Lol..You are 100% correct my friend. As most of the strange requests I get, they come from the customer's customer. Like when they change from a UR coating to parylene but forget to change the thickness requirement. Not pretty putting parylene down to 3 mils thick!! Lloyd Duso Diamond-MT Plant Manager (814) 535-3505 www.Diamond-mt.com On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Steve Gregory <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Yep Lloyd, but let me clarify, not my requirement, the customers... [?] > > Steve > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:12 PM, lduso - Diamond-MT.com < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Exactly my point....neither is coating boards to 20 mils thick with SR >> conformal coating, but yet we get told to do just that. Isn't that right >> Mr.Gregory?...lol >> >> Lloyd Duso >> Diamond-MT >> Plant Manager >> (814) 535-3505 >> www.Diamond-mt.com >> >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:01 PM, SALA GABRIELE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> > even not in the HDBK-830 >> > >> > Gabriele >> > >> > -----Messaggio originale----- >> > Da: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Per conto di Guy Ramsey >> > Inviato: mercoledì 4 marzo 2015 20.26 >> > A: [log in to unmask] >> > Oggetto: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > >> > Beware of false knowledge. It is more dangerous than ignorance. >> > This is not in the J-STD-001F, or IPC-CC-830B. >> > >> > Guy >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of lduso - >> Diamond-MT.com >> > Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 12:26 PM >> > To: [log in to unmask] >> > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > >> > All I can add is this: As coating application contractor we have had >> > hundreds of customers over the years and thousands of part numbers. >> > Everything from NASA Maven to paintball gun CCA's. In all that I think I >> > had >> > two part numbers in 8 years that the customer required the edge to be >> > coated. One claimed that the reason was to seal the edge of the board >> and >> > the other said it was because there was copper extremely close the edge. >> > >> > As everyone has said, it's something worked out between us and the >> > customer. >> > The funniest part is that they all claim it is in accordance with the >> IPC. >> > >> > Lloyd Duso >> > Diamond-MT >> > Plant Manager >> > (814) 535-3505 >> > www.Diamond-mt.com >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Richard Kraszewski < >> > [log in to unmask]> wrote: >> > >> > > Thanks to all for the great insights & discussion on this topic. >> > > >> > > Rich Kraszewski >> > > PLEXUS >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gregg Owens >> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:19 AM >> > > To: [log in to unmask] >> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > >> > > I vote great minds! :) >> > > >> > > Gregg >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Stadem, Richard D. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:36 AM >> > > To: TechNet E-Mail Forum; Gregg Owens >> > > Subject: RE: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > >> > > Gregg, I posted almost the same thing and sent it before I saw your >> > > posting. Great minds think alike, or something like that, I guess! >> > > dean >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gregg Owens >> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:31 AM >> > > To: [log in to unmask] >> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > >> > > Standards do not necessarily define every possible condition, >> > > exemplified by this thread's conversations. I am sure the standard >> > > committee members for conformal coating need to take note of this >> > > condition and come to some conclusion in future editions of the >> > > standard. The problem becomes "it depends" is sometimes the right >> answer >> > for some criteria in IPC standards. >> > > That is where the standards state: AABUS (as agreed to between user >> > > and supplier (manufacturer)). >> > > >> > > We live in a complex world where decisions making becomes convoluted >> > > between user (customer) and manufacturer. Some users depend on the >> > > manufacturer's experience for best industry practices because they may >> > > know very little about electronics manufacturing processes let alone >> > > end-use implications of those processes (e.g. whether or not to >> > > conformally coat a board, what type of coating to use and coverage >> > requirements). >> > > >> > > I live in a bubble where engineering resides with production and >> > > communication is very near seamless. So such issues can effectively >> > > and efficiently discussed and quickly and effectively decided upon. In >> > > the real world of contract manufacturers this rarely exists. >> > > >> > > If life were easy, most of use would not be needed. >> > > >> > > Gregg >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dale Ritzen >> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:07 AM >> > > To: [log in to unmask] >> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Conformal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > >> > > Seriously folks... is this a real or imaginary problem? We have seen >> > > both "yes" and "no" opinions over the last several days. Is anyone >> > > basing their opinions on a specific standard that states what >> > > conditions require the PCB edges to be coated, or is it simply a >> > > matter of the customer specifying that requirement on their S.O.W. for >> > > the product? Are manufacturers to second guess the customer about the >> > > places the product will be used and the environmental conditions it >> > > will be placed in that might warrant coating of the PCB edges, or does >> > > that really matter anymore with the state of the art PCB manufacturing >> > > processes - regardless of the condition of the material left on the >> > > edges (with the possible exception of PCBs made of Polyimide >> materials)? >> > > >> > > So far we have seen opinions - not quotes from any standard that >> > > covers this. Does that exist, or is it something that the IPC >> > > technical committees need to look into for further definition? Sounds >> > > to me like it needs some definition in a standard so we all have >> > something >> > to march to... >> > > >> > > IMHO, >> > > Dale Ritzen, ASQ CQA >> > > Quality Manager / ISO Management Representative >> > > ___________________________ Austin Manufacturing Services >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > _____________________________________________________________________ >> > > This email and any attachments are only for use by the intended >> > > recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged, confidential, >> > > proprietary or otherwise private information. Any unauthorized use, >> > > reproduction, dissemination, distribution or other disclosure of the >> > > contents of this e-mail or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If >> > > you have received this email in error, please notify the sender >> > > immediately and delete the original. