Thanks, Franklin D Asbell. Such ellagence in a simple statement. Thanks Bev Christiansen for helping with my personal oxidation problem.

I don't want to beat a dead horse or bore industry experts, but this subject deserves more consideration for and by us rookies – and it is far from 
being dead as evidenced by repeated questions about it. Also, I don't want to make a mountain out of a mole hill, but this matter is of no small 
concern to many as is evidenced by my email lately. That is why I submit the following:

The original question simply asked about re-running boards through the solder coating process and whether this would be good or bad. From my 
point of view, concerning solder wetting, if it didn't wet the first time – find out why, fix the problem, and prevent it from recurring. Even if such 
small areas do not wet, they will impact solder joint quality later. My fix and preventive method is some alternative to HASL as many in industry 
are striving to achieve but, as HASL still remains, it must be dealt with properly. The best way is first to ensure solder surfaces are clean before 
processing (in HASL not an easy task). Then, the process must be effectively managed instead of the results (the defect in question), and to re-
solder is results management.

Concerning PCB initial quality and reliability, I echo what most already know. Thermal stress and/or shock is not good for you. It's not good for 
me, and certainly is not good for PCB's – especially when repeated. It must be minimized where and whenever possible.

As many know, to reveal possible problems or determine initial multilayer PCB quality, MIL-P-55110 (now IPC-6012/5013?) requires (ed) the 
"B" coupon to be thermally pre-conditioned and subjected to a solder float at 550 degrees F. for 10 seconds. For thermal shock, no pre-
conditioning is done. Both tests emulate HASL/reflow/wave soldering conditions as boards see both stress and shock during these operations 
though not at such a high temperature or long dwell/contact time (hopefully). Hence, a good test.

After specimen testing, x-sectional analysis is performed. If no defects, as indicated in the aforementioned documents (in laminate and thermal 
evaluation zones), are found, board quality is acceptable to the extent tested. Many of us have seen many defects over time – consisting of 
delamination, pad lifting/rotation, hole wall cracking, and other thermally induced failures. Again, thermal stress and/or shock should be 
minimized where and whenever possible.

The Navy (Indianapolis?) in the early 1980's, ran tests to determine what was causing polyimide boards to fail and cause severe problems in 
aircraft digital engine controls that caused bigger problems with aircraft and crew losses. I seem to remember Hamilton Standard (Windsor 
Locks, CT) was the contractor. To cut this short, it was found that foil bond strength was reduced from about 7 lbs. as supplied, to less than 1 lb. 
after about 100 thermal excursions from – 55 to 125 degrees C. Jerry Kirchenbaum (Trace Labs) gave me the report though I don't remember all 
details and don't recall the results concerning inner laminar bond strength. Phil Hinton may shed more light as I remember he was/is very involved 
with polyimide material types. One of the fallouts of all this was suppliers recommending relamination cycle modification to reduce the Tg from 
its fully cured 270 degrees C. to about 250 to provide better bond characteristics over material and board life.

I know other studies have been done with other resin systems. I don't know all the results, but IPC and many having participated in round robin 
testing, probably has much data already published. The problems associated with polyimide are not as severe with epoxy resin systems though 
thermal stress and shock does reduce foil and inner lamnar bond strength also.

And on it goes,

Earl Moon

################################################################
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's web site (http://www.ipc.org) "On-Line Services" section for additional information.
For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312
################################################################