1) Wouldn't it be a good thing if the residues hardened?  This would mean
the ionic portions (if there) would be encapsulated.
2) Also if these boards are sitting for several weeks with strong ionic
contaminates on them, does the company look to see if any corrosion has
occurred?

Bev
RIM

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of - bogert
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] Question on Timeliness of J-STD-001D Ionic Contamination
Cleanliness Testing

July 17, 2008

J-STD-001D, paragraph 8.3.6 requires that, if cleanliness testing is 
mandated, the testing must be performed after final cleaning (i.e., prior to

conformal coating).  We have an OEM who performs cleaning within 1/2 hour 
after wave soldering.  The OEM also does post hand soldering after wave 
soldering and does local cleaning of the hand soldered joints in max 1/2 
hour after soldering.  However, several days or weeks may pass between the 
wave soldering and hand soldering operations before conformal coating is 
done.  The OEM does the cleanliness test just prior to conformal coating as 
is mandated by J-STD-001 since the cleaning after hand soldering is the 
"final cleaning operation".

My question is since the cleanliness test is not done until several weeks 
after wave soldering/post wave soldering cleaning was done, will the ionic 
cleanliness testing mandated by J-STD-001 (standard instrument test like 
Omegameter) be caple of detecting ionic contamination?

Seems to me that if the cleaning process is having problems, harmful Type M 
or H flux residue, if not completely removed by the cleaning process, may 
solidify to the extent that the DI water/Alcohol cleanliness test may not be

capable of dissolving the hardened residue precluding detecting ionic 
contamination.  Is this a valid concern or not?  Is there any data that 
shows the ability of the test equipment to detect ionic residue over time 
since cleaning?  Do we need to make any changes to J-STD-001, paragraph 
8.3.6 based on my question? If so, please propose recommended wording for 
the change.  Thanks for your support.

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0
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 15.0
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
-----------------------------------------------------