Inspection for solderability needs to start at the board shop... I would
suggest that a standard procedure be initiated for the board vendor to
"sacrifice"( this isn't true due to the fact that there probably is one
scrap piece in the lot) a part and provide a "floated" solder sample,
picture and the remainder of the part. If incoming inspection has any
doubts or wants to run a referee, schedule the sample upon receipt to run
through the soldering/cleaning process. I have found this to be an
inexpensive, yet representative test. Note# make sure the date code is the
same.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hamilton, Richard -4454 <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thursday, March 26, 1998 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: [TN] ASSY: PARTS SOLDERABILITY
>Steve,
>
>The last paragraph says it all, from my experience.
>
>Richard Hamilton
>Clemar Mfg. / Rain Bird
>[log in to unmask]
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: SteveZeva [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 1998 4:49 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [TN] ASSY: PARTS SOLDERABILITY
>>
>> Jim,
>>
>> Well, since I'm not employed at a assembly company (not at the
>> moment
>> anyway...hehehe), I'll share what has happened at other companies that
>> I've
>> worked at regarding any sort of solderability testing...
>>
>> I get the sneaking suspicion that there won't be many responses
>> that say
>> they don't do solderability testing, which IMHO is probably the norm
>> rather
>> than the exception...if I'm wrong go ahead and flame me, but I think
>> that most
>> of the time nowadays with the "demand-flow" of materials, there
>> probably isn't
>> near the solderability problems with components or PCB's that there
>> used to
>> be...parts and PCB's don't sit on a shelf for months and months
>> anymore and
>> become oxidized and unsolderable, it's too competitive out there...if
>> they
>> did, I'd bet there would be some Materials managers and buyers handed
>> their
>> walking papers.
>>
>> So nowadays in my opinion, the only time that there is solderability
>> testing
>> done (I'm speaking in pretty general terms now...) is when there IS a
>> problem,
>> after the fact, so they can have some ammo to be able to give the
>> parts or
>> PCB's back to who, or where ever they came from, or when there's some
>> sort of
>> survey or audit coming.
>>
>> I do think that may be changing as more and more companies are getting
>> into
>> no-clean...you have something hit the floor that ain't solderable when
>> you're
>> no-clean and it'll kill ya'...
>>
>> If it sounds like I'm being too pessamistic, maybe so...but I know
>> there's
>> been other M.E.'s or process engineers just like me who have been
>> tasked to
>> set-up a incoming recieving inspection area complete with all the
>> latest "doo-
>> dads" (wetting balance, viscosity meter and hot plates for solder
>> paste,
>> etc...) to check for problems before they hit the floor...it makes ya'
>> feel
>> like you wasted your time when you see dust gathering on all the
>> equipment
>> that you spent your time researching before you went out and spent
>> good money
>> on.
>>
>> But you know what? It really didn't hurt production... and for the
>> reasons I
>> stated in the beginning. Even though we were set-up to do
>> solderability
>> testing at the time, it didn't get done except for maybe a 2-4 week
>> stretch
>> just after the incoming recieving inspection area was set-up, and for
>> those
>> two occasions I spoke of earlier.
>>
>> The reason that was given to me why it wasn't done was that there were
>> hardly
>> ever any rejects, and that there were other items that DID need close
>> inspection (sheet metal, wiring harnesses, etc.) that drained all the
>> manpower
>> from incoming recieving.
>>
>> So that's my two-cents for what
>> it's
>> worth...
>>
>> -Steve Gregory-
>>
>> ################################################################
>> TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
>> 1.8c
>> ################################################################
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with
>> following text in the body:
>> To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name>
>> To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet
>> ################################################################
>> Please visit IPC web site (http://jefry.ipc.org/forum.htm) for
>> additional information.
>> For the technical support contact Dmitriy Sklyar at [log in to unmask] or
>> 847-509-9700 ext.311
>> ################################################################
>
>################################################################
>TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
>################################################################
>To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following
text in the body:
>To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name>
>To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet
>################################################################
>Please visit IPC web site (http://jefry.ipc.org/forum.htm) for additional
information.
>For the technical support contact Dmitriy Sklyar at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700 ext.311
>################################################################
>
################################################################
TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
################################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body:
To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name>
To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet
################################################################
Please visit IPC web site (http://jefry.ipc.org/forum.htm) for additional information.
For the technical support contact Dmitriy Sklyar at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.311
################################################################
|
