Electronics Forum | Fri Aug 28 05:26:05 EDT 2009 | sachu_70
Hi Dave, Would this be different from IPC-610-D. I am not sure.
Electronics Forum | Thu Mar 03 11:00:04 EST 2005 | PeteP
In a nutshell, what are the Rev D changes to the standards? What re-certification requirements are in place?
Electronics Forum | Wed Mar 16 18:39:55 EST 2005 | KT
I am looking for the same. IPC 610D does mention about the solder fill based on the class (A,B,C). But, there is no exhaustive study that I have come across. Please let me know if you find any. KT
Electronics Forum | Wed Mar 08 18:09:52 EST 2006 | jax
Part is most likely a QFN package. IPC-610-D has standards on solder quality for this new type of package.
Electronics Forum | Wed Jun 07 09:26:09 EDT 2006 | amol_kane
can you also please tell us the section in IPC-610?...is this in RevD? also, does this also give the solder volume for BGAs? Thanks, Amol
Electronics Forum | Wed Nov 29 11:46:57 EST 2006 | slthomas
IPC 610 *C* states that the solder thickness requirement is a properly wetted termination is evident. Fillet height is another aspect and is usually specific to the package but is some function of solder thickness plus a percentage of lead height. D
Electronics Forum | Wed Jan 03 15:57:38 EST 2007 | realchunks
Is there a seperate guideline for Pin In Paste process in IPC? I have IPC610 year 2000 rev C (I know rev D is out). Or do most people use the thruough hole part of the Guideline as their criteria?
Electronics Forum | Thu May 20 21:16:46 EDT 2010 | erli
Hi Pat According IPC-610D voids biger 25% are considered defects. You need verify you Pre Heat and try to reduce the ramp. Its very importante verify if the BGA`s are avoid hummity. Erli
Electronics Forum | Fri Jan 26 16:24:10 EST 2007 | Bob R.
Whether there's a fillet or not depends on the component type. Most have a fillet but some, such as QFN's, don't necessarily have one. Have a look at IPC-610D Workmanship Standards to understand when you should expect one and when you shouldn't. T
Electronics Forum | Mon Feb 20 04:59:40 EST 2006 | Loco
For visual inspection table 1-2 seems to be in order here. If you can not see the bottom using 1.8 and table 1-2, it clearly would be a defect and rework would be the only option Well, my thoughts anyway, wonder if someone has other thoughts on thi
