MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416880379 · doi:10.37665/smaffsu27301

Selective Wave Soldering DOE to Develop DFM Guidelines for Lead and Lead-Free Assemblies

2008· article· W4416880379 on OpenAlex
Craig Hamilton, Mario Moreno, Ramón Téllez Méndez

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSMTA International · 2008
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsHain Celestial (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesign for manufacturabilityPalletPrinted circuit boardSolderingSurface-mount technologyLead frameWave solderingCable glandSolder paste

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The desire to constantly push the limits of signal integrity and reduce material costs by minimizing component spacing is a continual requirement for printed circuit board designers. Unfortunately, in some cases these design objectives can conflict with the manufacturability of a product. For instance, the tight spacing of bottomside surface mount devices (SMT) placed next to pin-through-hole (PTH) connectors can make the process of soldering the PTH connectors in accordance with IPC-A-610 barrel fill specifications very difficult. In these cases, a selective wave soldering process is required. This is a process of using product specific wave solder pallets which are designed to shield the surface mount components placed on the bottomside of a printed circuit board while exposed through-hole connector locations are wave soldered. The reduction in the pallet opening size on a selective wave solder pallet reduces the ability to successfully fill PTH barrels. This is the case when using tin lead (SnPb) alloy, however, the problem is further amplified when converting to a lead free (Pb-free) alloy due to the differences in fluid properties which exist between these alloy types. Currently, there are no industry standards for minimum pad-to-pad spacing for bottomside SMT to PTH components for Pb-free. Most EMS and OEM companies have established acceptable Design for Manufacturability (DFM) guidelines when using SnPb alloy, based on many years of experience. However, it has been found that DFM guidelines which were established for SnPb processes in many cases do not result in the same level of quality joints when soldering with Pb-free alloy. Therefore, in order to maintain the process yields and minimize manufacturing costs when converting to Pb-free, it is essential to establish DFM guidelines specifically for Pb-free soldering. This paper will discuss the outcome of a study of several DFM features incorporated on a custom designed test vehicle. Specifically, a Design of Experiment (DoE) was established to test the limits of pad-to-pad (P2P) component spacing, in order to confirm the acceptable limits when using SnPb (63Sn-37Pb) alloy and to compare and define limits when using Pb-free (Sn-3.0Ag-0.5Cu) alloy. In addition to this, other DFM aspects were also studied such as the effect of pin-to-hole ratio and its interaction with the quantity of large copper planes connected to a PTH barrel and the effect of the type of connection – either solid or four spoke thermal relief. In addition, the ability of a standard wave pallet to shield bottomside SMT components from excessive heat during wave soldering is measured. The test vehicle was assembled using 5 different selective wave pallets, each with varying opening sizes to accommodate various levels of pad-to-pad spacing. The quality level of each of the described DFM features will be discussed, primarily focusing on the ability to achieve acceptable levels of barrel fill according to IPC-A-610 specifications [1].

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.220 · 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