|
Conception of 45° Clamping Technology
By:
Dave Corey
Back
in the late 80s, ACS Technologies, in partnership with Lantronic began
investigating the possibilities of clamping Printed Circuit Boards
(PCBs) at a 45° angle during the Hot Air Solder Leveling (HASL) cycle.
The goals set out by ACS and Lantronic were:
-
Improving SMT Quad Pack co-planarity
-
Decrease solder variation between the horizontal and vertical pads
-
Eliminate solder shorts in SMT Quad Packs below 25 Mil pitch
Preliminary
research and test findings were very encouraging and the pursuit for
perfect transportation of a PCB at the 45° angle was realistic. However,
I would first like to share a little history on the traditional vertical
HASL clamping technique and why we felt the need to improve the existing
process by positioning the PCB at the 45° angle during the leveling
cycle.
When vertical
HASL first appeared on the market, there was a lot of skepticism
regarding the overall ability of the process. Similar to most new
process introductions, the concerns came from those who sold horizontal
levelers. Proving that the concept of solder a consistent thickness over
various pad orientations while being applied in a vertical position
proved to be an industry challenge. Then, after initial success in the
market, the next problem facing the vertical process was the thickness
disparity of solder leveling between horizontal and vertical pads. The
horizontal process was having problems in this area as well.
Our customers and we have discovered over the years that the vertical
HASL process does in fact work well. Over the last twenty years
significant amounts of data has proven that the vertical process equals
or exceeds the performance characteristics of the horizontal process.
But the real test lies is how well the vertical process stacks up
against current user requirements for horizontal to vertical pad solder
thickness variance. But first we need to take a look at the normal
expectations one should have when it comes to vertical leveling.
As mentioned above, the data accumulated over the past several years on
vertical leveling performance is substantial enough to draw some
meaningful conclusions. One of the first such reviews we have done
examining the data so we can chart normal expectations of results using
the vertical process. In doing so, we choose what we believe are normal
operating parameters for our machines. After reviewing our history of
leveling performed within these parameters, we then developed a data
matrix that compares the horizontal pad thickness verses vertical pad
thickness across the PCB consisting of pad widths ranging from 8 Mils to
24 Mils. What we considered normal operating parameters are shown below
and a graph showing our results can be found at the top of the next
page.
Solder
Pot Temperature: 485° F Lead Solder - 495° F Lead Free
Solder
Clamp Ascent Speed: 2 Seconds
Dwell Time: 4 to 5
Second
Air Knife: Temperature 550° F
- Pressure 75 to 85 PSI

From the above
graph, you can see the clear relationship that exists between narrow
pads and thick coatings and wide pads and thin coatings. This is a
universal relationship among all liquids. The smaller the area the
liquid is confined to the more height you will get with each drop, or
bead of liquid applied. The key issue here, however, is not the solder
level within a given pad width, but rather the delta (which we call
variation on the graph) between the vertical and horizontal pads of
similar width. You will notice from the above graph that this delta
starts out low in the 8 Mil pad widths and rises as you approach the 24
Mil pads. This is also normal in solder leveling and occurs whether you
use horizontal or vertical leveling process.
In today’s market the whole issue of horizontal to vertical variation
has been reduced to the user’s need for solder height stability on all
sides of a quad pack. Since two of these sides are vertical and two are
horizontal, the need for minimal height differences is important.
In summary, you can see from the graph above that the variation between
the horizontal and vertical pads across the PCB clearly fall within
specifications. We also sorted our past data in such a manner that we
were able to see what happens to the solder thickness using different
air knife pressure settings. Using pads in the 16 to 18 Mil width range,
we used various air knife pressures. Keeping all normal parameters
constant, the results are in the following graph.
As might be
expected, the higher the PSI used in the air knives the lower the
solder thickness. While the above is a representation of nominal values,
we caution against using high PSI to solve thickness problems. There are
inconsistencies that occur once you go above 85 PSI and we feel that you
will find the thickness above this range too erratic for normal
processing purposes.
Given the preceding and resultant data that supports the conclusion, the
45° angle theory will truly meet your current and future HASL needs.
Basically, our premise was that if the 90° angle of horizontal and
vertical pads is such a major contributor to solder level differential,
then the 45° setting had to be an improvement.
To test our theory, we took a population of PCBs and divided it into
three groups. The PCBs were all identical in terms of circuitry and we
focused our attention on the leveling performance of the PCB’s 20 mil
pitch Quad Packs. One group was ran 65 PSI, the second at 75 PSI, and
the third at 85 PSI. For each of these settings, the nominal solder
thickness values for horizontal and vertical pads are charted on the
next page. For all of these tests, we have chosen normal parameters,
except the PSI settings. In addition, the front to back PSI differential
between air knives was kept to a 2 to 3 PSI minimum.

As you can see,
clamping the PCB at the 45° angle results in an improved Quad Pack
co-planarity. Even though the results at 65 PSI were mediocre at best,
the improvement over the normal clamping method at 65 PSI on the
previous page is worth noting, as it correlates with the improvements
seen at 70 and 75 PSI. At 75 PSI we are starting to make some serious
progress; we were able reduce a 300 thickness variation down to roughly
180 thickness variation.
At 85 PSI, however, we seem to have hit upon something. Driving solder
thickness to a nominal of 287 on the horizontal we hit a 272 nominal on
the vertical. The test was repeated four times with the following
results:
|
|
Horizontal |
Vertical |
Variation |
|
Test A |
304 |
308 |
4 |
|
Test B |
293 |
262 |
28 |
|
Test C |
278 |
246 |
32 |
|
Test D |
349 |
291 |
57 |
Conclusion
The goals set out
in an attempt to improve SMT Quad Pack co-planarity, decrease solder
variation between horizontal and vertical pads, and eliminate solder
shorts in SMT Quad Packs below 25 Mil pitch were successfully
accomplished utilizing the 45° technique. During this process, our
findings led us in discovering a new and radical way of clamping and
supporting PCBs during the HASL process. This new clamping system, “Tru
Track,” changed the traditional way of clamping PCBs.
The patented 45°
Tru Track Clamping System is the heart and soul of the Lantronic Model
TT30. When leveling the PCBs at a 45° angle, the PCBs are clamped at the
top corner while the bottom of the PCB is supported by the Tru Track
System. Traditional clamping technique only clamps the top of the PCB
and has no bottom support. When trying to duplicate the Tru Track
Clamping System, utilizing a traditional clamp in combination with Side
Guides, the 18" x 24" panel very unstable during the HASL process. In
addition, the 45° angle is not secured.
Furthermore, the Tru Track Clamping System guides the PCB instead of
pushing the PCB into the solder pot. The Tru Track Clamping Systems
bottom bar breaks the surface tension of the solder and eliminates the
PCB from bowing during the decent stroke giving an even greater front to
back uniformity. As stated before, solder shorts were eliminated; thus,
ACS was able to successfully HASL 10 mil pitch Quad Packs without any
solder shorts.
Simply stated,
processing PCBs at the 45° angle utilizing the patented Tru Track
Clamping System is far superior than traditional clamping technology, as
well as traditional clamping in combination with Side Guides in an
attempted to duplicate the 45° angle.
|