Electronics Assembly Knowledge, Vision & Wisdom
Is No-Clean the Trend for QFN Components?
Is No-Clean the Trend for QFN Components?
Is there a move to no-clean for QFN components, or will certain technologies have to continue using a traditional cleaning process? The Assembly Brothers, Phil Zarrow and Jim Hall, answer this question.
Board Talk
Board Talk is presented by ITM Consulting

Phil Zarrow
Phil Zarrow, ITM Consulting
With over 35 years experience in PCB assembly, Phil is one of the leading experts in SMT process failure analysis. He has vast experience in SMT equipment, materials and processes.


Jim Hall
Jim Hall, ITM Consulting
A Lean Six-Sigma Master Blackbelt, Jim has a wealth of knowledge in soldering, thermal technology, equipment and process basics. He is a pioneer in the science of reflow.

ITM Consulting
* EMS Qualification, Evaluation and Selection
* SMT Process Consulting and Troubleshooting
* SMT Process Development and Set-up
* SMT Process Audits
* Lead-free Process Readiness Audits
* SMT Process Optimization
* On-Site Workshops
Submit A Comment
Comments are reviewed prior to posting. You must include your full name to have your comments posted. We will not post your email address.

Your Name


Your Company


Your E-mail


Your Country


Your Comment



Transcript
Phil
And welcome to Board Talk with Phil Zarrow and Jim Hall, The Assembly Brothers. Today we're coming to you from the ITM Consulting Failure Analysis Cave, high atop Mt. Rialto.

We're here to talk about electronic assembly, materials, equipment, components, practices, procedures among other things. Jim, what's today's question?

Jim
The question. I recently switched businesses from simple single boards to complex double sided boards which are water cleaned.

I had previously been using no-clean processes at all our contract assemblers. That is what I have training and experience on with resolving issues.

Since moving to this new job I have been pushing to reduce cost by moving and testing no-clean processes at our current contract assemblers. I recently had an issue of residue left under a QFN package, that's a form of BTC bottom terminated components, after cleaning.

The resolution was a series of design experiments at the contract assembler to determine the best line speed, water temperature, pressure to run the boards and which saponifier to use.

My question, is there a continuing trend to move to no-clean or is industry in agreement that certain technology will have to remain in a cleaning process?

Phil
I guess there's two answers to your question, the way you pose it anonymous. No, the true answer is there really is no trend per se, obviously people with certain commercial interests might indicate there is, but it's like everything in our industry.

It's application driven. In this case, the decision whether to go to no-clean or clean is depending on the actual residue that you have there and the service environment that the application is going to see.

 Do you agree with that my brother?

Jim
Obviously everybody would love to go to no-clean if they could. It's cheaper, you eliminate the process and so forth. Yes, for high rel applications, long service lives, people have concerns.

And with certain technologies, in this case we're talking bottom terminated components, QFNs and other related packages, there are serious issues.

As we've spoken of before, there are questions even about the safety and long-term reliability of no-cleans with the BTC package. The idea that flux residues and flux chemistry gets trapped under the package, because a low stand-off and high volume of solder paste and flux in the central pad, can you guarantee that you fully deactivate that flux under a BGA package?

Even if you put the whole package through the appropriate temperature cycle during reflow. Yes I do agree. It's application specific.

If you decide you have to clean the bottom terminated components, what you're seeing in the experience with your CEMs is absolutely correct, it is not trivial.

Even with a good water cleaning process and engineered cleaning agents, to get everything right to ensure that you actually clean all of the residue that's supposed to be cleanable or a no-clean residue, simply because, mainly the geometry.

You've got low clearance and very little open space to get fluids to flow under there and flow back out again to carry the potential contaminants away. I think you're on the right path and you're dealing with the reality that exists in the market place and you're going to have to make your own decision of whether no clean is worth it with your specific product.

So I guess I agree with you, Phil.

Phil
This has been Board Talk with Phil and Jim.

And whatever you do ...

Jim
Don't solder like my bother. 

Phil
Don't solder like my brother. 

Comments
This is the perfect application for a vapor defluxing process and the reason why vapor defluxing has become so popular in the past few years. Vapor can go places that water cannot and the solvents used in vapor defluxing are much stronger than a water based solution. More info on vapordefluxing can be found at vapordegreasing.info
Rick Perkins, Chem Logic
Free Newsletter Subscription
Every issue of the Circuit Insight email newsletter will bring you the latest information on the issues affecting you and your company.

Insert Your Email Address

Directory Search


Program Search
Related Programs
bullet How Clean is Clean Enough
bullet Dissolution of Metal Foils in Common Beverages
bullet Is Cleaning Critical to POP Assemblies?
bullet Ultrasonics as an Option for Electronics Assembly Cleaning
bullet Cleaning High Reliability Assemblies with Tights Gaps
bullet Seeking Alternatives to Solvent Cleaning
bullet Incoming Circuit Boards - How Clean Is Clean?
bullet Alternative Solvent with Low Global Warming Potential
bullet Cleanliness Assessment for Class III Lead-Free No-Clean Assemblies
bullet HCFC-225 Phaseout, What Now?
More Related Programs