TECHNET Archives

November 2012

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:
Victor Hernandez <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
Date:
Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:44:54 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (88 lines)
This whole thread is about common sense in process/material selection, not the fast pace production Willie Nellie ship it out scenario as big box mfg, jge.

"X"

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David D. Hillman
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 9:28 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Reflux and reflow BGA rework

Hi George -  good discussion and I completely agree. I should have been more detailed in my response. We do not use the "reflux and reflow" 
process as a routine procedure. As you detailed, we do a root cause investigation and do not allow the process to be used without some due diligence. And as Richard detailed in his response, our "reflux and reflow" process is a detailed process with specific procedure steps that must be used. Use of the "reflux and reflow" process without conscious thought can get you into trouble as you suggested. A good example was one case where we found that a lot of boards had crack microvias in the BGA pads so when the BGA was reflowed, the solder electrically  "reconnected" 
the microvia giving the impression that there was a bad solder joint when in fact there was a bad microvia fabrication process.  I agree with you - blindly using a "reflux and reflow" process can be dangerous practice.

Dave



From:   "Wenger, George M." <[log in to unmask]>
To:     <[log in to unmask]>
Date:   11/13/2012 09:30 PM
Subject:        Re: [TN] Reflux and reflow BGA rework
Sent by:        TechNet <[log in to unmask]>



Julie / Dave,

I'm going to stick my neck out and say that injecting flux and re-reflowing is a risky repair process.  You may be able to make a part that wasn't working work again but just because it works again doesn't mean you have reliable solder interconnections.  I'm aware of a case were injecting flux and re-reflowing did fix PCBA product well enough to pass functional test and those "fixed" boards failed after being deployed.  The problem with "fixing" non-working BGAs is that the non-working BGAs may have been "fixed" but you don't know what was "fixed" and you don't know how good the "fix" is.

Before fixing any non-working BGAs I think the important thing to do first is identify what you are trying to fix.  Is the BGA non-working because of Head-n-Pillow, Double Reflow, Insufficient solder paste dispensing, Plugged stencil aperture and no dispensed solder paste, Poor wetting, De-wetting, etc.

Regards,
George
George M. Wenger
Senior Principal Reliability / FMA Engineer Andrew Corporation - Wireless Network Solutions
40 Technology Drive, Warren, NJ 07059
(908) 546-4531 Office (732) 309-8964 Mobile
E-mail: [log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David D. Hillman
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 9:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Reflux and reflow BGA rework

Hi Julie - I don't know of any standards that cover this topic unless there is something in the IPC-7711 specification. When we use our BGA repair procedure, we use specific fluxes that are easily removed and we are very conscious about the volume of flux used. "Bigger the glob, better the job" is not a applicable process philosophy when utilizing fluxes for BGA repair. Our focus for the process is to insure that we are using flux in such a way that we don't cause a reliability issue that was not there prior to our BGA repair actions. The example we discussed of the flux packed under the BGA in the previous Technet thread is a classic case of not understanding how much flux was necessary for successful BGA repair.

Dave Hillman
Rockwell Collins
[log in to unmask]



From:   Julie Silk <[log in to unmask]>
To:     <[log in to unmask]>
Date:   11/13/2012 07:51 AM
Subject:        [TN] Reflux and reflow BGA rework
Sent by:        TechNet <[log in to unmask]>



A discussion of the practice of re-flux and reflow of BGAs to rework them has emerged within the "limits of flux residue" discussion.  I'm taking it out into a separate thread.  This rework process injects flux under the BGA, then reflows the BGA.  The part is not removed.  It will frequently make a part that wasn't working work again.  The heat damage to the board is less (fewer cycles) than a replacement process.  The question Joyce asked about whether there are standards and reliability studies has not been answered.  What is the proper procedure for this rework process?  Are there official standards?  Studies of effectiveness / reliability?




______________________________________________________________________
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] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2