TECHNET Archives

May 2014

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:
"Rivera, Raye" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Rivera, Raye
Date:
Thu, 8 May 2014 17:03:32 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
Hello Technetters,

We are qualifying a new product to telecom standards, and had an unexpected failure during an indoor airborne-contaminant test. The test is 10 days exposure to 10 ppb Chlorine, 10 ppb Hydrogen Sulfide, 200 ppb Nitrogen Dioxide, 200 ppb Sulfur Dioxide.  (Test procedure is from GR-63-CORE  5.5.2.2 and according to ASTM B-827-05-2009.)

One specific component failed, at two out of five placements on the board.  It is a 3 mm x 3 mm  QFN. Both parts still function marginally but with a reduced output voltage that brings down the board. The two locations that failed are directly in the path of the DUT's cooling fan which runs throughout the test. We are still doing the device level failure analysis.

At this early stage, we are considering conformal coating to protect this part. Does anyone have a suggestion for what kind of conformal coating would be appropriate for this mix of corrosive gasses?

This is a bit out of my experience, so I'd appreciate any tips or warnings for a situation like this.


Best regards,
Raye Rivera

QA Manager * Canoga Perkins
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[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