Get the right stencil for the job.

This month we illustrate an example of what appears at first glance to be poor lead solderability. When examined, however, it is a combination of component and pad design.

FIGURE 1 shows the lead to be floating in the solder joint, suggesting poor wetting. When we examine the component lead and plastic body, however, the lead is not parallel, so it always sits off the pad surface, even if perfectly soldered. The lead sits in a cavity in the component body to maintain its position. But with the size of the pad used in the design and a full solder paste print, the component body will always lift.

To continue reading, please log in or register using the link in the upper right corner of the page.

Is poor stencil design the culprit?

This month we illustrate solder balling and incomplete reflow when reflowing through-hole components with pin-in-paste.

Solder balling pin-in-hole reflow (PIHR) close to the body of the connector suggests poor design of the stencil for this application (FIGURE 1). There is no standoff on the corner of this part, which may have permitted the paste to be displaced when the component was attached. There should always be free space around the paste deposit to permit placement and reflow, without contacting the paste.

A simple in-process test for determining component wettability.

This month we illustrate solderability testing using simulation. This is basically conducting simple on-the-shop-floor solderability testing to decide whether to use old components. I use paste printed onto glass slides using the paste and stencil from production. I use the same reflow profile for the board design and components in question.

These J-leaded component terminations wet successfully with the solder paste deposits on the glass plate. The paste has reflowed up, wetting the termination on the front face of the lead (FIGURE 1). However, look at the edge and the corners of the leads. If the solder paste has not added to the original tin plating, it calls into question the coating and component age. We have recently used this test to look at the compatibility of low-temperature solders on different terminations as well.

Why “dye and pry” is a fast, workable solution.

This month we show examples of testing BGAs with a “dye and pry,” a simple and cost-effective way of looking at joint failure or their condition after some form of mechanical testing or abnormal assembly practice.

FIGURE 1 shows a sample BGA joint after dye-and-pry testing. Eighty percent of the separated surface is covered by the red dye. This clearly shows separation occurred before the dye was added.