THE PRINTED

CIRCUIT ASSEMBLER’S GUIDE

Conformal Coatings
for Harsh Environments

Phil Kinner
Electrolube
 PEER REVIEWERS

This book has been reviewed by the following technical experts in the PCB industry:

Douglas Pauls
Chairman, IPC Cleaning and Coating Committees

Douglas Pauls holds a B.A. in chemistry and physics, and a B.S. in electri-
cal engineering. He worked for the Naval Avionics Center as a materials
engineer, then served as the technical director of Contamination Studies
Laboratories. Doug moved to Rockwell Collins in 2000 and is currently a
principal materials and process engineer. In 2004, he received Rockwell’s Arthur A. Collins
Engineer of the Year award.
Doug has been active in the IPC for over 30 years, chairing both the Cleaning and Coating
Committees and the Technical Activities Executive Committee. Doug is most known for his
expertise in surface insulation resistance testing, cleaning and cleanliness assessment,
conformal coatings, and how to qualify manufacturing processes. He has been a U.S. repre-
sentative to ISO and IEC working groups on SIR, electromigration, and cleanliness reliability
standards.
Doug has also participated in numerous national and international consortia on electronics
manufacturing materials and processes and a recent recipient of the IPC Hall of Fame Award.

Debora Obitz
Consultant, Electronic Protection Chemistries Group

Debora Obitz has over 33 years’ experience and knowledge in the indus-
try regarding the testing of PCB, PCA, conformal coating, flux, and solder
mask, and has helped to design and develop new test methods. She start-
ed in 1984 with Trace Laboratories, followed by employment with Microtek Laboratories,
NTS Anaheim, and recently Barry Ritchie (formerly Dow Corning) as a consultant with the
Electronic Protection Chemistries Group.
Debby has been instrumental in defining the IPC training materials. She is also a registered
CIT, and is well-versed in IEC and military specifications. Further, Debby has held many IPC
positions throughout her career, including the following current positions:
• Chair of the 5-30 Cleaning and Coating Committee, 5-33 Coating Subcommittee, 7-31at
IPC-A-600 Technical Training Committee, and the D-30 Rigid Printed Board Committee
• Vice Chair of the 5-33a Conformal Coating Task Group and the 7-11 Test Methods
Subcommittee

Dr. Helmut Schweigart

Technology Development Department Head, Zestron Europe

Dr. Helmut Schweigart studied mechanical engineering at TU Munich

and completed his Ph.D. thesis on climatic reliability of protective coated
electronics. From 1998 to 2012, Helmut managed the department of
application technology at Zestron Europe in Ingolstadt, Germany. Since
2013, he has served as the head of the company’s technology development department. In
addition, Helmut is committed to his role as head of the Corrosion Protection of Electronics
working group, and a member of the board at GfKORR e.V. (Society for Corrosion Protection).
He is also involved in several other working groups and committees concerning reliability,
corrosion, and corrosion protection at ZVEI, DVS, EFC, and others.
 MEET THE AUTHOR

Phil Kinner MSc (Chemistry), MBA

Global Business and Technical Director for
Electrolube, Conformal Coatings Division

Phil has spent his entire career within

the conformal coatings industry
including employment at Concoat,
Humiseal, and PVA. This experience has
produced a thorough understanding
of problems and processes associated
with both materials and equipment.
Phil is a specialist troubleshooter and
works to analyse material and process failures.

During his career, Phil has been instrumental in the development and
commercialisation of the first generation of UV curable conformal coatings
and has further undertaken the pioneering development of revolutionary
2K conformal coatings. This includes testing and collaboration with PVA and
Nordson Asymtek dispensing systems.

Phil is an active member of the IPC Conformal Coating Task Group, a regular
speaker at IPC and SMTA events, and a member of the technical committee
of the UK SMART group. Phil is also a nominated expert on the committee
of IEC TC91 WG2—requirements for electronics assemblies. He has a long
association and close working relationship with NPL, and is also a prolific
columnist and producer of technical articles and white papers.
The Printed Circuit Assembler’s Guide to...
Conformal Coatings for Harsh Environments
Phil Kinner
Electrolube

© 2017 BR Publishing, Inc.

All rights reserved.

BR Publishing, Inc.
dba: I-Connect007
PO Box 1908
Rohnert Park, CA 94927
U.S.A.

ISBN: 978-0-9982885-5-0

Visit I-007eBooks.com for more books in this series.

I-Connect007.com
CONTENTS

Introduction . . . . . . 1

Chapter 1
Types of Material: How Many Choices? . . . . . . 3
Chapter 2
Protection, Protection, Protection . . . . . . 9
Chapter 3
The True Value of Reliability Testing . . . . . . 17
Chapter 4
Condensation Testing: Working with the NPL . . . . . . 25
Chapter 5
Industry Standards and Best Practices . . . . . . 29
Chapter 6
Less is Most Definitely More . . . . . . 35
Chapter 7
I Have Selected the Coating: How Do I Apply It? . . . . . . 39

Conclusion . . . . . . 43

Further Reading . . . . . . 44

About Electrolube . . . . . . 45
Introduction
This is an easily-digestible guide for individuals involved in the procurement or spec-
ification of conformal coatings, particularly those who are required to perform in
harsh environments. This book is written to help guide you through the minefield of
available coatings, dispel many commonly held myths, and address those burning
issues.

Conformal coatings are thin polymeric films that cover and protect solder joints,
leads of electronic components, exposed traces, and other exposed metallized
areas on printed circuit boards (PCBs) from corrosion in their end operating envi-
ronments. Humidity, condensation, salt spray, corrosive gases, or a combination of
these factors usually drive corrosion. Residues can accelerate this process from the
soldering and other assembly processes prior to coating.

