DESIGNERCOUNCIL Archives

October 2004

DesignerCouncil@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:
Chris Ball <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Designers Council Forum)
Date:
Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:20:07 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (276 lines)
HiJack (just wanted to see if that would trigger homeland security),

We've used no clean flux of some kind or another for over 20 years now. All
in all, it's made our lives easier, but we have had situations from time to
time where dendrites grow and bad things happen. Point being; if it's in a
fairly harsh environment maybe it's better not to let the flux get in there
at all if possible, even if it's no-clean.


Speaking of tenting or open vias....
In my situation us USA guys had been steered away from LPI tenting for
years because we were told that the contaminants left in the vias during
bareboard fab would get us eventually in our environment (automotive).
We're really global nowadays... our German counterparts work under the same
constraints, but our French contingent always tents vias and if trapped
contaminates have caused them any trouble they aren't telling.

Not the same issue but it's friday afternoon and I'm kinda giddy....

Later,
-Chris

 ---------------------------------------------------

   Hi, Steve...   Welcome to "the other side of the fence"!




   I'm pretty sure we were getting the "volcano effect" using the
   bottom-mask
   only.
   What you are seeing now is probably the result of a customer who first
   tried
   masking BOTH sides, had problems, and decided to uncover one of them.
   You're probably not in too much trouble if you are using no-clean,
   though.
   Does anyone disagree?




   As a matter of fact, I've recently been asked to uncover both sides
   completely.
   Kind of a shock since I have been tenting so long (either completely or
   at
   least
   encroaching up to the maximum hole size).




   For whoever was asking about the theory behind encroachment, here's as
   brief
   a summary as I can write:




   Plugging is a good idea, but difficult and expensive to do correctly.
   Plugging is great if you can get 100% plugs and planarity too.
   BUT...
   Studies have proved (ask Werner!) that a partially plugged hole is far
   less
   reliable than either a completely plugged or completely unplugged hole.
   I assume that is a conductive plug.
   We used to plug with LPI mask which never gave us any problems but left
   partially uncured epoxy in the hole (only fully cured on the surface by
   the
   UV light or whatever) So the advantage of allowing the mask to flow up
   onto
   the pad, but not down the hole seems ideal, no junk in the hole, no
   issues
   with
   the two-sided or one-sided tenting debate, the ability to put vias very
   close to
   pads without the solder wicking away down the hole (because we have a
   wider
   dam of mask between the pad and the hole)




   We were always taught to NOT put exposed vias under components because
   of the cleaning issue, but now we use no-clean. Now we are being asked
   to
   clear the whole via pad (for accessibilty issues like test points) and
   the
   only
   down side that I can think of is having to move the via out a little
   more
   from
   the pad to get enough mask between them.   no problemo, mon!




   Am I missing something?




   Any thoughts?




   Jack
























                Steve Gregory
                <[log in to unmask]
                M>
                Sent by:
   To
                DesignerCouncil
   To
                <DesignerCouncil@         [log in to unmask]
                ipc.org>
   cc








                09/29/2004 07:14
                PM





   Subject
                Please respond to         [DC] Via protection beneath a
   fine
                   "(Designers            pitch BGA...
                 Council Forum)"
                <DesignerCouncil@
                IPC.ORG>; Please
                   respond to
                [log in to unmask]




















   Caterpillar: Confidential Green                 Retain Until: 10/29/2004
                                                   Retention Category:  G90
   -
                                                   General
                                                   Matters/Administration








   Hi All!




   This is my first post to the Designers Council. I have a question about
   solder masking via's in a BGA pattern, and want to see if I'm thinking
   correctly.
   I'd like your opinions about this.




   I think it's a bad idea to leave the via's free from solder mask on the
   topside of the board beneath the BGA, and then tent (or plug) the via's
   from the
   bottomside. To me, you're just asking for trouble down the road because
   you're
    creating a little "cup" if you will, that willl trap flux residue and
   all
   kinds of stuff in the via's that won't be able to be cleaned out well.
   This
   is
   a  676 ball 1.0mm pitch BGA pattern.




   This assembly will be put together using double-sided reflow, there will
   be
   no wave soldering. All through-hole is going to be hand-soldered.




   My opinion is that either you leave the via's free from solder mask on
   both
   sides, or cover them on the topside only, or ideally, plug them
   completely.




   Am I wrong about this?




   Thanks!




   -Steve Gregory-







"This e-mail message is intended only for the use of the intended
recipient(s).
The information contained therein may be confidential or privileged, and
its disclosure or reproduction is strictly prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please return it immediately to its
sender at the above address and destroy it."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DesignerCouncil 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 DesignerCouncil.
To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail 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 847-615-7100 ext.2815
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2