BSI PD IEC TR 61189-5-506:2019
$142.49
Test methods for electrical materials, printed boards and other interconnection structures and assemblies – General test methods for materials and assemblies. An intercomparison evaluation to implement the use of fine-pitch test structures for surface insulation resistance (SIR) testing of solder fluxes in accordance with IEC 61189-5-501
Published By | Publication Date | Number of Pages |
BSI | 2019 | 26 |
This Technical Report is an intercomparison supporting the development of IEC 61189-5-501 in relation to the SIR method. This document sets out to validate the introduction of a new 200-µm gap SIR pattern, and was benched marked against existing SIR gap patterns of 318 µm and 500 µm.
PDF Catalog
PDF Pages | PDF Title |
---|---|
2 | undefined |
4 | CONTENTS |
6 | FOREWORD |
8 | INTRODUCTION |
9 | 1 Scope 2 Normative references 3 Terms and definitions 4 Test board concept for intercomparison 4.1 The need for a fine-pitch SIR pattern |
10 | 4.2 Test board design |
11 | 4.3 Test board fluxing Figures Figure 1 – TB144 Tables Table 1 – SIR pattern information |
12 | 5 Test procedure for intercomparison 5.1 Sample preparation Table 2 – Flux to be used for SIR evaluation test Table 3 – Samples for SIR evaluation testing |
13 | 5.2 Preparation of samples for humidity chamber 5.3 Placement of samples inside the humidity chamber Figure 2 – Connector arrangement |
14 | 5.4 Resistance measurements 5.5 Evaluation of results 5.6 Additional information 6 Results Figure 3 – Sample orientation in test chamber |
15 | Figure 4 – Participants’ (a to f) resistance measurements for the six test patterns on the checkerboard Figure 5 – Participant A control boards |
16 | Figure 6 – Participant A flux loaded boards Figure 7 – Participant B control boards Figure 8 – Participant B flux loaded boards |
17 | Figure 9 – Participant C control boards Figure 10 – Participant C flux loaded boards Figure 11 – Participant D control boards |
18 | Figure 12 – Participant D flux loaded boards Figure 13 – Participant E control boards Figure 14 – Participant E flux loaded boards |
19 | Figure 15 – Participant F control boards Figure 16 – Participant F flux loaded boards Figure 17 – Participant G control boards |
20 | Figure 18 – Participant G flux loaded boards Figure 19 – Participant D, and evidence of a fibre and the effect on the SIR Figure 20 – Participant E and evidence of corrosion shorting across the gap |
21 | Figure 21 – Participant G and evidence of a water droplet and the resulting drop in SIR and dendrite like failure Figure 22 – Participant G and a corrosion defect probably from a flux residue Figure 23 – Participant C dendrites and corrosions formed on all SIR patternsof all fluxed samples tested at 85°C/85% |
22 | Figure 24 – The average final SIR value for the control boards Figure 25 – The average final SIR value for the flux loaded boards |
23 | Figure 26 – The average final SIR for flux-loaded patterns by participant Figure 27 – Final SIR plotted as ohm.squares |
24 | Figure 28 – Ratio of the log Ω.square value to the 500-µm pattern |
25 | Bibliography |