LEADFREE Archives

April 2000

Leadfree@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:
Alan Rae <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Leadfree Electronics Assembly E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Fri, 28 Apr 2000 07:18:14 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (63 lines)
We are starting a program at Cookson Performance Solutions to assess the
cross-compatibility of lead-free products  and processes - laminates,
innerlayers, surface finishes, solders, fluxes in reflow and wave.  The issue
is, we have asked people for appropriate test vehicles...and we're up to 20 and
counting.   Some are extremely complex and it is not unusual to see a matrix
where for for one program alone the boards and components cost is in the tens of
thousands of dollars. There is no standard basic test vehicle which means that
most published results are not comparable.

This is what we propose as a first step.

We think we need a minimum of two very basic test vehicles to assess
performance:
   One for reflow with one side regular pitch and one side fine pitch (these may
   not in fact be compatible as ultra-fine pitch might need microvia technology,
   pushing us to three boards).
   The second with mixed technology that can handle wave or pin in paste reflow
   - rather like the dummy modem board we produced at Productronica.

We think we need to standardize, apart from the basics (tooling holes,
fiducials, part number and revision level, labelling area)
   0.062" thickness
   Daisy chain components
   Edge connector for electrical testing
   SIR test pattern

The boards would be subject to the usual destructive and non-destructive testing
of solder joints after environmental exposure.

Based on your comments and an analysis from our statistician on how many
components would be needed for meaningful results we plan to design the boards
and make the designs freely available to whoever wants them.  They could be
adapted to be industry standards (or be superseded by industry standards...but
we have to start somewhere?)

My question to the forum:
   Does this make sense to you?
   What have we missed in our analysis?
   Does anyone already have economic and effective test board designs already
   that they'd be prepared to share with the industry?  If so, can you describe
   the board design and what it costs in board and components?

Thanks in advance for your input!

Alan Rae
Director of Technology
Cookson Electronics
Foxborough MA
508-541-5843

################################################################
Leadfree E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
################################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask]
with following text in the body:
To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE Leadfree <your full name>
To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF Leadfree
###############################################################
Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
(http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
For technical support contact Keach Sasamori [log in to unmask] or 847-790-5315.
################################################################

ATOM RSS1 RSS2