Jim: I think you have a good point about J-STD 001B, although I do believe that can cause problems when using multiple-vendors. Matthew Curtis Burnett Technical Training Center Austin, Texas 78752 512-459-1110 >>> <[log in to unmask]> 12/02/98 12:52PM >>> Bill Dasprzak: - I think that you need to consider accumulating defect data on multiple pwb's (of the same p/n) that you are processing. Folks running small pwa's with a small number of connections would have a devil of a time (for example one defect on a pwa with 300 connections probably puts you over the 0.3% threshold). - Re par. 9.1.2, I always thought that the intent of that paragraph was to make sure that the defect rate calculations were based on a standardized method of determining the number of opportunities (instead of counting a pth as 2 defect sites - one on top of the pwb and one on the bottom of the pwb) and telling everyone to just count each interconnection site once (whether thru-hole or not). - "Touching up" a solder joint after machine soldering should not be necessary if the process is in control. If you don't record the number of "touch-ups" as defects (and feed that information up-stream) you may never discover that you are dealing with a component lot which has poor solderability. In addition, and more likely, the folks will be touching up things that "just don't look right to me" and spending a lot of time and money to reduce the reliability of the product (if it ain't a real defect, leave it alone). Hand soldering (add parts) after machine soldering is usually done in such limited quantity that classic SPC is seldom applicable. - Re corrective action system, paper work and record keeping. One of the great things about the J-STD-001B is that it lets you do what ever makes sense to you, as long as your customer agrees. I've never seen identical methods used in different companies, so I don't know if there is a "typical way" to perform/document corrective actions. Generating a "corrective action report" for a single defect confuses me a little. Some method of identifying the defect should exist and be factored into the process control system. Hopefully the "corrective action report" you refer to is a "PRODUCT" corrective action and not a PROCESS corrective action. Jim Moffitt, Moffitt Enterprises Consulting ################################################################ TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c ################################################################ To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body: To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name> To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet ################################################################ Please visit IPC's web site (http://www.ipc.org) "On-Line Services" section for additional information. For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312 ################################################################ ################################################################ TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c ################################################################ To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body: To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name> To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet ################################################################ Please visit IPC's web site (http://www.ipc.org) "On-Line Services" section for additional information. For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312 ################################################################