Knowledge Base

ESD Handling: Unpacking, Transfers and Repacking

Review protective handling across unpacking, temporary storage, process transfers and repacking, with an original handoff matrix and project-specific limits.

Huitai PCB/14 min read

Short answer

For identified sensitive components and unpackaged assembled boards requiring project assessment, review protection at every change of location or packaging: unpacking, temporary storage, transfer between operations and repacking. Ask what is being protected, which instructions apply, what arrangement is proposed, what evidence supports it and who will assess unresolved information. This is an engineering recommendation for evaluating a handling proposal; it does not qualify the packaging or approve production.

Electrostatic discharge (ESD) is the transfer of electrostatic charge between bodies at different electrical potentials, through contact or an electrostatic field. NXP explains this meaning in AN10365, Rev. 8, 1 October 2021, page 26, section 6.1. The handling question here concerns protection during manufacturing movements. Product-port immunity, certification testing and moisture-sensitive reflow release are outside the scope.

Before unpacking: identify the receiving arrangement

NXP recommends keeping its electronic components in their original packing during storage. When a bulk container is partially unpacked, its guidance calls for a protected workstation; components stored temporarily should be repacked in conductive or anti-static packing or carriers. These statements appear together in AN10365, page 26, section 6.1.2.

Analog Devices provides a complementary process view. Its MT-092 tutorial, Rev.0, marked 01/09, page 5, Figure 6 advises customers to minimize handling, inspect and open packages at a grounded workstation, and retain original protective packaging for inventory and delivery to the work area.

An actionable handoff question is therefore: which items will be opened, under which current instructions, at which workstation, and for which recipient? As an editorial engineering recommendation, ask the sender to provide item identity and instructions and ask the recipient to examine the proposed receiving arrangement. Where workstation evidence is missing, identify who will supply it. Naming a location or completing a checklist does not establish that the workstation is qualified.

Temporary storage: describe the arrangement after opening

For storage between operations, request the proposed packing or carrier, the storage location, applicable item instructions and supporting evidence. Make that information available to the next recipient. This recommendation connects NXP's temporary-storage guidance with the storage-area and container considerations in STMicroelectronics TN1225, Rev 3, September 2026, page 13, section 4.1.1.

ST's document concerns through-hole device (THD) packages, rather than all assembled boards. Its list is useful for framing questions about storage and movement; it does not establish implementation at a particular site. No universal carrier material, storage duration, humidity, resistance limit or inspection frequency follows from combining these documents.

The useful decision is whether the responsible parties have an item-specific basis for the proposed arrangement. Actual storage conditions and current instructions remain information to obtain, rather than results established by this article.

Process transfer: examine the complete route

A transfer review can connect the sending area, transport container or carrier, relevant trolley and handling controls, and receiving area. Ask who supplies the route information and who examines its applicability on receipt. This is an editorial planning method grounded in Analog Devices' delivery-to-manufacturing guidance and ST's package-handling lists.

Within its through-hole package scope, TN1225, page 13, sections 4.1.1–4.1.3 includes working and storage areas, trolleys with dissipative surfaces and wheels, shipping and storage containers, personnel equipment, and machine and tool considerations. These dimensions help organize a route review; they do not mandate identical equipment for every transfer.

For an unpackaged assembled board, request an assessment of the installed devices and actual exposure environment. Component-packaging examples alone cannot establish applicability to the whole board. Neither the route map nor the supplier lists demonstrate any particular factory's equipment, staff practices or completed verification.

Repacking: request configuration evidence

Before repacking for the next stage, ask for the complete proposed packaging configuration, its item-specific applicability basis and available verification evidence. Include current product documents, customer requirements and the next handling environment in that request.

Texas Instruments SZZA027A, April 2002, pages 6–10 describes particular magazine, tray and tape-and-reel configurations and associated testing. Page 10 states that its internal specifications require verification of tape-and-reel material ESD properties. Page 14 emphasizes protective effectiveness. These report-specific descriptions support asking how a proposed configuration is evaluated; they do not qualify another arrangement or establish current supplier practice.

ST separately directs readers to product and package specifications and its sales department for available packaging information in TN1225, page 13, section 4.2. Availability is one input, not proof of suitability for the intended route. Analog Devices' Figure 6 includes subassembly packaging, while its separate final shipping entry qualifies the instruction with “if required.” Preserve that distinction when applying the guidance.

Do not treat conductive, dissipative, anti-static and shielding descriptions as interchangeable evidence. The engineering recommendation is to request evidence relevant to the actual configuration and items, without importing historical supplier numerical results as acceptance limits.

Original review matrix

Use the following matrix to organize questions shared by the sending and receiving parties. Its stable row references allow a discussion to identify a specific review item. The rows are recommendations for assessment, not completed handling records.

