TECHNET Archives

June 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:
"Stephen R. Gregory" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:33:47 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
Hi ya'll!!

I gotta generic question about flux types. We do quite a few boards here that
still call out that the assembly is to be built to MIL-STD-2000 specs, and as
has always been here, RMA flux is always used. My question is, what is the
REAL reason to use an RMA?

I've been under the impression that because a RMA is not as active as an OA,
any residues that might be left behind from the RMA wouldn't be as harmfull
as OA residues would be. But if you always ensure that you clean your boards
thoroughly, what difference does it make whether you use an RMA or an OA?

-Steve Gregory-

##############################################################
TechNet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
##############################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the body:
To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE TECHNET <your full name>
To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF TECHNET
##############################################################
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information.
If you need assistance - contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700 ext.5315
##############################################################

ATOM RSS1 RSS2