TECHNET Archives

August 2009

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:
Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:16:46 +0300
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (128 lines)
Doug

Yes and I can!

Bergendahl, C.G. and Dunn, B.D. Evaluation of Test Equipment for the 
Detection of Contamination on Electronic Circuits, European Space Agency 
Technical Memorandum ESA-STM-234, Paris (1984)

Brian

[log in to unmask] wrote:
> 
> Brian,
> Was the ESTEC study you refer to ever published?  If so, can you provide 
> the reference?
> 
> Doug Pauls
> 
> 
> *Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>*
> Sent by: TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> 08/25/2009 01:17 AM
> Please respond to
> TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>; Please respond to
> Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> 
> 	
> To
> 	[log in to unmask]
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	Re: [TN] ROSE Equivalency Factors
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with Doug. The European Space Agency (ESTEC) did a profound
> study with 4 different makes of tester and (I think) 6 different types
> of flux, cleaned according to manufacturers' recommendations and found
> there was absolutely zero correlation between them. It was impossible to
> determine a so-called equivalency factor (aka as fiddle factor or fudge
> factor) for any given instrument, as it varied greatly with different
> fluxes and different cleaning processes. The whole notion was dreamt up
> by NAFI in a nightmare; their testing was unscientific as they
> determined it for instruments very different for those used today with
> uncleaned boards, using a reference method that is, in itself,
> unscientific and imprecise.
> 
> Forget the whole notion of equivalence because none exists and the
> figures were, in any case, determined for instruments that were marketed
> a quarter of a century ago and whose only resemblance to todays' ones is
> that they may bear the same name. The ONLY way of using ionic
> contamination testers is, during qualification, to determine the mean
> and the standard deviation of the residual contamination on assemblies
> deemed safe for the intended purpose, individually for each type of
> board you make, using YOUR instrument under standardised conditions.
> During manufacture, the mean should fit within the Gaussian curve
> determined during qualification. If it deviates in either direction,
> then you know that your process has changed somewhere along the line
> between goods-in and cleaning.
> 
> If you have a certain book, Chapter 20 explains the danger of using
> equivalence factors and the use of mean/standard deviation for
> determining SAFE process control.
> 
> Brian
> 
> Richard Kraszewski wrote:
>  > Can someone please refresh my memory and tell me which document has the
>  > equivalency factors for the various ROSE testers? I seem to think that
>  > it was the IPC TR 583, but I don't see them there. Believe it may have
>  > been a Military document.
>  >
>  > Thanks
>  >  
>  > Rich  Kraszewski
>  >  
>  >
>  > ---------------------------------------------------
>  > 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
-----------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2