Godspeed, Dieter Bergman

Dieter BergmanI first met Dieter Bergman in the early 1980s, in a small IPC office in Evanston. It had tons of boxes of booklets jammed in between huge copiers and desks so old they could have been updated by slapping an “I Like Ike” sticker on the grey metal.

I had just moved to Illinois from California, where I wrote mainly about minicomputers and the emerging role of electronics in aeronautics. Dieter took the time to explain IPC’s role in the industry, trying to figure out how to explain the role of FR-4 to a journalist who could talk about system architectures and control techniques but hadn’t given solder a thought since shop class in high school.

IPC has undergone significant changes in the four decades since, moving from that dingy facility to a number of newer and better buildings, with a corresponding upgrade in professionalism. During those many transitions, Dieter remained a constant.

Whenever he was the point man for an IPC effort that fit the systems approach of the magazines I wrote for, he was willing to sit down to explain it. IPC technologies typically weren’t in my mainstream areas back then, so he’d have to explain even more background than normal. Often, the interviews took a while.

Even though I’m sure he sometimes would have preferred talking with IPC people, he always made me feel like I was the most important person around during our interviews. Over time, as I got more closely involved in packaging and other areas that were more intertwined with IPC’s programs, we often chatted about more personal stuff, so I got to know him much better.

Whether it was work or finding a great food cart in a Taiwan market, Dieter was always a lion who threw himself into whatever he was involved in. It’s been great working with someone who was a mainstay in building a strong infrastructure for the industry, as well as helping set IPC on a course that will serve it and the industry well in coming years. I’ll certainly miss those conversations, as will all who knew him. Farewell, Dieter.

Feel free to share your comments/reflections about Dieter.

IPC Mourns Loss of Industry Icon, Pioneer and Friend

It is with great sadness that IPC announces the passing of Dieter Bergman, IPC staff member for more than 40 years.

DieterBergmanDecorated with countless awards over his lifetime, Bergman’s name will forever be synonymous with IPC and he leaves a legacy of friendships, lasting memories, and what is affectionately treasured by IPC staff and close friends as “Dieter-isms” — such as a 45-minute answer to a 10-second question.

Bergman began his career in 1956 as a designer for Philco Ford in Philadelphia, Pa. He assumed the position of supervisor of the printed circuit design group in 1967, and joined the company’s advanced technology group where he specialized in printed circuit computer-aided design. In 1962, while at Philco Ford, he became the company’s official representative to IPC; and received the IPC President’s Award in 1968, the same year he assumed chairmanship of the IPC Design Committee.

Bergman was elected Chairman of the IPC Technical Activities Executive Committee in 1974, and later that year joined the IPC staff as Technical Director. In that role, he was responsible for the coordination of standards, specifications and guidelines development; round robin test programs; establishment of workshops and seminars; serving as a government and inter-society liaison; and initiating IPC activities in Europe and Asia.

In 1984, he became Director of Technology Transfer to help foster the interchange between design and manufacturing, and to continue to serve as a leader in the identification of future technologies and industry needs.

While Bergman had a special place in his heart for the design community, his contributions to the industry as a whole earned him the IPC Hall of Fame Award, IPC’s highest honor, in 1985.

Most recently, Bergman chaired the IPC Ambassador Council, a group of IPC Hall of Famers who provide advice and guidance to IPC, and encourage active participation in IPC activities by all of its members to enhance the electronics industry.

“The staff and I feel very fortunate to have known Dieter, and have benefited from his knowledge and his passion for the industry,” said IPC President and CEO John Mitchell. “He will be missed, but always remembered as an icon, pioneer and friend.”

 

IPC Provides Feedback to DoD on Flexible Hybrid Electronics and Electronic Packaging and Reliability

In an effort to accelerate development and adoption of cutting-edge manufacturing technologies for making new, globally competitive products with commercial and defense applications, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued a Request for Information (RFI) on future advanced manufacturing centers called Institutes for Manufacturing Innovation or IMIs. On July 14, IPC submitted two separate responses to the RFI in areas of particular importance to its members: flexible hybrid electronics and electronic packaging and reliability.

