TECHNET Archives

April 1997

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:
Paul Gould <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 8 Apr 1997 07:53:49 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
In message  "D. Rooke" <[log in to unmask]> writes
>In the same vein, are there any Cupric etchers out there using sodium
>chlorate as the oxidant as opposed to hydrogen peroxide? Again, any
>positive/negative impacts?

I was recently looking at the pros and cons of using sodium chlorate as
a more stable oxidiser as we currently use hydrogen peroxide. I think
the sodium chloride you spoke of is just the by-product of the reaction
with sodium chlorate and not an additive system in its own right.

When I queried the change with our disposal company, they advised that
they would not be able accept the etch if it contained sodium chloride.
They currently take our spent etch away and plate out the copper for
which we receive a credit.

Hope this helps,
-- 
Paul Gould

***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To subscribe/unsubscribe send a message <to: [log in to unmask]>   *
* with <subject: subscribe/unsubscribe> and no text in the body.          *
***************************************************************************
* If you are having a problem with the IPC TechNet forum please contact   *
* Dmitriy Sklyar at 847-509-9700 ext. 311 or email at [log in to unmask]      *
***************************************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2