![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Not one mention. How about a paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.60.126 ( talk • contribs) 08:26, 12 June 2011
I have removed this image from the article. It is a nice picture, but I don't quite see the relevance that it has to the article text (it was inserted into the test section). If it does have relevance, we need some text to go with it to explain. SpinningSpark 12:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I can get some x-rays of maybe a 4-layer PWB's with out components, so it will not be cluttered. This image has the components installed. Very confusing. What I can do maybe is an image of the top of of the board and then an x-ray of the same area showing all the stuff inside you don't see. I'll put it on my list. -- :- ) Don 05:38, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Didn't want to risk changing this erroneously so I'll post a comment to see if anyone else can confirm.
The PCB substrate in these images appears to already have copper on them and a coating of what appears to be already developed photoresist - if this is the case then these boards cannot still be in the process of electroplating nor are they likely to still be in the machine designed to do so - more likely some sort of drying rack ready to be etched. Tim Bell87 ( talk) 02:11, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I've seen the term wired chassis and wired chassis assembly used as an alternative "technology" relative to printed circuit boards. I'm not an expert; should this be clarified in this article? If not, would a knowledgeable person please find a good redirect link for these terms? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.31.106.35 ( talk • contribs)
The sentence, "In 1949, Moe Abramson and Stanislaus F. Danko of the United States Army Signal Corps developed the Auto-Sembly process in which component leads were inserted into a copper foil interconnection pattern and dip soldered." is in error. The original designer of this process was Samuel J. Lanzalotti, an electrical engineer and inventor, who, with the two aforementioned electrical engineers, worked at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. The prototype Lanzalotti designed shows the three layers within the circuit board and displays side-by-side two different methods of etching that could be used. With Lanzalotti's design notes in hand, the two others applied for the patent and received a $10,000 award from the government. This information was never disclosed to the public.-- 96.242.73.244 ( talk) 11:12, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Article states "Well known prepreg materials used in the PCB industry are ... FR-4 (Woven glass and epoxy), ..., CEM-3 (Woven glass and epoxy) ..."
I read elsewhere that CEM-3 is not woven, which is its main difference from FR-4. Sorry that I do not have an authoritative reference on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zlel ( talk • contribs) 04:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Composite Epoxy Materials (CEM) are a group of composite materials typically made of woven glass fabric surfaces and non-woven glass core combined with epoxy resin. The core is non-woven fabric! That's the difference between CEM material and FR-4 material.-- 203.163.97.36 ( talk) 05:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Is there a more general article that compares and contrasts the many ways of electrically connecting and mechanically supporting electronics components? Or a general category to simply list these techniques? solderless breadboard, point-to-point construction, wire wrap, Project Tinkertoy, general-purpose printed circuit board: prototyping stripboard and prototyping perfboard, custom printed circuit board, etc. -- 68.0.124.33 ( talk) 03:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
this article is full of fundamental errors, e.g.:
drilling is performed before etching, but the sequence of sections suggests otherwise
section "Exposed conductor plating and coating" sentence "PCBs[2] are plated with solder, tin, or gold over nickel as a resist for etching away the unneeded underlying copper.[3]" is nonsense
212.159.59.5 ( talk) 14:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Article states that it is impossible to solder BGA by hand. This is not true. It is possible to remove, reball and replace BGA and uBGA devices using a hand held hot air rework station. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.32.168 ( talk) 08:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
>Some of these dielectrics are polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon), FR-4, FR-1, CEM-1 or CEM-3.
PTFE is only used in high performance PCB for ultra high frequencies. One supplier is i.e. http://www.rogerscorp.com . Cost can be easily over US$1000 per raw sheet. Beside PTFE there are a few other exotic materials.
>FR-2 (Phenolic cotton paper), FR-3 (Cotton paper and epoxy)
XPC, FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, CEM-1 use cellulose paper, not cotton paper.
> CEM-3 (Woven glass and epoxy)
CEM-3 uses a glass felt and not woven glass. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.198.92.79 ( talk) 03:21, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Why does Breakout Boards redirect to here? This article does not use the term Breakout Board, which means anyone coming to the article redirected from "Breakout Board" will be confused into thinking there might be information about Breakout Boards here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.207.40 ( talk) 07:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
The Multiwire board section does not belong here; it is not a printed wiring technology. It should be mentioned in the wirewrap article. Multiwire board may deserve an article of its own.