With the increasing adoption of electronics in less controlled environments,

where there are generally higher levels of pollution in the atmosphere, there is an
increasing need for corrosion protection. In addition, there is an increasing trend
toward making devices smaller and more functional. This results in higher-density
assemblies, which are expected to operate trouble-free for an increased lifetime
in ever-more aggressive operating environments. From automotive in-cabin and
under-hood applications to military handsets and aerospace sensors, wherever
electronics are used, conformal coatings are often required to achieve the required
performance and reliability for the design life of the product and beyond.

Apart from the conformal coating material’s primary function as a barrier to delete-
rious conditions such as high humidity, corrosive gases, and conductive debris that
can result in the corrosion of metallic surfaces, the materials are also used to provide
additional dielectric reinforcement. Thus, conductors can be spaced more closely
in high-density applications. Conformal coatings also serve as a tin whisker mitiga-
tion strategy. Evidence shows that these materials can retard tin whisker eruption
and prevent established tin whiskers from making contact with other conductive
surfaces.

The key to achieving reliable performance in these adverse conditions comes back
to the selection of an appropriate conformal coating and a suitable application
method to achieve a uniform, perfectly covered, defect-free protective film over the
many vertical surfaces and sharp edges. Without perfect coverage, there will always
be a weakness in the protective capabilities of even the best coating material.

Conformal coating is a process. The inherent protective characteristics of the mate-

rial and the workmanship or characteristics of the application method determine
the final level of protection. When considering the use of conformal coatings for
enhancing the reliability of an electronic assembly, it is important to consider the
system—both the material and application processes.

1
Chapter 1

Types of Material: How Many Choices?

Material Types
There are many conformal coating chemistries available. Each type has its
own benefits and drawbacks. Conformal coatings are available in solvent-
based, water-based, 100% active formulation (where nearly everything that
is applied in liquid form is converted into a solid protective coating), and
vapour deposited (where monomeric gases are mixed together in a vacuum,
polymerized, and deposited onto the surface of the PCB as a protective film).

Solvent-based materials, as the name suggests, consist of polymeric mate-

rials dissolved in a carrier solvent. They are low-viscosity materials that
can be easily thinned by the addition of a suitable solvent to ease applica-
tion in specific application processes. The materials can either air-dry only
(physical drying, which can be heat-accelerated and leaves the polymeric
coating behind once the solvent carrier is evaporated), or they may contain
a further cross-linking method to produce the protective polymeric film.

Solvent-based materials are very popular due to their ease of use, relatively
fast dry times, and the fact that the carrier solvent can act as a quasi-cleaning
process that dissolves contamination and locks it up in the polymer matrix.
Solvent-based materials can be used in almost any application method, and
a huge choice of polymer chemistries is available.

The main disadvantage to solvent-based materials is that they contain

solvents, which are considered volatile organic compounds (VOCs). There is
considerable environmental pressure to reduce emissions of VOC containing
materials, which has led to the development of alternative technologies. In
some processes, it is possible to capture and recycle considerable parts of
the VOC emissions. However, this can be cost-prohibitive and pose health
and safety concerns.
3
Water-based materials are similar to solvent-based materials, except that
they use water as the carrier solvent. Water-based coating materials are
generally not as effective as solvent-based materials. They also require
much cleaner surfaces. Water-based materials usually dry much slower
than solvent-based products. Any trace of water left in the film could cause
current leakage. Most water-based systems contain low levels of solvents.
Commonly their protective performance is below that of their solvent-based
counterparts.

Solvent-free, 100% active conformal coatings do not contain solvents or

non-active volatile diluents. They are characterised by the fact that all of the
liquid coating applied to the circuit will be converted to protective coating by
a curing process. For example, a 100-micron wet film will yield a dry coating
of approximately 100 microns.

Solvent-free conformal coatings are available with a variety of curing mech-

anisms:

• Room-temperature vulcanising: These materials are “moisture curing”

(i.e., they react with atmospheric moisture in order to harden). Some
kind of reaction by-product is usually produced (typically an alcohol or
carbon dioxide) that needs to be released from the coating for the reac-
tion to proceed. It is also worth mentioning that these materials tend
to skin over, since the outer surface is usually the area in contact with
the highest levels of humidity. Once the material has skinned, moisture
must be able to diffuse through the skin and the volatile materials must
be able to evaporate through the skin to continue the curing process.
Due to their nature, these types of material are usually more permeable
to moisture vapour, gases, etc.

• Heat-cure: This type of material requires heat activation above a

minimum temperature to cure. Failure to achieve the minimum temper-
ature can result in incomplete or non-initiation of curing. In order to be
sufficiently stable and useful at room temperature, cure temperatures
are usually above 85°C and can be as high as 150°C. Cure durations can
also be quite long (over 30 minutes).

• Chemical-cure: These materials cure by a chemical reaction that is initi-

ated when two or more components are mixed together. The reaction
can be accelerated with heat, but once mixed, the reaction proceeds at a
well-defined and repeatable rate. By keeping the components separate

4
 prior to mixing, the formulator can achieve potentially higher perfor-
mance polymers. However, the trade-off is that a slightly more sophisti-
cated and controlled process is required to use them effectively.

