Bounced this off a collegue who works in our TX office and here is the outcome; This picture poses an interesting question. I looked up the requirements in ANSI-J-STD-001 B (I don't know if this is the latest, but it is the one I have => the Draft of C didn't change either). The photo shows good wetting in all areas, with the exception of the area under the termination where the adhesive contaminated the pad (just left of the arrow), but it appears to be less than the 90 degree contact angle requirement. It would have to be better viewed under magnification to verify. Poor wetting here could potentially initiate microcracks in a high vibe condition. In para 9.2.6.4 there does not appear to be a violation of the requirements to me, but I have been out of the specification interpretation game for a while. There are chip caps that only have metallization on the end of the component. In the case of this picture, there is a good solder fillet between the pad and the end metallization. This component will function properly, and unless it is in a high vibration usage, I don't believe that there will be any reliability issues. I guess a question that may come out from other responders is "what is the end use environment" for the component. If it is a TV set or something, this is acceptable. If it is for a missile application or a pace maker, it may work, but I think I would still reject the joint. This is just my opinion, of course. -----Original Message----- From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Becerra Alejandro Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 5:51 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: [TN] Adhesive contamintation Good afternoon Technetters, I am sending a photo of one cross section of an 0603 component soldered in the bottom side. The photo shows how in the left terminal of the component there are not solder between the metallization and the pad. The right terminal shows solder between the metallization and the pad. This effect is caused by adhesive contamination over the pad. Unfortunately this condition is not clearly observed in the photo, but it is observed in the microscope. The fillet that is formed in the end side of the component is not affected. Is this condition acceptable? Thanks in advance for your help, <<0603soldera1.jpg>> Alejandro Becerra Phone (915) 841-8518, Fax (915) 841-8518 [log in to unmask] ############################################################## TechNet Mail List 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://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional information. If you need assistance - contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315 ##############################################################