I would love to see a no-clean water soluble flux. Most cases we see of
companies having trouble with flux are OA that are not being removed
from under connectors and components. I have yet to see an OA with an
J-STD-004 classification of L0 or L1, most are H0 or H1. I am aware of
one OA flux that has been classified as M1.

An M1 flux is aggressive (as you have indicted below) and can easily
cause failure of electronic assemblies if not completely removed. I am
not saying that OA fluxes can not be used in electronic manufacturing.
But, the warnings in J-STD-001 section 4.2 should not be trivialized.

J-STD-004 seciont 4.2 Flux (c.) Type H or M luxes may be used only for
tinning of terminals, solid wire, and sealed components when performed
as part of an integrated fluxing, soldering, cleaning, and cleanliness
test system.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Fenner
> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 4:20 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] RA vs. RMA vs. OA flux
>
>
> Classically activities used to go R RMA RA OA IA
>
> In practice activities were something like this scale
> according to supplier and type within supplier range: R
>   <-RMA->
>            <--RA-->(SRA)>
>               <--------- OA ---------->
>
> with IA well over to the right of the page/screen. The OA and
> IA being highly active and needing 100% removal, also the
> super active rosin [although this was never an "official"
> designation, nor even admitted by some suppliers!].
>
> OA fluxes were water soluble and for this reason most people
> still tend to equate water soluble fluxes with high activity.
>
> This is not automatically the case these days, some water
> soluble fluxes can have only the same activity as no cleans.
> They are just water soluble after soldering instead of
> solvent soluble, but it's a reasonable assumption.
>
> Regards
>
> Mike Fenner
>
> Applications Engineer, European Operations
> Indium Corporation
>  T: + 44 1908 580 400
> M: + 44 7810 526 317
>  F: + 44 1908 580 411
>  E: [log in to unmask]
> W: www.indium.com
> Leadfree: www.Pb-Free.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Phil Nutting
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 6:54 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [TN] RA vs. RMA vs. OA flux
>
>
> Can anyone define for me which flux is the most active?
> There was a discussion today around how the OA fluxes were
> not as good as the old RA or RMA fluxes relative to being
> active and how well they "clean" a component lead during the
> soldering process.  I used to swear by the old standby of
> Kester 44 core and 1544 flux.  After working with OA fluxes I
> like the end product of the OA fluxes better.  Yes the
> cleaning requirements are different, but that is a separate
> discussion.
>
> Thanks in advance for your comments.
>
> Phil Nutting

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
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/html/forum.htm for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
-----------------------------------------------------