Rudy, I'm more than a little surprised you would go back so far in history to dredge up this old plating technology myth. And you talk of HP boards as if they were the holy grail of pwb manufacture, that their PhD and considerable money spent arrived at a valid conclusion about plating thickness in the hole. And I'm surprised you didn't bring up the gold plating issues. Overall, it's been misleading to the readers. The electroplaters meeting to which you refer was the AES meeting at Dinah's Shack, correct? The announced conclusion you referred to was simply wrong. HP never achieved satisfactory mass transport of solution through the hole. I spent considerable time on copper plating technology in every one of HP's shops, including that R&D facility near the Page Mill Rd. plant and this was long after the AES meeting. They did achieve some plating hole improvement but it was because of more precise control of plating additives. If I can dig up all the old data I'll pass it along. In the absence of what might be covered in some old NDA you might want to look into the patent applied for, maybe granted, by Jack Josefowicz (Tyco). It should clarify the mass transport issue. I heard the patent was either invalidated or that hints of infringement were dismissed because of the prior art established long before by Jani and Diehl. Sincerely, Roger Mouton EIMC - Advanced Plating Technologies ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] ______________________________________________________________________