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:
"Ramoodit Kimal" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
23 Apr 1996 11:01:28 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed
Parts/Attachments:
Re: (897 bytes) , ATTACH01.TXT (595 bytes)

  I would be very much interested to know whose process your are
  evaluating. I have seen this problem with the conventional electroless
  process, where the electroless deposit will literally crack and flake off
  the the hole wall resulting in pin hole voids and sometimes ring voids.
  As for the inconsistent results you are experiencing with your direct
  metalization, I would suggest you look into the cleaners and to make sure
  you are getting a good wetting in the holewall. Another issue you may
  want to investigate is hole wall preparation prior to thru-hole. Do you
  use plasma or permanganate desmear.  The plasma is the preferred in most
  cases.


  To:       TechNet @ ipc.org at Internet@CCMAILEXCHANGE
  cc:        (bcc: Ramoodit Kimal/CDev/Ceridian)
  From:     TechNet @ ipc.org at Internet@CCMAILEXCHANGE
  Date:     04/22/96 04:40:00 PM
  Subject:   Direct metalization of Flex Rigid PWBs



We are working on developing direct metalization process for flex-rigid pwbs using palladium based process. Currently we are very early in the development stage and are experiencing inconsistent results. Some of the test results were very good others failed. The failures exhibited rough hole walls and voids. The roughness appears to be caused by something flaking off of the hole wall and plating. The appearance is similar to blistered or peeling electroless. Does anyone run flex-rigid through a direct metalization process? If so, has anyone experienced similar problems and what is the cure?

ATOM RSS1 RSS2