Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a223726b690926b9

Jump to content

Talk:In-circuit testing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Miffo7uk in topic Merge proposal

Merge proposal

[edit]

I concur that Fixtureless_in-circuit_test and flying_probe should be meged into in-circuit test. Pro crast in a tor (talk) 19:32, 13 March 2010 (UTC)Reply


I believe there are enough differences to justify separate sections with links. Flying Probe uses some incircuit techniques but has limitations. The big difference is the mechanical issues of accessing loaded PCB’s. Incircuit test (ICT) should included discussion about MDA’s and combinational test.


As a practitioner of in-circuit test in a major electronics manufacturer and now as an independent consultant since 1979, flying probe test and "fixture-less" belong in separate categories. It is appropriate that they be linked together. Also, AOI Automated Optical Inspection and Automated Tomographic Xray Inspection should be linked.TDMIntl (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)Reply


The method of analog electrical testing is similar but the interfacing method is very different. Incircuit also uses parallel digital testing and other test techniques that can not be performed on a flying probe tester. I therefore agree that they should reference each other but have separate sections.Miffo7uk (talk) 15:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply