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

Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design Forum

SMT electronics assembly manufacturing forum.


1

Views: 42814

We have tested SN100C and SAC305 in our selective solder mac... - Dec 29, 2005 by

Cmiller

#38727

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 29 December, 2005

We have tested SN100C and SAC305 in our selective solder machine (Ersa Versaflow). We wanted to test both alloys in the selective first because the investment in filling the pots is minimal. In our initial tests the SN100C alloy appears to be the best choice. The joint appearance is much, much better than SAC305. There is less dross production. The solder fountain was more stable. The price is lower. Although we did not test the copper disolution or the corosive effects on the hardware in the pot, SN100C is generally acceptaed as being better than SAC305 in those areas. We did see slightly better wetting with the SAC305 but considering everything else SN100C seems to be a better choice. Since we did not use it in a wave yet I am concerned about bridging and wetting in a wave. I assume it wil behave in a similar manner but the selective gives you the opportunity to control contact time on each joint and fountain motion to minimize bridges, where the wave does not. I would think there are a lot of people using both of these alloys in thier waves by now. Any experience that could be shared would be greatly appreciated!!

reply »

#38733

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 29 December, 2005

CMiller,

Thanks for the valuable info! We are in the midst of lead-free deployment and need to know good alloy choices at both wave and ERSA. I have heard the same things regarding SAC305's price for bar solder, but don't yet know what the process implications are. I'm glad to hear that the SN100 performs well with your VersaFLOW solder fountain. Keep us posted!

Incidentally, ERSA does offer a "lead free" pot.

reply »

Cmiller

#38734

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 29 December, 2005

We bought the lead free pots for the Ersa machine and change back and forth. We had a lot of problems running SAC305 in the Ersa. It seems to create a ton of dross and you need to frequently clean and flux the nozzles.

I would really like some feedback from some people who are using these alloys in the wave process. Anybody out there?

reply »

Joseph

#38740

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 29 December, 2005

We have tested SN100C for LF wave soldering process since August'05 and currently start production for a month ago. Initially we use SAC305, but due to the shrinkage cavities (micro-crack) we changeover to SN100C. In summary, SN100C did perform well for less solder bridging as well as smooth and shiny joint. The only concern is to achieve solder hole fill for PTH is more critical if compared with SAC305. We have spend a lot of times for the machine optimization and upgrading in order to achieve the 100% hole fill as per customer requirement.

Best regards

reply »

Cmiller

#38747

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 30 December, 2005

Joseph, thank you for your comments. Can I ask what kind of flux you are using?

reply »

#38750

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 30 December, 2005

There are over 1200 machines running SN100C worldwide (>250 tons/month) and, as it has been stated here, many customers have switched from SAC305 to SN100C but we are not aware of any customer who has switched from SN100C to SAC305. As the inventor of SN100C states, �once a customer touches the SN100C, he can�t let go!� The advantages that SN100C has over SAC305 are not only lower initial cost but lower total cost, lower drossing, slower copper dissolution, better appearance, less micro-cracking, and much less reactivity to the solder equipment. (I have a cd available with test results supporting these advantages- bgilbert@fctassembly.com ) SAC305 was very successful in Asia due to it�s early availability in the market and the strength of the Senju (who holds the Japanese patent on SAC305) marketing/sales effort. When you review the status of Europe's lead free conversion where Senju is not as strong, the lead free wave/selective choice has been more due to merit instead of �marketing� and SN100C is the predominant alloy of choice. This should follow on in North America despite the lack of availability of SN100C from the 2 major solder manufacturers- Alpha and Kester. Good luck in your LF Conversion in 2006! Bob

reply »

#38753

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 1 January, 2006

Please elaborate more on hole fill issue.How difficult to optimise the process para?

reply »

Joseph

#38754

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 1 January, 2006

We are using selective soldering pallet, which the soldering flux is Interflux 2005M. We encountered the poor hole fill mainly at the heat sink components. Initially we tried to apply more heat but tend to overkill the flux activity. After some modification to the pallet and preheaters, we have learnt that sufficient thermal demand of PCB assembly play a major role for better solder hole fill.

reply »

aj

#38756

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 2 January, 2006

has anyone used or trialed the SACX from Alpha, from reportes and studies carried out it seems that its a go between SAC305 and SN100.

reply »

#38787

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 3 January, 2006

> has anyone used or trialed the SACX from Alpha, > from reportes and studies carried out it seems > that its a go between SAC305 and SN100.

Same question re: Kester's K100. Apparently it's a new .6% Cu alloy that they haven't yet begun to market heavily.

reply »

GS

#38799

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 4 January, 2006

HI aj, I suppose you have visited the Alphametal situ where they have plenty of information about SACX

http://www.alphametals.com/main.asp

For sure every one talks well about own products.

I think the best judgement can be done from those who have hands on mainly those who are doing that for several years. SN100 seams to have more experienced tech life.

