TECHNET Archives

October 2003

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:
JaMi Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Wed, 1 Oct 2003 22:18:23 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (104 lines)
Adam,

My initial thoughts regarding the 50 percent overlap were based on my
thinking that the spray distribution was somewhat uniform across the
whole of the angle, and my intent was that that the difference in spray
angle, which would in most cases cause a slight difference in the
intensity , distribution, and deflection of etchant out at the edges of
the "fan", and that by overlapping them by 50 percent, you would be
doing the most to compensate for this action.

But in a perfect world . . .

I realize that the distribution, etc., would not actually be liniear,
but I was thinking it would be close enough, but in looking at the spec
that you link to below, I notice that they state right up there at the
top of their "characteristics" list that the nozzels have: "Uniform
distribution with tapered edges for overlaping spray" which is just what
I would expect someone to say when they could not really pull off the
uniform distribution, which would make me say that possibly you should
have more than 50 percent overlap, if you can understand what I am
getting at here. My intent here with the overlap would be to combine the
strongest and highest intensity part of one nozzle and have it overlap
with the weakest and least intense part of the next nozzle, such as to
"average" the effects of both such that the result would be as if there
were actually no individual nozzels at all, but rather one large "wiper
blade" of a spray as it were, if that were at all possible.

I don't know, maybe I am being too pessimistic, and the spray from the
individual nozzles is in fact uniform enough that it will all work as
"advertized", with just a small amount of "overlap" at the "tapered
edges".

You are probably right in that the proof is in the experimentation.

I would be interested in knowing what you come up with, once all of the
results are in.

Respecting the "Paper" that Rudy was talking about, I am sure that if he
can track down the date and time of the presentation (it was probably
either at Apex in Anahiem or IPC Expo in Long Beach), that you can come
up with a topic and the name of the speaker from a the seminar /
presentation schedule, and with that information a copy of the paper
should be available from IPC, minimally for a price, and if you can
actually track down the presenter, he just might be willing to send you
a copy of his presentation or at least his "slides" for the "price" of
asking. It may be worth a try to track it down.

JaMi


----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Seychell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: [TN] spray nozzle configuration for etching


> JaMi,
>
> Thanks for the pointers. I'm learning now that there is no simple
answer to
> the problem, precisely as Rudy Sedlak remarked.
> The shear number of variables are going to make this impossible to
solve
> without experimentation. I will take note of your advice, and just
> experiment with different nozzle positions and angling until I'm happy
with
> the etch uniformity. Does a 50% overlap in the spray pattern sound
rather a
> lot ? The datasheet for the particular nozzles I using are shown here;
> http://www.bete.com/metric/products/pages/nf.htm
>
> It would be nice to get hold of the ICP paper Rudy Sedlak was talking
about.
>
> Adam
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Technet Mail List provided as a 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
ext.5315
> -----------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
-----------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2