Technical Library | 2019-05-29 16:04:52.0
Scheugenpflug focuses on e-mobility and autonomous driving and, with its high-quality dispensing solutions, is accompanying an imminent turn of events in the growth field of mobility.
Technical Library | 1999-08-05 09:51:47.0
This document summarizes the finding of testing to determine the immunity of semiconductor equipment to voltage sag events. Based in part on the findings, global standards have been adopted to define voltage sag immunity requirements for semiconductor equipment...
Technical Library | 2009-03-13 00:27:09.0
Open product reliability testing in Stockholm, Sweden in January as part of a live production event generated some quite startling results. It was apparent that many components simply cannot handle the high reflow temperatures of a lead-free soldering process, and that many surface-mount machine suppliers are battling significant problems with QFN packages and other components that are mounting edgeways (bill boarding). However, some suppliers have achieved good results.
Technical Library | 1999-05-06 13:35:26.0
The invention of the transistor almost fifty years ago was one of the most important technical developments of this century. It has had profound impact on the way we live and the way we work. This paper describes the events that led to the invention of the point-contact transistor in December of 1947. It continues with the development of the theory of the junction transistor in early 1948 and the fabrication of the first grown-junction transistor in 1950.
Technical Library | 1999-08-05 10:34:17.0
This document defines a set of standard test structures with which to benchmark the electrostatic discharge (ESD) robustness of CMOS technologies. The test structures are intended to be used to evaluate the elements of an integrated circuit in the high current and voltage ranges characteristic of ESD events. Test structures are given for resistors, diodes, MOS devices, interconnects, silicon control rectifiers, and parasitic devices. The document explains the implementation strategy and the method of tabulating ESD robustness for various technologies.
Technical Library | 2016-04-14 13:49:44.0
A system level test, usually built-in test (BIT), determines that one or more subsystems are faulty. These subsystems sent to the depot or factory repair facility, called units under test (UUTs) often pass that test, an event we call No-Fault-Found (NFF). With more-and more electronics monitored by BIT, it is more likely that an intermittent glitch will trigger a call for a maintenance action resulting in NFF. NFFs are often confused with false alarm (FA), cannot duplicate (CNDs)or retest OK (RTOK) events. NFFs at the depot are caused by FAs, CNDs, RTOKs as well as a number of other complications. Attempting to repair NFF scan waste precious resources, compromise confidence in the product, create customer dissatisfaction, and the repair quality remains a mystery. The problem is compounded by previous work showing that most failure indications calling for repair action at the system level are invalid. NFFs can be caused by real failures or may be a result of system level false alarms. Understanding the cause of the problem may help us distinguish between units under test (UUTs) that we can repair and those that we cannot. In calculating the true cost of repair we must account for wasted effort in attempting to repair unrepairable UUTs.This paper will shed some light on this trade-off. Finally, we will explore approaches for dealing with the NFF issue in a cost effective manner.
Technical Library | 2010-08-26 21:06:17.0
Driven by high-profile regulations compliance like the TREAD Act, warranty management has become a hot topic across industries worldwide. Recalls are costly and time-consuming events that should be avoided entirely. But without adequate process traceability and product genealogy, too many customers will get defective products and too many products will be recalled for repair or replacement even though they are not defective. Both scenarios have enormous implications for the quality-conscious manufacturer that gets rated on the number of recalls it performs - not to mention the enormous direct costs. The core issue is visibility into product quality.
Technical Library | 2017-05-17 22:33:43.0
The selective soldering application requires a combination of performance attributes that traditional liquid fluxes designed for wave soldering applications cannot fulfill. First, the flux deposition on the board needs to be carefully controlled. Proper fine tuning of the flux physicochemical characteristics combined with a process optimization are mandatory to strike the right balance between solderability and reliability. However, localization of the flux residue through the drop jet process is not enough to guarantee the expected performance level. The flux needs to be designed to minimize the impact of unavoidable spreading and splashing events.From this perspective a fundamental understanding of the relationships between formulation and reliability is critical. In this application, thermal history of the flux residues (from room temperature to solder liquidus) is a key performance driver. Finally, it is necessary to conduct statistically designed experiments on industrial selective soldering machines in order to map the relationships between flux characteristics and selective process friendliness.
Technical Library | 2018-01-04 11:05:34.0
Traceability has grown from being a specialized need for certain safety critical segments of the industry, to now being a recognized value-add tool for the industry as a whole. The perception of traceability data collection however persists as being a burden that may provide value only when the most rare and disastrous of events take place. Disparate standards have evolved in the industry, mainly dictated by large OEM companies in the market create confusion, as a multitude of requirements and definitions proliferate. The intent of the IPC-1782 project is to bring the whole principle and perception of traceability up to date. Traceability, as defined in this standard will represent the most effective quality tool available, becoming an intrinsic part of best practice operations, with the encouragement of automated data collection from existing manufacturing systems, integrating quality, reliability, predictive (routine, preventative, and corrective) maintenance, throughput, manufacturing, engineering and supply-chain data, reducing cost of ownership as well as ensuring timeliness and accuracy all the way from a finished product back through to the initial materials and granular attributes about the processes along the way.
Technical Library | 2023-06-02 17:37:43.0
This presentation of Nano Dimension Ltd. (the"Company") contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act and other securities laws. Words such as "expects," "anticipates, " "intends, " "plans, " "believes, " "seeks, " "estimates" and similar expressions or variations of such words are intended to identify forward-looking statements. For example, the Company is using forward-looking statements when it discuss the potential of its products, strategic growth plan, its business plan and investment plans, the size fits addressable market, market growth, and expected recurring revenue growth. Forward-looking statements are no historical facts, and are based upon management's current expectations, beliefs and projections, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain. Such expectations, beliefs and projections are expressed in good faith. However, there can be assurance that management's expectations, beliefs and projections will be achieved, and actual results may differ materially from what is expressed in or indicated by the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual performance or results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements. For a more detailed description of the risks and uncertainties affecting the Company, reference is made to the Company's reports filed from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), including, but not limited to, the risks detailed in the Company's annual report for the year ended December 31st, 2020, filed with the SEC. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date the statements are made. The Company assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, subsequent events or circumstances, changes in assumptions or changes in other factors affecting forward-looking information except to the extent required by applicable securities laws. If the Company does update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference should be drawn that the Company will make additional updates with respect thereto or with respect to other forward-looking statements.
