Jeff,

I have been waiting to see responses to your 356A question but it has been
10 days and I have seen nothing. Perhaps they emailed you directly.

I have been also waiting to receive a sample of 356A to review along with
the spec but have not had any responses myself.

In my opinion, based on our equipment capabilities, the blind/buried via
description should be standard. Many of our customers have unique
requirements whereas engineers request specific testing to be performed
relative to Bl/Bu vias.

Etch path/circuit routing also should be standard. This info can be
integrated into the primary test database that will assist in verification
of faults. It identifies layer info and highlights probable fault
locations, and the net in question, based on the proximity of circuits in a
given layer.

Embedded components, again should be standard. Although we are not capable
of this type of test in house, front end processing software will use it if
the test equipment selected for the test output supports it, and many out
there do.

If you may have, or will have, a 356A file, I welcome the opportunity to
review it.

Thank you,

Blaine R. Shelkey
Test Engineering Manager
TYCO PCG/Melbourne
600D John Rodes Blvd.
Melbourne, Fl. 32934

407.752.8843 (Ph)
407.752.8868 (Fax)
Email: [log in to unmask]
<http://www.iu.net/aqc>

##############################################################
TechNet Mail List 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 web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information.
If you need assistance - contact Gayatri Sardeshpande at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700 ext.5365
##############################################################