TECHNET Archives

April 2016

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:
Yuan-chia Joyce Koo <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Yuan-chia Joyce Koo <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:11:50 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (149 lines)
yes.  photo-DSC will tell you.  It all depend upon the formulation of  
the material - exotherm and response to the lamp (wavelength  
distribution plus thermal generated heat).  You might get shrinkage  
if excessive UV  is used.  If you use embedded components in the  
board,  shrinkage stress might cause component value drifting...  
another story.  Nobody publish that kind of stuff (I don't  think.   
But I am out of the field for a while  now).
    jk
On Apr 7, 2016, at 3:59 PM, Brian Stumm wrote:

> I'd like to expand upon what Doug said because I know his company  
> has done
> studies related to this... I'm not sure if that data is available
> publically or not.
>
> I manufacture UV and Thermal cure ovens as well as SMT Reflow ovens.
>
> It is common practice to attach thermocouples to PCB Assemblies and  
> record
> thermal profiles for use in verifying the reflow process. Data such  
> as rise
> rate and peak temperature are recorded.
>
> How many of you have conducted thermal profiling in your UV curing  
> process?
> You would be amazed to see the rise rates, which far exceed the  
> limits of
> SMT reflow soldering.
>
> YMMV,
>
> Brian
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Douglas Pauls <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Good afternoon Rich,
>>
>> As Joyce and Steve have pointed out, components like UV PROMs or  
>> UV EPROMs
>> are susceptible, but that is easily fixed with a black tape over the
>> programming window.
>>
>> In general, you should not get much damage as the UV tracer dye  
>> that is in
>> most coatings will absorb some of the incoming UV energy.
>>
>> Corey Peterson, Rockwell Automation, wrote an excellent paper on  
>> optimizing
>> the UV cure process.  ULTRAVIOLET CONFORMAL COATING PROCESS  
>> DEVELOPMENT.
>>
>> He found that some of the plastic sleeving on tall caps were damaged
>> because the tops were much closer to the UV lamp.
>>
>> *"The damaged sleeving on this capacitor body shown in Figure 9  
>> was not the
>> result from thermal excess. A thermal profile was taken and  
>> indicated that
>> the temperature at the top of the capacitor was only 86ºC. This  
>> temperature
>> is lower than would be expected in normal wave soldering  
>> processes. The
>> source of damage for this capacitor is from the UV energy itself.  
>> This
>> damage could have two mechanisms. The tearing of the sleeving is  
>> right
>> where component identification was stamped into the sleeving and  
>> could have
>> produced a weak spot in the sleeving. The other possible mechanism  
>> is the
>> component color itself. Sleeve tearing on Black, Dark Blue, and  
>> Brown parts
>> could not be duplicated."*
>>
>> Lots of great info in that paper.  I can send you a copy if you wish.
>>
>>
>> Doug Pauls
>> Principal Materials and Process Engineer
>> Rockwell Collins
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Richard Kraszewski <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Have a customer who is very concerned that  the cure UV light from
>>> conformal coating cure process might be harmful to their(any)   
>>> electronic
>>> assembly.
>>>
>>> Historically  we have  UV cured  automotive and industrial   
>>> assemblies
>>> without issue. Solder mask usually is UV cured hence  normal cure
>> processes
>>> shouldn't damage the PCB at minimum.
>>> Contacted  several UV coating and equipment  manufacturers but  
>>> nothing
>>> useful came out of that.
>>> Nothing in IPC CC830 Handbook either.
>>>
>>> I am looking for  reports/thoughts  that anyone may have , which  
>>> supports
>>> or disputes this claim.
>>> Any components know to be UV sensitive?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance
>>>
>>> Rich  Kraszewski /Plexus
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________________ 
>>> __
>>> 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]
>> _____________________________________________________________________ 
>> _
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Brian Stumm
> ETS, Inc.
> +1-509-276-2015
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 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