This article presents the first time that an millimeter-wave (mm-wave) multichip module (MCM) with on-demand "smart" encapsulation has been fabricated utilizing additive manufacturing technologies. RF and dc interconnects were fabricated using inkjet printing, while the encapsulation was realized using 3-D printing. Inkjet-printed interconnects feature superior RF performance, better mechanical reliability, and on-demand, low-cost fabrication process.
This work examines the use of dual-material fused filament fabrication for 3D printing electronic components and circuits with conductive thermoplastic filaments. The resistivity of traces printed from conductive thermoplastic filaments made with carbon-black, graphene, and copper as conductive fillers was found to be 12, 0.78, and 0.014 ohm cm, respectively, enabling the creation of resistors with values spanning 3 orders of magnitude. The carbon black and graphene filaments were brittle and fractured easily, but the copper-based filament could be bent at least 500 times with little change in its resistance. Impedance measurements made on the thermoplastic filaments demonstrate that the copper-based filament had an impedance similar to a copper PCB trace at frequencies greater than 1 MHz. ...
Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies allow developing and manufacturing very complex shaped parts and functional products with a high level of customization, being a great alternative to Traditional Manufacturing (TM) methods like injection molding, die-casting or machining. Due to the importance of cleaner production in the field of manufacturing processes, sustainability of AM processes needs to be assessed in order to make easier its acceptance and implementation in the industry. Furthermore, the manufacturers can improve their competitiveness and profitability by considering the ecological aspects during the manufacturing step of a product. This paper gives a survey on sustainability issues related to AM.
A platform that enables the integration of conductive traces and printed three dimensional mechanical structures has been developed. We discuss the development of the platform and address issues that arise when combining 3D printing and printable electronics. We demonstrate a rapid prototyped three dimensional conductive trace and propose future applications for the platform.
Printed electronics is a familiar term that is taking on more meaning as the technology matures. Flexible electronics is sometimes referred to as a subset of this and the printing approach is one of the enabling factors for roll to roll processes. Printed electronics is improving in performance and has many applications that compete directly with printed circuit boards. The advantage of roll to roll is the speed of manufacturing, the large areas possible, and a reduction in costs. As this technology continues to mature, it is also merging with the high profile 3D printing. (...)
This paper will show working demonstrations of printed circuit structures, the obstacles, and the potential future of 3D printed electronics.
IPC-J-STD vs IPC-A-610 -- In both IPC standards, it is referenced: "When 'X' standard is cited or required by contract, the requirements of 'X OTHER' do not apply unless separately or specifically required."
I've always understood J-STD to be the act of assembling, where A-610 was inspection -- but they both sort of went hand in hand, as A-610 is based from J-STD and therefore any requirements in A-610 would also be the minimum requirements in J-STD...
So, what exactly does it mean the other would not apply? ...
Wouldn't all requirements within J-STD be covered in A-610?
(though, 610 would have additional information for final assembly, of course)
Would the following summary be a correct, generalized understanding of the two?
If only implementing A-610, technically we only care about the end visual result but the act of getting there would be left open, correct?
But if implementing J-STD only, then the act of getting their would also be specified, but wouldn't the end visual result be covered, too?
To summarize: Would this imply, the only reason A-610 would be implemented in addition to J-STD, would be for hardware/final assembly criteria?
Therefore, if SMT/THT only, would A-610 be redundant when using J-STD?
Views: 49
Implementing Standards and Requirements within a CM - When is too much? -- For contract manufacturers,
Unless expectations/requirements are particularly specified by customers OR there is a discussion and contract in place, what are the expectations when it comes to the assembly standards and practices?
Is J-STD essentially just a standard to ideally implement, but unless specifically referred to/requested by the end user, then technically is the MFG required to follow any of these?
(though of course, not doing this would be poor practice and not recommended...)
To expand: if for example a customer requested assemblies but never specified their requirements, would MFGs be expected/required to follow parameters from a specific class related to the end use of said product?
Or would this leave it completely open and become a judgment call by the MFG?
If let's say you are inspecting the boards to class 2 (but not specified by customer, but based on end use/cost of failure/typical cases)
but since the assembly isn't technically specified as class 2, would passing a joint that's only class 1 technically be allowed? Where would the line be drawn?
Same for cleaning (among other things): if the customer never specifies cleaning requirements/expectations, then at what point would you be cleaning too much? What about not enough? What even is the definition of clean if it's not being specified/references, as arguably the end customer may just be visually requesting.
Overall, how does a MFG determine requirements for assemblies when customer doesn't specify? As typically, most customers we see just want an assembled board and don't have any information regarding inspection/assembly/expectation requirements, so what is to be followed?
The Surface Mount Technology Association (SMTA) is thrilled to announce the generous donation of a series of webinars, photo libraries, and poster sets from renowned industry expert, Bob Willis. These resources cover various aspects of the electronics manufacturing industry, offering practical guidance, troubleshooting techniques, and best practices. This valuable content will be made available by SMTA in the coming months, providing insights and resources for professionals in the field....
SMTA is a non-profit international association of companies and individuals (totalling 4,000) involved in all aspects of advanced electronics assembly, surface mount and related technologies.
IPC is a US-based trade association dedicated to the competitive excellence and financial success of its nearly 2,600 member companies which represent all facets of the electronic interconnection industry, including design, printed wiring board manufacturing and electronics assembly.