TECHNET Archives

January 2006

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:
Joel Alexander <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
Date:
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:57:21 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (146 lines)
It works in a bulk sampling mode.  The gun is usually placed in a
base/stand. The part or parts are placed in the aperture opening and
scanned. It will not give you an exact PPM but it will tell you that there
is a presence of a banned substance. There is a 30% error factor use to
determine go/nogo to make up for some of the inaccuracy.  Again it will not
give you a complete break down of all the PPM levels but it will detect if
any banned substances are present. This may then require further testing.
For example if an IC tests positive for lead, then you can test only the
leads to determine if the lead is in the body or the lead finish.

We went this route because we sometimes receive over 1000 different parts a
day and no other method was cost effective.  We have found it works quite
well as a screening even when you scan through packaging like SMT reels.



Joel Alexander

APSCO Quality Assurance Manager




             "Kane, Amol
             \(349\)"
             <akane@harvardgrp                                          To
             .com>                     "TechNet E-Mail Forum"
                                       <[log in to unmask]>,
             01/12/2006 04:21          <[log in to unmask]>
             PM                                                         cc

                                                                   Subject
                                       RE: [TN] Any comments?










Hi,
How are you dealing with the shortcomings of portable XRFs, like the area
under consideration (which has a greater potential of obscuring the
results), and pointing and holding it at the correct spot?

Amol Kane
M.S (Industrial Eng.)
Process Engineer
Harvard Custom Manufacturing
941 Route 38  Owego, NY 13827
Phone: (607) 687-7669 x349
[log in to unmask]

 -----Original Message-----
From:       TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]  On Behalf Of Joel Alexander
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 4:19 PM
To:   [log in to unmask]
Subject:    Re: [TN] Any comments?

We use a portable XRF scanner. It checks for all the RoHS banned
substances. It is more of a go/nogo test. It has a couple drawbacks. It can
detect Bromine but it can not tell if it is the restricted PBBs or PBDEs.
It also can not differentiate between Cr VI and other Cr. There not cheap
though at $40K-$50K



Joel Alexander

APSCO Quality Assurance Manager




             "Stadem, Richard
             D."
             <Richard.Stadem@G                                          To
             D-AIS.COM>                [log in to unmask]
             Sent by: TechNet                                           cc
             <[log in to unmask]>
                                                                   Subject
                                       Re: [TN] Any comments?
             01/12/2006 02:01
             PM


             Please respond to
              TechNet E-Mail
                   Forum
             <[log in to unmask]>
             ; Please respond
                    to
             "Stadem, Richard
                    D."
             <Richard.Stadem@G
                D-AIS.COM>






Deconstruction and some sort of analysis such as XRF will work for
terminal finish, but how are we to check to ensure that the rest of the
part is free of toxic materials besides lead? Examples are bromides,
cyanide, etc.
There will be brokers out there that will tin-plate the leads thinking
that makes them RoHS compliant, but the chemicals inside the components
will remain the same.

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Burke
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:25 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Any comments?

It is bound to happen.

Unfortunately, this is where the rubber hits the road, and where a
certificate of compliance is not going to cut it. The only way to check
as has been stated is by de-construction and testing of individual parts
which in most cases is probably not going to happen.

The answer here I suspect is to not engage in "grey market" deals but
only work through regular distribution channels, this may not cure the
issue, but you will have a watertight audit trail for litigation
purposes.




ForwardSourceID:NT0008BEAE

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2