Download the original review matrix.

Original citation matrix

Review electrostatic discharge (ESD) protection across unpacking, temporary storage, process transfer and repacking. This original editorial synthesis by Huitai PCB, version 1.0, helps manufacturing handoff personnel identify what information each recipient needs. Every proposed action and responsibility below is an engineering recommendation for project assessment. The matrix establishes neither packaging qualification nor production approval.

The supplier guidance concerns semiconductor components, sensitive devices and subassemblies within the scopes stated below. For an unpackaged assembled board, request an assessment of its installed devices and actual exposure environment before applying component-packaging examples.

Stable row reference	Review item	Protected item and source basis	Information to request — engineering recommendation	Responsibility interface — engineering recommendation	Assessment question and unresolved inputs
transition-matrix:unpacking	Before unpacking	Identified sensitive components or an assembled board requiring project assessment. NXP describes protected partial bulk unpacking; Analog Devices advises grounded-workstation opening and minimized handling. See sources N and A.	Identify the items, current handling instructions, intended workstation and receiving person. Record questions where information is missing.	Sender provides item identity and instructions; recipient examines the proposed receiving arrangement. Agree who supplies missing workstation evidence.	Does the information address the actual items and intended workstation? Sensitivity, current documents and actual controls remain project inputs; this row does not qualify the workstation.
transition-matrix:temporary-storage	Storage after opening	Opened components or an assessed assembled board. NXP describes original-package storage and repacking temporarily stored components; Analog Devices covers original protective packaging in inventory. ST lists storage areas and containers within its through-hole package guidance. See sources N, A and S.	Describe the proposed packing or carrier, storage location, applicable item instructions and supporting evidence; make these available to the next recipient.	Storage party describes the arrangement and its applicability basis; next recipient examines that information. Agree responsibility for outstanding storage questions.	Is there an item-specific basis for the proposed storage arrangement? Actual conditions and applicable instructions remain inputs. No universal material, duration, humidity, resistance limit or inspection frequency is specified.
transition-matrix:repacking	Packaging for the next stage	Components or an assessed assembled board entering another handling environment. NXP addresses temporary-storage repacking; Analog Devices addresses subassembly packaging and qualifies final shipping packaging with “if required.” ST directs readers to product/package information. Texas Instruments describes particular configurations and associated evaluation. See sources N, A, S and T.	Request the complete proposed configuration, current item documents, customer requirements, next environment, applicability basis and available verification evidence.	Packing party supplies configuration information and evidence; receiving party examines their relevance to the next stage. Designated project parties assess gaps.	Does the evidence concern this complete configuration and these items? A material description or packaging availability alone does not establish suitability. No supplier example or historical test result qualifies this arrangement.
transition-matrix:process-transfer	Movement between operations	Items moving from a sending area to a receiving area. Analog Devices describes delivery to manufacturing in original protective packaging; ST lists storage/work areas, trolleys, containers, personnel equipment and machine/tool considerations within its through-hole package scope. See sources A and S.	Map the sending area, transport container or carrier, relevant trolley and handling controls, and receiving area. Request evidence appropriate to the actual exposure path.	Agree who provides route and control information and who examines it on receipt. Identify the party responsible for unresolved applicability questions.	Does the information cover the actual route and items? This is a planning method; it neither requires identical equipment for every transfer nor confirms any factory's implementation.
transition-matrix:missing-information	Incomplete assessment inputs	Any item whose proposed handling arrangement lacks relevant information. ST directs readers to product and package specifications and its sales department for available packaging information. See source S.	Identify the missing document, condition or evidence, the assessment question it affects and the designated party from whom to request it.	Project parties agree who supplies and assesses the missing information before relying on the proposed arrangement.	Is there enough applicable evidence for the responsible parties to assess the proposal? Responsibility and resolution remain to be agreed. Completing a field does not establish compliant handling or decide release, rework or scrap.

transition-matrix:unpacking

Review item: Before unpacking
Protected item and source basis: Identified sensitive components or an assembled board requiring project assessment. NXP describes protected partial bulk unpacking; Analog Devices advises grounded-workstation opening and minimized handling. See sources N and A.
Information to request — engineering recommendation: Identify the items, current handling instructions, intended workstation and receiving person. Record questions where information is missing.
Responsibility interface — engineering recommendation: Sender provides item identity and instructions; recipient examines the proposed receiving arrangement. Agree who supplies missing workstation evidence.
Assessment question and unresolved inputs: Does the information address the actual items and intended workstation? Sensitivity, current documents and actual controls remain project inputs; this row does not qualify the workstation.