The redirect at Multiwire should be a dab.
Glrx ( talk) 15:45, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
<ref> (original internal documentation of inventor Seymour Golub and NOMA catalog) </ref> is not a usable citation. A citation tells you how to find the original document; this doesn't even tell us which edition of a "NOMA catalog" to look for. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 13:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I have moved the following from the article for discussion here first:-
Through-hole technology mostly duplicates what is already here. It could be merged for context and coherence. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 19:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Hardly any information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.150.170.241 ( talk) 09:24, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
This page is a bit confusing with pieces of the processing out of order and scattered here and there. I think it would be more understandable if it was arranged in the order of operations with the most common variations listed in each appropriate section. Drill => Plate => Etch => Mask => Legend. Multi-layer is not talked about much, but probably accounts for 50-75% of the PWB dollar volume produced today. That would require the addition of Image => Laminate before the standard processing described above. Or, in the case of blind vias, Drill => Image => Plate => Laminate.
Yeah/Nay? -- :- ) Don 21:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
This works. -- :- ) Don 21:40, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Panel plating processing steps |
---|
![]() |
This article is in the Vital articles list. Ideally vital articles should be "Feature Class". This should be better than its current Class-C or Class-B. We need diagrams, flow charts, pictures. I have been working on some flow charts and processing pictorials. Any ideas on how these could be presented? There are many variations, I hate to clutter up pages with too many. Something like the collapsible lists, but how to do with .PNG's? I don't think pop-ups are allowed. Sub-pages may be too slow. HTML5 has lot of options available, but I'm not sure what Media-wiki's implementation plans are. -- :- ) Don 05:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
71.230.79.235 did not find what they were looking for. 6 days ago
Regarding your description for printed circuits, it was my understanding that Harry Rubinstein was credited by the IEEE in 1984 with the invention. http://www.ieee.org/documents/brunetti_rl.pdf 1984 - HARRY W. RUBINSTEIN Sprague Electric Co. Grafton, Wisconsin "For early key contributions to the development of printed components and conductors on a common insulating substrate." Here's a note from an award ceremony from the University of Wisconsin alluding to this fact. HARRY W. RUBINSTEIN For his innovations in the technology of printed electronic circuits and the fabrication of capacitors. Harry W. Rubinstein (BSEE '27) was president of Sprague Electric Company, Grafton, Wisconsin, from 1952 until 1970. He retired in 1971. Faced with problems of weight, space, and shortage of strategic materials, he developed the printed electronic circuit for the proximity fuse used in bombs in World War II. That project, in addition to the work of the National Bureau of Standards, was the forerunner of the laminated plastic base printed circuits so widely used today. In 1946, he was a cofounder of Herlec Corporation, which concentrated on manufacturing and distributing ceramic disc capacitors. Herlec merged with Sprague Electric in 1948. Mr. Rubinstein was responsible for Sprague's Grafton, Wisconsin, plant, set up factories in Nashua, New Hampshire, and Hillsville. Virginia, and was a consultant to many of Sprague's 31 factories worldwide. He helped improve manufacturing processes, reduce costs, and avoid duplication of facilities and effort. He holds 19 U.S. patents. He and his wife Else have a daughter and two sons. http://www.engr.wisc.edu/eday/eday1984.html I would have thought this information would be found on this site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printed_circuit_board Thanks. Dr. Cohen
This article talks mainly about a PCB although the technology, point to point connectivity, it technically a PWB (Printed Wiring Board). A PCB (Printed Circuit Board) is a board that has a printed RF element on it. Also, technically an assembly for these boards is a CCA (Circuit Card Assembly) or in the case of a backplane a Backplane Assembly as defined by H6 ( http://www.dlis.dla.mil/H6/search.aspx). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jschwa01 ( talk • contribs) 20:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I added an item listing this as a technique that can be used to make PCBs. I know it to work and I learned about it from a forum. I cannot (yet) cite a published reference.
Somebody anonymous removed this entry without any reference to me or making any note of what they did and why that I have found. As this was my first ever update to Wikipedia I am somewhat miffed. Is this how you treat contributors?
The normal approach when a citation is missing seems to be to add 'citation needed'. However, given that the entry was under the heading 'hobbyist', how likely do you think it is that hobbyists will bother to formally publish their findings? The particular entry is important because it reduces the cost of making PCBs in small quantities dramatically.
