 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0w7Kwo-000BBrC; Wed, 19 Mar 97 06:58 CST |
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 19 Mar 1997 21:06:07 +0800 |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| X-MSMail-Priority: |
Normal |
| Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
| X-Status: |
|
| X-Loop: |
|
| Message-ID: |
<19970319130801.AAB24278@sbwest> |
| TO: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"VMQrp2.0.e8J.rB-Bp"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| From [log in to unmask] Thu Mar 20 10: |
44:37 1997 |
| X-Mailer: |
Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 |
| X-Priority: |
3 |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
From: Scott Westheimer
Date: 3/19/97
We are working with Ciba's epoxy and building Photovia's. We have
encountered a strange problem with the plated copper over the epoxy. The
peel strengths over laminate areas are better than the peel strengths over
oxided copper areas. Have any of you, that are either using or are
evaluating this process, encountered the same? Also we see that KMno4
attack is inconsistent. Same time temperature and concentration and
processed the same way. Any information on this and how you are running in
production would be helpful.
Thanks,
***************************************************************************
* 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] *
***************************************************************************
|
|
|
