TECHNET Archives

October 2015

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:
Craig Sullivan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Craig Sullivan <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 8 Oct 2015 08:46:30 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (349 lines)
I forgot to update until I just saw a new thread.

For this issue, SEM and XRF show the Ni thickness to be an average of 60 micro inches. Au average was 3.5. 
So with the Ni half of the IPC-6012 minimum, it's no wonder we were having issues.

Craig Sullivan
Manufacturing Engineer / IT Administrator
Phone:  (607) 266-0480 x115
Fax:  (607) 266-0482
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web:  www.mplinc.com

MPL, Inc.
41 Dutch Mill Road  |  Ithaca  |  NY  |  14850
 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.


-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert e. welch
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 5:28 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] ENIG coating durability

Well I agree with all you guys, almost.  This is a fabricators 2 cents
1. 	definitely looks like plain old skip nickel plating to me.  Probably no nickel at all under those orange pads.  Lots of times it is not evident until time or heat takes its toll.
2.	root cause looks like someone tried to cover these large vias with one coat of LPI solder mask.  Depending on the panel thickness and hole size you could end up with a "Weeping Via" (My term)  That little tiny pinhole in the mask will suck in nasty stuff like cleaner and microetch and then spit it back out when it sees the heat of the nickel bath.  Of course the nickel will not plate but the immersion gold doesn't care. This has been a recurring problem for us fabricators ever since Dry Film Solder mask went away (where tenting of large vias was common). 
 
The only ways to fix it is:
A; to plug the hole with a separate operation (before the final solder mask operation) using solder mask or some of the newer hole fill products. (higher cost) B;  open up the via completely (both sides) C; or go to a much smaller via.
I also would be leery of trapped flux residues hanging around eating up these vias internals.

As for ENIG longevity; Once had a ENIG sales friend literally carry a ENIG board around under the floor mat of his Ford Explorer. (to show to potential customers) If my memory serves me, this went on for at least 10-12 years with no adverse effects on the ENIG appearance.

Robert E. Welch
Senior Process Engineer
Moog Components Group

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steve Gregory
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 3:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] ENIG coating durability

Hi Craig,

Got em' and have them posted:

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stevezeva.homestead.com_Craig-5F0.jpg&d=AwIFaQ&c=ByDrzdYw8tO08sJlHDO_Vg&r=LW2JrkDqJ9rzfIEkoxZO_Q&m=t46MbLau6bEiDAQIx0asMlar7ZNoldZUlWvDk9NvVb8&s=yMPOF2ZPpfRxfpHBm1dJOVZBs8EQ-YmDRfAegFo1_g8&e= 

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stevezeva.homestead.com_Craig-5F1.jpg&d=AwIFaQ&c=ByDrzdYw8tO08sJlHDO_Vg&r=LW2JrkDqJ9rzfIEkoxZO_Q&m=t46MbLau6bEiDAQIx0asMlar7ZNoldZUlWvDk9NvVb8&s=UZPfSAg74lBAugrBN4Vdd2AjrcD9OeAcjGUTtUm8YKE&e= 

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stevezeva.homestead.com_Craig-5F2.jpg&d=AwIFaQ&c=ByDrzdYw8tO08sJlHDO_Vg&r=LW2JrkDqJ9rzfIEkoxZO_Q&m=t46MbLau6bEiDAQIx0asMlar7ZNoldZUlWvDk9NvVb8&s=5kXGTDHNh2kc7eML2iA_PwzwSQu4KBrpaTtjwOCnpV0&e= 

Boy, you were right about the PTH in Craig 2 looking horrible! YUCK!