Another Geoff ( talk) 12:18, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
The odd thing is that I added a third item under two pre-existing others, neither of which had references or requests for citation. One rule for some it seems. The information I added was hardly contentious, it can be verified in a few seconds that putting olive oil onto plain paper makes it translucent. Another Geoff ( talk) 16:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I have just copyedited the recent insertion in the lede about IPC terminology. It now reads,
The IPC preferred term for populated boards is CCA, circuit card assembly.[1] This does not apply to backplanes; asssembled backplanes are called backplane assemblies by the IPC.
However, my impression from this is that the IPC is describing card racks (why is that a redlink by the way?) and the cards that go in them, not PCBs in general. Also, I am not convinced that this terminology is in widespread enough use to go in the lede anyway. Our article should not be driven by how the IPC would like the world to be, but rather how it actually is. Spinning Spark 12:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
What is "earlier era tag type circuit assembly processes"? can't find on web at all... 71.139.166.154 ( talk) 22:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I think the section on laminates is too detailed for an encyclopedic article. I suggest to remove the table and other technical details. Burning objections, anyone? Karloman2 ( talk) 20:53, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Multiwire has nothing to do with PCB. Chordwood may or may not use a PCB, but it is not a PCB, and many manufacturing methods use PCB's. IMHO multiwire and chordwood have no place in a PCB article. I suggest to move them to separate articles. Burning objections, anyone? Karloman2 ( talk) 22:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
My last edit was undone. It did two things on the intro section of the article.
I think the changes made the intro more concise and more correct.
However, I certainly do not want to start an undo war, so I leave this to the community. (I will no longer edit this article in the foreseeable future.) Karloman2 ( talk) 08:48, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
This edit recently removed "The majority of printed circuit boards today are made from purchased laminate material with copper already applied to both sides" and now states that the semi-additive process is the most common process. Is this true, and if so can we have a cite for this please? I am not current enough to know if this is right, but it always used to be the case that the pcb process would start with copper-clad laminate board. It is possible the editor may have mistakenly copyedited the statement that the semi-additive process is the most common additive process into it is the most common process. Spinning Spark 07:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
About the most common process. The original article already stated that semi-additive is the most common process. I simply left it in place. Apart from that,I believe it is true.In the west it is in nearly universal use. Japan uses a lot of panel plating, which is more subtractive. I have no references. However, I am not sure if this is true or not, which is why I left this as it is. 212.78.197.250 ( talk) 08:57, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Appearantly, companies introduce weak points in PCB's/ consumer electronics they design so the device becomes defect quicker, with the result that the consumer need to buy new devices quicker. Appearantly , in motherboards it's mostly caused by capacitors they place on the boards (not sure why these are needed at all). Perhaps mention in article. KVDP ( talk) 17:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
First author is User:Ray Van De Walker whose page states he's US. first edit. Glrx ( talk) 00:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I added some useful topics about precautions while using PCBs. Those has been removed. Please let me know the issue with the edits User talk:Pcbapc — Preceding undated comment added 07:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The current text on patterning method by volume contains the following:
Large volume
Silk screen printing–the main commercial method. Photoengraving–used when fine linewidths are required.
I do not believe that silk screen printing is the main method, I believe photo-engraving is. (The statement is unreferenced.) I know quite a number of manufacturers, and few use silk screen printing, but I have no statistics, proof or references. Consequently, I am not comfortable to make statements about this. Still, I would like to change the text as follows, sidestepping the volume question.
Large volume
Photoengraving – used when fine line widths are required. Silk screen printing – used for PCBs with thicker lines.
Are there burning objections? Or does anyone has references about this?
