TECHNET Archives

1996

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:
[log in to unmask] (Pat McGuine)
Date:
Mon, 15 Jan 1996 18:09:40 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
Paresh:

We purchased the AT&T fluxer about two years ago.  At the time, it was the
most expensive model, I don't know if it still is.  It has performed very
reliably.  We perform scheduled maintenance on it once a month and have not
experienced any unplanned down time.

One of the benefits of the AT&T is that it uses a standard Allen Bradley
programmable controller.  We had to remove the board sensor form our wave
solder machine to make room for the fluxer.  The sensor controlled the
timing for turning on and off the pre heaters and the air knife on the ws
machine.  Using the Allen Bradley, we were able to make use of an unused I/O
to mimic the removed sensor.  AT&T was very helpful in explaining how to
accomplish it.

They have always returned all of my calls within an hour or so.  They have
even told us where to buy parts for rebuilding the spray gun instead of
purchasing the parts through them, which would be more expensive.

Finally, recently they improved the design of the spray nozzle.  They
contacted me and told me how to go about replacing my nozzle with the
improved version free of charge.  I would recommend the AT&T.

At 08:22 1/15/96 CST, Paresh Patel wrote:
>We are currently using Foam fluxer and recently started thinking about
>switching to spray fluxer.
>
>Could someone tell me which spray fluxer is good in his/her opinion and why?
>
>
>


-Pat-

-------------
Patrick McGuine
Nicolet Instrument
[log in to unmask]
(608) 276-6334



ATOM RSS1 RSS2