1. maximum value
2. Yes, per J-STD-001DS, soon to change to -ES. We also have more stringent cleanliness requirements to meet per Navy Weapon Specs. However, these do not apply to our particular contracts where the customers require RMA. For those, we have our own internal requirements which are more stringent yet, thus the two-bath methods. (These are underseas applications, which are much more demanding).
-----Original Message-----
From: PIRES Fabrice [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 9:21 AM
To: TechNet E-Mail Forum; Stadem, Richard D.
Subject: RE: [TN] RMA flux and IPA
With IC measures do you apply maximum value requirements for each contaminants or do you simply use it to follow process variations.
In the second case I assume ROSE testing must be enough to indicate process variations except if proportions of contaminants change but with a constant level of the global contamination. This last case seems to be of low probability.
Fabrice
-----Message d'origine-----
De : TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] De la part de Stadem, Richard D.
Envoyé : mercredi 16 février 2011 17:36
À : [log in to unmask]
Objet : Re: [TN] RMA flux and IPA
No-clean flux residues are not allowed on most military high-rel contracts, as they can be just as bad as RMA or even OA flux residues. I do agree that RMA flux residues should be cleaned, and that is also a requirement.
For RMA, we clean using a solvent, followed by machine wash with a good saponifier. This is a good method of ensuring all flux residues and other contaminants are removed. We perform ROSE testing daily, and we also perform IC testing periodically to ensure the CCAs are clean. Cleaning with just the solvent method, or just the saponified DI wash, but not both, has never been able to consistently pass. The solvent should be something other than IPA, which is not a good cleaning solvent.
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian Ellis
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 10:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] RMA flux and IPA
For me, the short answer is don't! I'm sure the subject has been touched
upon many times already. As Mike says, all you are doing is diluting the
active components in the alcohol and letting them dry on again exactly
in the places where you want them least.
However, I disagree with Mike on one point and that is that RMA flux did
have to be cleaned off with specific solvents according to the 28 809
standards for military purposes. It was not permitted to use it as a no
clean flux. That having been said, many people did use it as a no clean
flux for non-military applications, with varying degrees of success.
Despite what many people think, these fluxes did contain halide
activators, although the quantity was limited.
In my opinion, if you need the utmost in reliability, you should do a
proper clean with RMA fluxes or use a suitably qualified no clean flux,
which will give you the reliability that you desire.
Brian
On 16/02/2011 17:17, Phillip Bavaro wrote:
> What happens when the RMA liquid flux used to hand solder thru hole components
> is cleaned using an IPA bath and a brush? Most comnponents come out bright and
> shiny but happens underneath the bodies? Ionic testing doesn't pick up
> anything. Thanks in advance.
>
> Phil
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0
> To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
> To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
> To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
> Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
> Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/ContentPage.aspx?Pageid=E-mail-Forums for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/ContentPage.aspx?Pageid=E-mail-Forums for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
|