Did avoiding the voids just get less important?
A new study by Rockwell Collins, RIM, Indium and Dage shows voids are not a “primary” issue to BGA solder joint integrity.
New BGA voiding requirements to be proposed to J-STD-001 task group based on study’s findings, Rockwell engineer Dave Hillman says.
Altium will ship the next release of Altium Designer on Jan. 31.
The new release is said to change how designers manage component and design data, and take products from design to manufacture.
Release 10 will feature a new desktop platform; new dimensions to sourcing and managing component data; intelligent linking of supply chain data to the design environment; and new ways to manage component data throughout the design and production lifecycle, with a structured release process to ensure the integrity of all data leaving the system.
Keep watching here for more details.
Three quick thoughts on today’s news that the world’s electronics OEMs haven’t been able to eradicate conflict minerals from their supply chains.
1. Given that OEMs have a tough time discerning where, exactly, materials came from, how is it that a third-party is so certain it knows how that supply chain is supposed to look?
2. Given the third-party’s judging criteria covered traceability and auditing, and not actual supply,we should not assume that the OEMs under review even use conflict minerals in the first place. Indeed, the Congo supplies a very small percentage of most the industry’s raw materials. Media reports on the unpublished study are not clear on either point.
3. Did anyone really think they could change a supply chain overnight?
Lots of changes in the first revision of the industry rigid board design spec since it was introduced as a separate module in 1998.
IPC-2222A, Sectional Design Standard for Rigid Organic Printed Boards, is characterized by the addition of several tables intended to simplify design decisions, particularly when it comes to materials. New tables offer at-a-glance differences in dimensional stability, CTE, and material consistency, by laminate type.
PCB thickness tolerances, key in assessing potential bow and twist, have been clarified, as the measurement method has been standardized to include just laminate to laminate, with no coatings or platings included.
Another table aids the understanding of relative costs, but keep in mind that laminate pricing is subject to change.
The US Commerce Department seeks input on a revised export control list. In short, the CCL describes items using objective criteria such as qualities to be measured (e.g., accuracy, speed and wavelength), units of measure (e.g., hertz, horsepower and microns) or other precise descriptions rather than broad, open-ended, subjective, catch-all or design intent-based criteria. However, not all export control classification numbers contain positive descriptions, and some descriptions could be clearer and more specific. The Obama administration wants to change this so that persons who understand the technical parameters, characteristics and capabilities of an item, even if they are not knowledgeable about US export controls, will ordinarily be able to determine its export control classification and jurisdictional status without needing to consult the government for an interpretation.
Public comment is open until Feb. 7. Click here for more info.
“Will Tablets Kill the PC Star?”
That’s the provocative headline of this piece in Barron’s today, which discusses a recent Citigroup report asserting that hidden inside the otherwise overwhelming volume of PC shipments (400 million next year) is the makings of an ugly trend: tablet computer shipments (35 million next year) eliminate one PC for every 2.5 tablets sold.
That would translate into eliminate about 11 million lost PC sales next year, the analysts say.
What is not commented on — but should be — is the effect of smartphones on both markets. Smartphones currently outsell by more than tablets 4 to 1, and that market is growing much faster than those for tablets or PCs, for good reason. The 4G phones are fast — faster than broadband, in my experience — and obviously highly portable. Given that anyone under the age of 30 seems to have innate texting skills, not to mention a preference for that medium, the advantage of the standard (read: larger) PC keyboard is somewhat neutralized. Cost? Advantage smartphone.
If anything, I think this suggests the vast potential of cloud computing is very real. Users could, as needed, simply plug in their phones to dummy terminals: storage and applications software would reside elsewhere.
Unfortunately, except for a relative handful of players, no matter which way the end-market shifts most EMS companies will be left in the cold. These are very-high volume arenas in which few have the capacity to play.
Earlier this month, a Gizmodo photographer was allowed inside Foxconn’s massive campus in Shenzhen, where he shot the following montage of where hundreds of thousands of workers live.
It is this photo of the exterior, however, that I found haunting.
George Soros is taking a stake in Mentor. Carl Icahn is buying up Mentor and Cadence.
What’s with the notorious billionaires wanting a piece of our little industry? And who’s next? Gordon Gekko?
Interesting comments from Charlie Barnhart on biggest risks for next year. No. 1: Cost of labor in China, which is forecasted to increase about 1% per month for at least the next six quarters for an aggregate of at least 20%.
Finally!
IPC is taking aim at Greenpeace for its aggressive stance against electronics OEMs and their environmental stewardship. The trade group last night issued a statement asserting Greenpeace’s quarterly report card on electronics companies is based on “faulty science.” IPC further alleges the environmental organization penalizes companies that do not subscribe to its agenda.
Thank goodness and it’s about time.
I’ve criticized Greenpeace in the past for its foolhardy attempts to globally ban on anything with even minimal toxicity while conveniently overlooking the bigger picture: many of the potential replacement materials are unproven and product that doesn’t work ends up in landfills faster than you can say “Save the whales.” Don’t get me wrong: Greenpeace is a great organization, but it is out of its league here. While some groups, like ChemSec in Europe, are very well-informed about materials science and its tradeoffs, others like Greenpeace use questionable methodologies to further their agendas. That in itself is a problem, but even worse, all the blown smoke obscures — and perhaps even diminishes — the potential for real dialogue on how to solve the bigger problems.
Greenpeace’s methods are aimed at maximizing attention for itself and putting its targets on the defensive. OEMs, faced with a no-win proposition, tend to publicly bow in the face of pressure (although apparently not fast enough for Greenpeace). I’d rather they sit down and have extensive, publicized open meetings on what it means to be environmentally responsible.
