Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | TechNet E-Mail Forum. |
Date: | Wed, 31 Mar 2004 15:57:26 -0600 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
We still see a few orders for such a beast...we have been pretty successful however in getting customers to see the benefits of SMOBC.
Adhesion over tin/lead reflow is difficult considering how smooth such a surface is. On those jobs we do see it we run the panels through a pumice scrubber before solder mask coating, this does a pretty good job in creating a rough surface for the mask to adhere to. Of course once they run the boards down their assembly line, and the tin/lead flows again, under the mask, well all bets are off...
All I can suggest is to present your case to customers as strong as possible, even offer them samples of SMOBC-HASL for them to evaluate, etc etc...we did that long ago...costs a few bucks but it worked out for the best...good luck
Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Gregory
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 3:41 PM
Subject: [TN] Solder mask over Tin/Lead...
Hi All!
I'm just wondering if I'm missing something. Is there any performance reason
whatsoever, that requires solder mask over Tin/Lead instead of using SMOBC
(Solder Mask Over Bare Copper)?
Got a board in receiving inspection that I got called back to look at because
the mask was failing tape test. When I saw the board, it was solder mask over
Tin/Lead, just like it was called out on the drawing. The mask had already
lost adhesion in a few places, but we hadn't done anything to it yet
assembly-wise...
I see didn't see this particular boards drawing before we went out and bought
it, otherwise I would have thrown-up a red flag then. What suprised me
though, is that our fab vendor didn't say anything before they built it. Is anything
other than SMOBC being used regularly. I thought solder mask over Tin/Lead
was ancient stuff, and that everybody learned not to do that anymore...
-Steve Gregory-
---------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------
|
|
|