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yuan-chia Joyce >> > > Koo >> > > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 5:20 PM >> > > To: [log in to unmask] >> > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > >> > > also there are cut off edges of the PWB like using shear... really bad >> > > with all the fiber glass stick out.... there is not enough coating can >> > > fix that... (don't laugh, those are real surprise you get from far)... >> > > jk >> > > On Mar 2, 2015, at 10:04 AM, Stadem, Richard D. wrote: >> > > >> > > > You lost me on that post, Wayne. >> > > > Not sure what you are trying to describe when you talk about >> > > > drilling thousands of overlapping holes as a method of routing out a >> > PWB? >> > > > The edge-coating being discussed was conformal coating, not plating >> > > > of the edges? >> > > > Sorry if I am slow on the uptick today. >> > > > dean >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wayne Thayer >> > > > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 8:44 AM >> > > > To: [log in to unmask] >> > > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > > >> > > > I feel the need to point out the obvious: >> > > > >> > > > -Suppose we singulated a board by using a pcb drill, drilling >> > > > thousands of overlapping holes. It's hard to keep drills sharp, so >> > > > let's assume we just swap out bits after the same number of "hits" >> > > > that we deem the bit good for via hole drilling. Now how 'bout we >> > > > coat the exposed edge with plated metal, just to make sure that if >> > > > there's a problem with the drilling/routing process, we have a real >> > > > good chance of making a short. >> > > > >> > > > Any reason that should be dis-allowed? Try calculating the exposed >> > > > area on the edge vs. all of the via circumferences you've got! >> > > > >> > > > Therefore, it's ridiculous to specify coating of routed board edges, >> > > > which if anything, have less potential to damage fiber bundles than >> > > > a drill. Snapped areas are a different category because >> > > > drilling/milling has a limited capability to damage the laminate. >> > > > >> > > > Wayne >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stadem, >> Richard D. >> > > > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 9:26 AM >> > > > To: [log in to unmask] >> > > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > > >> > > > Rich, >> > > > In addition to what Dr. Pauls has detailed below, I also want to >> > > > point out that whether or not any specification "recommends" or >> > > > "does not recommend" >> > > > coverage on certain areas of components and PWBs, it is the assembly >> > > > drawing which has historically taken precedence over all standards >> > > > when it comes to defining conformal coating coverage. >> > > > This is because every assembly and PWB has different design >> > > > requirements and it would be too difficult to document all of the >> > > > exceptions to the different rules for each type. >> > > > Many circuit boards are simply blanked out on a press, leaving >> > > > exposed fiberglass edges, but these are also typically high-volume, >> > > > low-reliability PWBs used only for consumer electronics. All other >> > > > PWBs are typically routed or laser cut, and as Doug stated those are >> > > > typically sealed by the singulation process. Depending on the type >> > > > of PWB material, the method of singulation, and the application, >> > > > there may be no need to coat the edges. >> > > > Or there might be, but then one would expect this to be detailed as >> > > > part of the assembly requirements on the drawing. >> > > > >> > > > dean >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Douglas Pauls >> > > > Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 8:07 PM >> > > > To: [log in to unmask] >> > > > Subject: Re: [TN] Required Confromal Coating of Edges of PCB's >> > > > >> > > > Rich, >> > > > MIL-I-46058 is simply a materials qualification document. It does >> > > > not address the coating of board edges. I would disagree with >> > > > Graham and I do not believe that conformal coating edges of boards >> > > > is a value added process. Most boards in high performance >> > > > electronics have routed edges. >> > > > The routing process tends to smear the resin over the glass >> > > > reinforcement, sealing the edges. And since most design standards >> > > > do not allow internal circuitry closer than 25 mils from the edge of >> > > > the boards, water or external contaminants would have to penetrate >> > > > 25 mils of epoxy resin to get to circuitry. If the edges of the >> > > > boards were sheared or snapped, where the resin did not seal the >> > > > ends, then perhaps the sealing would be justified. I can say that >> > > > Rockwell has coated some board edges and left other edges free. >> > > > We have no field failure, ever, that can be traced to lack of >> > > > coating the board edges. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Doug Pauls >> > > > Principal Materials and Process Engineer Rockwell Collins >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Richard Kraszewski < >> > > > [log in to unmask]> wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> Does anyone recall which MIL document calls out the requirement >> > > >> to cover the PCB edges of assemblies? >> > > >> I have been led to believe that one exists but that more than >> > > >> likely it is not MIL-I-46058C. >> > > >> >> > > >> Any thoughts?? >> > > >> >> > > >> Rich Kraszewski >> > > >> Plexus >> > > >> >> > > >> ___________________________________________________________________ >> > > >> __ >> > > >> _ >> > > >> 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] >> > > >> ___________________________________________________________________ >> > > >> __ >> > > >> _ >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > > > __ 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] >> > > > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > > > __ >> > > > >> > > > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > > > __ 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] >> > > > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > > > __ >> > > > >> > > > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > > > __ 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] >> > > > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > > > __ >> > > >> > > >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > 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] >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > 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] >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > 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] >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > 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] >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > 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] >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > >> > >> > >> > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > 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] >> > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > >> > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > 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] >> > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > >> > >> > --- >> > Questa e-mail è priva di virus e malware perché è attiva la protezione >> > avast! Antivirus. >> > http://www.avast.com >> > >> > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > 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] >> > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> 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] >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > > > This email and any attachments are only for use by the intended > recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged, confidential, proprietary > or otherwise private information. Any unauthorized use, reproduction, > dissemination, distribution or other disclosure of the contents of this > e-mail or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the > original. > ______________________________________________________________________ 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] ______________________________________________________________________