Karloman2 ( talk) 16:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Karloman2 ( talk) 08:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
An IP editor recently tried to move the history section to the top [1]. That was reverted by User:Karloman2 with the comment "I dont think history comes first. People looking at this article are probably not interested in the history." I agree that history should not be at the very top, but on the other hand I don't necessarily agree that it should be relegated to the very bottom. There should be enough in front of history to explain what the subject is all about and introduce terms that might be used in the history. Karloman, you are making assumptions about why readers come to an article. Those who work with pcbs and understand the technicalities would be ill advised to come to Wikipedia for technical information. For the general reader of a technical article, the history is often the most accessible and easily understood part of the article. It may even be what they came to the article to find. Spinning Spark 07:57, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Straight onto boards before exposing them, I laid out my first that way. did my 2nd with 1:1 tape onto a board (1 sided, early-mid '70s). And for photo-lithography, I'll bet freehand drawing was used as well, the Flipchip in the 2nd photo looks like it might have been hand drawn, not done with tape. Note the short thick section in the bottom trace, inconsistent with tape, but not with pen and ink, and in general doing curves like that with tape would have been a real pain. Hga ( talk) 19:17, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
It is obvious that a lot of work has gone into this article and there is a load of good information, but suggest that some rationalization of the the content/heads would make it more readable. A bit of copy editing here and there would help too. CPES ( talk) 10:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Currently the articles states that "The impedance of transmission lines decreases with frequency", even though earlier it is stated that the dielectric constant (Dk) is "usually decreasing with frequency". Actually, if Dk decreases with frequency, that means the characteristic impedance will increase. Lower Dk means lower per-unit-length capacitance, which means higher sqrt(L/C).
The article should state that trace impedance will increase for typical materials which have Dk decreasing with frequency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbleslie ( talk • contribs) 17:49, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Potential sources:
Anyone interested in either writing this up, or researching further? :-) Quiddity ( talk) 04:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The re-ordering of section is probably a good thing - the article could do with some reorganization. Adding an Overview section is a good idea. I did not look at the copy-edits, but I assume they are improvements. However, I have two remarks: 1) The new Overview section and the new words in the intro are wholly without references. Zero. I think that either references must be added, or the new content removed. 2) The intro section is now much longer than the original one, and somewhat rambling. The benefit of an Overview is that the intro can be short. Those that want to know more can go to the Overview. For a casual visitor, that wants quickly to know what a PCB is, I think the new intro is daunting. I suggest to drastically shorten it. Opinions? Ludwig Boltzmann ( talk) 09:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I thank Wtshymanski for cutting back the intro to a suitable length. Ludwig Boltzmann ( talk) 16:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Seeing that it seems to be what the people want, I have stripped the intro down even further. Anything that might not be a loss, I cut. (Unfortunately, already stripped data doesn't compress much further.) Also put in 2 short sentences hinting at neutral balance, one replacing a cut sentence. I do think now the intro is much better than I first left it. I have also resurrected those two paragraphs I didn't originate, to the Overview, while cutting some other parts of the Overview a little bit. And if we don't define "populate" until halfway through the article, we should refrain from using it until then: Done. (I also tried to delete a lot of my massivette treatise of earlier today, since I get it that "no one" is going to read through most of it, especially those parts I tried to cut, so why make them scroll past it? But "a filter" won't let one edit even one's own words on talk pages, even the same day, so that's that.)
Shame there isn't more detailed feedback & editing coordination here. That's it for me; been wasting too much time. At least the article is a lot better than it was before the 5th, and that will probably benefit many people. Over & out. 173.59.13.98 ( talk) 20:49, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Obviously the best material for a printed circuit board is fused corundum, plated in pure silver-109, hand-etched by Circassian virgins of noble birth. Back in the real world, you use the material that does the job; a mouse won't work any better with an FR 4 or Teflon circuit board. Anyone who's lived long enough on this planet to learn to read has also learned their are cheap things and expensive things. We dn't need to beat this over the reader's head. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 21:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
There is a sentence that states the IPC standard is to use the term CCA and the reference states IPC-14.38. IPC-14 does not appear to fit the IPC numbering system and is not listed in the IPC Standards Tree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.30.143.130 ( talk) 15:34, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
The recent copy and paste from the website www.911eda.com is a copyright violation. Since the material appeared in a copyrighted website, the material is considered copyrighted for Wikipedia purposes. The policy is designed to keep Wikipedia out of legal trouble. However, if you are the owner of the copyright, you can give Wikipedia permission to publish the material. There is a little bit of bureaucratic record keeping, but it is straight forward. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. The purpose is to establish that you are giving the proper rights to Wikipedia and understand what those rights are.
However, www.911eda.com is a commercial site offering services for sale. It would be considered SPAM to cite www.911eda.com as a source. So, you can use the material, with permission, but you need to cite reliable independent sources.
