Thanks Jim.
There is a more targetted question, what about head-in-pillow?
Looking at the recent threads on TN and LF, it seems that more and more companies see this phenomenon and I think they are all on SAC. Is there any record of this problem with the SN100C? Any theoretical considerations that would make the SN100C more successfull in avoiding these issues?
Thanks,
Ioan
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Wertin - FCT Assembly [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 2:45 PM
To: 'TechNet E-Mail Forum'; Tempea, Ioan
Subject: RE: [TN] SN100C vs. SAC305
Hello Ioan and fellow netters...
Allow me to apologize in advance for the commercial-esque flair of this
post, but I feel the following are all valid points.
Though the lead-free Battle Royale is destined to continue awhile longer,
Sn100C is clearly doing more than keeping its head above water. To comment
on your questions/statements Ioan, I present the following:
Sn100C is readily available in all formats; Bar, Wire, Pre-forms, Spheres
and Solder Paste.
On mixing SAC and Sn100C alloys, there has been comprehensive testing
performed, and that data is readily available as well. If you or anyone
would like a copy of that information, please e-mail off-forum.
While admittedly Sn100C has less available reliability data than SAC, it has
also not until fairly recently begun to receive a fraction of the attention
that SAC did early on. Think for a moment of all the focus that was put on
SAC. Despite all of the evaluations and the testing and the analysis
performed, we're still discovering some pretty major characteristic
idiosyncrasies yet today.
As a lead-free alloy, to most users Sn100C is a relatively new product;
however, what most do not know is that Sn100C has been in commercial
production for close to eight and a half years.
Some of you may further recall that Sn100C was the alloy many competitors
mocked, but as the user list grew, and the success stories continue to
spread, it has become the alloy many competitors wish they had... so much so
that many knock-offs have been, and are being attempted.
There has been extensive testing performed by the inventing company, it
undergoes seemingly constant comprehensive scrutiny at third party testing
facilities, and continues to be a participant in a countless evaluations
around the world at CEM's and OEM's large and small.
As of this date, Sn100C is currently run in over 3500 assembly lines
worldwide. It is in millions of circuit boards and billions of solder
joints with no known failures directly associated with its use.
There is data out there, it's constantly being added to, but it is
available...Maybe much of the problem lies in the marketing of this and
other Sn100c info.
There are alloys much newer than Sn100C to the market that can't begin to
touch this type of successful track record, or the amount of available test
and performance data, but to my chagrin, I see them being used without
requests for their reliability data.
Is Sn100C the Holy Grail of alloys?... not at all. Is it the best lead-free
choice out there ? I think this is a relative question, and is application
specific, but it is a major contender, and continues to gain momentum daily.
SN100C is within reason, an open book, again, if anyone has an interest
contact me off-forum, and I'll be glad to do what I can to see that you get
the information you're looking for.
Kind Regards to all.
Jim Wertin
FCT Assembly
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tempea, Ioan
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 2:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] SN100C vs. SAC305
Gary,
I've told you I was behind on that. I'll contact AIM. You have tested it,
but are you using it? We still dream about having a standard material, so
that the new developments be faster communicated and redily applicable by
everybody. If the reliability research is mainly on SAC, who will take care
of the SN100C?
John, I've originally sent it to leadfree also, but the message bounced
back. I have to figure this one out. Which brings me back to the question I
have already asked at least twice: why is IPC still keeping 2 forums? TN and
LF are practically populated by the same persons, with the same interests.
Thanks,
Ioan
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Gary Camac
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 3:03 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] SN100C vs. SAC305
Iaon,
Concerning your second bullet point, I successfully tested a SN100C
paste from AIM last year.
Gary Camac
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tempea, Ioan
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 1:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] SN100C vs. SAC305
Dear Technos,
I need to know how is this combat evolving. This topic has been brought
up several times, but things change fast right now and there must be
more empirical data on the matter.
What I know regarding the 2 materials can be summarized:
* Pro SN100C: cheaper, better looking, eats less copper in the TH
* One major unknown - the Reliability: SN100C is not available in
solder paste format, therefore the boards would have SAC SMT joints and
SN100C TH joints. This means 2 different materials and since we don't
know how reliable a board with only one material is, should we risk
introducing an extra variable?
I would like to know what your take is. Does anybody mixes the 2
materials? Any reliability testing done? How long have you been doing it
and do you see RMAs?
Thanks,
Ioan
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0 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 15.0
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 15.0
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 15.0
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
-----------------------------------------------------
|
