Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design SMT Electronics Assembly Manufacturing Forum

Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design Forum

SMT electronics assembly manufacturing forum.


Todd N

#12264

Spray Fluxers | 15 March, 1999

Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option?

Thanks, Todd

reply »

Chrys

#12265

Re: Spray Fluxers | 15 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd | Hi Todd,

There are big differences between the high-priced ultrasonics and the more economic time/pressure systems. And yes, unfortunately, you get what you pay for...

I really like USI's Opti-fluxer. It's an ultrasonic head that reciprocates back and forth under the circuit board. I've got an article coming out about it in Electronics Packaging and Production. I think it's in the March issue, but it may not be until next month. I'll email you a copy of the study I did where we put the Opti-Fluxer head-to-head with the Jet Fluxer. In my opinion, the Opti was much better. And as a bonus, it was about $20K cheaper, too.

Now I know I said you get what you pay for, but in that sense I was referring to the simple time/pressure systems that typically use Binx spray heads that were designed for spraying paint. A high solids content will clog these in a heartbeat, particularly if the carrier is alcohol.

The other problem is that these types of sprayers cannot atomize the flux as readily as the ultrasonics can. The coarser mist cannot penetrate the samll clearances in pin thru hole parts or small vias. You end up throwing a lot of flux at the board in an effort to try to get topside solder fillets. Then you have so much flux on the bottom of the board that you underactivate it, getting crappy soldering, and letting the wave wash it off, so you end up with the black rosin sludge floating on top of the solder pot. Doesn't sound pretty, does it? It isn't.

As for precautions associated with OA, everything around the flux mist should be stainless, not just the nozzle. OA is active at room temperature, and seems to never get exhausted. You'll need a stainless enclosure, a good curtain to keep it from getting into the wave solder machine chassis, stainless exhuast ducts, and teflon delivery hoses. Most of the fluxer manufacturers offer an OA upgrade package that encompasses these precautions. If the manufacturer claims that their regular spray fluxer will handle OA just fine, don't believe them!! Either they haven't really done the life cycle test, or they're counting on the revenue from the spare parts. And they're sure as heck not just altruistically making all fluxers super-beefy in this cost-compettitive market.

I think that pretty much covers it. Sorry to be so long-winded, but I haen't been on the SMT net for a few weeks and I think I just got carried away. I'll email the report.

Chrys

reply »

George Steele

#12266

Re: Spray Fluxers | 15 March, 1999

| | Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | | | Thanks, | | Todd | | | Hi Todd, | | There are big differences between the high-priced ultrasonics and the more economic time/pressure systems. And yes, unfortunately, you get what you pay for... | | I really like USI's Opti-fluxer. It's an ultrasonic head that reciprocates back and forth under the circuit board. I've got an article coming out about it in Electronics Packaging and Production. I think it's in the March issue, but it may not be until next month. I'll email you a copy of the study I did where we put the Opti-Fluxer head-to-head with the Jet Fluxer. In my opinion, the Opti was much better. And as a bonus, it was about $20K cheaper, too. | | Now I know I said you get what you pay for, but in that sense I was referring to the simple time/pressure systems that typically use Binx spray heads that were designed for spraying paint. A high solids content will clog these in a heartbeat, particularly if the carrier is alcohol. | | The other problem is that these types of sprayers cannot atomize the flux as readily as the ultrasonics can. The coarser mist cannot penetrate the samll clearances in pin thru hole parts or small vias. You end up throwing a lot of flux at the board in an effort to try to get topside solder fillets. Then you have so much flux on the bottom of the board that you underactivate it, getting crappy soldering, and letting the wave wash it off, so you end up with the black rosin sludge floating on top of the solder pot. Doesn't sound pretty, does it? It isn't. | | As for precautions associated with OA, everything around the flux mist should be stainless, not just the nozzle. OA is active at room temperature, and seems to never get exhausted. You'll need a stainless enclosure, a good curtain to keep it from getting into the wave solder machine chassis, stainless exhuast ducts, and teflon delivery hoses. Most of the fluxer manufacturers offer an OA upgrade package that encompasses these precautions. If the manufacturer claims that their regular spray fluxer will handle OA just fine, don't believe them!! Either they haven't really done the life cycle test, or they're counting on the revenue from the spare parts. And they're sure as heck not just altruistically making all fluxers super-beefy in this cost-compettitive market. | | I think that pretty much covers it. Sorry to be so long-winded, but I haen't been on the SMT net for a few weeks and I think I just got carried away. I'll email the report. | | Chrys | | |

I would like a report, if possible also. Thank you.