Since you appear to be associated with 911EDA, you need to adhere to conflict of interest WP:COI and WP:SPAM policies. Constant314 ( talk) 20:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Not one mention. How about a paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.60.126 ( talk • contribs) 08:26, 12 June 2011
I have removed this image from the article. It is a nice picture, but I don't quite see the relevance that it has to the article text (it was inserted into the test section). If it does have relevance, we need some text to go with it to explain. SpinningSpark 12:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I can get some x-rays of maybe a 4-layer PWB's with out components, so it will not be cluttered. This image has the components installed. Very confusing. What I can do maybe is an image of the top of of the board and then an x-ray of the same area showing all the stuff inside you don't see. I'll put it on my list. -- :- ) Don 05:38, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Didn't want to risk changing this erroneously so I'll post a comment to see if anyone else can confirm.
The PCB substrate in these images appears to already have copper on them and a coating of what appears to be already developed photoresist - if this is the case then these boards cannot still be in the process of electroplating nor are they likely to still be in the machine designed to do so - more likely some sort of drying rack ready to be etched. Tim Bell87 ( talk) 02:11, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I've seen the term wired chassis and wired chassis assembly used as an alternative "technology" relative to printed circuit boards. I'm not an expert; should this be clarified in this article? If not, would a knowledgeable person please find a good redirect link for these terms? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.31.106.35 ( talk • contribs)
The sentence, "In 1949, Moe Abramson and Stanislaus F. Danko of the United States Army Signal Corps developed the Auto-Sembly process in which component leads were inserted into a copper foil interconnection pattern and dip soldered." is in error. The original designer of this process was Samuel J. Lanzalotti, an electrical engineer and inventor, who, with the two aforementioned electrical engineers, worked at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. The prototype Lanzalotti designed shows the three layers within the circuit board and displays side-by-side two different methods of etching that could be used. With Lanzalotti's design notes in hand, the two others applied for the patent and received a $10,000 award from the government. This information was never disclosed to the public.-- 96.242.73.244 ( talk) 11:12, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Article states "Well known prepreg materials used in the PCB industry are ... FR-4 (Woven glass and epoxy), ..., CEM-3 (Woven glass and epoxy) ..."
I read elsewhere that CEM-3 is not woven, which is its main difference from FR-4. Sorry that I do not have an authoritative reference on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zlel ( talk • contribs) 04:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Composite Epoxy Materials (CEM) are a group of composite materials typically made of woven glass fabric surfaces and non-woven glass core combined with epoxy resin. The core is non-woven fabric! That's the difference between CEM material and FR-4 material.-- 203.163.97.36 ( talk) 05:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Is there a more general article that compares and contrasts the many ways of electrically connecting and mechanically supporting electronics components? Or a general category to simply list these techniques? solderless breadboard, point-to-point construction, wire wrap, Project Tinkertoy, general-purpose printed circuit board: prototyping stripboard and prototyping perfboard, custom printed circuit board, etc. -- 68.0.124.33 ( talk) 03:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
this article is full of fundamental errors, e.g.:
drilling is performed before etching, but the sequence of sections suggests otherwise
section "Exposed conductor plating and coating" sentence "PCBs[2] are plated with solder, tin, or gold over nickel as a resist for etching away the unneeded underlying copper.[3]" is nonsense
212.159.59.5 ( talk) 14:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Article states that it is impossible to solder BGA by hand. This is not true. It is possible to remove, reball and replace BGA and uBGA devices using a hand held hot air rework station. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.32.168 ( talk) 08:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
>Some of these dielectrics are polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon), FR-4, FR-1, CEM-1 or CEM-3.
PTFE is only used in high performance PCB for ultra high frequencies. One supplier is i.e. http://www.rogerscorp.com . Cost can be easily over US$1000 per raw sheet. Beside PTFE there are a few other exotic materials.
>FR-2 (Phenolic cotton paper), FR-3 (Cotton paper and epoxy)
XPC, FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, CEM-1 use cellulose paper, not cotton paper.
> CEM-3 (Woven glass and epoxy)
CEM-3 uses a glass felt and not woven glass. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.198.92.79 ( talk) 03:21, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Why does Breakout Boards redirect to here? This article does not use the term Breakout Board, which means anyone coming to the article redirected from "Breakout Board" will be confused into thinking there might be information about Breakout Boards here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.207.40 ( talk) 07:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
The Multiwire board section does not belong here; it is not a printed wiring technology. It should be mentioned in the wirewrap article. Multiwire board may deserve an article of its own.
