Prior to the end of the QPL program Water Soluble fluxes were accepted and listed as qualified to QQS-571-E. (section 2 of Mil-F-14256F) We obtained the qualification during the QQS571-F rev. and prior to the cancellation of the Q rating. If you would like more information feel free to contact me off TechNet as I do not wish to mix Technical and commercial issues one line. Thanks VBK Vincent B. Kinol CQE Applications Engineer OMG Americas Microbond [log in to unmask] Phone 919-544-8090 x298 FAX 919-544-8090 -----Original Message----- From: Kasprzak, Bill (esd) US [SMTP:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 5:38 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [TN] Semi-Aqueous Cleaner... Eric: Not necessarily so. We use water soluble flux on both NHB5300 and Mil-Std-2000A programs. Without going into a huge amount of detail in this forum, I'll make the following points. #1 - Mil-Std-2000A no longer exists, your customer must be informed of this reality. However, if they insist, the last known QPL (Qualified ProductsList) for Mil-F-14256 (Another obsolete spec referenced in the 2000 spec) is dated sometime in early 1995. Since you have to pick a qualified RMA flux from this list, there are absolutely no guarantees that the formulations for the same flux today is exactly the same as it was 4 years ago. You can apply the same rationale to many of the reference specs in Mil-std-2000A. #2 - The use of non-rosin fluxes was allowed in Mil-Std-2000A. One was simply to get your customer to approve the flux, other options involved testing. This testing roughly parallels the same kind of testing required when using a non-rosin flux on J-Std-001A. We have one customer ourselves, still living in the past with Mil-std-2000A, we are using the data used to qualify for J-Std-001A as evidence of compliance. #3 - In NHB5300, Chapter 9 addresses the use of Water Soluble flux. We simply requested approval from the procuring agency based on the strength of the testing we did for J-std-001A. We got approval. In closing, both specs do not require the use of R or RMA. Certainly they are the preferred since no specific testing other than an Omega Meter type test is required for use. There are alternatives. Bill Kasprzak Moog Inc. ---------- From: Eric Kalgren To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [TN] Semi-Aqueous Cleaner... Date: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 10:23AM We use RMA because NASA's NHB5300 and the MIL-STD-2000A both require the use of R or RMA flux. Anything else has to be specially approved by the military and NASA. And despite the fact that I have heard that both documents have been superceded, most of our contracts hold us to those standards. Eric Kalgren BFGoodrich Aerospace Data Systems Division (505) 938-5139 [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 Gayatri Sardeshpande at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5365 ##############################################################