TECHNET Archives

December 2019

TechNet@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:
David Hillman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, David Hillman <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 18 Dec 2019 11:08:11 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
Hi Nigel - the testing we conducted on the gold wirebonding of ENIG
finishes was not successful. My recommendation would be to go to an ENEPIG
finish if you wanted to use gold wire instead of aluminum. We have had very
good success with the ENEPIG finish (IPC-4556) for wirebonding.

Dave Hillman
Collins Aerospace
[log in to unmask]

On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 11:03 AM Nigel Burtt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Semi-hypothetical question.
>
> Aluminium wire wedge bonding to PCB ENIG pads that meet IPC-A-600
> requirements is normal and OK, but if I also wanted to bond the same Al
> wires to PCB "soft gold" bondable pads (2um electrolytic gold over 2.5um
> Ni) on another similar PCB with suitable adjustment of the wedge bonder
> process parameters as necessary that gave me acceptable and comparable pull
> test strength results, what would be the likely long-term reliability of
> such an interface?
>
> Is this a simple No-No?
>
> Many thanks
>
> Nigel
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2