PCB007 Magazine


Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/612684

Contents of this Issue


Page 84 of 115

December 2015 • The PCB Magazine 85 of the standards for this industry, is Electronics Assembly Technology committee, and it has a number of Working Groups: • WG1 Requirements for Boards • WG2 Requirements for Assemblies • WG3 Test Methods for Assemblies • WG4 Base Materials and Printed Boards • WG5 Terms and Definitions • WG6 Embedded Substrates • WG10 Test Methods for Boards and Materials • WG11 Printed Board Data Description & Transfer • WG12 Design of Printed Boards & Assemblies • WG13 Design Automation, Components, Circuits & Systems • WG14 Design Automation, Library of Reusable Parts • WG15 Design Automation, Testing I am the conveyor of Working Group 4 on Base Materials and Boards. There are 19 mem- ber countries that vote on the documents that are developed. The process for standards de- velopment entails a country proposing a New Work Item Proposal (NWIP). The countries then vote and propose an industry expert from their country to work on the document. The first circulation of a proposal is called a Com- mittee Draft (CD). Comments are resolved re- sulting in a second circulation called a Commit- tee Draft Voting (CDV) where countries make comments but in addition vote "Aye" or "Nay." The comments are then resolved and this ends the ability to make technical revisions. The near-standard is then circulated once more for a final country vote in a step called Final Draft International Standard (FDIS). The document is then ready to be published. Just kidding. For some inexplicable reason, the standard must then be translated into French, a process re - quiring about six months. It must be due the large number of CCL/prepreg suppliers, PWB shops and assembly houses located there. Thus the total time for developing an IEC standard is 30–36 months. What do both of these standards' organiza- tions have in common? There are a very limited number of people that actually put pen to pa- per, or in today's terms, fingertips to keyboard to create the first strawman documents and work- ing drafts. These working experts, as opposed to reviewing experts, are slowly disappearing for reasons outlined elsewhere. There is no one left to do the heavy lifting. Perhaps it was easier for these people to write effective documents since they had grown up in the business and all of the historical perspective was at their fingertips. I am sure that there are technical people out there that have the talent, experience and am- bition to get involved with the industry stan- dards organizations and write the new docu- ments. But in looking around the room at the standards meetings, all I see is the old guard. Why no new blood? Some of the problem may be that their employers seem to feel that there is no value in standards development. Others just do not want to take the time. Company travel and living expenses to attend meetings may also be an issue. However, these groups are al- ways the first to cry wolf when a standard does not reflect the products of their company. Help me fill in the blanks of my Base Materi- als Organization Chart. I would like to pass the baton—but to whom? PCB DIETER IS GONE AND I DON'T FEEL SO GOOD MYSELF! Doug Sober is the president of essex technologies Group and may be reached by clicking here. Mr. lAMinATe Tells All " These working experts, as opposed to reviewing experts, are slowly disappearing for reasons outlined elsewhere. "

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of PCB007 Magazine - PCB-Dec2015