MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416876876 · doi:10.37665/smbsfyu17170

PWB Contamination & Reliability Doe

2001· article· W4416876876 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSMTA International · 2001
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)ElectronicsContaminationMiniaturizationPrinted circuit boardSurface-mount technologyCircuit reliabilityElectronic equipmentProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT When searching for common industry-accepted test methods to determine the cleanliness of printed wiring boards and assemblies, most manufacturer's turn to IPC (Association Connecting Electronic Industries) for guidance. It is common to use IPC-A-610 (Acceptability of Electronic Assemblies) as well as IPC TM 650 (Test Methods of Electronic Assemblies) and it's methods to benchmark the cleanliness or contamination of a process and product. Unfortunately, a chart listing contamination levels for a specific flux and process does not exist. Contamination can lead to electromigration risk, dendrite growth and subsequent product reliability issues. There are several common, accepted techniques (R.O.S.E. (Resistivity of Solvent Extract)) and modified R.O.S.E. test, SIR test, Ion Chromatography, water-drop-across-trace test, and others). However, there is little consensus as to which test is the best measure of PWB or assembly contamination or cleanliness as well as the test result correlation to long-term reliability. In the 1980s, prior to the Montreal Protocol and subsequent phase-out of CFCs, manufacturers could rely on CFCs and vapor phase reflow to meet soldering requirements. The eventual move away from RMA fluxes, replacement of vapor phase soldering with reflow and the continual miniaturization of electronics has made the focus on contamination and its link to product reliability more important than ever. Dozens of pastes, fluxes, and cleaning materials, as well as continued miniaturization of packaging and designs further complicate matters. This report hopes to achieve several goals: Determine the link between bare PWB contamination, soldered assembly contamination and long-term product reliability. Establish measurable limits for bare PWB cleanliness as well as process control limits for both an aqueous as well as a water-soluble soldering process. Determine whether there is any correlation between common, industry-accepted rose/modified rose (omegameter/ionograph type) testing and long term product reliability. Determine the effect PWB plating finish (HASL, Immersion Silver and Cu OSP) has on both bare PWB contamination as well as soldered assembly in a no clean and water soluble process. Determine whether there is a link between percentage of saponifier used to wash soldered assemblies and long-term reliability. Establish a more cost-effective test for manufacturers to use as a process-monitoring tool.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it