Order by: Relevancy | Date
Feb 1, 2006 | Good point
Feb 1, 2006 | or conformal coat the cap.
Dec 16, 2005 | Try paste flux instead.... oh yeah.. clean it as soon as it comes out of reflow.
Nov 18, 2005 | Just don't forget to clean the fingers, they will contaminate you Pb-Free pot.
Sep 7, 2005 | Hi Steve Will try your sugestion and C. Thanks. Smartasp
Aug 30, 2005 | No-Clean flux residue and RF application limits the type of chemistry used in your process, perhaps the chemistry is not able to consistently remove the residues. No-clean residues are the most difficult to remove. Steve suggested going to a water soluble, and, using spray type cleaner. You can also, use a spray type cleaner on RMA, No-clean and Water Soluble chemistries. Spray type cleaners allow for greater flexibility in chemistry selection and typically offer integrated rinse and dry processes. The statistical quality of the cleaning process can be checked using integrated rinse to a specified exiting rinse water resistivity value. Have
Aug 16, 2005 | Hi, Are they no clean fluxes? Regards, Grant
Jul 21, 2005 | are you going to clean the boards prior to coating?
Jul 16, 2005 | Thanks Everybody!!!
Jun 22, 2005 | started referring to the machine as "the sauna" and decided it was a feature, not a bug. Our 3 Hellers used 100cfm, I think, and we had one that fouled the air with no-clean fumes no matter what we did. I could run 200cfm through the stack with a new blower AND roof unit, clean impeller, clean filters , clean baffles, etc., and it still blew fumes (and puffed on the tissue). Never figured it out. We outsourced and now it's someone else's problem.
Jun 7, 2005 | I need to know about the quality of water to clening and deionization degree. Thanks
Apr 26, 2005 | Are you cleaning the component off first with alcohol or something equivelent (noresidue)?
Apr 25, 2005 | technology on populated assemblies to prevent its wide spread use. I am not saying that it is not a good technology. What I am saying is that if a user chooses to apply ultrasonic energy to populated assemblies, they should be prepared to defend it. May I remind you of the military cleaning standard that stated �subject to review and disapproval�. You do not address the issues of process control (or lack thereof) with regards to ultrasonic cleaning systems. Perhaps you can recommend just one ultrasonic cleaning system designed specifically for populated circuit assemblies. I am a proponent of ultrasonic cleaning. I am also very pragmatic. Mike Konrad
Mar 1, 2005 | Indium NC SMQ92J for both lead and unleaded
Dec 15, 2004 | Thank you Pete C. I will check these web site first. Grayman
Dec 13, 2004 | Thank you for the information I will check the web site today. Arman
Dec 9, 2004 | What does your flux supplier say?
Dec 2, 2004 | Does anyone know the proper range of Oxygen PPM for no clean fluxes ?
Nov 24, 2004 | Very Smart!!
Nov 22, 2004 | How could I determine the effectiveness of the cap vendor's cleaning process? Thanks again, John
Aug 31, 2004 | Indy, could you give me pls, the address of Chemtronics? Tnks
Jul 29, 2004 | Thank you for the Information. CJ
Jun 24, 2004 | IPC / EIA J-STD-001-C, Appendix B
May 7, 2004 | Bruce, Using a foam fluxer with no-clean flux is a very touchy situation. It is imperative that the specific gravity of any flux be maintained within the manufacturers recommendations. If it is not, you will get icicles and bridging. Maintaining the specific gravity is difficult with no-clean fluxes because the specific gravity is so low. Spray fluxing is generally recommended when using a no-clean flux. If you can't afford a spray fluxer you should check the specific gravity hourly. Also, the Hollis machines normally used calrod preheat elements. This can be tricky when using a no-clean
Apr 13, 2004 | Water Soluble for No Clean BGA Balls Hi Dreamsniper, It seen this is the major issue had been occurs you.( We had face all this issue last time too) We had done a lot of areospace products before and most of ours products is a must on class 3 spec. BGA is not that tough to clean of the flux whether is NC or WS. Is still underfill, encapsilation, EPIR... not only about the corr or clean issue. We had done may clean test, ion test, ftir.... Is still show WS is the best for class 3 products. Current our wash can perform to below 1.5mil washing and it had pass all test too. If you need more info please give me your email
Apr 13, 2004 | Water Soluble for No Clean BGA Balls Dreamy, OA fluxes / pastes have differing levels of activity. Most OA fluxes must be cleaned very soon after reflow. OA fluxes and pastes, while offering an aggressive flux package and a relatively easy removal (solubility in water), they are the worst if left on the board. Sometimes leaving OA flux on a board for one week is OK but most of the time the solder joint and component leads will be damaged. No clean flux is no more difficult to remove after one week or one year than if cleaned immediately after reflow. Best advice: Remove OA flux / paste immediately after reflow (at least
Apr 8, 2004 | Didn't they do this on an old episode of The Brady Bunch? Your wash will have severe foaming prob
Mar 29, 2004 | Russ is correct.