Steve

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Craig Sullivan <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Attached are pics. Sent to Steve Gregory for posting, directly to Dean 
> and David.
>
> Pic 0 is where a trim pot lifted right off, 1 minute ago. It appears 
> to be a layer of Ni left on the pad.
> Pic 1 is a circuit where a trim pot fell off at the slightest touch.
> Again, looks like a layer of Nickel left on the pad. It's gray in 
> color compared to the gold PTH.
> Pic 2 is what I am seeing on PTHs after we reflow these things.
>
> It only appears after the reflow. I have not seen it before.
> Also, I have seen no discernible difference in plating colors.
>
> Craig Sullivan
> Manufacturing Engineer / IT Administrator
> Phone:  (607) 266-0480 x115
> Fax:  (607) 266-0482
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Web:  
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mplinc.com&d=A
> wIFaQ&c=ByDrzdYw8tO08sJlHDO_Vg&r=LW2JrkDqJ9rzfIEkoxZO_Q&m=t46MbLau6bEi
> DAQIx0asMlar7ZNoldZUlWvDk9NvVb8&s=GYLfPeJW0Ukjkom-vjH9JXQzjWx_AvDRYWVK
> 4ed0bF0&e=
>
> MPL, Inc.
> 41 Dutch Mill Road  |  Ithaca  |  NY  |  14850 P Please consider the 
> environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stadem, Richard D.
> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 3:06 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] ENIG coating durability
>
> Sorry about the lack of continuity in my emails. But the reason I 
> asked about the orange pads is because through the years I have 
> noticed that sometimes if the immersion gold layer is too thin, say 
> from 1 to 3 uinches, the nickel layer can begin to oxidize underneath 
> as Dave described, and if the boards are older, the nickel can oxidize 
> so badly that it does not even provide a barrier to the copper 
> underneath the nickel. What happens then is that the copper can reach 
> the gold, and it reacts right up on the surface and it shows up as 
> orange pads interspersed amongst the gold pads I can see (at 20X magnification).
> I have seen this (myself) like 3 or 4 times in the past 15 years, and 
> I have found that it is a sure indicator of either nickel skips in the 
> plating, or the ability of the nickel to completely oxidize and allow 
> the copper through (thin nickel), or insufficient gold, all of which 
> can lead to the oxidized pads and solderability issues in older ENIG 
> PWBs. If you can see any evidence of this on PWBs not yet soldered, it 
> is evidence of absence of either nickel or gold, or both. No fabricator can dispute it.
> Evidence of absence is not absence of evidence.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stadem, Richard D.
> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:27 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] ENIG coating durability
>
> No problem. Send pictures of the pad surface after the parts were 
> removed also, if you can. That can be very revealing.
> One more question. On the bare PWBs not yet processed, are there pads 
> that are a little bit more "orange" than gold in appearance?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Sullivan
> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:14 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] ENIG coating durability
>
> Sections and SEM are forthcoming.
> I agree with both of you.
>
> Richard: Apologies for my terminology. Yes... we assembled bare PCBs 
> into CCAs and the problems appeared at this process.
>
> Craig Sullivan
> Manufacturing Engineer / IT Administrator
> Phone:  (607) 266-0480 x115
> Fax:  (607) 266-0482
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Web:  
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mplinc.com&d=A
> wIFaQ&c=ByDrzdYw8tO08sJlHDO_Vg&r=LW2JrkDqJ9rzfIEkoxZO_Q&m=t46MbLau6bEi
> DAQIx0asMlar7ZNoldZUlWvDk9NvVb8&s=GYLfPeJW0Ukjkom-vjH9JXQzjWx_AvDRYWVK
> 4ed0bF0&e=
>
> MPL, Inc.
> 41 Dutch Mill Road  |  Ithaca  |  NY  |  14850 P Please consider the 
> environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Hillman
> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 2:06 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] ENIG coating durability
>
> Hi Richard - good info. The issue Craig described could also just be 
> oxidation of the nickel thus making solderability near zero and then 
> the parts just "fall off".
>
> Dave
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Stadem, Richard D. < 
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > I seldom see issues with ENIG-finished PWBs even after 5 years or 
> > longer, provided the ENIG finish was properly applied in the first 
> > place and the boards were stored properly during that time. ENIG, 
> > when done properly, is a very, very durable finish. The 4-5 uinches 
> > of gold will protect the underlying nickel very well, and that is 
> > what you actually solder to, not the gold.
> > However, when problems such as those you are describing show up 
> > after soldering, it is a very strong indicator of Black Pad. If the 
> > ENIG is not plated properly and the immersion gold is not applied 
