SMT007 Magazine

SMT007-Jan2020

Issue link: http://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1197000

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 11 of 107

12 SMT007 MAGAZINE I JANUARY 2020 "When/if one single solder joint in an elec- tronic system fails, the whole electronic sys- tem, regardless of the level of design sophis- tication or functional complexity, fails," summarizing the critical role of solder joint in electronics. Accordingly, J-STD-006 has been playing a pivotal role in serving the industry's needs and wants, particularly during the transitional period from the leaded world to lead-free and onward. Serving as the chairman of the standard over the years, I have been privileged to personally work with both users and suppliers of solder alloys to enhance communication and facilitate solving prevalent issues in a timely manner. Our goal has always been to find the best solu- tion when an issue arises and to reach consen- sus when different positions exist. Throughout the years, in our communications and discus- sions, whether in-person or via air waves, our task group always follows the principles of standardization from the American National Standard Institute (ANSI) and IPC. These principles include how standards should show a relationship to design for man- ufacturability (DFM) and design for the envi- ronment (DFE), minimize time to market, contain simple language, focus on end-prod- uct performance, and include a feedback sys- tem on use and problems for future improve- ment. Principles also: include—rather than inhibit—innovation; do not keep people out, and; do not contain information that cannot be defended with data. The standard should include specification information—it should not tell you how to make something. In a nut- shell, it is worthwhile being reminded that the standard is a specification—not a know-how document. With these items in mind—for the benefit of readers who have not been participants in our task group, and for the interest of paving the future path of current and future partici- pants—I share a few highlights of J-STD-006, in both retrospective and prospective perspec- tives, that might be helpful. What Has Been Accomplished First and foremost, we thank our task group members who have worked patiently and relentlessly to move the J-STD-006 forward and upward over the years. J-STD-006 has moved (improved) from J-STD-006 to J-STD-006A ver- sion (May 2001), and to J-STD-006 B (Janu- ary 2006) and J-STD-006B with Amendments 1 and 2 (October 2009), further to J-STD-006C (July 2013) and J-STD 006C with Amendment 1 (October 2017). For the recent years since the lead-free transition period, key milestones include: • J-STD-006A was revised to J-STD-006B. The Revision J-STD-006B, published in January 2006, essentially was to "intro- duce" lead-free alloys (i.e., Table A-1) • In October 2009, Amendments 1 and 2 to J-STD-006B were introduced to include proper notes for tables • In 2011, our task group's focus was to harmonize the alloy designation or naming system. Efforts were directed to elect a logical system that is also practical to our industry's use. Several options have been considered. For instance, the order of the metallic elements in an alloy designation can be predicated on the rules of academic/metallurgy (e.g., AgAuBi- CuInNiSbSn) or custom and convenience (e.g., SnAgAuBiCuInNiSb) • J-STD-006C was born in July 2013 to adopt the naming system of our choice and the conversion of all alloy designa- tions in accordance with the naming system of choice Our goal has always been to find the best solution when an issue arises and to reach consensus when different positions exist.

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of SMT007 Magazine - SMT007-Jan2020