I agree that there are a number of variables that enter into this test methodology and that it is not a good tool for product qualification. As a process control tool it works, provided you have correlated it back to some other method like IC (Ion Chromatography) and can define what a value of say 5, actually means (clean or not clean). I personally have never been fond of this test methodology due to its lack of repeatability; but if I understand Joe's question, he is wanting to know if the value defined in J-STD-001C can be revised based on their piece of equipment. Certainly, if heated cells are figured into the mix, then I would expect to see increases in the amounts of extractable ionics, as heat aids solubility. But simply to make a change to the defined value based on one premise (our piece of equipment is an Omegameter, therefore can we change the value) is not what I would consider a justification for changing that value. Another point, for which I may be incorrect (please correct me if I am wrong), but my cursory review of J-STD-001 Rev D states that IPC-TM-650, method 2.3.25 Rev C be used for static (item 6) and dynamic (item 5) systems. So a compensation is being made for the different systems. Additionally, I have found nothing that suggests the defined value is different for either system only by the type of flux used. Personally, I think Brian Ellis has hit the nail on the head and I agree with his thoughts. Best Regards, Joe Russeau Process Analyst Precision Analytical Laboratory, Inc. 4106 Cartwright Dr. Ste. A Kokomo, IN 46902 P: 765-455-1993 F: 765-455-1996 E: [log in to unmask] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Kraszewski" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 11:19 AM Subject: Re: [TN] Omegameter to IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.25 cross reference > There can be a significant difference in the results presented by the > instruments in question. Case in point, is that I have compared results > from a Omegameter 600SMD (static system) versus an Ionograph 500M SMD > (dynamic & heated). On the same type of assemblies I have gotten a 3.5 > times higher contamination rate on the 500M SMD. > > The calibration solution is primarily for a one point calibration, used > to confirm where the manufacturer believes that one point should be at. > When you add features such as heating, and dynamic solution cleaning you > can get quit a noticeable difference in results, especially if you are > using a set time for the test. At one time the EMPF did some work where > they were developing correlation factors compared to the MIL P-28809 (?) > manual (beaker & wash bottle) method. Those tests seem to end with the > EMPF so in actuality I think they only ran ~ 3-4 systems. > > These ROSE tests are only really useful to monitor an established > process. They are not really meant to qualify a product for use. I seem > to remember this more or less stated in some IPC document (HDBK-001?). > > Hope we get some more conversation going on this point as I too would > like to find a way to better correlate these results from different > instruments. > > > Rich K/KEDS > > > -----Original Message----- > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joe Russeau > Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:21 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [TN] Omegameter to IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.25 cross > reference > > Hi Joe, > > I have reviewed rev D of J-STD-001 (don't have Rev C), in section > 8.3.6.3, > it says "for assemblies soldered with ROL0 or ROL1 fluxes, the surface > contamination shall be less than 1.56 micrograms per square centimeter > NaCl > (approximately 10 micrograms / sq. in) equivalent ionic or ionizable > flux > residue". I do not see in the Rev D version ( I would assume it is > similar > in the Rev C) where a particular piece of equipment is specified. Thus, > I > would conclude that adjustments to that value are not warranted, unless > you > and your customer have agrred to a different value. I will grant you > that > not all pieces of equipment measure the same on all occassions ( too > many > variables to discuss, perhaps another discussion), but the Omegameters I > have worked with have standardizing solutions that can be purcahsed. > Standardizing the machine before testing to make sure it is measuring > correctly is always a good practice, but changing the recommended value > just > because you are using an Omegameter instead of an Ionograph, not enough > justification for me. My 2 cents. > > Best Regards, > > Joe Russeau > Process Analyst > > Precision Analytical Laboratory, Inc. > 4106 Cartwright Dr. Ste. A > Kokomo, IN 46902 > > P: 765-455-1993 > F: 765-455-1996 > E: [log in to unmask] > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Macko, Joe @ IEC" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 9:27 AM > Subject: [TN] Omegameter to IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.25 cross reference > > > > Fellow techs, > > > > > > > > Good morning. > > > > We have an Omegameter 600SMD that is used to check boards for ionic > > contaminates. The ionic residue limit within J-STD-001C, para. 8.3.6 > is > 10 > > ug/sq. NaCl. Some personnel believe that this number should be > adjusted > > based on the actual instrument used (e.g., an Omegameter). Would > someone > be > > so kind as to comment on this subject and what the correct limit is > for an > > Omegameter type of instrument. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > joe > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > > Technet Mail List provided as a 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 > for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] > or > 847-615-7100 ext.2815 > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Technet Mail List provided as a 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 > ext.2815 > ----------------------------------------------------- > > --------------------------------------------------- > Technet Mail List provided as a 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 > ----------------------------------------------------- > --------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a 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/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 -----------------------------------------------------