• UV curable: The primary curing reaction is initiated by exposure to

ultraviolet (UV) light of a particular wavelength and sufficient intensity to
bring about rapid polymerisation. The curing process is reasonably fast
and requires shorter ovens than other types of material, but curing is
line of sight. Due to the 3D nature of PCBs and the tendency for material
to be drawn beneath components by capillary forces, a secondary curing
mechanism is necessary to ensure curing in these shadowed areas. It
should be noted that this secondary curing process can take a significant
period of time and the coating properties can change continually during
this time. The secondary curing method can be any of the previous meth-
odologies. The RTV mechanism is more common, since it involves no
additional process steps. However, it can be a very slow process because
the curing mechanism involves diffusion of moisture through a semi-
cured matrix and dissipation of generated by-products back through the
matrix. If the coating is a strong barrier to humidity and moisture, then
this reaction becomes increasingly slow. If the secondary cure mecha-
nism is fast, then the coating must be a poor barrier to moisture and
gasses.

IPC currently recognizes five generic types of conformal coating chemistry

based on the main chemical constituent of the polymer. The main conformal
coating base chemistries are:

• Acrylic (type AR): Acrylic materials are best considered as all-rounders.

Acrylic materials are easy to use, rework, and repair, and they provide
good protection against humidity, salt mist, and corrosive gases. They
are not particularly abrasion resistant or resistant to solvents and other
organic liquids, such as transmission fluids, oils, etc.

• Polyurethane (type UR): Polyurethane materials cover a wide range

of properties from soft elastomeric rubbers to hard, scratch-resistant,
glass like coatings. In general, though, they are characterised by better
solvent and oil resistance than acrylic materials, but are often more diffi-
cult to rework or repair.

• Silicone (type SR): Silicone materials, such as polyurethanes, cover a

wide variety of properties. In general, silicone materials can be char-

5
 acterised as being more permeable to moisture vapour and corrosive
gases (especially those containing sulfur), yet more resistant to liquid
water than the other types. Silicone materials, unlike the other material
types, are inorganic polymers and have a higher maximum operating
temperature range. Silicone materials usually swell and gel in the pres-
ence of organic solvents, oils, and other fluids, but do not dissolve. This
can make them difficult to effectively rework.

• Epoxy (type ER): In comparison with the other material types, epoxy
chemistry is not widely used as a conformal coating. The available
epoxies are based on older technology. This can make them hard, brittle,
and highly stressful on assemblies. They also suffer from poorer elec-
trical properties, particularly at higher relative humidities and tempera-
tures, thus limiting their applications. Overall, epoxy chemistry provides
the greatest degree of solvent, oil, and other chemical resistance, but
this also makes them virtually impossible to rework or repair. Epoxy
conformal coatings are largely used in niche and/or legacy applications
where a high degree of chemical resistance alone is required, such as
NBC applications.

• Paraxylylene (type XY): This type is a vapour-deposited coating tech-

nology. Precursor materials are heated to produce a gas, and are then
pumped into a vacuum chamber where they spontaneously polymerize
onto every surface within the chamber. Paraxylylene materials are
relatively hard and somewhat brittle, but characterised by extremely
uniform deposition and exceptional coverage. Paraxylylene coatings
require sophisticated application equipment and can only be applied in a
batch process. Any areas that do not require coating must be extremely
well masked.

In addition to these five main classes, there is provision for the creation
of new classes of materials. One new type that has received much atten-
tion is nanocoatings—coatings intended to be applied at a thickness of 12.5
microns or less that have been designated as ultra-thin (type UT). This class
covers plasma and other gaseous deposition techniques, as well as liquid
applied coatings such as the fluoropolymer surface-modifiers. However,
this material class is still too broad and new to discuss in the context of
harsh environments.

6
 AR UR SR ER XY

Conformal

Polyurethane

Paraxylylene
Coating

Silicone
Acrylic

Epoxy
Types

Ease of Application

Drying / Curing Time N/A

Chemical Resistance

Moisture Protection

Ease of Rework

Environmentally Dependent on Dependent on

Friendly Technology Technology

General
Main Features Chemical Resistant High Temperature Chemical Resistant Coverage
Purpose

Table 1.1: This table is intended to form a simplistic comparison of some of the most common
materials by coating type. There are literally hundreds of formulations within each material coating
type. This table is not applicable to every specific formulation.

SB WB UV XY SR 2K

Conformal

Solvent-Free 2K
Solvent Based

Solvent-Less
Paraxylylene
Water Based

Coating
Technology
UV Cure

Silicone

Types

Ease of
Application

Drying / Curing
Time

Chemical Dependant on Dependant on

Resistance Chemistry Chemistry

Moisture
Protection

Ease of Rework

Environmentally
Friendly

Excellent Coverage
High Temperature
Gives Outstanding
Main Features Easy to Apply Manual Application Fast Initial Range, Excellent
Excellent Coverage Protection Against
and Rework Only Tack-free Cure Liquid Water
Liquid Water and
Protection
Humidity

Table 1.2: This table is intended to form a simplistic comparison of some of the most common
materials by coating type. There are literally hundreds of formulations within each material coating
type. This table is not applicable to every specific formulation.

7
Chapter 2

Protection, Protection, Protection

The vast majority of decisions to use conformal coating fall into one of the
following four categories:

1. Protection against corrosion in the end operating environment

2. Protection against condensation in the end operating environment

3. Tin whisker mitigation

4. Reduction in component spacing to meet safety or design criteria

By considering the requirements of each application independently, some

common themes emerge.

