TECHNET Archives

February 2000

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:
Shean Dalton <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Fri, 18 Feb 2000 10:46:01 -0600
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (4 kB) , pic05652.pcx (4 kB)

Please accept my apologies if you perceived that I crossed the line between
a discussion of technical merit and a product promotion as a result of the
last paragraph's call to action.  (The last paragraph has been removed from
the reply posting)  I assure all of you that in future contributing
postings, I will observe the forum's acceptable tolerance for such
information as Jack recommends.

Thank you all for your concerned feedback,

Shean Dalton
Speedline ACCEL




 (Embedded
 image moved   "Jack Crawford" <[log in to unmask]>
 to file:      02/18/2000 09:24 AM
 pic05652.pcx)




To:   [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
      [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Shean Dalton/ElectrovertUS/Cookson)
Subject:  Re: [TN] Admin Comment: PWB CLEANING SOLVENTS




Shean is new to the forum and lets give him the benefit of the doubt first
time around here; as I read his reply their is a lot of good general info
as well as the pointer to their specific piece of equipment.

Shean, you'll typically get better response from the TechNetters by
stopping just before your last paragraph and concluding: "Hope this info
helps.  To avoid the online commercial, please contact me offnet at
........ for more info on this or some equipment we offer."  Yeah, it's
almost the same thing, but keeps things looking a bit cleaner and doesn't
raise emotional issues.

Thanks to all for using TechNet.  I'm still convinced that the positives
far outweight the occasional negatives.  jack

>>> Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]> 02/18/00 02:50AM >>>
Mike,

I agree.

I am in the process of evaluating a cleaning process for a client. I'll
be required to suggest alternative cleaning technologies to what he is
currently using. I had already mentally reserved what Shean is
publicising as one possibility, but his unashamed post here is causing
me to have second thoughts on the grounds that a company which ignores
the netiquette of a forum may also ignore the ethics of commerce.

Brian

Michael Fenner wrote:
>
> Am I alone in feeling a little miffed by the response below? At the risk
of being offensive to
> Shean, however sincerely he might believe in what he says, I don't think
this is the place for
> outright product placements masquerading as answers.
>
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Shean Dalton <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 6:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [TN] PWB CLEANING SOLVENTS
> >
> > Hello Fellow Technetters,
> >
> > What an interesting forum!!! An alternative to in-line spray cleaners
and
> > spray under immersion wash systems is centrifugal cleaning.   Spinning
the
> > PCB about it's center while immersed in a wash solution creates an
angular
> > acceleration that acts along the plane of the PCB.  While the PCB
> > alternates between clockwise and counter clockwise spinning motions,
the
> > angular acceleration converts the PCB's rotational energy into
centrifugal
> > cleaning energy.  The centrifugal energy's magnitude AND direction are
> > parallel to the plane of the PCB, ideal for cleaning underneath low
> > profile, high density components.  Centrifugal cleaning removes 100% of
all
> > entrapped flux residues beneath components when measured ionically
(0.00
> > microg/in2) or visually at 30X.
> >
> > As was posted earlier, effective water removal can prevent downstream
> > production problems; but, the evaluation of a cleaning equipment's
ability
> > to remove water is often over looked.  Spin drying the PCB in the
presence
> > of heated, dry air  causes 100% moisture removal and spot-free results
in
> > SECONDS.
> >
> > The effectiveness of Centrifugal cleaning reduces the number of
required
> > cleaning steps by eliminating repetitive cleaning cycles and additional
> > drying steps.  The reduction of cleaning steps provide for short
cleaning
> > cycle times (3-7 minutes), yielding a high through-put.
> >
> > Odors are eliminated by containing the cleaning process inside a sealed
> > process chamber.  If appropriate materials are used in the construction
of
> > the centrifugal cleaning system, solvent versatility is assured.  And
with
> > an on board, closed loop waste water treatment system, No Drain is
required
> > and a single drum of solvent may last a year or more.
<snip>
> > Shean Dalton
> > Speedline ACCEL





ATOM RSS1 RSS2