I agree that there are a number of variables that enter into this test
methodology and that it is not a good tool for product qualification. As a
process control tool it works, provided you have correlated it back to some
other method like IC (Ion Chromatography) and can define what a value of say
5, actually means (clean or not clean). I personally have never been fond of
this test methodology due to its lack of repeatability; but if I understand
Joe's question, he is wanting to know if the value defined in J-STD-001C can
be revised based on their piece of equipment. Certainly, if heated cells
are figured into the mix, then I would expect to see increases in the
amounts of extractable ionics, as heat aids solubility. But simply to make
a change to the defined value based on one premise (our piece of equipment
is an Omegameter, therefore can we change the value) is not what I would
consider a justification for changing that value. Another point, for which
I may be incorrect (please correct me if I am wrong), but my cursory review
of J-STD-001 Rev D states that IPC-TM-650, method 2.3.25 Rev C be used for
static (item 6) and dynamic (item 5) systems. So a compensation is being
made for the different systems. Additionally, I have found nothing that
suggests the defined value is different for either system only by the type
of flux used.
Personally, I think Brian Ellis has hit the nail on the head and I agree
with his thoughts.
Best Regards,
Joe Russeau
Process Analyst
Precision Analytical Laboratory, Inc.
4106 Cartwright Dr. Ste. A
Kokomo, IN 46902
P: 765-455-1993
F: 765-455-1996
E: [log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Kraszewski" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: [TN] Omegameter to IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.25 cross reference
> There can be a significant difference in the results presented by the
> instruments in question. Case in point, is that I have compared results
> from a Omegameter 600SMD (static system) versus an Ionograph 500M SMD
> (dynamic & heated). On the same type of assemblies I have gotten a 3.5
> times higher contamination rate on the 500M SMD.
>
> The calibration solution is primarily for a one point calibration, used
> to confirm where the manufacturer believes that one point should be at.
> When you add features such as heating, and dynamic solution cleaning you
> can get quit a noticeable difference in results, especially if you are
> using a set time for the test. At one time the EMPF did some work where
> they were developing correlation factors compared to the MIL P-28809 (?)
> manual (beaker & wash bottle) method. Those tests seem to end with the
> EMPF so in actuality I think they only ran ~ 3-4 systems.
>
> These ROSE tests are only really useful to monitor an established
> process. They are not really meant to qualify a product for use. I seem
> to remember this more or less stated in some IPC document (HDBK-001?).
>
> Hope we get some more conversation going on this point as I too would
> like to find a way to better correlate these results from different
> instruments.
>
>
> Rich K/KEDS
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joe Russeau
> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:21 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] Omegameter to IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.25 cross
> reference
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I have reviewed rev D of J-STD-001 (don't have Rev C), in section
> 8.3.6.3,
> it says "for assemblies soldered with ROL0 or ROL1 fluxes, the surface
> contamination shall be less than 1.56 micrograms per square centimeter
> NaCl
> (approximately 10 micrograms / sq. in) equivalent ionic or ionizable
> flux
> residue". I do not see in the Rev D version ( I would assume it is
> similar
> in the Rev C) where a particular piece of equipment is specified. Thus,
> I
> would conclude that adjustments to that value are not warranted, unless
> you
> and your customer have agrred to a different value. I will grant you
> that
> not all pieces of equipment measure the same on all occassions ( too
> many
> variables to discuss, perhaps another discussion), but the Omegameters I
> have worked with have standardizing solutions that can be purcahsed.
> Standardizing the machine before testing to make sure it is measuring
> correctly is always a good practice, but changing the recommended value
> just
> because you are using an Omegameter instead of an Ionograph, not enough
> justification for me. My 2 cents.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Joe Russeau
> Process Analyst
>
> Precision Analytical Laboratory, Inc.
> 4106 Cartwright Dr. Ste. A
> Kokomo, IN 46902
>
> P: 765-455-1993
> F: 765-455-1996
> E: [log in to unmask]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Macko, Joe @ IEC" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 9:27 AM
> Subject: [TN] Omegameter to IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.25 cross reference
>
>
> > Fellow techs,
> >
> >
> >
> > Good morning.
> >
> > We have an Omegameter 600SMD that is used to check boards for ionic
> > contaminates. The ionic residue limit within J-STD-001C, para. 8.3.6
> is
> 10
> > ug/sq. NaCl. Some personnel believe that this number should be
> adjusted
> > based on the actual instrument used (e.g., an Omegameter). Would
> someone
> be
> > so kind as to comment on this subject and what the correct limit is
> for an
> > Omegameter type of instrument.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > joe
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> 847-615-7100 ext.2815
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 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 847-615-7100
> ext.2815
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 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
847-615-7100 ext.2815
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
---------------------------------------------------
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 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
|