Dissimilar
Metals/External
Bias

Solvent Ionic
(usually Species
water)

Figure 2.1: In the vast majority of cases, these three requirements must be fulfilled in order
for corrosion to take place.
9
Protection Against Corrosion in End Operating Environment
Corrosion is a complicated, diffusion-controlled, electrochemical process
that takes place on an exposed metal surface. There are a variety of poten-
tial mechanisms and causes beyond the scope of this book. However, as
illustrated in Figure 2.1, in the vast majority of cases, three requirements
must be fulfilled in order for corrosion to take place:

1. Intrinsically electrochemically dissimilar metals (e.g., gold/silver and

nickel/tin) or the creation of an anode and cathode by application of
applied bias

2. The presence of an ionic species (usually salts, halides, hydroxides,

etc.) from the assembly process, but also from operating environment
(e.g., corrosive gases, salt-spray, etc.)

3. The presence of monolayers of condensed water to dissolve the

ionic species, which results in an electrolyte solution

In order to prevent the possibility of corrosion, it is necessary to eliminate

at least one of these prerequisite conditions.

The choice of metals is limited to those used in the solder and solder finish
chemistries, which are dissimilar. There will always be areas of potential
difference due to the nature of electronic assemblies. Cleaning can help
remove ionic species, but cannot prevent the re-deposition of ionic species
from the operating environment.

Conformal coatings help prevent the formation of electrolytic solutions by

acting as moisture barriers. Given the 3D topography of metal surfaces
on a PCB, in order to provide the maximum degree of protection, all metal
surfaces need to be sufficiently coated to prevent exposure of the metal
surface to a potentially corrosive environment. Small voids in the coating
that expose the metal surface can actually accelerate corrosion under the
right environment. The challenge in conformal coating is achieving the
required level of coverage on the three-dimensional, complex topography
of exposed metals.

In addition to providing a high degree of coverage, the coating needs to

be a strong barrier against moisture and must have good adhesion to
the substrate to prevent delamination. Once a coating has delaminated,
moisture may eventually collect in this pocket and form an electrolytic
solution with any pre-existing ionic contamination. This is the reason that
10
cleaning prior to conformal coating is recommended—to provide a power-
ful synergistic elimination of two of the three prerequisite conditions
necessary for corrosion.

Protection Against Condensation

Whenever there is a significant level of humidity, there is always the chance
for parts of the assembly to drop beneath the dew point. This results in the
formation of condensed water on the surface of the assembly, which can
significantly reduce the insulation resistance of the board’s surface and
lead to malfunctioning electronics.

Ergo pure water is a great conductor of electricity. Any ionic impurities

(e.g., salts from manufacturing or end-use environment) will dissolve and
form a conductive pathway, and this will lead to corrosion. Higher levels
of liquid water can rapidly accelerate this phenomenon and will result in
electro-chemical migration (ECM).

In addition to corrosion, condensation severely tests the insulative proper-

ties of the coating. Considering that this is essentially an immersion appli-
cation, water will quickly find weak spots or voids in the coating. If there is
a thin coating or no coating at all, the result will be either less than optimal
insulation or no insulation at all. The conductive solution can quickly carry
current from one weak spot to another. This could result in immediate
failure, which may be reversible when the board dries out again. However,
it could also result in permanent failure if conductive corrosion products,
dendrites (metallic filaments), or other permanent sources of current flow
are deposited onto the coating surface.

11
Real Life Example: Case Study 1
A manufacturer of industrial automation equipment in Asia was experi-
encing high failure levels of uninterruptible power supplies within three
months of installation. The boards were coated with a solvent-based
acrylic conformal coating over a no-clean process, which had been tested
to be compatible and reliable by corporate R&D. During failure analysis,
corrosion over the top of discrete ceramic passives was found (evidence
of dendritic corrosion beneath fine pitch devices). Additionally, there was
extensive corrosion in one particular localised area. Upon closer inspec-
tion, it became clear that the conformal coating was completely missing in
this highly corroded area as shown in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2: Component Corrosion Images courtesy of Foresite, Inc.

Upon further investigation, it was discovered that the area of corrosion

correlated exactly with the incoming airflow of the cooling fan. Failure
engineers detected a high level of grit and sand inside the housing when
they opened it.

The acrylic material was soft and readily abraded away by the grit and sand
brought in with the cooling fan, which resulted in exposed areas of the
assembly where corrosion could form. The adhesion of the acrylic coating
to the solder resist was not optimal, either. Moreover, the dendritic growth
was traced back to the cleanliness of the incoming components.

Switching to a more abrasion-resistant polyurethane conformal coating,

implementing a semi-aqueous cleaning process, and placing a particle
filter into the cooling air stream has dramatically improved the lifetime of
these assemblies.

12
Real Life Example: Case Study 2
The board in question was encased in a housing and cycled between 25°C
and 55°C with greater than 90% relative humidity for six eight-hour cycles.
Overall, these cannot be considered as particularly harsh conditions.
However, as soon as the temperature rise cycle started, bringing increased
levels of water vapour, the lag between the board/housing temperature
was sufficient to generate condensation.

The housing design resulted in pooling of condensate in certain areas and

this was found to correspond with high-density component areas. The
leakage current rose from about 10 μA to around 100 μA, before briefly
spiking to 1A just before the end of the heating transition. Water marks
were present at the failure areas along with what appeared to be filaments
of corrosion. The filaments were analysed and found to consist primarily of
carbon. There was no evidence of corrosion on any of the metal surfaces,
but the coverage on the corners of the ceramic devices was poor due to the
neighbouring no-coat area.

Figure 2.3: Burnt coating due to localised heat and water rings.

As shown in Figure 2.3, the carbon residues discovered were most likely
burnt coating due to the localised heat produced by the high leakage
current during the condensation event.

