TECHNET Archives

September 1999

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:
Clive ffitch <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Thu, 2 Sep 1999 16:21:27 +0100
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
BDY.RTF (1423 bytes) , BDY.RTF (1710 bytes)
All,

I know this has been raised before, but the picture does not seem all
that clear. So here goes.

We have an issue with some SMT part tapes and reels being supplied using
non-ESD compatible materials, where we have measured up to around 1000V
on the plastic reels, or as measured on the tapes themselves when peeled
back. Some plastics used do appear to be static dissipative/conductive,
as do some of the black tapes, but not all. The tape/reels in question
are for resistor/capacitor parts, and some SOT23s etc.

When challenged, some suppliers have said this is not an issue for other
people, and to re-package the parts would cost +300%, but we can have it
if we pay. We assemble resistors/capacitors/discretes on the same
equipment as more sensitive ESDSs, and feel sure we are not the only
people with these concerns; what we want are parts supplied using
ESD-safe tape and reel packaging. For the assembly of high reliability
equipment, we do not want to have to resort to installing ioniser farms.

However, we do not have any leverage in the market place on our own, and
our order quantities are small - even insignificant - so the question
is, ARE we alone?

Is the rest of industry getting what it wants, or do we have to adapt
our own practices to accommodate resistors and capacitors being
delivered in the packaging that suppliers say we can have them in?

All comments to TechNet most welcome.

Clive ffitch
MBUK
Stevenage, England



ATOM RSS1 RSS2