transition-matrix:temporary-storage

Review item: Storage after opening
Protected item and source basis: Opened components or an assessed assembled board. NXP describes original-package storage and repacking temporarily stored components; Analog Devices covers original protective packaging in inventory. ST lists storage areas and containers within its through-hole package guidance. See sources N, A and S.
Information to request — engineering recommendation: Describe the proposed packing or carrier, storage location, applicable item instructions and supporting evidence; make these available to the next recipient.
Responsibility interface — engineering recommendation: Storage party describes the arrangement and its applicability basis; next recipient examines that information. Agree responsibility for outstanding storage questions.
Assessment question and unresolved inputs: Is there an item-specific basis for the proposed storage arrangement? Actual conditions and applicable instructions remain inputs. No universal material, duration, humidity, resistance limit or inspection frequency is specified.

transition-matrix:repacking

Review item: Packaging for the next stage
Protected item and source basis: Components or an assessed assembled board entering another handling environment. NXP addresses temporary-storage repacking; Analog Devices addresses subassembly packaging and qualifies final shipping packaging with “if required.” ST directs readers to product/package information. Texas Instruments describes particular configurations and associated evaluation. See sources N, A, S and T.
Information to request — engineering recommendation: Request the complete proposed configuration, current item documents, customer requirements, next environment, applicability basis and available verification evidence.
Responsibility interface — engineering recommendation: Packing party supplies configuration information and evidence; receiving party examines their relevance to the next stage. Designated project parties assess gaps.
Assessment question and unresolved inputs: Does the evidence concern this complete configuration and these items? A material description or packaging availability alone does not establish suitability. No supplier example or historical test result qualifies this arrangement.

transition-matrix:process-transfer

Review item: Movement between operations
Protected item and source basis: Items moving from a sending area to a receiving area. Analog Devices describes delivery to manufacturing in original protective packaging; ST lists storage/work areas, trolleys, containers, personnel equipment and machine/tool considerations within its through-hole package scope. See sources A and S.
Information to request — engineering recommendation: Map the sending area, transport container or carrier, relevant trolley and handling controls, and receiving area. Request evidence appropriate to the actual exposure path.
Responsibility interface — engineering recommendation: Agree who provides route and control information and who examines it on receipt. Identify the party responsible for unresolved applicability questions.
Assessment question and unresolved inputs: Does the information cover the actual route and items? This is a planning method; it neither requires identical equipment for every transfer nor confirms any factory's implementation.

transition-matrix:missing-information

Review item: Incomplete assessment inputs
Protected item and source basis: Any item whose proposed handling arrangement lacks relevant information. ST directs readers to product and package specifications and its sales department for available packaging information. See source S.
Information to request — engineering recommendation: Identify the missing document, condition or evidence, the assessment question it affects and the designated party from whom to request it.
Responsibility interface — engineering recommendation: Project parties agree who supplies and assesses the missing information before relying on the proposed arrangement.
Assessment question and unresolved inputs: Is there enough applicable evidence for the responsible parties to assess the proposal? Responsibility and resolution remain to be agreed. Completing a field does not establish compliant handling or decide release, rework or scrap.

Source basis and applicable limits:

Source N — NXP, AN10365: Surface mount reflow soldering, Rev. 8, 1 October 2021, page 26, section 6.1.2, Receipt and storage of components. NXP recommends retaining original packing during storage, protected-workstation partial bulk unpacking, and conductive or anti-static packing or carriers for temporarily stored components. These are component-handling statements, not universal assembled-board packaging rules. Page 3 explains that guidance has been incorporated into package-family application notes and this document remains for older references.
Source A — Analog Devices, MT-092: Electrostatic Discharge, Rev.0, marked 01/09, copyright 2009, page 5, Figure 6, customer incoming-inspection, inventory and manufacturing entries. Its sensitive-device guidance covers grounded-workstation inspection/opening, minimized handling, original protective packaging for storage and delivery, and static dissipative packaging for subassemblies. The separate final shipping entry says “if required.” This historical tutorial establishes neither identical sensitivity for every assembled board nor sufficient packaging performance for a particular assembly. Port-immunity and device-test sections are outside this matrix.
Source S — STMicroelectronics, TN1225: Mounting instructions for THD (through-hole device) packages, Rev 3, September 2026, page 13, sections 4.1.1–4.1.3 and 4.2. Here THD means through-hole device; the guidance concerns that package category. Its protection lists provide review dimensions, not evidence of site implementation or mandatory equipment for every assembled board. Section 4.2 directs readers to product/package specifications and the supplier's sales department for packaging availability; availability does not establish qualification for a handling path. No supplier contact or project packaging assessment is represented here.
Source T — Texas Instruments, Electrostatic Discharge Protective Semiconductor Packing Materials and Configurations, SZZA027A, April 2002, pages 6–8, Typical ESD-Protective Packing-Material Configurations; page 9, Static Voltage Test on Loaded Tape-and-Reel Material; page 10, Test Requirements for Material Properties Confirmation; and page 14, Conclusions. This report describes specified configurations, materials, tests and an internal material-verification requirement. Its emphasis on configuration-specific protective effectiveness informs the request for evidence. It establishes neither current supplier practice nor arbitrary packaging suitability; its numerical limits and test results are not adopted as project acceptance criteria.