Faced with the prospect of redesigning the housing to prevent the accumu-
lation of condensation, the customer chose instead to reinforce the coating
thickness and coverage in those specific areas by dispensing an additional
reinforcement layer to the most sensitive areas. The new process prevent-
ed failures during further testing.

Tin Whisker Mitigation

The application of conformal coating is a tin whisker mitigation strategy.
Conformal coatings mitigate the risk of tin whiskers generating a short in
one of the following ways:

13
 1. A tin whisker eruption must penetrate the coating (as Figure 2.4
portrays, this can happen, but research shows this is uncommon)

2. In order to short, the protruding tin whisker must either:

a. Meet another protruding tin whisker from an alternative polarity;

or

b. Penetrate back through the coating at a place of opposite polarity

to create a short

It should also be noted that a whisker could break off and be re-deposited
where it can bridge metallic surfaces of opposite polarity and create a
short.

Non-Coated Board / Coated Board /

Components Components

Non-Coated PCB / Components, Coated PCB: Tin whisker must

tin whiskers can form freely. penetrate the coating first.

Coated Board / Coated Board /

Components Components

If a tin whisker forms and penetrates meet a whisker coming in the other
coating, it must then penetrate the direction which has also broken
coating again to cause a short... OR through the coating.
Figure 2.4: Tin whisker formation on coated and uncoated assemblies.

14
All of these situations for forming a tin-whisker short are infrequent,
but not impossible. Research and modelling show that as long as you
have adequate coverage and thickness of conformal coating on conduc-
tive surfaces leads, it is unlikely for tin whiskers to penetrate through the
coating once and almost impossible to do so twice. With good coverage, it
is also unlikely that a broken tin whisker will bridge two conductors. That
leaves the only real potential failure mechanism as two protruding tin
whiskers meeting and forming a short, an event that has an extremely low
probability.

Of course, if poor coverage exposes the metal surfaces or if the coating is

very thin, then tin whisker mitigation is likely to be limited.

Reduction in Component Spacing

Although air is normally an excellent insulator, when stressed by a suffi-
ciently high voltage (an electric field strength of about 3 kV/mm), air can
begin to break down and become partially conductive. Across relatively
small gaps, breakdown voltage in air is a function of separation. If the
voltage is sufficiently high, complete electrical breakdown of the air will
culminate in an electrical spark or an electric arc that bridges the entire
gap. Conformal coatings provide additional insulation resistance and may
enable designers to design more compact PCBs by placing components
closer together than would otherwise be possible. This is of particular
importance in aerospace applications since the insulating characteristics
of air are greatly reduced at altitude, and corona, arcing, and other insula-
tion breakdown events can become more frequent.

Once again, weaknesses in the coating, bubbles, thin spots, or zero-cover-

age areas present opportunities for arcing or other voltage breakdown
mechanisms to occur.

15
16
Chapter 3

The True Value of Reliability Testing

Whether the primary purpose of conformal coating is to protect against
corrosion in end operating environments, eliminate the possibility of
condensation events, mitigate against tin whiskers, enable tighter compo-
nent packing, or all of the above, it should be clear that achieving excellent
coverage at an adequate thickness must be the user’s primary goal. What
defines excellent coverage and adequate thickness depends on the design
of the assembly, the end-use environment, and the consequences of an
assembly’s failure. Therefore, these goals must be determined by the user
in a series of reliability tests designed to reflect the end-use performance
requirements of the assembly.

Testing to Ensure Reliability in High-Performance Environments

It is important to understand that performance testing of conformal
coatings to IPC-CC-830 or other standards is usually performed on flat,
unpopulated FR-4 test assemblies that are scrupulously cleaned prior to
the coating application. These coupons have no solder resist, no compo-
nents, and are usually finished in bare copper metal. The purpose of
material qualifications such as IPC-CC-830, MIL-I-46058C, and IEC-1086 is
to differentiate those coatings that are suitable for protecting electronic
assemblies from those intended for other applications.

These standards are not, and were never intended to be, guarantees that
the conformal coating will perform acceptably in any end-use environment.
Similarly, whilst IPC-J-STD-001 and IPC-A-610 are intended to help the user
produce a reliable product, there is no guarantee that a reliable product
will be obtained. It is always the responsibility of the original equipment
manufacturer (OEM) to ensure the coating is suitable for their product in
their application.

17
Conformal Coating Adhesion to Solder Resist (Solder Mask)
First, it is important to ensure that the coating selected can adhere to the
solder resist used. Given that there are perhaps hundreds of solder resist
product formulations available and that adhesion to solder resist is not
tested in any of the material qualification standards, it is essential that
users perform their own evaluations.

This is complicated by the fact that, from a coating compatibility point of

view, whether or not the coating adheres to the solder resist as intended
depends largely on the processing of the solder resist during bare board
manufacturing. A key property of the solder resist is the surface energy
(SE), a measure of how easily a substance will wet the surface in question.
From a soldering point of view, the lower the surface energy, the lower the
amount of bridges, solder balling, or other soldering defects. But from a
coating point of view, the higher the surface energy, the better the coating
wets the surface. From this perspective, higher surface energy also results
in better adhesion. A good compromise between adequate soldering and
coating adhesion is found at a surface energy of around 40 dynes/cm or
higher.

The SE value of incoming bare boards should be as high as possible.

Additional thermal excursions during soldering and residues from solder-
ing will further reduce the surface energy and affect the level of adhesion
the coating can achieve. The user should specify a level of 40 dynes/cm
as an incoming QC check from the bare board manufacturer. Moreover,

Fig. 3.1: Determining the surface energy of a substrate can be achieved by: (a) measuring the
water contact angle of the surface, or (b) simply using surface energy test liquids to determine
the surface energy of the substrate in dynes/cm (or mN/m). Click image for demo.

