A Comparison of Localized Electronics Cleanliness Testing and Surface Insulation Resistance – Part 2Author: Jason Fullerton
Company: Alpha Assembly Solutions
Date Published: 9/17/2017 Conference: SMTA International
The flux test coupons for both tests were prepared in accordance with IPC TM-650 220.127.116.11. The IPC B-24 coupons used were manufactured using a lead-free wave solder process. Coupons were then tested for SIR per JSTD- 004B using IPC TM-650 18.104.22.168, and tested with localized cleanliness testing.
The results for fifteen no-clean fluxes are presented: three VOC-free rosin-free fluxes, two alcohol-based rosin-free fluxes, and ten alcohol-based fluxes with rosin. The results with six of these fluxes were demonstrated in Part I of this study.
A divergence in test results is observed between the J-STD- 004B SIR pass/fail requirement of 100 MO minimum and the clean/dirty results provided by the cleanliness test system.
The SIR resistance/time graphs and cleanliness tester current/time graphs are compared. The Corrosivity Index (CI) calculated based on the result of localized cleanliness testing is compared with final SIR values for the fluxes.
localized cleanliness testing, SIR, liquid flux
Members download articles for free:
Not a member yet?
What else do you get when you join SMTA? Read about all of the benefits that go along with membership.
Notice: Sharing of articles is restricted to just your immediate work group. Downloaded papers should not be stored on an external network or shared on the internet.