I agree.
Those bureaucrats had no idea what they are getting the world into.
Regarding the specific problem - I would prefer the reballing procedure,
although it takes up time and cost.
Based on the available information I also think that soldering SAC balls
with an Sn63/PB37 paste gives you an unreliable solder joint (it is because
of having these four components to a very complicated intermetalic layer).
As a military spec manufacturer (or any other high reliability equipment) I
would not risk the combination.
Good luck,
Yehuda Weisz
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wenger, George M.
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 3:57 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] BGAs; SnPb vice SAC Balls
Welcome to the Pb-Free world. It sounds like you have the same two
choices those of us who don't have a military exemption:
1. Get mad at the component vendors who only want to provide one flavor
"i.e., Pb-Free) parts because they need to stay profitable to stay in
business and can't if they have to maintain two product lines
2. Get mad at the EU bureaucrats who enacted The RoHS Pb ban.
Regards,
George
George M. Wenger, Andrew Corporation
Reliability / FMA Engineer
Base Station & Subsystems Group
40 Technology Drive, Warren, NJ 07059
(908) 546-4531 [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of - Bogert
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 8:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] BGAs; SnPb vice SAC Balls
July 27, 2006
Folks, I have a dilemma regarding the transition to Pb free.
As a military user, we have no intention of transitioning to Pb free
assembly soldering at this time, and probably never, unless industry can
positively provide documented evidence, based on accelerated life
testing acceleration factors, that establish that the use of Pb-free
solders, such as SAC, will provide a product that will meet the same
reliability life requirements that Pb based solders have been proven to
meet, and that this level of reliability can be easily and consistently
achieved on the production floor without hiring a "Rocket Scientist" or
a team of 20 people to establish the soldering process using Pb-free.
Given this, I am frustrated by some BGA manufacturers apparent "Don't
give a dam attitude" about the military users of BGA'S since some folks
are eliminating Pb from solder balls in favor of alloys such as SAC.
Appears they are more interested in their bottom line industrial and
commercial customers than us military folks. This is understandable
since us military folks constitute a very small % of their overall
business.
Although some manufacturers will still provide Pb BGA balls, some will
only provide SAC balls. Also if Pb balls are requested, there may be
long lead times involved.
There have been published test studies done that show that if one
solders BGA's having SAC balls in an assembly soldering process using
traditional Sn63 solder, an unreliable solder joint may exist.
Based on the above, our current intent is to prohibit the use of any BGA
that does not use SnPb balls.
My question is, which is the least reliable alternative. That is,
allowing BGA'S with SAC balls soldered using Sn63 solder, or having
someone take the BGAs and have the SAC balls replaced with SnPb balls?
What suppliers have the capability of doing this ball replacement?
My preference is to stick with the prohibition on non-Pb BGA balls. The
down side of this is that by doing this, we may not be able to take
advantage of new technology parts that may only use SAC balls.
This Pb free issue is driving up costs. Since about 50% of the part
manufacturers are eliminating Pb from their part finishes without
changing their part numbers, we are forced to implement XRF testing of
parts received by our OEMs to verify they contain the 3% Pb mandated by
most military specifications.
Just because it is a mil spec part does not mean one will not get Pb
free part terminations. There have been several recent GIDEP Alerts
that indicate that some mil parts contained pure tin finish, in
violation of the mil spec.
While my experience to date is that part manufacturers who have
transitioned to a Pb free finish such as pure tin have implemented
tin-whisker mitigation methods, there is no guarantee that all folks
have done this. Additionally, even though JP002 tin whisker mitigation
methods can reduce the risk for growing tin whiskers, if one uses pure
---------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------
tin, there is no positive guarantee that a tin whisker will never grow.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
[mf2]
---------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------
__________ NOD32 1.1682 (20060727) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
---------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------
|