The redirect at Multiwire should be a dab.
Glrx ( talk) 15:45, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
<ref> (original internal documentation of inventor Seymour Golub and NOMA catalog) </ref> is not a usable citation. A citation tells you how to find the original document; this doesn't even tell us which edition of a "NOMA catalog" to look for. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 13:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I have moved the following from the article for discussion here first:-
Through-hole technology mostly duplicates what is already here. It could be merged for context and coherence. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 19:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Hardly any information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.150.170.241 ( talk) 09:24, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
This page is a bit confusing with pieces of the processing out of order and scattered here and there. I think it would be more understandable if it was arranged in the order of operations with the most common variations listed in each appropriate section. Drill => Plate => Etch => Mask => Legend. Multi-layer is not talked about much, but probably accounts for 50-75% of the PWB dollar volume produced today. That would require the addition of Image => Laminate before the standard processing described above. Or, in the case of blind vias, Drill => Image => Plate => Laminate.
Yeah/Nay? -- :- ) Don 21:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
This works. -- :- ) Don 21:40, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Panel plating processing steps |
---|
![]() |
This article is in the Vital articles list. Ideally vital articles should be "Feature Class". This should be better than its current Class-C or Class-B. We need diagrams, flow charts, pictures. I have been working on some flow charts and processing pictorials. Any ideas on how these could be presented? There are many variations, I hate to clutter up pages with too many. Something like the collapsible lists, but how to do with .PNG's? I don't think pop-ups are allowed. Sub-pages may be too slow. HTML5 has lot of options available, but I'm not sure what Media-wiki's implementation plans are. -- :- ) Don 05:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
71.230.79.235 did not find what they were looking for. 6 days ago
Regarding your description for printed circuits, it was my understanding that Harry Rubinstein was credited by the IEEE in 1984 with the invention. http://www.ieee.org/documents/brunetti_rl.pdf 1984 - HARRY W. RUBINSTEIN Sprague Electric Co. Grafton, Wisconsin "For early key contributions to the development of printed components and conductors on a common insulating substrate." Here's a note from an award ceremony from the University of Wisconsin alluding to this fact. HARRY W. RUBINSTEIN For his innovations in the technology of printed electronic circuits and the fabrication of capacitors. Harry W. Rubinstein (BSEE '27) was president of Sprague Electric Company, Grafton, Wisconsin, from 1952 until 1970. He retired in 1971. Faced with problems of weight, space, and shortage of strategic materials, he developed the printed electronic circuit for the proximity fuse used in bombs in World War II. That project, in addition to the work of the National Bureau of Standards, was the forerunner of the laminated plastic base printed circuits so widely used today. In 1946, he was a cofounder of Herlec Corporation, which concentrated on manufacturing and distributing ceramic disc capacitors. Herlec merged with Sprague Electric in 1948. Mr. Rubinstein was responsible for Sprague's Grafton, Wisconsin, plant, set up factories in Nashua, New Hampshire, and Hillsville. Virginia, and was a consultant to many of Sprague's 31 factories worldwide. He helped improve manufacturing processes, reduce costs, and avoid duplication of facilities and effort. He holds 19 U.S. patents. He and his wife Else have a daughter and two sons. http://www.engr.wisc.edu/eday/eday1984.html I would have thought this information would be found on this site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printed_circuit_board Thanks. Dr. Cohen
This article talks mainly about a PCB although the technology, point to point connectivity, it technically a PWB (Printed Wiring Board). A PCB (Printed Circuit Board) is a board that has a printed RF element on it. Also, technically an assembly for these boards is a CCA (Circuit Card Assembly) or in the case of a backplane a Backplane Assembly as defined by H6 ( http://www.dlis.dla.mil/H6/search.aspx). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jschwa01 ( talk • contribs) 20:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I added an item listing this as a technique that can be used to make PCBs. I know it to work and I learned about it from a forum. I cannot (yet) cite a published reference.
Somebody anonymous removed this entry without any reference to me or making any note of what they did and why that I have found. As this was my first ever update to Wikipedia I am somewhat miffed. Is this how you treat contributors?
The normal approach when a citation is missing seems to be to add 'citation needed'. However, given that the entry was under the heading 'hobbyist', how likely do you think it is that hobbyists will bother to formally publish their findings? The particular entry is important because it reduces the cost of making PCBs in small quantities dramatically.