The DoD RFI solicited information on six technical focus areas that the agency is considering for future IMIs. These technical focus areas are:

  • Flexible Hybrid Electronics
  • Photonics
  • Engineered Nanomaterials
  • Fiber and Textiles
  • Electronic Packaging and Reliability
  • Aerospace Composites

Four IMIs currently exist and the DoD is expected to establish two more this year, each concentrating on a different technical focus area.  The date when the DoD will release a solicitation for proposals of a future IMI is unknown at this time, but it is expected to be soon — possibly within the next couple of months.

IPC supports the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 2013 (S. 1468 & H.R. 2996) to authorize a new public-private partnership called the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI). A top priority policy area for the association, this network of public and private partners would draw on the resources of the federal government, local governments, universities, research institutes and industry to fund the IMIs. Unlike other federally funded programs, which focus on basic research, the NNMI aims to bridge the gap from basic research to product development and commercialization. The four IMIs that have been established are:

  1. America Makes: National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute (3-D Printing) in Youngstown, Ohio
  2. Next Generation Power Electronics Manufacturing Innovation Institute in Raleigh, N.C.
  3. Lightweight and Modern Metals Manufacturing Innovation Institute in Detroit, Mich.
  4. Digital Manufacturing & Design Innovation Institute in Chicago, Ill.

More information about the NNMI is available at http://www.manufacturing.gov/nnmi.html. For information on IPC’s efforts related to the NNMI, contact, Ken Schramko, IPC director of government relations at KenSchramko@ipc.org or +1 202-661-8094.

Nanotechnology Researchers Replace Solder with Water

Advanced research is often really interesting, and often not-so-much. For me, that’s especially true with nanotechnology. Some projects have potential to change things. Others seem like pipe dreams that will take decades to emerge, if they ever advance toward the mainstream.

A new study on self-assembling electronics seems to fit in the middle. Researchers from the University of Twente in the Netherlands believe they can replace solder with water. It’s quite intriguing, but it also sounds like its reality may be some time away.

Dutch researchers folded flat sheets of silicon and silicon nitride into various shapes. They then added water to get the sheets to expand into 3-D structures that filled a small space with electrical components. That’s a significant change from similar research in the 1990s, when researchers used solder to unfold flat sheets in their attempt to cram even more computing power into shrinking electronic devices. The surface tension of molten solder caused silicon to create shapes that fit into tight spaces.

Folded components have enthralled researchers for a while. In 2003, an MIT optical systems group demonstrated that it would be possible to fold many wires encased in a flexible polymer in order to transform a long 2-D chip into a dense 3-D structure. Harvard researchers used the origami-like concept to build a light detector a few years ago. Elsewhere, the concepts have been explored for medical applications.

It will be intriguing to see if these concepts ever join through-silicon vias and other 3-D packaging technologies that are finally moving into the mainstream after years of research. Sometimes, research projects eventually fly. Other times, they fold.

Final Rule on Military Electronics Covered by ITAR Implements IPC Advocacy for Enumeration of PCBs

Today, the U.S. Department of State published a final rule that enumerates printed circuit boards (PCBs) in Category XI for Military Electronics of the United States Munitions List (USML).

This is a significant win for IPC which has advocated for the enumeration of PCBs on the USML. The specific listing of PCBs in Category XI clarifies and highlights the importance of International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) on PCBs in ITAR-controlled defense articles. This clarity addresses concerns of the sourcing of printed boards for ITAR items from non-ITAR facilities, and thereby protects national security. The State Department rule states that PCBs “specially designed” (see definition of this term in this rule) for articles in USML Category XI, as well as for articles in all other USML categories, are controlled in USML Category XI and their related designs or digital data are controlled as technical data, per ITAR § 120.10.

It is expected that the enumeration of PCBs will begin to address current confusion in the defense industry about ITAR controls on PCBs by establishing a clearer standard for contractors who design, manufacture or source PCBs for military use, reducing the inappropriate sourcing of ITAR controlled PCBs from non-ITAR compliant facilities.
The rule is effective December 30, 2014 . The State Department’s Initial Implementation Rule FRN can be viewed at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2014-14681.pdf and the State Department’s press release is available at: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/06/228578.htm.

