TECHNET Archives

April 2018

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:
"Stadem, Richard D" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Stadem, Richard D
Date:
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:19:23 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
Bev, you anwered at 12:17 my time, and I sent at 12:18 my time.

Then I read your response below.

Great minds think alike, eh?



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

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

Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 12:17 PM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: [TN] Flux question



Joey,

You probably don’t want to hear this, but… the answer is “it depends”.  How marginal is marginal? What is the lead finish? Are the pad connected to a ground plane?  What is your reflow profile?



Regards,

Bev



Sent from Mail for Windows 10



From: Jose A Rios

Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 1:06 PM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: [TN] Flux question



Is ROL0 flux an adequate one when faced with having to solder marginally oxidized components. Or should a different flux type be selected. Application is ground based/hi-rel (non flight). Flowdown is J-001 (not space addendum). Thanks….





José (Joey) Ríos, Sr QA Engineer

Mission Assurance Manager

Kavli Institute for Astrophysics & Space Research Massachusetts Institute of Technology [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

(617)324-6272


ATOM RSS1 RSS2