Chris, Bill, et al. -
FYI, regarding Chris' comment about the multitude of characteristics, you
may want to look into using the Multiple Analysis of Variance technique.
It's the next step beyond DOE and Taguchi. Social scientists have some
tools, like this, that I think could be useful in physical science and
engineering. Lou Hart
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Gifford [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 1:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN]
Bill,
I'm sure you know there are always trade-offs when it comes to solder paste
characteristics. In circuit testability, ultra-fine pitch printing, long
stencil life, low residue, long tack time, ability to hold components well
(tack strength), closed head printability, cleanability, ease of rework,
vendor service, lead time, price, etc., etc., etc. I know this doesn't
answer your question - just something to think about.
Regards,
Chris Gifford
Indium Corporation of America
Ph: (315) 853-4900 Ext. 7572
Fx: (315) 853-1000
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Howard Watson
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 11:58 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN]
Bill,
Like yourself, I too am doing a solder paste evaluation, and am nearing
completion. To answer your question on age or freshness of paste, it may
not be an issue, but you may want to get all fresh samples and evaluate
them
fairly, and if you desire, let them sit for a month or so to evaluate their
performance with age. That's what I did, but did not notice any
performance
difference with age. I have heard that when paste sits in its container at
room temperature, the solder tends to settle towards the bottom, but I have
not seen evidence of this. I have had paste sit at my desk for 3 months
and
it performed great, though your environment will likely be different than
mine.
As far as whether or not you should make a science project out of this,
I
would say "yes", by all means. If you don't, you probably won't choose a
"bad" solder paste, but you might not choose the "best" for your needs. By
the way, I used a fractional factorial DOE checking for response variables
such as wetting, bridging, solder balls and other items that you mentioned.
I found that all the pastes I tried were very good, but there was one (EFD
576D) that was exceptional with regards to eliminating solder balls, or
more
correctly, solder "beads", which for us is a sporadic and troublesome
problem. Good luck, and I hope to hear more of your evaluation.
Howard Watson
Manufacturing Engineer
AMETEK/Dixson
"Mengers, William D." <[log in to unmask]>
Sent by: TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
06/21/01 06:55 AM
Please respond to "TechNet E-Mail Forum."; Please respond to
"Mengers, William D."
To: [log in to unmask]
cc:
Subject: [TN]
Fellow Techies,
We are getting ready to do a somewhat "extensive" solder paste evaluation
for an SMT operation. What to do seems fairly straight forward using
"standard" tests (wetting, solder ball, slump, etc.), but a concern I
have
is age and relative age of the different pastes we are testing. In
practice, we generally use paste within three months of the date
manufacture, so the paste we use is anywhere from one to three months
old.
Manufacturers claim good performance for the paste until expiration of
shelf
life, but I suspect there could be a difference in performance between
fresh
paste and 6 month old paste. Maybe not for all pastes, but probably for
some. My question is, at what age should we test the paste, and does it
matter (significantly?) if some pastes are fresh and others are close to
6
months old, or am I sweating the small stuff by even being concerned
about
this?
The pastes we will be testing are no-clean formulations, eg. Alpha LR737,
UP
78N, Omnix 5000, Indium NC-SMQ92J, AIM NC 251, Heraeus SC3401HTP, Kester
Easy Profile 256, and Qualitek 691A.
Do we really need to make a science project out of this or should we just
go
with something that is popular for the type of application we have and
see
if it works on our hardware as long as it meets the standard (J-Std) we
are
using?
Any ideas? Thanks for any responses you give.
Bill Mengers
Process Engineer
Northrop Grumman Corp.
Baltimore, Md.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
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 delivery of Technet send the following message: SET
Technet NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
>
E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
ext.5315
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
<< File: ATT00004.htm >>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
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 delivery of Technet send the following message: SET Technet NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
