Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/525318
18 The PCB Design Magazine • June 2015 deficiencies in the existing revision, and all con- flicting information is reviewed to verify that complementary documents are in agreement for criteria information. Once all the information is reviewed and ac- cepted by the committee, a draft is sent to the IPC community for review and comment. Once again there is a review and dis- cussion on the comments, and subsequently another draft is created and the process re- peats itself until all the com- ments are resolved and a new document is published. Creating updates to the documents is also handled in the same fashion, and since the comments are considered critical, the review period is shorten to enhance the speed to which the approval cycle is made and then the docu- ments are published for the user community. This is a relatively short process as it only addresses critical issues to the main body of the doc- ument. So, what defines the changes? First, comments from the user community as found on the comment sheet in the back of every IPC specifi- cation. Second, submittal from the component manufacturers on new components being intro- duced for new technology applications. Finally, corrections needed from editorial and technical mishaps in the existing documents. Introduction to 610 Changes The changes from Rev E to Rev F of IPC- A-610 are as follows: In going through the changes, there are some which reflect not necessarily the inspection of the product but the skills of the operators/in- spectors. For example, the first major change is in the scope of the document where we added the statement "…this standard does not provide criteria for cross-section evaluations," as this would be a defect analysis situation and this is not the intent of the document, because this is an inspection document. Then we added the Personnel Proficiency requirement statement to reflect a synergy issue with the J-STD-001 docu- ment. The ESD section was modified to include the information from ANSI/ESD-S-20.20 and other related ESD documents. Chapter 4 was modified to dis- cuss torque, which is a new in- clusion into the document in- cluding wire routing, bend ra- dius, and the use of tie wraps. Chapter 6 discusses the importance of wire stripping and no damage to the insula- tion and the wire strands. Ta- ble 6-10 was modified to try to make the criteria less con- fusing when using wire that is less than 30 AWG. There were also changes in the Swage Hardware section for the ter- minal base to land separa- tion, which was included to make sure the terminals were not loose on the boards. Chapter 7 discussed ad- hesive bonding of compo- nents and how it is accept- able if and when the adhesive goes beneath the component. The important section of this chapter is 7.3.5 Supported Holes – Solder. The criteria for solder fill of the plated through holes with solder for components with more than 14 leads. When this was added to the document, the section for less than 14 leads was left out, and due to that mistake an amendment is being readied for release to correct this issue. If and when this does come up, the recommen- dation is to continue using the Rev E criteria. In section 7.5.6 Jumper Wires Lap Soldered, it expands on the assembly of those wires to land areas and surface mount components for the type of solder joints which are created when at- taching jumper wires to the boards. Chapter 8 discusses staking adhesives and changes the criteria for coverage of components when applying the adhesive, it also goes into changing the definition of low-profile compo- feature once all the information is reviewed and accepted by the committee, a draft is sent to the IPC community for review and comment. once again there is a review and discussion on the comments, and subsequently another draft is created and the process repeats itself until all the comments are resolved and a new document is published. " " IPC-A-610: WHAT'S NEW WITH REV F? continues