Regards.........GS

This message was posted Add this forum to your site! Click to learn more. the Electronics Forum @

reply »

#38824

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 4 January, 2006

All I can say about Alpha and their GOTT-DAMN website is THEY SUCK!! I refuse to register to view product literature... for that reason, Alpha Metals, you won't be looked at for my pb-free paste or bar solder evals.

reply »

greg york

#38946

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 10 January, 2006

Not sure about Sn/Cu/Ni large market share here in Europe as we have a large part of the UK market with SACP0307 alloy 0.3%Ag introduced over Two years ago Also worked against Sn/Cu/Ni alloy with large TV Co and they went with 0.3%Ag due to reliability issue's which they released in an article in a magazine. Also heard 0.3% Ag has the lowest Cu dissolution rates. Biggest advantage is it flows well similar to 3% Ag and 3.8% without the drossing rates associated with it and through hole wicks better than Sn/Cu/Ni Additves are required for all Lead Free solder's to keep them 'fresh' so not a drop in and forget liek good old Lead unfortunately

reply »

#38985

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 11 January, 2006

Hello Greg, Glad to hear your success with the SACX0307 copy. By the way, does the P mean it contains phosphorus? Does yours also contain bismuth like the SACX0307 (according to their plumbing solder patent for X0307)? In response to your discussion points:

Not sure about Sn/Cu/Ni large market share here in Europe as we have a large part of the UK market with SACP0307 alloy 0.3%Ag introduced over Two years ago.

SN100C has been running in Europe over 3 years with over 500 machines to date.

Also worked against Sn/Cu/Ni alloy with large TV Co and they went with 0.3%Ag due to reliability issue's which they released in an article in a magazine.

I was present at this trial and the article was written with boards used in the DoE to establish machine settings. As stated in the article, many of the settings are NOT recommended for SN100C so, of course, reliability tests would be invalid for these test boards. It�s the same result you would get doing a DoE on Guinness Beer tasted at various temperatures. It�s not recommended at Budweiser temperature! Oh also, this TV Co. is currently using at least 4 different LF alloys in production, including SN100C.

Also heard 0.3% Ag has the lowest Cu dissolution rates.

You hear a lot of rumors when the two major solder companies (A & K) stand to lose so much share of solder bar sales. I have test results comparing copper dissolution of SN100C to SACX0307 and SAC305 (bgilbert@fctassembly.com)

Biggest advantage is it flows well similar to 3% Ag and 3.8% without the drossing rates associated with it and through hole wicks better than Sn/Cu/Ni

Results are all about setting up the wave solder process properly. 1200 plus SN100C machines running happily can�t be too wrong.

Additves are required for all Lead Free solder's to keep them 'fresh' so not a drop in and forget liek good old Lead unfortunately

Do not forget the subtractions as SAC305 dissolves copper so quick, many users have to replace solder in the pot to maintain the copper level.

Regards, Bob

reply »


Rob

#38992

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 12 January, 2006

The most prevailent wave solder machine in small to medium UK companies is the Blundell CMS400 - every man and his dog has one. And the recommended lead free solder for these machines is..... Greg's 0.3% Silver.

Quite a few of our customers use his solder and they all seem to be getting on well with it, and are happy with the service.

Please note we do not recieve any benefit from Greg's company - part of our group actually competes with them.

reply »

#39003

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 12 January, 2006

Hi Guys I think you should all be looking at the Nousstar lead free machine this machine has been approved with some of the larger oems and has a good base in Europe and the uk we have one and the design is excellent we are using Aim for class 3 products with excellent results this machine has specialy designed Nozzles

reply »

#39194

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 18 January, 2006

Sorry Bob Could not respond been away busy.

Just to correct you, we did not copy the SACX as we brought ours to market at least six months before so how could we copy, it is also a little different, but nicely reassuring when the 'big boys' do something similar. Funny I did not see you at the European trials as I was there as well, saw the other competitors not you, must have been US trials I guess. I too would not recommend high SAC for copper dissolution I would stick with 0.3Ag 500 machines for Europe is OK but are they mostly HASL machines ?? Wave Soldering more demanding. Anyway Bob not really wanting to get into a debate over who has the best solder, wish you all the best. And thanks to ROB for being honest, its not about the best perceived product its about giving the customer a working solution while still allowing them a competitive edge. By the way the SOLDER RESIST Issue's I have been banging on about for years IS OFFICIALLY getting much worse with Lead Free Wave soldering - ENJOY

P.S - there is no comparison between Guiness and Budweiser, Guiness is pure QUALITY drank warm or cold

Cheers

Greg York Technical Sales Manager BLT Circuit Services Ltd England

reply »

#39195

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 18 January, 2006

Hi Rob

You do not receive any benefit from me (I dont get any from my employers either) but if I knew who you were I would buy you a warm Guiness next time I saw you, or if you preffered a warm Bud I'm not fussy.

