So Bev, LF residues really are more reactive? You seem to have done some measurements. Thanks, Ioan -----Original Message----- From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Bev Christian Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:12 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [TN] Cleaning John, Not if they do their homework and do the proper testing to show that the tweak in reactivity won't put them on dangerous ground. That is why there are tests like copper mirror, halide ion, British corrosion test, SIR and electrochemical migration. Bev RIM -----Original Message----- From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Burke Sent: January 9, 2007 12:02 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [TN] Cleaning That's what I was thinking Brian...................8-) With the change to lead free and the various "wetting" issues a lot of people are using a more active flux if only to make the joints "look" more like 63/37 and as a result are having to use cleaning systems to remove the flux. Of course the ones that do not remove the flux will find out eventually why they should have done!! John John Burke (408) 515 4992 --------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------