Another Geoff ( talk) 12:18, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
The odd thing is that I added a third item under two pre-existing others, neither of which had references or requests for citation. One rule for some it seems. The information I added was hardly contentious, it can be verified in a few seconds that putting olive oil onto plain paper makes it translucent. Another Geoff ( talk) 16:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I have just copyedited the recent insertion in the lede about IPC terminology. It now reads,
The IPC preferred term for populated boards is CCA, circuit card assembly.[1] This does not apply to backplanes; asssembled backplanes are called backplane assemblies by the IPC.
However, my impression from this is that the IPC is describing card racks (why is that a redlink by the way?) and the cards that go in them, not PCBs in general. Also, I am not convinced that this terminology is in widespread enough use to go in the lede anyway. Our article should not be driven by how the IPC would like the world to be, but rather how it actually is. Spinning Spark 12:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
What is "earlier era tag type circuit assembly processes"? can't find on web at all... 71.139.166.154 ( talk) 22:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I think the section on laminates is too detailed for an encyclopedic article. I suggest to remove the table and other technical details. Burning objections, anyone? Karloman2 ( talk) 20:53, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Multiwire has nothing to do with PCB. Chordwood may or may not use a PCB, but it is not a PCB, and many manufacturing methods use PCB's. IMHO multiwire and chordwood have no place in a PCB article. I suggest to move them to separate articles. Burning objections, anyone? Karloman2 ( talk) 22:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
My last edit was undone. It did two things on the intro section of the article.
I think the changes made the intro more concise and more correct.
However, I certainly do not want to start an undo war, so I leave this to the community. (I will no longer edit this article in the foreseeable future.) Karloman2 ( talk) 08:48, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
This edit recently removed "The majority of printed circuit boards today are made from purchased laminate material with copper already applied to both sides" and now states that the semi-additive process is the most common process. Is this true, and if so can we have a cite for this please? I am not current enough to know if this is right, but it always used to be the case that the pcb process would start with copper-clad laminate board. It is possible the editor may have mistakenly copyedited the statement that the semi-additive process is the most common additive process into it is the most common process. Spinning Spark 07:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
About the most common process. The original article already stated that semi-additive is the most common process. I simply left it in place. Apart from that,I believe it is true.In the west it is in nearly universal use. Japan uses a lot of panel plating, which is more subtractive. I have no references. However, I am not sure if this is true or not, which is why I left this as it is. 212.78.197.250 ( talk) 08:57, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Appearantly, companies introduce weak points in PCB's/ consumer electronics they design so the device becomes defect quicker, with the result that the consumer need to buy new devices quicker. Appearantly , in motherboards it's mostly caused by capacitors they place on the boards (not sure why these are needed at all). Perhaps mention in article. KVDP ( talk) 17:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
First author is User:Ray Van De Walker whose page states he's US. first edit. Glrx ( talk) 00:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I added some useful topics about precautions while using PCBs. Those has been removed. Please let me know the issue with the edits User talk:Pcbapc — Preceding undated comment added 07:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The current text on patterning method by volume contains the following:
Large volume
Silk screen printing–the main commercial method. Photoengraving–used when fine linewidths are required.
I do not believe that silk screen printing is the main method, I believe photo-engraving is. (The statement is unreferenced.) I know quite a number of manufacturers, and few use silk screen printing, but I have no statistics, proof or references. Consequently, I am not comfortable to make statements about this. Still, I would like to change the text as follows, sidestepping the volume question.
Large volume
Photoengraving – used when fine line widths are required. Silk screen printing – used for PCBs with thicker lines.
Are there burning objections? Or does anyone has references about this?