You see its not difficult for competitors to get on maybe some world leaders should take a leaf out of our books and share a warm Guiness, the World would be a better place for it.

GULP

reply »

Loco

#39232

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 20 January, 2006

Just wondering what the companies that are use SN100C are using for reflow (I guess SAC), and especially for handsoldering. Do SAC and SN100C mix? are there any studies proving this?

reply »

#39238

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 20 January, 2006

We are using SAC for reflow because of the lower temp and better wetting and copper disolution is not so much an issue in reflow.

There is not much difference in the alloys and they can be mixed with no problems. I assume any supplier of SN100C could get you some study results, I think its in the NASA study but I have not read it in a while.

reply »

Jon Provost

#40163

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 3 March, 2006

We switched to Sn100C on 2 waves and kept one with SAC305. The SAC305 will be converted to SN100C as soon as the Aim rep. delivers it next week.

reply »

#40167

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 3 March, 2006

the latest circuits assembly mazagine features an article on this by Karl Seelig

reply »

Marcus

#40782

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 31 March, 2006

We have used the SN100C for over a year now with fanastic results. We use the SAC305 for SMT and SN100C wire exclusively. There are no problem mixing the alloys. I am also on the commitee for the NASA testing. The SN100C did out perform SAC and SnPb in the mechanical shock test. All other test did not provide enough failures to analyze. I will say that barrel fill is a challenge with SN100C. Especially in heavy ground planes. I have been able to succeed on all my assemblies and this running at 500F. You can't do that with SAC. SN100C just requires skilled profiling and process control. It works and it works well! we are evaluating it for SMT use as we speak.

reply »

GS

#40788

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 31 March, 2006

Hi Marcus,

by using SN100C have you seen any tearing phenomena like what shown on the link ?

http://www.smartgroup.org/pdf/Defect01.pdf

Tnks

Regards.........GS

This message was posted Add this forum to your site! Click to learn more. the Electronics Forum @

reply »

GS

#40867

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 6 April, 2006

found this interesting comparison (SAC305 SN100C)

http://www.nihonsuperior.co.jp/english/data/pdf/nse2_1.pdf

Regards..........GS

This message was posted Add this forum to your site! Click to learn more. the Electronics Forum @

reply »


RDR

#40869

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 6 April, 2006

Anyone using the new SACX from Alpha?

reply »

Marcus

#40910

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 10 April, 2006

No I have seen Zero hot tears. Thats with water soluble or No-Clean. We have built over 10,000 boards.

reply »

#41692

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 19 May, 2006

Hi,

Sorry to drag this thread up again, but we were recommended to change the wave to SAC305, but is everyone recommending SN100C? That seems to be the feeling on this thread.

What flux is used?

Regards,

Grant

reply »


Rob

#41706

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 22 May, 2006

Hi Grant,

I've seen a couple of good fluxes on lead free - WF-7742 from Indium & JS-EU-01 from Koki.

I'm sure everyone else has a good one too - just make sure it is one formulated for the elevated temperatures involved.

Cheers,

Rob

reply »

#41813

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 25 May, 2006

We are using the Kester 979 with excellent results; the bonus is that it can be cleaned w/Di water.

reply »

#41814

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 25 May, 2006

Hi,

So that's really important to have a specific flux for lead free?

We are looking at changing to SN100C after reading this thread and other stuff we have found, so can anyone recommend the best no clean flux for that metal?

Do you need different types of flux for SN100C vs SAC305, or will the one flux to both as long as it's a lead free flux?

Grant

reply »

#43471

HELP Abaut comparison of the SM988 and SAC 305 wave soldering | 22 August, 2006

I must prepare formal report abaut comparison of the SM988 and SAC 305 wave soldering( as a .ppt file). May you help me please ?

reply »

Wayne

#48062

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 28 February, 2007

There is one solder you guy want to consider, that is SCS7 from Asahi. It is Sn Cu & Si, and it is the lowest price at the moment. We had been changing our pot from SAC, then SACX, and recently to SCS7. The result is better than all other solders. In term of solderability and dross data, etc. It is true.

reply »

Aquino

#48130

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 2 March, 2007

Yes, our company is also using SCS7 at the moment. Price is really cheap compared to all other solders. So far, we have been using it for about 1 1/2 years, no problem at all!

reply »


JJ

#54276

SN100C vs. SAC 305 wave soldering | 4 April, 2008

We have been seeing continued difficulty with solder shorts and/or insufficient barrel fill with our Juki selective solder machine while using SAC305. We want to switch to something in the SN100 series, but we do not know enough to seperate the hype from the hard data that you find on the internet and other places. Does any one out there have some kind of literature/information/presentation that you can send me on the advantages of using SN100 in our Juki 400L Selective Solder machine?

reply »

PCB Soldering Tools

JTAG Live PCB Debug Software