TECHNET Archives

1996

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:
"Rex Breunsbach" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
16 Feb 1996 11:11:02 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
        Reply to:   RE>Flux Residue After Wave Cleaning
Does you product have solder mask?
The chemistry  and types of these materials has changed quite a bit in the last
year or 2.

--------------------------------------
Date: 2/16/96 9:46 AM
To: Rex Breunsbach
From: Dick Pond
We're experiencing increased flux residues after wave solder cleaning.  The
flux residue is causing false failures at bed of nails testing, is visible
in larger quantities, and measures higher on bulk ionic contamination tests.
Our experiments found two primary problem contributors.  Both 1)one specific
wave soldering flux and 2)some lots of circuit boards must be present.
The wave flux is a low solids, no-clean(yes, we are water cleaning).
The boards are FR-4 with liquid photoimageable solder mask, mixed surface
mount & thru hole, and with routing & holes.
Both the flux and the board fabricator have been used successfully for years.
The ionic contamination levels range up to 25 times higher(0.1 ug vs 3 ug
equivalent NaCl) on recent controlled experiments and 100 times higher than
on past process performance.
A band-aid fix has been to add saponifier to our hot water wash.
What's the mechanism of why some board lots have much higher flux residues
after wave cleaning compared to other board lots in a long established process?
Any advice would be appreciated.











ATOM RSS1 RSS2