Over the past three years, IPC met with key officials at the Departments of State and Defense, filed formal comments on proposed revisions to Category XI, launched a six-month educational initiative , “Follow the Law, Protect the Board,” published a white paper, “Applicability of U.S. Defense Trade Controls to Printed Boards,” and testified before the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Since the President’s 2009 announcement on export control reform, IPC intensified its advocacy campaign for clearer and more explicit ITAR controls on PCBs as part of a revised USML. IPC’s position is clear: PCB designs should remain under the jurisdiction of ITAR when the end product for which the board is designed is a USML item. PCBs and their designs hold valuable and specific information about the workings of the underlying defense articles. In its January 2013 comments on the proposed rule, IPC stated, “In order to fully protect defense electronics and the defense articles into which they are integrated, PCBs must be controlled in the same manner as the defense electronics for which they are designed.”

IPC Member-company Executives Make an IMPACT on Capitol Hill

IPC President and CEO John Mitchell recaps IPC member-company meetings in Washington, D.C. with Members of Congress and Administrations officials.

 

Electronics Industry Leaders Meet with U.S. Policy Makers on Capitol Hill

A healthy electronics industry is critical to the economy and national security of all nations. That’s why 17 IPC member-company executives gathered in Washington, D.C. last week (June 10-11) to meet with senior policy makers as part of IMPACT 2014: IPC on Capitol Hill. Through a series of meetings, the executives educated lawmakers about the needs of our industry, specifically:

  • Manufacturing and the economy: Support for domestic innovation and manufacturing through the creation and full funding of the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI), and passage of S. 1468/H.R. 2996, the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act (RAMI). The NNMI is a public-private partnership that draws on the resources of the federal government, local governments, universities, research institutes and industry to accelerate R&D of manufacturing technologies with commercial applications. IPC is working with its members and the government to influence the selection of the next round of R&D programs in areas such as flexible hybrid electronics and electronic packaging and reliability.
  • Environmental regulation: A bipartisan effort to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and promote recycling of manufacturing byproducts.
  • National Security: A modernized export control regime with clear and appropriate controls on printed boards designed for defense electronics.

IPC-IMPACT2014-241-for-blogTo mention just a few of our important meetings, we met with:

  • Senator Tom Udall (D-NM), who plays a leadership role on both environmental and manufacturing policy issues.
  • Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, who told us about a planned a committee vote on the RAMI bill in July, as well as his support for extending the R&D tax credit and insisting upon science-based environmental regulations.
  • Jason Miller, Special Assistant to President for Manufacturing Policy, with whom we discussed our shared support for the NNMI and how we can work together to promote its enactment and successful launch in the coming year.

The full agenda and list of meetings is here: http://www.ipc.org/calendar/2014/capitol-hill-day/agenda.htm.

IPC also arranged opportunities for member-company executives to sit down with their hometown congressional representatives to discuss key issues.

Altogether, IMPACT 2014 was another reflection of IPC’s commitment to making our members’ voices heard in the halls of government. We are constantly working to deepen and widen our network of influential friends and allies. Our member-company executives’ personal involvement delivers significant benefits for them and for the entire industry.

Thanks again to all who participated! Please let me know if you have any questions or suggestions for our IPC Government Relations program.

John Mitchell, IPC President and CEO, will deliver a video recap of IMPACT 2014: IPC on Capitol Hill in the July 1 issue of IPC Outlook.

Participate in Tulane University’s Conflict Minerals Post-filing Survey

GoldIn 2011, Tulane University estimated the projected cost of conflict minerals compliance upon companies to be $7.93 billion. Your participation in Tulane University’s post-filing survey will help provide critical information about the cost impacts of conflict minerals compliance.

Access survey at: http://tulane.co1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_0oBvozy4Y6do3bL. Password: JUNE2014.

For up-to-the-minute information on conflict minerals reporting and lessons learned from the first reporting cycle, IPC is offering a one-day conference, “Conflict Minerals: Staying Current in a Changing Landscape” on July 10 in Santa Clara, California. For more information, visit www.ipc.org/cm-conference.

IPC Standards Committee Reports: Data Transfer, Supplier Declaration, Electronic Documentation, EH&S

These standards committee reports from IPC APEX EXPO 2014 have been compiled to help keep you up to date on IPC standards committee activities. This is the fourth and final in the series of reports.

Data Generation and Transfer
The 2-16 Product Data Description (Laminar View) Subcommittee discussed potential new requirements and possible changes to IPC-2581B, Generic Requirements for Printed Board Assembly Products Manufacturing Description Data and Transfer Methodology. The group also discussed ways to develop user guides that show designers how to implement 2581 concepts in their transfer between design and manufacturing.

