Re: Solder, wither art thou?

John Devereux wrote:

>> Robert Baer writes: >> >>> Joerg wrote: >>>> >>>> What's wrong with no-clean? I like it. But I never use lead-free >>>> unless I really have to. >>>> >>> Because it is verrrry hard to clean all of the sh*t off! >>> I think that the so-called "no-clean" formulations are rather >>> conductive, spread like crazy, and polluting and need semi-aggressive >>> cleaners to remove..and need multi-level cleaning methods and more >>> time and energy than water soluble fluxes. >> >> That's why it's called no-clean! :) >> >> I've never had any trouble with it, analog circuits included. >> > > Hmm, three experienced posters had conductivity trouble with this > solder and you and I never did. That's really strange. And I did > solder rather sensitive stuff with it such as photodiode circuitry > where nanoamps mattered.

Me too on occasion (photodiode circuits).

I gather it can be bad to actually try to clean "no-clean" flux. Perhaps the reports from people who tried have given it a bad reputation?

> > > Just for the record I use the 15mil Kester 8806 No-Clean (leaded) in > my lab and also at many clients. > > >>> When one wants to have their circuit to work reliably to 200C (not a >>> misprint), then everything, meaning all parts: under, over and around, >>> as well as all of the PCB *must* be clean. >> > > Ok, my stuff doesn't run that hot :-)

No, nor mine :)

--

John Devereux
Reply to
John Devereux
Loading thread data ...

We only tried to clean it when the problems showed up in boards back from the assembly house. Scrubbing with an aggressive solvent using something like a toothbrush in the small affected area got rid of the problem, but it was about 10x as much work as just cleaning the regular flux off.

Maybe they quietly changed the flux formulation..

Reply to
Spehro Pefhany

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.