18
the user should check the incoming surface energy of samples from each
batch of bare boards and reject batches that fail to meet these incoming
surface energy requirements.

As described in the corrosion section, the delamination of coating from the

solder resist is often the rate-determining step of corrosive failures at the
board surface. Therefore, it is essential that the adhesion of the coating be
maximised for high-reliability applications.

Compatibility with Flux and Other Process Residues

In a perfect world, the assembly would be scrupulously clean prior to
coating just as it is before material qualification testing. However, with the
almost ubiquitous use of no-clean chemistries, the presence of residues
and at least some contamination is ensured in most processes. In many
protective coating applications (e.g., the chassis of a car), the substrate
is thoroughly cleaned and often primed or prepared to accept paint to
ensure good adhesion. The popularity of the no-clean process, even in
high-reliability applications, is analogous to driving that newly made car
chassis through a muddy field as the treatment prior to applying the paint.

Residues from the soldering process, despite being referred to as

“no-clean,” can have a significantly negative impact on the coating perfor-
mance. Coating over these residues with solvent-free products can often
result in less than perfect wetting and coverage. Even in a situation where
the coating coverage and coating adhesion to the flux residue may be
good, the adhesion of the flux to the board may be poor. This could result
in adhesive failure of the flux residue and lead to coating delamination in
the areas around solder joints—exactly where you need the best adhesion
for protection from corrosion. These flux residues often soften and lose
adhesion with heat, and can crack during thermal excursion testing. These
cracking events can also cause the coating to crack.

Physical compatibility of the coating with the flux residue is usually

assessed by some form of temperature cycling or temperature shock test,
along with ageing at higher temperatures and humidities.

It is also important to verify the electrochemical compatibility of the

coating with your soldering consumables. No-clean fluxes are formulated
to lock up the active species in a rosin or resin matrix. This matrix can
crack during thermal transitions, damage the integrity of the coating, and

19
expose potentially corrosive species. Additionally, the coatings can interact
with the matrix, release deleterious species, and compromise the ability of
the coating material to cure correctly.

This verification is best done by performing a surface insulation resistance

(SIR) test at an elevated temperature and high humidity to ensure there
is no bad electrochemical interaction between the coating and soldering
product. It is often a good idea to pre-stress the coating/flux combination
prior to SIR testing, usually by exposure to thermal excursions between
temperature extremes relevant to your end-operating environment.
Further, it is worth noting that many SIR-based specifications call for a test
duration of one week to establish compatibility. However, it is the author’s
suggestion that 1,000 hours is the minimum duration for such a test. It can
take this long or longer for moisture permeation and the development of
interactions to become apparent during an SIR experiment.

SIR is a measure of the insulation resis-

tance between two metal traces of
opposite bias at the surface of a test
board, usually at high temperature and
humidity. Ideally, the coating and solder
residue combination will yield an SIR
value that is stable and is not lower than
either of the materials in isolation.

Fig. 3.2: Example of an SIR pattern showing an interdigitated comb pattern. The width of the
tracks, the separation between the tracks, and the applied bias will all affect the reported SIR.

Figure 3.3 shows an example of typical data obtained during such an SIR
compatibility study. In this case, the coating itself has a very high insulation
resistance. The paste, which is soldered to the tracks, has the lowest SIR
value and the combination has a slightly higher value. For this particular
combination, the paste and coating can be considered compatible and the
paste largely determines the overall level of SIR. It is equally possible for
the coating to be the determinant of the overall SIR, too—it depends on
the degree and type of interaction between the two chemistries. As long
as the result of coating and paste is stable and greater than or equal to the
lowest individual value, the combination can be said to be electrochemi-
cally compatible.

20
Figure 3.3: An example of typical data obtained during such an SIR compatibility study.

As shown in Figure 3.4, after 1,000

thermal shock cycles between -40°C
and +140°C, the coating can be seen
to still fluoresce a continuous blue.
Meanwhile, extensive cracking of
the flux residue can be seen beneath
the coating when in white light. In
Figure 3.4: Board following thermal cycling.
this case, the coating was tough and
elastic enough that it resisted cracking, whereas the flux residue cracked
on both coated and uncoated assemblies. With a coating material that was
less tough and elastic, it is entirely likely that the cracking of the flux would
have also cracked the coating.

Once the physical and electrochemical compatibility of the material sets

have been established, the user’s reliability focus should switch to a more
functional testing approach.

21
 Corrosive Mixed Flowing Gas
(MFG) Testing
In many cases, coated assemblies
will be subjected to mixtures of
corrosive gases due to pollution in
cities or operation in environments
with high levels of such gases (e.g.,
process control sensors in a metal
smelting facility). It is important
that the coating is able to provide
sufficient barrier properties to
these gases to prevent corrosion.

SIR testing can be a valuable

tool to understand the inher-
ent protective capability of the
material. Instead of performing
the experiment at high tempera-
ture and humidity, the experiment
is simply performed in a special
MFG chamber. The coupons are
exposed to parts per billion (ppb)
Figure 3.5: Corrosive gas test.
levels of gases at a controlled
temperature and humidity (e.g., chlorine, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen
sulphide, sulfur dioxide, etc.). These gases can form a variety of acidic
species under these test conditions that are detrimental to the perfor-
mance of the assembly, especially those that are plated with ENIG, silver,
or left with a bare copper/OSP finish.

