TECHNET Archives

November 2012

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
Sender:
X-To:
Date:
Fri, 9 Nov 2012 09:58:45 -0600
Reply-To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Julie Silk <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
From:
Julie Silk <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2 lines)
Are the open joints caused by the excessive flux?  Or are both the excessive flux and the open joints caused by rework?  I would bet on the latter.  I can't visualize a scenario where the flux would cause good joints to open.  Ugly, sure, but very common with reworked BGAs.  Reworking BGAs does not always successfully make good joints on all balls, and neither does the practice of injecting flux and reheating to hope that the bad joints melt together.  It's possible and even likely that they make a contact joint vs metallurgical that fails later.  The flux is a symptom, not a cause.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2