Chemical Data vs Electrical Data - Which is a Better Reliability Predictor
This study looks to correlate IPC Chemical and Electrical CAF test results. The electrical testing utilized was found within the PCQR2 Database document.
DOWNLOAD
Authored By:
Mark Northrup
IEC Electronics
Timothy A. Estes
Conductor Analysis Technologies, Inc.
Joe Russeau
Precision Analytical Laboratory, Inc.
Summary
The goal of this study was to correlate IPC Chemical and Electrical CAF test results. The electrical testing utilized for the test coupons was found within the PCQR2 Database document. The chemical testing of the coupons utilized Ion Chromatography (IC) testing in accordance with IPC-TM-650, method 2.3.28.
Conclusions
1. There currently are no Pass / Fail cleanliness criteria exist for the IPC ion chromatography method. Criteria used for this study was based on customer suggested levels.
2. The Current Pass / Fail criteria for CAF testing per PCQR2 are 107Ω latch level.
3. Per industry customer cleanliness criteria, the following groups failed chemical testing: * All, except P10 because there were no samples available after CAF testing
4. Per PCQR2 criteria the following groups failed electrical testing: * P5, P10, 08, 028 and 030
5. Neither method is a better CAF reliability predictor.
Initially Published in the SMTA Proceedings
|