George Steele Process Engr.

reply »

Earl Moon

#12267

Re: Spray Fluxers | 15 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd | Chrys lays it out well. Las year I worked with US fluxers on Seho machines in a very tightly controlled inert atmosphere using all flux types. The Seho has the capability described as on capable of automatically balancing flux reservoirs/contents and moving across the board's bottom side with highly controlled accuracy.

I am currently working with a similar process on another machine type. The results are equally impressive without N2.

Earl Moon

reply »

#12268

Re: Spray Fluxers | 15 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd

Todd:

You might want to take a look at Sono-Tek. They manufacture Ultrasonic flux Spraying sytems that can be purchased as a stand-alone in-line system or retrofit into your present wave.

Wayne

reply »

Steve Skinner

#12269

Re: Spray Fluxers | 16 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd |

reply »

Steve Skinner

#12270

Re: Spray Fluxers | 16 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd | Todd there is a huge difference between ultrasonics and atomizing sprayers. Some of the Ultrasonics cannot handle the OA fluxes, especially when they are such high solids.

The Ultransonic nozzles can clog with some high solids fluxes. Additionally the nozzle sometimes has a tendency to overheat and stop working until it is cooled down.

One major difference that is inherent with Ultrasonics is their exhaust capabilities. Because of the low flow, the exhaust system CFM's must not be too high. They recommend 200cfm's or less for the exhaust. If you go higher you risk the danger of sucking the workable spray out of the system. Any disruption in the air flow in your plant can also have adverse effects on the quality of the spray because it is such a fine mist.

Additionally since the exhaust is low, the problems of odor from the flux can irritate the workers on the floor, and contributes to significant increase in maintenance of your wave solder machine because the flux residue attaches itself throughout your wave.

This fine mist in the wave can also contribute to a flash in the machine. I am not aware of this happening, but I think the potential for this to happen is greater than with non ultrasonics.

Spraying flux is not rocket science, why spend more than you have to?

Also some of the Ultrasonics require you to replace parts every year, some of them get rather expensive. With non reciprocating ultrasonics the deposition is not even, and this can be true with some of the reciprocating units. In reality the deposition is not what they claim it to be, nor is the topside penetration.

I hope this helps

reply »

Steve Skinner

#12271

Re: Spray Fluxers | 16 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd | Todd,

I should have read the replies before I answered your questions.

The ROSCO spray fluxer by SMS utilizes a stainless nozzle and everything that comes in contact with flux is either Teflon, nylon, or PVC. All corrosion resistant.

We have a customer spraying an RA flux of 14% solids with no problem. ROSCO is warranteed for 2 years with the exception of the wetted components of the spray nozzle. The replacement cost for them is under $100.

ROSCO does not use a binks nozzle, but one that is, and has been, in use for more than six years. 11% solids clogging the nozzle is a load of bunk. The nozzle in the RR2 has sprayed up to 24% solids effectively.

It is true that the old Binks nozzles had clogging problems but that was in the early days of spraying. This is simply not true today.

USI has a list of parts they recommend be replaced yearly on their web site. Who then is counting on the revenue from spare parts?

I have never seen black sludge, nor crappy soldering with the RR2. That is truly a load of hogwash. The reverse is true when it comes to topside penetration and has nothing to do with the size of the atomized flux droplets.

Ultrasonics do not have the velocity to penetrate holes with a tight pin to hole ratio. The flux is everywhere with ultrasonics and I suspect that this has more to do with top side fill than size of droplets.

You do get what you pay for in less expensive units, and that is value and real perfomance, especially with Skinner Machine Systems RR2 fluxer.

I think the reverse is true with the high priced units. You do not get what you pay for and you keep on paying, and paying.