22
23
Chapter 4

Condensation Testing: Working with the NPL

While the characterisation of coating performance under high humidity
conditions is detailed in well accepted IPC and IEC standards, the perfor-
mance and testing under condensing conditions is not as well developed.

This situation largely reflects the hardware challenge. Most humidity

chambers are designed to achieve stable, well-controlled humidity and
temperature conditions, but none of them offer condensing options.
Therefore, the user has to improvise. A common approach to attempting
to achieve condensing conditions is to ramp at a fast enough rate to cause
condensation—a feature the humidity chamber designers have mostly
managed to remove. An immediate drawback of this approach is that
chambers of different designs will perform differently and be sensitive to
small drops in cooling performance.

An alternative approach is the BMW test K15 from GS 95024-3-1, in which

a tray of water is introduced to the chamber and heated to cause excess
moisture, which results in condensation. The sensors in the chamber can
detect the additional moisture and will work to reduce the humidity level
to the required setpoint.

The National Physical Laboratory (NPL) in the UK developed a new approach

where the test board is mounted on a substrate whose temperature can be
independently controlled without changing the ambient condition. Thus,
the temperature of the test board can be depressed below ambient to any
desired point and produce condensation at different levels. Hence, it is
straightforward to cycle between condensing and non-condensing condi-
tions on the test board in a constant ambient environment. By continuous-
ly taking SIR measurements during the cycling between conditions, users

25
Fig. 4.1: These charts show how the insulation resisitance is relativeley high above dew point
until the surface becomes saturated with water, then it drops below dew point.

can create charts similar to those shown in Figure 4.1 where the insulation
resistance is relatively high above dew point and drops are significantly
below dew point as the surface becomes saturated with water.

It is possible to see the impact of componentry

and the effect of thickness and coverage when
using an SIR test board (Figure 4.2) designed to
reflect modern fine pitch componentry. While
the absolute values are different, the same
trends are evident and understood by compar-
ing thickness and coverage.

One thing that could be seen on this style of

assembly, compared to the uncoated bare
Figure 4.2: Test coupon.
board, was that condensation collected beneath
certain low-standoff devices and did not dry out as the temperatures alter-
nated. This was especially true of passives, QFP, and BGA patterns.

The acrylic-coated boards were better than uncoated boards, but there
were still significant drops in insulation resistance between wet and dry
conditions. The thick-film urethane-coated boards showed very little

26
Fig. 4.3: SIR data.

difference between wet and dry conditions. Further, they did not allow
condensation to become trapped due to the improved sealing and gap fill
achieved with these materials.

The choice of conformal coating material for harsh environments will

ultimately depend on many factors. However, it is important to under-
stand and test some of the key protective performance capabilities of the
coating to ensure it can give the level of protection you require in your end
environment. Nevertheless, much of the discussion thus far has focussed
on the importance of adequate coating coverage of metal surfaces and
adequate coating thickness in these critical areas to provide the required
level of performance and circuit functionality.

27
Chapter 5

Industry Standards and Best Practices

This chapter will focus on industry standards that provide guidance for
workmanship. IPC-J-STD-001 prescribes practices and requirements for
the manufacture of soldered electrical and electronic assemblies, and
is accompanied by IPC-HDBK-001. The standard describes materials,
methods, and acceptance criteria for producing soldered electrical and
electronic assemblies.

The intent of this document is to implement sufficient process control

methodology to ensure consistent quality levels during the manufac-
ture of product. The standard recognizes that electrical and electronic
assemblies are subject to classifications by intended end-item use. Three
general end-product classes have been established to reflect differences
in constructability, complexity, functional performance requirements,
and verification (inspection/test) frequency. However, this will always be a
Class 3 application for harsh environments and “includes products where
continued high performance or performance-on-demand is critical, equip-
ment downtime cannot be tolerated, end-use environment may be uncom-
monly harsh, and the equipment must function when required, such as life
support or other critical systems,” according to IPC.

The intention behind J-STD-001 is this: if you follow each prescriptive step
in the assembly sequence in accordance with the workmanship require-
ments of IPC-A-610, you will build a reliable product. The statement at the
beginning of both IPC-A-610 and IPC-J-STD-001 reads, “Standards allow
manufacturers, customers, and suppliers to understand one another
better. Standards allow manufacturers greater efficiencies when they can
set up their processes to meet industry standards, allowing them to offer
their customers lower costs.”

29
IPC’s Principles of Standardization, which are found at the front of these
documents, states, “Standards should not contain anything that cannot
be defended with data.” However, there are some instances within the
documents that seem to provide conflicting guidance.

For example, consider the J-STD-001 requirements for conformal coating.

IPC J-STD-001F requires that conformal coating be applied at the following
nominal thickness range as measured on a flat, unencumbered part of the
assembly or witness coupon.

Conformal Coating Approvals

J-STD-001F IPC-CC-830B

Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum

IPC Base
Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness
Designation Chemistry
µm (mil) µm (mil) µm (mil) µm (mil)

AR Acrylic 25 (1.0) 130 (5.2) 25 (1.0) 75 (3.0)

UR Polyurethane 25 (1.0) 130 (5.2) 25 (1.0) 75 (3.0)

SR Silicone 50 (2.0) 200 (8.0) 50 (2.0) 200 (8.0)

ER Epoxy 25 (1.0) 130 (5.2) 25 (1.0) 75 (3.0)

XY Paraxylylene 10 (0.5) 50 (2.0) 10 (0.5) 50 (2.0)

Table 5.1: The values highlighted in blue signify that the thicknesses tested and qualified by
the manufacturer are significantly less than allowed by the J-Standard document (J-STD-001F).
This may cause unexpected application and performance issues.

