TECHNET Archives

December 1998

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jim Axton <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Mon, 7 Dec 1998 17:46:18 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (53 lines)
Frank,

It's interesting that you are asking about the micro BGA's..... and the testing issues. Our company has four PCB fabrication facilities.... I'm responsible for the technical direction of our test groups. 

Everyone in the PCB arena is pushing the envelope when it come to testing BGA's.... You may solve (placing the BGA vectors to the test grids, .1", .08", & .07") one BGA on a test fixture, what happens when there are multiple BGA's?  Our company has single density, double density, 80 mil grids & flying probe... BGA's are our biggest headache.

Deflecting the test pin (pin tilting) out to .7" or 1.0" works as long as there is not another device to be tested within that distance. Last month approximately 73% of our product had some type of BGA or chip scale package. Multiple pass test fixtures are a way of life for us. We can perform combo testing.... solve as much as you can to the test grid and place the remaining test points on a flying probe.

There is not an easy answer....... 

Jim Axton
Dynamic Details, Inc
714-688-7388
>>> "Winiarski, Frank" <[log in to unmask]> 12/07 7:54 AM >>>
Our board supplier is having problems testing one of our board designs
which have several .8mm (.031 pitch, .024 pad dia.) 144 pad and .75mm
(.029 pitch, .016 pad dia.) 48 pad microBGA devices in the design.

They claim that they have to use their Probot flying probe tester, which
is very time consuming and very expensive.

My question is: Are the microBGA designs too tight to utilize "standard"
or even "double" density test  equipment?  With microBGA's becoming so
"common" (?) there must be a way to cost effectively 100% net list test
bare PCB's.  If not, does anyone see a new/iimproved test technology on
the horizon that does allow fast and cheaper testing of these designs,
and when will it be available?

Thanks.

################################################################
TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
################################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body:
To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name>
To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF TechNet 
################################################################
Please visit IPC's web site (http://www.ipc.org) "On-Line Services" section for additional information.
For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312
################################################################

################################################################
TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
################################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body:
To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name>
To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF TechNet 
################################################################
Please visit IPC's web site (http://www.ipc.org) "On-Line Services" section for additional information.
For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312
################################################################


ATOM RSS1 RSS2