Steve

reply »

Bryan Beaumont

#12272

Re: Spray Fluxers | 16 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd | Todd, I have been using Nordson Spray fluxers for over 4 years. Give these guys a call, I am sure they will be able to help you out. Pat Hogan at Nordson (440) 985-4350

reply »

Scott Cook

#12273

Re: Spray Fluxers | 17 March, 1999

| Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | Thanks, | Todd

Ok, guys.....serious question from an old timer.....

First, let me qualify by saying I've had my share of experiences with spray fluxers, as well.....starting back with the original AT&T design.

Why can't we all step back a bit in time? What might be the objection to utilizing a WAVE fluxer vs. foam? even application controlled by air knife and wave height......

Can anyone tell me why this simple answer (and MUCH cheaper) won't work--with OA, RA, RMA, or even noclean?

Just wondering out loud.......

Scott

reply »

Steve Skinner

#12274

Re: Spray Fluxers | 17 March, 1999

| | Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | | | Thanks, | | Todd | | Ok, guys.....serious question from an old timer..... | | First, let me qualify by saying I've had my share of experiences with spray fluxers, as well.....starting back with the original AT&T design. | | Why can't we all step back a bit in time? What might be the objection to utilizing a WAVE fluxer vs. foam? even application controlled by air knife and wave height...... | | Can anyone tell me why this simple answer (and MUCH cheaper) won't work--with OA, RA, RMA, or even noclean? | | Just wondering out loud....... | | Scott | |The answer is Scott, it does work. Not as effective in all types of applications. Boards have changed. They are smaller, denser, some have mixed technology on both sides of the board.

Cheaper? Maybe initially for the fluxer itself, however have you priced them lately? they are not that cheap.

Operationally, they are more expensive to operate because you use more flux than you have to (this is borne out by proven sprayer results) and you waste a lot more flux. Nowadays, you have to pay dearly in some areas to dispose of that hazardous waste.

You also have to spend money for thinner, which is not necessary with sprayers. So if you step forward a little bit, and look at the true cost of wave or foam fluxing over the lifetime of that process, you will see that it is not cheaper and that it is much more expensive in the long run. Whereas with spray fluxing, over the life of that process, you have actually made money with the machine through savings year after year.

I hope that helped.

reply »

#12275

Re: Spray Fluxers - was this an ad??? | 29 March, 1999

| | Does anyone have any recommendations on spray fluxers? Are there major differences between the high priced ultrasonic machines to the low priced flux/air spraying machines? We are going to be spraying an OA flux with 11% solids content. Are there any precautions I need to be aware of for spraying an OA flux besides having a stainless nozzle and a purge option? | | | | Thanks, | | Todd | | | Todd, | | I should have read the replies before I answered your questions. | | The ROSCO spray fluxer by SMS utilizes a stainless nozzle and everything that comes in contact with flux is either Teflon, nylon, or PVC. All corrosion resistant. | | We have a customer spraying an RA flux of 14% solids with no problem. ROSCO is warranteed for 2 years with the exception of the wetted components of the spray nozzle. The replacement cost for them is under $100. | | ROSCO does not use a binks nozzle, but one that is, and has been, in use for more than six years. 11% solids clogging the nozzle is a load of bunk. The nozzle in the RR2 has sprayed up to 24% solids effectively. | | It is true that the old Binks nozzles had clogging problems but that was in the early days of spraying. This is simply not true today. | | USI has a list of parts they recommend be replaced yearly on their web site. Who then is counting on the revenue from spare parts? | | I have never seen black sludge, nor crappy soldering with the RR2. That is truly a load of hogwash. The reverse is true when it comes to topside penetration and has nothing to do with the size of the atomized flux droplets. | | Ultrasonics do not have the velocity to penetrate holes with a tight pin to hole ratio. The flux is everywhere with ultrasonics and I suspect that this has more to do with top side fill than size of droplets. | | You do get what you pay for in less expensive units, and that is value and real perfomance, especially with Skinner Machine Systems RR2 fluxer. | | I think the reverse is true with the high priced units. You do not get what you pay for and you keep on paying, and paying. | | Steve

|

Sounds like an advertisement to me.......

reply »

SP700avi inline stencil printer

BGA Rework Services