Karloman2 ( talk) 16:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Karloman2 ( talk) 08:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
An IP editor recently tried to move the history section to the top [1]. That was reverted by User:Karloman2 with the comment "I dont think history comes first. People looking at this article are probably not interested in the history." I agree that history should not be at the very top, but on the other hand I don't necessarily agree that it should be relegated to the very bottom. There should be enough in front of history to explain what the subject is all about and introduce terms that might be used in the history. Karloman, you are making assumptions about why readers come to an article. Those who work with pcbs and understand the technicalities would be ill advised to come to Wikipedia for technical information. For the general reader of a technical article, the history is often the most accessible and easily understood part of the article. It may even be what they came to the article to find. Spinning Spark 07:57, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Straight onto boards before exposing them, I laid out my first that way. did my 2nd with 1:1 tape onto a board (1 sided, early-mid '70s). And for photo-lithography, I'll bet freehand drawing was used as well, the Flipchip in the 2nd photo looks like it might have been hand drawn, not done with tape. Note the short thick section in the bottom trace, inconsistent with tape, but not with pen and ink, and in general doing curves like that with tape would have been a real pain. Hga ( talk) 19:17, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
It is obvious that a lot of work has gone into this article and there is a load of good information, but suggest that some rationalization of the the content/heads would make it more readable. A bit of copy editing here and there would help too. CPES ( talk) 10:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Currently the articles states that "The impedance of transmission lines decreases with frequency", even though earlier it is stated that the dielectric constant (Dk) is "usually decreasing with frequency". Actually, if Dk decreases with frequency, that means the characteristic impedance will increase. Lower Dk means lower per-unit-length capacitance, which means higher sqrt(L/C).
The article should state that trace impedance will increase for typical materials which have Dk decreasing with frequency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbleslie ( talk • contribs) 17:49, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Potential sources:
Anyone interested in either writing this up, or researching further? :-) Quiddity ( talk) 04:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The re-ordering of section is probably a good thing - the article could do with some reorganization. Adding an Overview section is a good idea. I did not look at the copy-edits, but I assume they are improvements. However, I have two remarks: 1) The new Overview section and the new words in the intro are wholly without references. Zero. I think that either references must be added, or the new content removed. 2) The intro section is now much longer than the original one, and somewhat rambling. The benefit of an Overview is that the intro can be short. Those that want to know more can go to the Overview. For a casual visitor, that wants quickly to know what a PCB is, I think the new intro is daunting. I suggest to drastically shorten it. Opinions? Ludwig Boltzmann ( talk) 09:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I thank Wtshymanski for cutting back the intro to a suitable length. Ludwig Boltzmann ( talk) 16:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Seeing that it seems to be what the people want, I have stripped the intro down even further. Anything that might not be a loss, I cut. (Unfortunately, already stripped data doesn't compress much further.) Also put in 2 short sentences hinting at neutral balance, one replacing a cut sentence. I do think now the intro is much better than I first left it. I have also resurrected those two paragraphs I didn't originate, to the Overview, while cutting some other parts of the Overview a little bit. And if we don't define "populate" until halfway through the article, we should refrain from using it until then: Done. (I also tried to delete a lot of my massivette treatise of earlier today, since I get it that "no one" is going to read through most of it, especially those parts I tried to cut, so why make them scroll past it? But "a filter" won't let one edit even one's own words on talk pages, even the same day, so that's that.)
Shame there isn't more detailed feedback & editing coordination here. That's it for me; been wasting too much time. At least the article is a lot better than it was before the 5th, and that will probably benefit many people. Over & out. 173.59.13.98 ( talk) 20:49, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Obviously the best material for a printed circuit board is fused corundum, plated in pure silver-109, hand-etched by Circassian virgins of noble birth. Back in the real world, you use the material that does the job; a mouse won't work any better with an FR 4 or Teflon circuit board. Anyone who's lived long enough on this planet to learn to read has also learned their are cheap things and expensive things. We dn't need to beat this over the reader's head. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 21:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
There is a sentence that states the IPC standard is to use the term CCA and the reference states IPC-14.38. IPC-14 does not appear to fit the IPC numbering system and is not listed in the IPC Standards Tree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.30.143.130 ( talk) 15:34, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
The recent copy and paste from the website www.911eda.com is a copyright violation. Since the material appeared in a copyrighted website, the material is considered copyrighted for Wikipedia purposes. The policy is designed to keep Wikipedia out of legal trouble. However, if you are the owner of the copyright, you can give Wikipedia permission to publish the material. There is a little bit of bureaucratic record keeping, but it is straight forward. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. The purpose is to establish that you are giving the proper rights to Wikipedia and understand what those rights are.
However, www.911eda.com is a commercial site offering services for sale. It would be considered SPAM to cite www.911eda.com as a source. So, you can use the material, with permission, but you need to cite reliable independent sources.
Since you appear to be associated with 911EDA, you need to adhere to conflict of interest WP:COI and WP:SPAM policies. Constant314 ( talk) 20:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)