TECHNET Archives

August 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:
"Lepsche, Thomas G (NM75)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet Mail Forum.
Date:
Mon, 4 Aug 1997 07:45:47 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (79 lines)
Graham,
        You, obviously do not have any belt and suspender personnel at your
facility. At my facility we do have such persons and the theory goes
something like this " We really don't trust the performance of no-clean
fluxes on our CCA's. We really want clean boards for maximum
performance, but if we err in cleaning, we want to leave a residue that
really didn't need to be cleaned off anyway."  We are therefore covered
with an explanation for the customer no matter what happens and have the
best of all worlds. Quality and acceptability of the product and CYA is
of most importance, cost and process difficulty is of minor importance.
Semper Fi
Tom

>----------
>From:  Graham Naisbitt[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent:  Sunday, August 03, 1997 5:21 PM
>To:    [log in to unmask]
>Subject:       Re: [TECHNET] No-clean flux query
>
>In reply to Yuan's message on Friday, I am baffled.
>
>Why do you want a "No-Clean" flux that you can clean? Do you mean a low or no
>solids product instead?
>
>From our experience, trying to clean no-clean is not good news. Finding the
>right chemistry to work for you can be a time consuming and difficult
>project.
>I therefore strongly suggest that whatever trials you conduct, make sure they
>are as close as possible to production conditions. I.e. run minimum 4 hour
>tests with largest possible number of assemblies not just 10 or 12.
>
>Yuan correctly indicates that there will be residues. The issue is not so
>much
>visual appearance but whether any remaining residues could impair circuit
>reliability.
>
>So when you do get to your trials, try producing through J-STD-001, and
>testing to IPC-TM-650 (and IPC9201) with inspection to IPC-610
>
>I would love to hear from others, their views on this topic.
>
>Graham Naisbitt
>
>
>Concoat Ltd                                     Email: [log in to unmask]
>Alasan House, Albany Park                       Tel:    +44 (0)1276 691100
>Camberley, Surrey GU15 2PL UK           Fax:    +44 (0)1276 691227
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:   TechNet Mail Forum  On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
>Sent:   Friday, August 01, 1997 5:31 PM
>To:     [log in to unmask]
>Subject:        [TECHNET] No-clean flux query
>
>     Hello,
>
>     My company would like to move to No Clean flux for rework of PCBA's.
>
>     The main criteria we are looking for is the following:
>
>     1.  High Quality Solder Joint
>     2.  Easy to work with
>     3.  Low residue
>     4.  Capability to be water washed
>     5.  Capability to be not cleaned
>     6.  The residue be contained at the location of the solder joint.
>     7.  The residue be formulated in such a way that it will not collect
>     dust and debris.
>
>     Any information about such fluxes are appreciated.
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Yuan
>     (303)417-5655
>


ATOM RSS1 RSS2