Thanks Wolfgang and others who have replied on and offline so far. I always think I have the right answers but really know better. I have several reasons for asking this question. The first relates to who is doing what out there just out of curiousity. Next, IPC has developed relatively new reliability and design requirements for surface mount solder joints as 9701, 785, and 279 as examples in addition to 7095 and, of course, 782. Also, IPC, according to Jack, has had its great 610 adopted by the DoD. Finally, while realizing 782 is a set of guidelines, as most all IPC documents have been for years up until recently, I wonder how many folks have the resources, or dedication like Wolfgang, to whittle, cut, scrape, or otherwise come up with better, lesser, or more pad sizes. I have worked with comanies as HP, Nortel, NG, and Celestica who used their vast resources to come up with very different land patterns and pad sizes for some parts. I recognize the component manufacturers also have the wherewithall to do the same. Additionally, like the round pad string earlier in this month's forum presented some interesting and, to me, realistic possibilities for non BGA pads and the ability to minimize, mitigate, or otherwise prevent small chip devices from tombstoning let alone moving - period. What I'm really after, if we accept all our solder joints to IPC STANDARDS, not guidelines, how can we not design to the guidelines without having to spend so much extra effort refining them to be STANDARDS, or rules. A very small company I am continuing my contract with, has reached a critical point where they/I must decide what direction in which to proceed. With but two designers, we are faced with decisions concerning a starting and staying point and path. We can go all IPC, go with the "big boys proven" land requirements, or go with component supplier recommendations. Sure, I can use my stuff gathered and continually evolving over the years or have a library created using available guidelines and hope to refine them over the years. Furthermore, if all my suppliers are accepting in strict accordance with IPC 610, as an example, surely I must design to them especially in light of my first paragraph's important issues. These reliability requirements are based on considerable research using IPC guidelines, aren't they Werner and associates? Earl Moon --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------