TECHNET Archives

1995

TechNet@IPC.ORG

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

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

Print Reply
Received:
by ipchq.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0sii4g-0000HTC; Wed, 16 Aug 95 08:00 CDT
Old-Return-Path:
<miso!aol.com!LouisHart>
Date:
Wed, 16 Aug 1995 07:36:41 -0400
Precedence:
list
X-Loop:
Resent-Sender:
X-Status:
Status:
O
X-Mailing-List:
<[log in to unmask]> archive/latest/872
TO:
Return-Path:
Resent-Message-ID:
<"4OylG2.0.DyB.FlUCm"@ipc>
Subject:
From:
Resent-From:
From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 14:
34:03 1996
Message-Id:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (16 lines)
Could someone provide advice or comments about treatments to promote solder
mask adhesion?  I'm thinking of treatments to copper on outer layers.  We
have been having some problems with LPI.  Dry film has been OK.  

Our plant has been using something called an "OXIDE LITE" (a homemade
process) on outer layer copper.  It involves putting the panels through a few
steps of the inner layer oxide bath, that's all I know for the moment.  The
process is timeconsuming and thus expensive, and may have a bad effect on the
oxide baths.  Our chemist wants to know if there is anything better that this
"LITE" process for treating the copper to help solder resist adhesion.
 Thanks for any comments.

Lou Hart



ATOM RSS1 RSS2