DESIGNERCOUNCIL Archives

1996

DesignerCouncil@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Eric L. Johnson" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 02 Oct 1996 12:58:37 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
Please foward this message to it's appropriate location.

Our company has been manufacturing a double-sided SMD pcb using an IR
solder process.  We have been using the same no clean solderpaste for
the last few years.  Recently we changed pcb vendors for cost reasons,
and the new boards seem to have a higher degree of solder flux residue
migration.  

The problem we have is with the hardened flux on the testpoints and the
difficulty in penetrating it consistantly.  The only difference in the
pcb's from the new source is in the soldermask.  The new boards have a
Hysol screened Wet mask that has a rough texture to it.  The previos
boards had a LPI soldermask that was glossy and smooth in texture.

My question is, why would the difference in soldermask applications
cause a higher rate of solder flux residue migration?  Any insight at
all would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you.

Eric L. Johnson
Sr. PC Designer
Nartron Corp.
[log in to unmask]

****************************************************************************
* The mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05      *
**************************************************************************** 
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to:            *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text. *
****************************************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2