Bill:

The development of standards is a tedious and, at times, emotional process. The committee and task group members and their employers that volunteer their time and resources recognize the long term value of working with the standards. (From an economic standpoint alone, it (1) helps to put potential vendors on an level playing field when you are soliciting bids, and (2) vendors preparing bids know that their competition has to meet the same KNOWN guidelines--no low-ball blindside bids from some competition that may be using questionable or industry unacceptable practices.) There are many other very good reasons to use standards which I'm sure you understand and appreciate.

The ANSI/J-STD-001B is NOT just an IPC document. It was JOINTLY developed and approved by both the members of The Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits (IPC) and the Electronic Industries Association (EIA), and has been adopted by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). There are several portions of the document that are sometimes overlooked, and I quote here for clarification and understanding.

NOTICE (from the front of the J-STD-001B document)
"EIA and IPC Standards and Publications are designed to serve the public interest through eliminating misunderstandings between manufacturers and purchasers, facilitating interchangeability and improvement of products, and assisting the purchaser in selecting and obaining with minimum delay the proper product for his particular need. Existence of such Standards and Publications shall not in any respect preclude any member or nonmember of EIA or IPC from manufacturing or selling products not conforming to such Standards and Publications, nor shall the existence of such Standards and Publicaitons preclude their voluntary use by those other than EIA or IPC members, whether the standard is to be used either domestically or internationally. . ."

Vendors and their customers REGULARLY negiotiate and come to agreement on exceptions and variances to the general Standards and Publications they have agreed to use.

Again, from J-STD-001B
"3.1 Order of Precedence
The contract always takes precedence over this standard, referenced standards and drawings. In the event of a conflict between the text of this standard and the applicable documents cited herein, the text of this standard takes precedence.

3.1.1 Conflict
In the event of conflict between the requirements of this standard and the applicable assembly drawing(s) / documentation, the applicable approved assembly drawin(s) / documentation MUST govern. In the event of conflict between the requirements of this standard and an assembly drawing(s) / documentation that has not been approved, this standard MUST govern.

3.1.2 Specialized Proceses and Technologies
Mounting and soldering requirements for specialized processes and/or technologies not specified herein SHALL be performed in accordance with documents procedures with are available for review."

As an additional note, ANSI/IPC-A-610B ACCEPTABILITY OF ELECTRONIC ASSEMBLIES has a similar statment in the Foreword:

"Acceptance criteria and the Use of this Manual
. . .
Accept and/or reject decisions must be based on applicable documentation such as contract, drawings, specifications and referenced documents.

In the event of conflict, the following order of precedence shall apply:

1. Procurement as agreed between customer and vendor.

2. Master drawing  or master assembly drawing reflecting the customers detailed requirements.

3. When invoked by the customer or per contractual agreement, J-STD-001 and/or IPC-A-610 can be adopted or used.

4. Other documents t extent specified by the customer."

In reference to the lead protrustion requested by your customer, negotiate it as an exception to the requirements of J-STD-001B, put it on the drawings or other documentation, and proceed with building the product your customer is willing to pay you for.

With regard to your other questions about resolution of issues in development of Standards and Publications, you only need to participate in one meeting of any of the involved committees or task groups to gain an understanding of the in-depth discussion and voluminous data frequently submitted to support how these documents are developed. In addition to the opportunity to significantly raise your blood pressure and aggravate your ulcers through involvement in heated discussions, you have an tremendous opportunity for professional advancement by participating with an open mind and acknowledging the research and that been done by your peers in the industry. Please contact me directly for information about participating in the continuing process improvement effort; J-STD-001C is in development.

One more item. There is a "Standard Improvement Form" in the back of most IPC documents. You do not have to be a member of IPC or EIA to use this form to provide improvement suggestions. It is my policy to acknowledge receipt of one of these forms to the submitter. The form is then provided to the committee/task group chair to be put on the agenda for the next meeting. It will be discussed and if determined to be pertinent will be incorporated in the next revision. No other feedback is provided to the submitter; you have to participate in the meeting or have a mole there to find out what discussion took place.

>>> "Kasprzak, Bill (esd) US" <[log in to unmask]> 08/07/97 11:04AM >>>
Technetters:

We have a customer that we are working with concerning J-Std-001. The
customer wants to take exception to many portions of the standard as written
and instead impose different criteria. For example, Lead protrusion for
leaded components should range from discernible to 1.5mm (.060 ). This is
according to paragraph 6.5.3 of J-Std-001B. Our customer wants to impose a
.020 to .060 range for lead protrusion. The feeling being that the
discernible lead protrusion results in a solder joint with less strength
than one with more lead protrusion.

My questions are:

1) The criteria agreed upon in the J-Std-001, was it decided, discussed and
voted by committee ?  Were there any items that passed by a 51-49 vote ?

2) What happened to dissenting views ? What issues were debated ?

3) Anyone out there with experience with a customer who wants to take
exception to certain portions of J-Std-001 ? How was the situation handled ?

4) Anyone have any comments, good or bad, about J-std-001 ?

Thanks to all who can respond.

Bill Kasprzak
Moog Inc.
716-652-2000   ext. 2507
[log in to unmask]