Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0uX8pT-0000EeC; Fri, 21 Jun 96 11:13 CDT |
Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII |
Old-Return-Path: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 21 Jun 1996 09:19:44 -0700 |
Precedence: |
list |
Reply-To: |
|
From [log in to unmask] Fri Jun 21 15: |
26:08 1996 |
Resent-Sender: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Status: |
O |
Priority: |
Normal |
TO: |
|
Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
X-Status: |
|
X-Loop: |
|
Resent-Message-ID: |
<"YNdj73.0.SKG.Eeion"@ipc> |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
X-Mailing-List: |
|
Resent-From: |
|
cc: |
|
Message-Id: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Neal: I don't know of any OSP coating that can go thru that time/temp
exposure and still be solderable unless you're using zinc chloride for
flux :). Seriosly,I wouldn't do it.You may be able to get by with 1-2 hr bake
at 200-225F depending on the type of OSP coating your using and the
agressiveness of tour assembly fluxes.
We have run testing in the above time/temp ranges on a modified azole
type OSP with acceptable solderability results.However we use RSA and WSF
fluxes for flow solder after VP relow.These were stictly informational tests
and are not done for normal production processing.
Regards
Michael Barmuta
Staff Engineer
Fluke Corp.
Everett Wa.
(206)356-6076
On Thu, 20 Jun 1996 16:07:48 -0700 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> From: [log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 16:07:48 -0700
> Subject: Assembly - OSP? Clarification.
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Concerning my original question about the possible degradation of OSP
> when baking a Thermount or any board prior to wave.
>
> 1) What's the problem with Thermount, or what could happen if you
> don't bake? Due the the hydrophillic nature of the stuff it
> delaminates when not dehydrated...remember measles?...muliply them.
>
> 2) So, my question is really not about OSPs handling multiple reflows
> but OSPs handling a pre-bake prior to the wave. That's the crux of
> the problem. Can an OSP handle a prebake at say 225 degress F for 6
> hours?
>
> Thank you for all your responses.
>
> (I do appreciate this meduim, thank you IPC!)
>
|
|
|