=US/admd=MCI/prmd=Honeywell/; converted ( IA5-Text); Relayed; 19 Feb 1997 14:11:00 -0600
Return-Path:
<TechNet-request>
Content-Identifier:
016D8330B5E5414B
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
     We are redoing our specification and are wondering if anyone has design 
guidelines that take into account either aspect ratio (or drilled hole size) 
and choice of material into account.  For instance on a 0.125" board with a 
0.0135" hole( ratio 9.4), or a 0.093" board with a 0.0135"  mil hole(ratio 
6.9) do you specify to the designer use of a higher glass transition 
material that you do on the same hole size on a 0.062"        ( ratio4.6)? 
 An example would be polyimide for the 0.125 thickness, multifunctional for 
the 0.093 thickness and standard FR-4 for the 0.062 thickness or a chart 
that shows increasing thickness or aspect ratio versus what material should 
be used.  Anybody have any thoughts on this or comments?  Or is there any 
fabrication industry consensus?
          Thanks in advance for your inputs;
               [log in to unmask]  

***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To subscribe/unsubscribe send a message <to: [log in to unmask]>   *
* with <subject: subscribe/unsubscribe> and no text in the body.          *
***************************************************************************
* If you are having a problem with the IPC TechNet forum please contact   *
* Dmitriy Sklyar at 847-509-9700 ext. 311 or email at [log in to unmask]      *
***************************************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2