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] 
______________________________________________________________________