-----Original Message----- From: Ross Giesler Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 12:58 PM To: Mary Jane Chism; [log in to unmask] Subject: RE: [TN] Via holes damaged Group, What is the industry standard for probing vias then? Is industry changing to a less aggressive probe due to this new spec, 10.2.9.3? Has anyone else questioned this? The issue is we sometimes use a fairly aggressive probe to reduce the amount of false calls/failures at ICT. These probes can leave marks as shown in 10.2.9.3. How is industry dealing with this? Ross Giesler Kimball Electronics Design Services Strategic Initiatives Engineer Phone: (812) 634-4505 Cell: (812) 661-7601 Fax: (812) 634-4700 Email: [log in to unmask] -----Original Message----- From: Mary Jane Chism Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:52 AM To: Ross Giesler Subject: FW: [TN] Via holes damaged -----Original Message----- From: Franklin D Asbell [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 4:14 PM To: Mary Jane Chism Subject: RE: [TN] Via holes damaged Mary, You indeed have a defect... 1. Surface finish damaged exposing substrate/copper 2. Looks like metal overhanging into hole. Solder mask damage probably exposing fibers (which of itself is not a problem but due to the length of the damage it would be a defect) 3. Consider the annular ring a trace (which in all respects it is), from this image you have an 'open' as well as damage to the pad/hole wall interface...another reason for a reject. It really does not look like a test probe damage, more like physical damage from a hand tool, or mechanical...I would ask someone at test what they used on it for repair??? Franklin -----Original Message----- From: Mary Jane Chism [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 3:31 PM To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask] Cc: Ross Giesler Subject: FW: [TN] Via holes damaged Please see information below from the engineer who is working on this issue and also the attachment. Thanks. Mary Jane Chism -----Original Message----- From: Ross Giesler Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 2:15 PM To: Mary Jane Chism; [log in to unmask] Subject: RE: [TN] Via holes damaged Group, This issue is related to Section 10.2.9.3. As you can see from Page 1 of the attachment, IPC states that damage to a conductor or land is a defect Class 1, 2, or 3. This is not in Rev C. If you refer to the picture on Page 2, it was taken from a production unit. As you can see, 3 vias have damage that we believe came from our ICT test probes. Is this a defect according to the new IPC A 610 D? The picture in section 10.2.9.3 looks like it was caused by a ICT probe also. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Ross Giesler Kimball Electronics Design Services Strategic Initiatives Engineer Phone: (812) 634-4505 Cell: (812) 661-7601 Fax: (812) 634-4700 Email: [log in to unmask] -----Original Message----- From: Mary Jane Chism Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 1:56 PM To: Ross Giesler Subject: FW: [TN] Via holes damaged -----Original Message----- From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Franklin D Asbell Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 9:31 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [TN] Via holes damaged What are you considering damage? If the probe is merely indenting the metal this may not be considered 'damage'. If the probe is piercing the finish, exposing copper then inspect it according to exposed copper, if it is exposing glass, inspect it to exposed glass, if it is lifting the pad, inspect to lifted pads, if it is damaging the hole wall, copper separation, reduced hole size, etc etc etc then inspect to such. Franklin -----Original Message----- From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mary Jane Chism Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 9:25 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: [TN] Via holes damaged Group, I have a question on via holes damaged by test probes. We have a situation where some of the annular ring of the vias used for test points are being damaged. I have looked in the IPC-A-610 Rev. D and also IPC-A-600 Rev. G, but am not finding what I need or am not looking in the right place. If anyone knows of the requirements of what is acceptable or a defect for this type of condition, please let me know. Thanks. Mary Jane Mary Jane Chism Technical Trainer/ Learning Center Kimball Electronics Group email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> Phone: 812-634-4462 Fax: 812-634-4501 --------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e 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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 ----------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e 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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 ----------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e 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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 -----------------------------------------------------