Mar 28, 2004 | PCB post reflow cleaning Hi, I would also be interested in this thread, but our problem has a different twist to it. We have good results from our reflow with Koki no clean paste, however when we pass the boards through the wave solder machine, the flux in that leaves a foggy residue on the bottom side of the board. We are using a Soltec Delta C, and it's work ok as far as not spaying any flux onto the top of the board, so the component side looks great, however the bottom is foggy. The product is PCI cards, so they need to look clean and new when purchased by our customers. Does anyone have any suggestions for what we
Mar 26, 2004 | Big Claims� No Data� Ummm�
Mar 26, 2004 | PCB post reflow cleaning Dear Sir, If you are looking for the best bang for the buck you will have to stop cleaning and use a no-residue paste instead of a no-clean. No-residue chemistry becomes totaly volatile in dwell time above reflow resulting in residue free boards. I know you will not believe this but all i ask you , is to give this a try and all you can lose is one hour of your time but the gain could be a total solution for your cleaning problems. Patrick Patrick@no-residue.com www.no-residue.com
Mar 18, 2004 | Thanks, Dave Is that for cleaning component or PCB ? JJ
Feb 24, 2004 | Im using Hi-Grade 1075 now. Is the 3541 a no-clean?
Feb 13, 2004 | So Deionized water has high ion concentrations, never knew that.
Feb 4, 2004 | I like it too. Very clean and easy to use.
Dec 24, 2003 | Kapton tape is heat resistant to tempratures accociated with wave solder process. If your process is not no clean then masking compound will work.
Nov 13, 2003 | Hello folks, I have a customer who has what appears to be very oxidized leads on a component. Their component mnf. has no new product to offer and they have 20K of these they have to solder to get product out the door. They are using a no-clean chemistry. The leads don't accept solder. I have gotten samples attempted the no-clean process with additional flux and higher temp to no avail. An OA chemistry with dipping the leads in OA flux and then tinning them in a solder pot and then testing the wicking of the lead with a solder iron works. Two questions: One is I believe I have removed the oxidation from the lead, however I know nothing of plating. If there is poor plating of the lead and I OA and then Tin is this acceptable? Will there be problems down the road? Second is we the clean the OA flux off the leads, populate the boards and send them thru a No-Clean process via Wave. Does
Jul 17, 2003 | What is this oxidation? What does it look like?
Jul 17, 2003 | Any suggestions on trying a paste with a stronger flux?
Jun 20, 2003 | Russ, Uh, yeah. Thanks.
Jun 19, 2003 | Hoss, I notice that no has responded to you. Do you still need help?
Jun 13, 2003 | Why not a water soluble paste? They have very active flux. Russ
Jun 13, 2003 | What does your current paste supplier suggest?
Jun 4, 2003 | CAL, Thanks for the input. When I said chemistry I was refering to soldering chemistry and not cleaning. I believe this machine has the capability to incorporate a saponifier but would prefer not to run in this manner. Running a closed loop DI recirc system and using chemistry can be mutually exclusive as I understand it. The vast majority of our production is garden variety, easy to clean boards. Even though I'd like to be able to clean under BGAs inline without a saponifier, I do understand the benefits of doing so (reducing water's surface tension). We have vapor degreasing and batch cleaning (with chems)capability that would serve as my backup plan if an inline system does not perform well for the limited volume of BGAs we process (whew). At any rate, I understand your point and appreciate the input.
May 20, 2003 | Aqueous Board Cleaning This probably a reflow issue, not a cleaning issue. Although ultrasonic cleaners are not normally used in post-reflow applications (fear of internal wire bond damage), I have never heard of broken solder joints caused by an ultrasonic cleaning system. Most ultrasonic cleaners used in this industry are rated at 40 kHz, a relatively safe frequency. I would suspect there is a problem with you reflow process. As far as cleaning is concerned, high pressure spray-in-air systems are normally effective. A chemical may be added to the wash water to lower the surface tension and increase under
May 12, 2003 | We can email you a contact
Apr 30, 2003 | obviously are not cleaning your boards properly. Tell us how you know: * Washer is cleaning boards properly. * Saponifer concentration is monitored properly. * Saponifer concentration is measured properly. * Cleaning after third ops is ineffective. [Don�t tell us your operators use squeeze bottles for their flux.] Just to suave your wounds, Cascade does a GREAT job cleaning, but it�s very expensive and highly ionic.
Mar 13, 2003 | That's a good idea...and to add on to it, you could wash after the wave, too--it really doesn't matter. A question about this though--unless your Customer specifically requires "clean", no-clean flux whether it's ugly or not, is permitted by IPC, and as such we don't worry about it . Alternatively, we have a 'saponified' washer (basically an industrial size dishwasher) that is quite effective at removing the no-clean fluxes from reflow, if the picky Customers require it. We use Armakleen as the detergent. A 45-minute wash makes them clean, dry, and cosmetically appealing
Feb 28, 2003 | -Loop closed loop filtration system for Rinse TorridZone Dryer if you desire a "test ready" product out of the cleaner, otherwise go for SCAT option in Dryer 1 & CAT option for Dryer 2. *- if cleaning no-clean This configuration cleans no-clean flux residue from under devices with 3mil gap at a conveyor
Jan 16, 2003 | RMA vs No clean is not oxidized after reflow. I have to quitely run a few brds with No-clean paste just to compare the yield at ICT for data collection purposes. I've noticed tremendous improvement on the yield. I'm sure this gotta do with the solid flux that prevented the probes contact to the testpoint. Does anybody have similar experience on this ? Can somebody give me a technical explainations of to why this is so, OR why is the no-clean flux does not hv this problem when they also left the solid flux on the solder formation ? Pls help. I need some input to convince my customer to change to no-clean. Thank you
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197