even for knoop, 5 micro inch is too thin to get some good value without
substrate effect (providing your 5 micro-inch is pore free high quality
plating - electrolytic flash gold)... 20 micro-inch are common, 10, you
stretch it... you need a lots of data and gauge R&R to convince
me...IMHO...
> If you perform a Knoop hardness test but use a ball indenter instead of a
> diamond, you can tell the difference between hard gold over nickel and
> soft gold over nickel. (This method does not give you a true hardness
> measurement, however).
> You do need to use a good scope and be able to see the indentation
> clearly, and have a known sample of both for comparison.  I am not sure if
> the exact same process can be used with a Vickers, but I just assumed it
> can because it should be able to impress with a 100gram weight. The Knoop
> test works well because it does not induce the cracking that the Vickers
> sometimes does.
>
> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 12:07 PM
> To: Forum, TechNet; Stadem, Richard D.
> Subject: Re: [TN] Test
>
> Richard,
>
> I'm confused with your post.  Your statement about Vickers hardness test
> can tell the difference in hardness between 5 uinches of "hard" gold from
> ENIG, which is immersion plated and the approximately 40 uinches of soft
> gold used for wirebonding is just not correct.  First the 5 uinches of
> immersion gold plating on ENIG is "soft" gold not "hard" gold.  Secondly,
> you really can't use Vickers to measure the hardness of 5 uinches of
> immersion gold on ENIG.  Five uinches of immersion gold is too and the
> Vickers hardness measurement will really give you an indication of the
> hardness of the underlying electroless nickel.  I know there are people in
> the industry who are trying to use nano-hardness measurements to measure
> the hardness of thin platings but I haven't seen any encouraging results
> that it is accurate.
>
> George
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Richard D. Stadem"
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 9:15:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [TN] Test
>
> I agree. The Vickers hardness test I posted at the beginning of this
> thread is the best method. It can tell the difference in hardness between
> 5 uinches of "hard" gold from ENIG, which is immersion plated and the
> approximately 40 uinches of soft gold used for wirebonding applications.
> Remember the original question was if there is a test to determine if the
> finish is hard or soft gold, not the thickness.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gerry Gagnon
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 7:59 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [TN] Test
>
> Andy I'll give you a pass! More detail for history buffs.
>
>
> If we are talking about a true hard gold for hi-rel connector/contact/PWB
> Tab applications, we are talking about a cobalt modified gold
> electroplated from an acid gold cyanide solution electro-plated over a low
> stress nickel. Solution looks like grape Kool Aid.
>
>
> The test for determining the hardness of the gold is to use a Vickers
> diamond indenter. Be aware that to do the test, you must electroplate a
> thick deposit of gold from the production plating bath over the nickel. I
> remember using 200 micro-inches minimum gold thickness for the test. The
> reason for the heavy thickness is to be sure there is plenty of bulk gold
> below the indenter, otherwise you are testing the hardness of the nickel
> under-plate, copper, and laminate.
>
>
> Hard gold plated to 100 micro-inches over 300 micro-inches will pass the
> "old" nitric acid porosity and easily pass the more modern variants using
> a few "wiping type" connector insertions before the nitric acid porosity
> test (which is worst case (compared to a LIF or ZIF.
>
>
> Due to gold cost, the thickness went down to 70 micro-inches, then 50,
> then 30, then 15, to the point of who cares. None of this stuff will pass
> the original nitric acid test.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: TechNet <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of
> Giamis, Andy
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 10:45 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
>> >
>>
>
>