Mike,
Somewhat pencesive, but still common sense.
Thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Fenner
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 9:50 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] ??: [TN] [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA, is it really necessary?
Well I think the answers covered from yes to no and all in-between so I
don't really see what your problem is - Just pick those in the range that
suit your purpose :)
To give you a less wide ranging choice I think you really need to enlarge
your question slightly by adding something like:
"With a view to checking/monitoring......................... does it really
make sense to perform Ionograph testing on a CCA built with unremoved
no-clean flux residues?"
And then perhaps add.
If it doesn't make sense, what would be a better alternative? If it does
make sense why is it better than possible alternatives. And what would be
some good procedures to adopt to obtain meaningful results?
Regards
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Glidden, Kevin
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 1:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] ??: [TN] [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA,
is it really necessary?
Conversion complete. Now you're one of us........
-----Original Message-----
From: WTSJ-Willis Tam [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 5:42 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] ??: [TN] [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA, is
it really necessary?
Hi Richard,
>>what Willis Tam originally asked was "Does it really make sense to
>>perform
Ionograph testing on a CCA built with no-clean flux residues, but not
washed?"
Yes, this is exactly what I want to ask.
Hi All,
Thanks to all for your reply/feedback, but to be honest, I got confused
after reading all the inputs.
Regards
Willis Tam
-----????-----
???: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] ?? Stadem, Richard D.
????: 2012?7?13? 22:15
???: [log in to unmask]
??: Re: [TN] [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA, is it really
necessary?
Graham,
While I agree with you, we need to realize that what Willis Tam originally
asked was "Does it really make sense to perform Ionograph testing on a CCA
built with no-clean flux residues, but not washed?"
The answer is no.
If the CCAs were cleaned, then it might make a little bit of sense, just to
see how consistent the cleaning process is but not to determine if the CCAs
were actually clean.
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Graham Naisbitt
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 9:07 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA, is it
really necessary?
Fellow Techies,
Ionic Contamination Testing is a fast, accurate and reliable way to control
your assembly process.
ROSE testing ought to be consigned to history. At one time the US DOD wanted
to have a stake in the ground to better define what is acceptable and
unacceptable in terms of "cleanliness" hence the ROSE test was born and
setting a level of acceptance. This has caused more confusion and argument
in our industry than it reasonably deserves.
Tan Geok - in 1995 GEC Hirst Research determined that there are AT LEAST 16
different types of "white powder residues". You are not at all correct to
state that the flux residue will become white and, by inference, that this
is a bad thing. It might simply be cosmetic. How so? Because of a trapped
particle within the board surface that refracts the light in a different way
that "shows it to be white" - this might simply be pure and inert rosin. Of
course it could also be something far more sinister.
If I might be so bold, there will be an SMTA Conference in Chicago in
November on Cleaning and Coating. I shall be presenting a revised test
method that everyone assembling electronic circuits would benefit from, if
it is used correctly. If anyone wants the method, let me know, but I need a
few more weeks to complete the job.
Finally, and for the record, there are many systems in the market place that
are, in many cases, superior in performance and accuracy than either the
OmegaMeter or the Ionograph. There is also the Zero-Ion, the CT100 and our
Contaminometer - ALL of which deserve recognition. Hows that for fair play?
So, to answer the original question - is it really necessary? If you want a
fast and accurate control of your assembly process - yes.
Graham Naisbitt
Gen3 Systems
On 11 Jul 2012, at 08:40, Tan Geok Ang wrote:
> Ask your customer to pay for the PCBA once it undergoes the Ionic
Contamination Test with Omega tester as the flux residue will become white
residue on the PCBA. Who is your customer who might advice you how to go
about the process.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of WTSJ-Willis Tam
> Sent: Wednesday, 11 July 2012 3:14 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [TN] ??: [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA, is
> it
really necessary?
>
> Bob,
>
> The Omega Test is not yet set up, as I don't have the test result now.
>
> Actually, we don't want to set up such a test.
>
>
> Regards
> Willis Tam
>
>
> -----????-----
> ???: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] ?? Robert Kondner
> ????: 2012?7?10? 21:50
> ???: [log in to unmask]
> ??: Re: [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA, is it really
> necessary?
>
> Willis,
>
> I would be curious to hear the test restuls.
>
> Do you have any rework ( :-) ) and do you need to clean that for
> cosmetic appearance? If so soes that cleaning affect the No Clean flux?
>
> Thanks,
> Bob K.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of WTSJ-Willis Tam
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 12:13 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [TN] Ionic Contamination Test for Non-clean PCBA, is it
> really necessary?
>
> Hi Technet,
>
> We have implemented non-clean SMT and wave soldering processes for
> more than
> 10 years and there's no any issue, but recently one of our new
> customer required us to buy the Omega tester and set up the Ionic
Contamination test
> for the non-clean PCBA, according to IPC-TM-650. 2.3.25.
>
> We feel the Ionic Contamination test might not be an appropriate test
> for the non-clean PCBA, but is there any technical paper or industry
> standard for this topic? We need some supporting documents for further
> discussion with our customer.
>
> Any suggestion/feedback would be appreciated.
>
> Regards
> Willis Tam
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
|
