TECHNET Archives

June 1998

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
Sender:
TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
PWB Procurement Recommendations
From:
"arrigo.tony" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:32:00 -0700
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative; boundary="---- =_NextPart_001_01BDA443.BAC3E460"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
"TechNet E-Mail Forum." <[log in to unmask]>, "arrigo.tony" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (371 bytes) 
Can anyone tell me what is gained by specifying "Fabricate to Mil-PRF-31032
vs. IPC-xxx?"  Is a  fabrication specification even required when purchasing
a multi-layer PWB at all?   Will all PWB manufactures give some minimum
fabrication requirement if none is stated on the drawing or in the purchase
order, or is it  always BUYER BEWARE??

Thanks for your assistance.

Tony Arrigo

ATOM RSS1 RSS2