TECHNET Archives

November 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:
"Mattix, Dwight" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Mattix, Dwight
Date:
Wed, 2 Nov 2016 00:25:20 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
I don't know about TI and IP related to ENEPIG.  Just know that various chemistry suppliers are putting it out there and it's available in many larger fabs (and in plating services for fabs that don't have it).  If there's and IP involved I reckon the chemistry suppliers have dealt with that.



-----Original Message-----

From: Yuan-chia Joyce Koo [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 

Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 4:48 PM

To: TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>; Mattix, Dwight <[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)



isn't that pd layer patented by TI?  if your vendor didn't license it, it wouldn't have Pd? (or is it? ) On Nov 1, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Mattix, Dwight wrote:



> Yes, XRF would point out the presence of Pd but that aside from the 

> original question. That was about distinguishing hard

> (electrolytic) gold from ENIG.  Seems that a section is still the 

> simplest. Cut and polish a quickie, hold in a spring clip on the 

> scope, no potting,  just a matter of minutes.

>

> The mention of ENEPIG was just in passing to keep that possibility in 

> mind. When in NYC one hears hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras. ;)

>

>

> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 9:02 AM

> To: Mattix, Dwight <[log in to unmask]>

> Cc: Forum, TechNet <[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)

>

> Since you don't have an XRF I understand why you said in your cast a 

> section was quicker/easier but I'm sure if you hadn't lost your XRF in 

> a reorganization you would do the XRF measurement because it would be 

> much quicker/easier than a section

>

> ________________________________

> From: "Dwight Mattix"  

> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Cc: "TechNet Forum" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:57:46 AM

> Subject: RE: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)

>

> Indeed.

>

> In my case, it’s quicker/easier to do a section from a solder sample. 

> Lost XRF in a reorg… ☺

>

> From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 8:53 AM

> To: Mattix, Dwight

> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

> Cc: Forum, TechNet <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

> Subject: Re: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)

>

> Dwight,

>

> I agree with you that ENEPIG has been finding more use in contact 

> applications but a simple XRF measurement would let you know if there 

> were Pd between the ImmAu and the ENi..

>

> George

>

> ________________________________

> From: "Dwight Mattix"  

> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

> To: "TechNet E-Mail Forum"  

> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>,

> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:42:21 AM

> Subject: RE: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)

>

> Yes, traditionally. However ENEPIG is finding more use in contact 

> applications. It's not just a "universal" finish suitable for both 

> soldering and bonding but it turns out also useful in many cases for 

> contact wear resistance.

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of George Wenger

> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 8:39 AM

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)

>

> Victor,

>

> In my opinion if you are talking about a metal contact or pin that I 

> would assume that the gold plating is electrolytic plated Typically 

> those types of metal contacts used to be electrolytic plated with 

> thick gold (i.e., around 30 microinches) but over the years the trend 

> has been to reduce costs and many companies reduced the electrolytic 

> gold plating thickness to around 5 microinches.

>

> George

>

> ----- Original Message -----

>

> From: "Victor G Hernandez"  

> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:27:59 AM

> Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)

>

> This is true on a PWB gold finger. How about a connector contact 

> pin/button? The contact has no edges per say.

>

> Victor,

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mattix, Dwight

> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 10:03 AM

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test)

>

> X-section will tell very quickly whether it's hard Au or ENIG. Hard 

> gold will have an overhang that extends out beyond the underlying 

> etched copper.

>

>

> Hard gold is indeed an electrolytic process. As such, except in a  

> few very specialized pwb fabs, it is applied before the outer layer  

> is etched. The unetched, solid copper outerlayer serves as the buss  

> for the electrolytic plating. A photoresist is applied to the  

> outerlayer first so that the NiAu is plated on as the outerlayer  

> circuit pattern. Then the photoresist is removed to expose the  

> underlying copper. The panel is then etched and the NiAu pattern  

> serves as the etch resist for the outerlayer circuit image. As that  

> copper is etched down to the outer layer of laminate, it also  

> etches horizontally back under the NiAu. The result is an  

> overhanging "cornice" of NiAu along all the etched circuit edges.

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Giamis, Andy

> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:45 AM

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: [TN] Test

>

> Hi Victor,

> The great and all-knowing Wikipedia says hard gold often contains a  

> small amount of cobalt or nickel.

> I am also not an expert, but I believe hard gold is an electrolytic  

> process. Although the electrolytic process can be stopped any time,  

> typically target thicknesses are considerably thicker (30 micro- 

> inches or more). If you are looking at 5 micro-inches, I'd guess it  

> is immersion gold. The best action is to ask the supplier. If  

> that's not an option, try EDS looking for cobalt. That's no  

> guarantee, but positive results for cobalt would be informative. 5  

> micro-inches would be too thin to look for nickel. Good luck.

>

> Did I pass the test?

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of  

> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:19 AM

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: [TN] Test

>

> Fellow TechNetters:

>

> I did not receive a response the FIRST time . therefore I pose the  

> inquiry once again.

>

> “Is there a test or method to determine if gold plating is hard  

> gold or ENIG? XRF will determine thickness of gold but will not  

> verify plating process. I am working with a measurement of 5 micro  

> inches of gold.”

>

> Victor,

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Hillman

> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:14 AM

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: [TN] Test

>

> I don't know about the rest of the folks but I received an A+ and  

> its rumored you received a C-

>

> Dave

>

> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Douglas Pauls <  

> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> 

>  wrote:

>

>> And what percentage of our grade is this test?

>>

>>

>> Doug Pauls

>> Principal Materials and Process Engineer Rockwell Collins

>>

>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Vadim Matveyev

>> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

>> wrote:

>>

>>> Test

>>>

>>

>

>




ATOM RSS1 RSS2