New Technology Waterless Cleaning Approach

Transcription

1 New Technology Waterless Cleaning Approach Debbie Carboni, Mike Bixenman, DBA & Ram Wissel, KYZEN Corporation Ryan Hulse, PhD, Honeywell Performance Solvents

2 Drivers/Motivators

3 Agenda Introduction DuoSolvent Cleaning Soil Solubility Cleaning Machine Experimental Conclusions

4 Accelerated Technologies Today s technology markets are exploding Infinite computing Sensors Networks Artificial Intelligence Robotics Digital manufacturing Synthetic biology Digital medicine Nanomaterials What do all these technologies have in common? MINIATURIZATION

5 Industry Challenge Change is constant Rate of change? Cleaning has to adapt

6 Water may face challenges

7 DuoSolvent Cleaning

8 Solvent Cleaning Cleaning Criteria Effective cleaning Waterless Process Small footprint Non-flammable Meets environmental standards Low toxicity Able to clean the variety of fluxes No one solvent answers this task today Is DuoSolvent up to the task? DuoSolvent is a single solution for today's fluxes.

9 DuoSolvent

10 Solvating Agent Solubility properties balanced Low Evaporation Cleaning Agent Vapor Pressure ~ mm 20 C Non Flammable Rinses well with Solvent Vapor Clean flux residues post soldering No-Clean Rosin Water soluble

11 Rinse Solvent Hydrofluoro-Olefin Technology Environmental VOC exempt by EPA and SCAQMD GWP = 1 (100-year ITH) Performance High Degree of Solvency KB Value 25 Low Surface Tension Surface tension 12.7 dynes/cm Safety Nonflammable Very Low Order of Toxicity OEL 800 PPM Stability/Compatibility Excellent Metal and plastic No stabilizers required no monitoring

12 Teas Diagram for Fluxes

13 Teas Diagram for Solvents δh Water ACN δp THFA DMSO Acetone DGA DMF MEK npb TDCE Methanol MCL Solvating Agent Rinse Solvent IPA DBE MMB NMP Toluene PGPE d-limonene Mesitylene δd

14 Teas Diagram for Solvents δh Water THFA DGA Methanol Solvating Agent IPA DBE Acetone MEK TDCE δp Rinse Solvent d-limonene Mesitylene δd Remove Solvent with High Toxicity

15 Teas Diagram for Solvents δh THFA δp Water DGA Solvating Agent DBE Rinse Solvent d-limonene Mesitylene δd Requires an Engineered Cleaning Solution Remove Flammable (FP < 90 C) Solvents

16 Stage 1: Match Cleaning Agent to Soil Clean Part Secondary Condensers H Dirty Part H Saturated Vapor Zone Primary Condensers Satellite Cleaning Console H Boiling Sump Rinsing Degreaser Rinsing Sump P F Chemical Isolation Rinse

17 Stage 2: Rinse Clea n Part Secondary Condensers H Dirty Part H Solvent Separation System S S S Waste H P Boiling Sump Saturated Vapor Zone Rinsing Sump P Primary Condensers F Waste Separation/Consolidation

18 IPC Test Vehicle IPC-B-52 (ENIG) test vehicle Designed for the following cleanliness testing: Surface Insulation Resistance (SIR) Ion Chromatography (IC) Assembled B52 X X X X

19 Data Collection RunOrder Test Board Solder Paste Cleaning Testing Main Board IC Break Out Board 1 B-52 No Solder Paste Not Cleaned SIR for 7 & 14 days IC B-52 No Solder Paste Not Cleaned SIR for 7 & 14 days IC B-52 Lead Free No-Clean Lead Free NC ~ Not Cleaned SIR for 7 & 14 days IC B-52 Lead Free No-Clean Lead Free NC ~ Not Cleaned SIR for 7 & 14 days IC B-52 Lead Free No-Clean Partially Cleaned with Rinse Solvent SIR for 7 & 14 days IC B-52 Lead Free No-Clean Partially Cleaned with Rinse Solvent SIR for 7 & 14 days IC B-52 Lead Free No-Clean Totally Cleaned Solvent Process SIR for 7 & 14 days IC B-52 Lead Free No-Clean Totally Cleaned Solvent Process SIR for 7 & 14 days IC SIR coupon IC coupon ENIG finish Assembled B52

20 Visual Data Findings Lead Free NC Before Cleaning

21 Visual Data Findings Rinse Solvent Cleaned

22 Visual Data Findings DuoSolvent Cleaned

23 DuoSolvent Anion Results

24 DuoSolvent Cation Results

25 DuoSolvent 14 Days Rinse Solvent only

26 Rinse Solvent Cleaned Comments A. QFP80 Comb some white residue B. QFP80 Comb Possible Dendrites C. QFP80 Comb Possible Dendrites (Backlighting)

27 DuoSolvent Clean 7 days

28 Duo Solvent Clean 14 days

29 Duo Solvent Clean Comments Overall the data was good and maintained well above the 100 MΩ limit. S/N 12 showed better data stability. The variation observed in the two samples may be an indication of process / material variability. Starting board cleanliness may also be at work in the data. The SMT Connector on S/N 11 had some intervals where the data jumped around. Visually, the only item observed was some very mild process debris (see the photo above). There was no evidence of any water spotting, corrosion or dendritic growth.

30 DATA FINDINGS

31 SIR Electrical Testing 1. Unprocessed boards Adequately clean Met the SIR requirements 2. Lead Free NC ~ not cleaned Overall good electrical resistivity when left uncleaned. Some data variability observed, especially in the QFP160 location. The second board (S/N 4) showed better overall SIR performance, less data variability. This suggests potential process variability. Met the SIR requirements

32 DuoSolvent 1. DuoSolvent Rinse cleaned The QFP80 comb of S/N7 saw some loss in resistivity but recovered The cause appeared to be white residue next to component terminations. Possible dendritic activity led to lower resistance levels. Most patterns met the SIR requirements 2. DuoSolvent Totally cleaned Some data variability was observed across several components. The SMT Connector showed the most pronounced variability, but maintained above the defined limit. QFP160 values passed but trended lower than other values Met the SIR requirements

33 CONCLUSIONS

34 Summary Duo Solvent Process Fluxes are multi compositional soils Engineered cleaning fluids required for Clean multi-compositional flux residues Rinse with a high vapor pressure solvent composition Provides a waterless solvent-based process for cleaning today s electronic assemblies Effective many flux residues Rinse fluid is effective at Removing drag-out from wash process Removes ionic residues during the rinse process

35 Acknowledgements Lockheed Martin Ocala built the IPC B-52 test boards. The authors thank Ben Gumpert and Linda Woody of Lockheed Martin for building the test boards and providing feedback into the DOE design. The authors thank James Perigen of Kyzen Corporation for running IC analysis and Joe Russeau of Precision Analytical Laboratory for running SIR analysis. Thank you to AIM, Alpha, Cobar, Indium, and Senju for supply Paste/Flux samples

36 Thank You Debbie Carboni Kyzen Corporation 37

37 Appendix Solder Pastes on Slides 26 & 27 Paste A Alpha OM 338-PT Paste B Alpha OM 340 Paste C AIM NC 258 R-15 Paste D Senju 1 Paste E Senju 2 Paste F Indium 8.9 HF1 Paste G AIM NC 258 Paste H Indium 9.72 Paste I Alpha RMA 390 Paste J Cobar SC5-XM55 Paste K Indium SMQ92J Paste L Alpha RMA 9086 Paste M Indium 8.9 HF Paste N AIM 520