i see. most likely Victor is not getting Pd... possibly more pricy
than hard gold with limited vendor... agree xrf is great. Pd react
with solder form intermetallic (Pb/Sn), but better with SAC a bit...
gold slow somewhat Pd IMC formation...
On Nov 1, 2016, at 8:21 PM, George Wenger wrote:
> TI introduced Pd over Ni lead frame material in 1989. In the late
> '90s they reduced the Pd thickness because of the increase in the
> price of Pd. Also, many users found that because of shelf live
> issue TI began plating Au on the Pd to prevent the Pd layer from
> losing its solderability (i.e., the Pd on the surface was exposed
> to the environment and it did exactly what Pd in a cars catalytic
> converter does and that is pull crap out of the environment).
>
> My previous comment was that a simple XRF measurement would tell
> you if the plating was ENEPIG.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Yuan-chia Joyce Koo" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:48:06 PM
> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
|