Method and decision boundary: the original contribution is the connection between a handling node, the evidence a recipient needs, responsibility questions and unresolved inputs. Supplier guidance supplies the bounded handling context; the matrix structure, information requests and responsibility interfaces are editorial recommendations. No supplier table, graphic or document prose has been reproduced as the matrix, and no measurements, factory trials or executed Huitai procedures are claimed.

Before applying the matrix, designated project parties need item identities, current product/package documents, sensitivity and packaging requirements, customer instructions, actual route and receiving conditions, control and verification evidence, relevant abnormal-handling history and agreed responsibilities. These remain assessment prerequisites. The captured documents are not established as the latest applicable instructions for any particular item.

Conductive, dissipative, anti-static and shielding descriptions are not treated as interchangeable evidence. Different supplier materials, methods and historical numerical descriptions are not combined into a common threshold. The matrix sets no mandatory test method, acceptance limit, signing system or record-retention period and asserts no standard clause or standards compliance. Such additions require applicable original normative evidence and project applicability assessment. Common references to standards do not constitute independently verified normative support or separate experiments.

The matrix does not address product-port immunity, certification testing, moisture-sensitive reflow release, baking or exposure-time resets. It supplies no current-batch disposition and makes no claim about Huitai equipment, staff practices, packaging qualification, inspection coverage or completed verification.

Huitai PCB; original article and chart copyright: 深圳市会泰精密科技有限公司.

© 2026 深圳市会泰精密科技有限公司. Published under the Huitai PCB brand. Attributed quotation and links are welcome; full article reproduction or copying a complete chart requires permission. Uses permitted by applicable law remain unaffected.

Conditions and limits for a project decision

The matrix's information requests and responsibility interfaces are an original editorial organization method. Their purpose is to let the recipient examine the proposed handling basis and identify gaps. The cited suppliers do not prescribe this shared form, named responsibility assignment, signing system or record-retention period. An agreed record is not evidence that the proposed protection has been implemented or qualified.

For project use, assemble the item identities, sensitivity information, current product and package documents, customer instructions, route, receiving conditions, configuration evidence and relevant abnormal-handling history. Ask the designated parties to assess missing information before relying on the proposal. This article neither confirms that those inputs are complete nor decides the disposition of a current batch.

The supplier documents have different scopes and dates. NXP explicitly retains AN10365 for older references after incorporating guidance into package-family application notes. The Texas Instruments report and Analog Devices tutorial are historical sources. ST's newer revision remains specific to through-hole device packages. Their common standards references do not establish independently verified standard clauses or separate experimental replication. No numerical acceptance criteria or standards-compliance conclusion is offered here.

FAQ

Should components stay in their original packaging until use?

NXP AN10365, Rev. 8, page 26, section 6.1.2 recommends original packing during storage for its components. Analog Devices MT-092, page 5, Figure 6 also describes original protective packaging for inventory and delivery to manufacturing. Apply current item and project instructions; these statements do not qualify packaging for every assembled board.

Is a packaging material description enough to approve repacking?

No. As an engineering recommendation, request the complete proposed configuration, its item-specific applicability basis and available verification evidence. Texas Instruments SZZA027A, April 2002, pages 6–10 describes particular configurations and evaluation; ST TN1225, Rev 3, page 13, section 4.2 directs readers to product/package information. Neither establishes qualification for an arbitrary handling arrangement.

Who should resolve missing transfer information?

As an editorial engineering recommendation, the sending and receiving parties should agree who supplies each missing document or condition and who assesses its relevance before relying on the proposed arrangement. The matrix does not impose a supplier-mandated signing system or decide release, rework or scrap.

Does completing the matrix approve production?

No. The matrix organizes project assessment questions. It does not demonstrate implemented controls, packaging qualification, completed verification or production approval.

Sources

The matrix's Source N, A, S and T entries above provide linked document titles, dates, precise locations and applicable limits. The relevant evidence is NXP's component receipt/storage guidance, Analog Devices' customer handling sequence, ST's through-hole package handling considerations, and Texas Instruments' configuration-specific packaging evaluation. Consult the current applicable product documents before applying any historical example to a project.

Prepare a manufacturing handoff discussion

Huitai PCB's one-stop manufacturing perspective is to connect the information needed across manufacturing handoffs. For a discussion, prepare the relevant item and packaging documents, intended route, receiving conditions and unresolved questions, then contact Huitai PCB. The proposed arrangement still requires project-specific assessment.