I also agree that change in season has an effect on laminate.  It seems
that every spring when the humidity increases, layer to layer and
internal registration scrap increases as well.  It usually takes the
lamination department about a month to re-size artworks to adjust to the
changes in the laminate.  Regarding laminate cure, does everyone rely on
the results of a TMA and DSC or are there other tests to further evaluate
the cure of the laminate?

I have some experience drilling solventless laminate and I have not seen
any differences in registration from standard resin systems.  However,
after analysing the drills, solventless laminate abraids the carbide a
little less than conventional laminate.  One last comment is that
solventless  laminate drills a little dustier...is it dryer?

mf
On Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:12:24 -0700 drilbert <[log in to unmask]>
writes:
>I agree Glenn.  Over the years I have seen drilling process data that
>suggests the laminate drills differently with the seasons.  However,
>the
>cure never seems to be off.  I wonder how humidity might affect the
>behavior of the laminated panel.
>More recently I have heard that laminate suppliers will be changing to
>a
>sovlentless process.  How might this affect the material behavior?
>Does
>anyone have any information on this?
>Drilbert
>[log in to unmask] wrote:
>>
>> Richard,
>>         Could it be the change of seasons?  I believe  humidity and
>> temperature have an affect on several processes from the weaving
>operation, to
>> impregnation at the laminator, to stack-up, and press.  But, I don't
>have any
>> hard data to prove it.  Maybe the gremlin is Mother Nature in
>disguise.
>>
>> Glenn Pelkey
>> Quality/Reliability Engineer
>>
>> Richard MacCutcheon <[log in to unmask]> Wrote:
>> |
>> | We seem to have developed a gremlin in our registration
>> | dept.
>> | A very large portion of scrap is attributed to NO Annular
>> | Ring (<.002").
>> |
>> | Over 90% of our product is 8-layer GIL with 2 and 7 as
>> | ground planes.
>> | Cores are .005 constructed of 1-106 and 1-2313.  Prepreg
>> | is 2313.
>> |
>> | Layer to layer misregistration is around .005" on average.
>> |  Artwork pad
>> | sizes are .022" over the max acceptable hole size.
>> | Tooling seems to be as
>> | tight as ever but in the last few weeks we have had an
>> | inordinate amount of
>> | scrap due to NO Annular Ring.
>> |
>> | What is the best systematic approach to take in
>> | identifying the problem(s)?
>> |
>> | Thanks for your time.
>> |
>> | Richard MacCutcheon
>> |
>