Hi Jenny,
 
Your horrified expressions are not without merit.  Since the flux hasn't been heated, it hasn't had a chance to go through its full chemical reaction cycle that allows the activators to get bound by the residue.  That means the flux is still active as you ship it out the door.  Add a mix of moisture to mobilize the activators and you will be able to charge your customers for the "Chia Pet" that is on the board :-)
 
Its a classic problem.  Don't worry, you're not the first company to do this, and you won't be the last.  (You might even get to revisit this in a few years after everyone forgets why un-reacted no-clean flux can't remain on the board).
 
Ryan Grant
-----Original Message-----
From: Genny Gibbard [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 4:25 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] no clean flux as a board cleaner?

Consider a hand rework situation. 
We had a revelation from our production floor that occasionally a certain product is cleaned using a no-clean flux pen.  We have a product that the customer is very stringent that if we use no-clean solder on their product, we must not clean any residue off the board with our standard board wash.
However, if a component is removed and replaced during a rework situation, often there is a lot of excess flux residue left on the board.  It came to light that in order to make this look better, they were applying a small amount of no-clean flux to the area with a flux pen, and then scrubbing the area with a brush.
 
There were several horrified expressions around the table when this came to light. 
 
What would be the dangers of doing this?  The board is not heated like a reflow situation, or anything like that, after the 'cleaning' operation, so does this mean the flux may not be 'inert'?  I thought that it is no-clean flux used in the rework in the first place - why do they need to clean it off?  They said that it looked awful, and the inspectors wouldn't let the product thru if it wasn't cleaned up.
 
Thoughts, suggestions?  Should we be horrified, or just let them continue?

Genny Gibbard (mailto:[log in to unmask])

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------