Supplier Declaration
0199The 2-18 Supplier Declaration Subcommittee discussed the need to revise IPC-1751A, General Requirements for Declaration Process Management. The revision will facilitate the harmonization of all IPC data exchange standards and with the IEC 62474 materials declaration standard. As part of the revision, the subcommittee will restructure the 175x family of standards. The restructuring will allow the laboratory declaration standard (IPC-1753) and conflict minerals standard (IPC-1755) to be part of the IPC-175x family of standards.
The 2-18b Materials Declaration Task Group discussed further enhancements to IPC-1752A Materials Declaration Management. The task group continues to work in concert with the IEC 62474 materials declaration standards group to ensure harmonization of the standards. The task group also discussed the process for requiring solution providers to undergo a yearly review to ensure they follow the latest released standard, schema and IPC lists of substance categories and exemptions.

The 2-18f Packing Materials Declaration Task Group discussed amending IPC-1758, Declaration Requirements for Shipping, Pack and Packing Materials, to includEe a field for declaring recycled content of packaging material. The task group will propose an amendment after IPC-1751A, General Requirements for Declaration Process Management is revised.

The 2-18j Laboratory Declaration Task Group celebrated the approval of IPC-1753, Laboratory Report Declaration Standard. The standard allows for laboratory data to be seamlessly exchanged among supply chain partners.

Electronic Documentation Technology
The 2-40 Electronic Documentation Technology Committee and 2-41 Product Data Description Subcommittee discussed the IPC-261X series. Discussion included modifications to IPC-2611, Generic Requirements for Electronic Product Documentation, IPC-2612, Sectional Requirements for Electronic Diagramming Documentation and IPC-2612-1, Sectional Requirements for Electronic Diagramming Symbol Generation Methodology, as well as IPC-2614, Sectional Requirements for Board Fabrication Documentation. The committee started work on IPC-2614-1 which shows how to use an XML computer format to describe laminate materials.

Environment, Health and Safety
The 4-30 Environmental, Health and Safety Committee heard presentations and discussed several EHS issues impacting the electronics industry. The committee will help write the EHS section of the 2015-2016 IPC Roadmap. A presentation on the EICC Code of Conduct sparked good debate and discussion on what requirements may be seen in the future. IPC staff gave an update on their advocacy efforts on substance restrictions, both nationally and internationally. The presentations are available to IPC Members only at http://www.ipc.org/ehs.

The 4-32 Equipment Safety Subcommittee discussed the continued efforts to develop a joint equipment safety standard with SEMI. Committee members present at the meeting discussed the need to move forward with a draft standard.

The 4-34b Marking, Symbols and Labels for Identification of Assemblies, Components & Devices Task Group reviewed updates needed on J-STD-609A, IPC/JEDEC Marking and Labeling of Components, PCBs and PCBAs to Identify Lead (Pb), Lead-Free (Pb-Free) and Other Attributes, including adding references to the recast RoHS Directive and clarification that markings under this standard do not denote EU RoHS compliance or any other regional substance restriction legislation addressing lead content. The standard was intended to label PCB surface finishes, component terminal finishes and attachment solders not the lead used internal to the component.

Read additional IPC Standards Committee Reports:

 

IPC India PCB Design Contest Winner Showcases PCB Design Skills

Prevailing against other skilled PCB designers, Sakthivel Sivachandaran from Bloomenergy India PVT Ltd., took first place in IPC India’s PCB Design Contest on 19 May in Bangalore, India. As the first place winner, Sivachandaran won a complimentary registration to an IPC CID certification course.

V. Shivakumar, Tessolve Services Pvt. Ltd., was the runner up and also earned complimentary registration to an upcoming IPC CID certification course.

A panel of independent judges, Savita Ganjigatti, Sienna Ecad Technologies; Amba Prasad, Tejas Networks Ltd; and Ankan Mitra, ABB India Limited, evaluated each competitor’s design based on CAD tool expertise, design technology, design standards, overall understanding of PCB design requirements and performance speed.

Sakthivel Sivachandaran from Bloomenergy India PVT Ltd. took first place in IPC India’s PCB Design Contest on May 19 in Bangalore, India.

Sakthivel Sivachandaran from Bloomenergy India PVT Ltd. took first place in IPC India’s PCB Design Contest on May 19 in Bangalore, India.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 190 other followers