> > just right, after soldering the components you can send perfectly 
> > robust CCAs into the field, and in a few months the components can 
> > begin literally falling off the board. It sounds like what you are seeing is Black Pad.
> > Just google up ENIG and Black Pad and you will see examples of the 
> > cratering and appearance of the pads, and compare them with the 
> > pictures of your own.
> > Just about every time, the pictures are very similar.
> > Quite often, much older ENIG PWBs from one vendor solder much better 
> > than those of another vendor that were fabricated and plated two 
> > weeks ago. This is due to the plating process controls (or lack
> > thereof) at the fabricator, not the age of the plated PWB itself.
> > Your email is a little bit confusing; when you state " PCBs just 
> > over a year old are showing signs of oxidation after processing, 
> > components can be flicked off with ease." Printed circuit boards
> > (PCBs) are bare boards with no components assembled, whereas PCBs 
> > with components assembled are known as CCAs (Circuit Card Assemblies).
> > If you mean that after the PCB is processed to solder components, 
> > and immediately after that the parts fall off, yes, that is a sign 
> > of one type of Black Pad, but it can also show up months later on 
> > assemblies that were perfectly robust immediately after soldering.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Sullivan
> > Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 8:03 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: [TN] ENIG coating durability
> >
> > J-STD-003 and IPC-4552 basically state the ENIG should meet category
> > 3
> > (>6 months storage).
> >
> > My question is, what is the storage threshold for ENIG after the 6
> months?
> > 1 year, 2 years?
> >
> > What length of time should we conceivably expect to be able to store 
> > an ENIG board before seeing issues?
> >
> >
> >
> > Scenario: PCBs just over a year old are showing signs of oxidation 
> > after processing, components can be flicked off with ease. The Cu 
> > and Ni (if any
> > left) on a PTH look horrendous after processing. Here's a kicker, 
> > these boards are date code 3414, but date code 3514 appears to be ok 
> > and solders fine, and date code 3114 shows a very low and random 
> > case of the oxidation/solderability issue.
> >
> >
> >
> > All PCBs stored in the same environment/manner
> >
> >
> >
> > Craig Sullivan
> >
> > Manufacturing Engineer / IT Administrator
> >
> > Phone:  (607) 266-0480 x115
> >
> > Fax:  (607) 266-0482
> >
> > Email:  <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
> >
> > Web:   <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mplinc.com_&d=AwIFaQ&c=ByDrzdYw8tO08sJlHDO_Vg&r=LW2JrkDqJ9rzfIEkoxZO_Q&m=t46MbLau6bEiDAQIx0asMlar7ZNoldZUlWvDk9NvVb8&s=LjVu3b2JnqZGbwH4W1Fzbf8fY5vCO8FbrBqjqNfMLc8&e= > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mplinc.com&d=AwIFaQ&c=ByDrzdYw8tO08sJlHDO_Vg&r=LW2JrkDqJ9rzfIEkoxZO_Q&m=t46MbLau6bEiDAQIx0asMlar7ZNoldZUlWvDk9NvVb8&s=GYLfPeJW0Ukjkom-vjH9JXQzjWx_AvDRYWVK4ed0bF0&e= 
> >
> >
> >
> > MPL, Inc.
> >
> > 41 Dutch Mill Road  |  Ithaca  |  NY  |  14850
> >
> > P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >   _____
> >
> > Confidentiality Notice:
> > This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information which 
> > is the property of MPL Incorporated, intended only for the use of 
> > the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized use or disclosure of this 
> > information is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, 
> > please immediately notify MPL Incorporated and destroy any copies of 
> > this email. Receipt of this e-mail shall not be deemed a waiver by 
> > MPL Incorporated of any privilege or the confidential nature of the
> information.
> >
> > Export Control:
> > This message is intended only for the addressee and may contain 
> > information that is company confidential or privileged. Any 
> > technical data in this message may be exported only in accordance with the U.S.
> > International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR Parts 120-130) or 
> > the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR Parts 730-774).
> > Unauthorized use is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you 
> > are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for 
> > delivering to the intended recipient, you should not read, copy, 
> > disclose or otherwise use this message. If you have received this 
> > email in error, please delete it, and advise the sender immediately.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > __ 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 and any attachments are only for use by the intended
recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged, confidential, proprietary or otherwise private information. Any unauthorized use, reproduction, dissemination, distribution or other disclosure of the contents of this e-mail or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. 

______________________________________________________________________
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