It is important to understand that these values are intended to be used

for the purposes of process control. By measuring these values on a flat,
unpopulated part of the assembly or separate witness coupon, the user
can monitor the consistency of their process and ensure they are within
acceptable limits. It is also important to understand that this value is
extremely unlikely to be uniform across the assembly. With many confor-
mal coating chemistries, the thickness achieved on sharp edges, compo-
nent leads, and solder joints is likely to be significantly less.

Dave Hillman, a metallurgical engineer from Rockwell Collins, has led a

blind state-of-the-industry assessment of conformal coating thickness
30
(and by extension, coating coverage). The goal of the testing is to examine
conformal coating thicknesses on real-world component geometries using
industry standard coatings and coating processes.

Coating thickness is being determined using destructive cross-sectioning

methods. To preserve the coating, assemblies are sputtered with gold to
mark the conformal coating layer of interest, overcoated with a tougher
conformal coating, and encapsulated prior to cross-sectioning. A huge
number of cross-sections have been completed and the project is expected
to be completed by 2018. A typical cross-section produced by this process
can be seen in Figure 5.1.

Conformal Coat

Potting Copper Lead

Compound

Sealing
Conformal Coat Material
Potting
Compound

Solder

Copper Pad
Figure 5.1: Typical cross-section. Image courtesty of Rockwell Collins

The materials chosen for the study only demonstrated a tiny snapshot
of those currently available. When the study is completed, there will be
an opportunity to compare coating methods, material types, and facility
results to obtain a general state of the industry.

Taking some shots from completed sections, it is possible to compare the

coverage achieved by the same UV curable applied by selective or manual
spray processes as shown on the following page.

31
Following images courtesty of Rockwell Collins.

UV curable material
manual spray.

UV curable material
selective spray.

Overall, the results appear somewhat similar. If anything, the manual

spray-applied material is a little thicker with less of the knee of the gull-
wing component exposed. With the selectively coated UV material, the
entire knee of the component is free of conformal coating and completely
exposed.

32
Taking the same component, but with a heat-cured urethane conformal
coating, the following can be seen:

UV curable material
manual spray.

UV curable material
selective spray.

Once again, the results are somewhat similar. Similarly, the knee of this
component proved difficult to coat with either method, but particularly
with the selective method.

On a flat area of the board, the thickness was confirmed to be in accordance

with the requirements of J-STD-001.

33
Chapter 6

Less is Most Definitely More

It is surprising to note that J-STD-001F allows conformal thicknesses signifi-
cantly greater than those qualified by the manufacturer to the material
qualification standard IPC-CC-830B. The maximum coating thickness tested
during qualification of an acrylic material is 75 microns (3 mil). J-STD-001
allows the use of 130 microns (5.2 mils) of that same material. There is no
data to support this. In fact, most users and conformal coating suppliers
would suggest that this thickness range could create many latent defects
and failure mechanisms.

Anyone reading the standard might make the assumption that if some is
good, more is better. While this may be true for some performance param-
eters, others will suffer. Whether more is indeed better needs to be verified
by the user with their own reliability testing. During material qualification
testing to IPC-CC-830, the conformal coatings are tested on scrupulously
clean, flat FR-4 coupons without components, solder mask, or paste/flux
residues. Even at the higher thickness end of the qualified range, there is
no guarantee that the presence of components and solder mask will not
cause problems such as solvent entrapment, lack of adhesion, excessive
bubbles, coating stress-cracking during shrinkage from solvent evapora-
tion, or rapid thermal transitions between hot and cold. When applied
thickly, some coatings can exert more stress than expected on compo-
nents and lead to reduced solder-joint lifetimes or cracking of glass-bodied
diodes.

For example, when coating for high-performance or high-reliability appli-

cations with solvent-based conformal coatings, it is nearly always better to
apply two thinner layers of conformal coating than one thick layer. There
are many reasons for this:

35
 • Larger volumes of material are more likely to flow with capillary forces
into defined keep-out zones and lead to a non-uniform appearance.

• Larger volumes of material are more likely to flow with gravity to the
board substrate than coat the edge of a component.

• Larger volumes of material take longer to build viscosity by solvent

evaporation, exacerbating the tendency to flow with gravity.

• Larger volumes of material are more prone to solvent-entrapment,

which can create bubbles or set-up stress failures during thermal
excursions.

• Thicker coatings are at greater risk of delamination and cracking in

thermal cycling.

Conversely, thin coating films rapidly lose solvent and minimise these
issues. In addition, the first thin layer often acts like a primer. This enables
the second layer to wet and cover more uniformly than might otherwise be
expected. Some materials do not wet or adhere well to previous layers so
this must be tested to ensure good inter-coat adhesion.

In high-reliability environments, thickness on either a flat panel or unpopu-

lated part of the board correlates very little to the level of protection afford-
ed. Coverage of sharp edges and component leads, etc., is far more criti-
cal to determining the level of protection achieved. However, this remains
essentially impossible to achieve in a non-destructive fashion. Measuring
coating thickness on these critical areas in a fast, accurate, reproducible,
and non-destructive fashion remains the holy grail of conformal coating
inspection.

36
37
Chapter 7

I Have Selected the Coating: How Do I Apply It?

There are a variety of application methods used to apply conformal
coatings. However, in the context of coating for harsh environments, the
concentration will be on those used for this purpose and with reference to
the main five coating types.

Brush Coating
The use of a brush to manually apply conformal coating is probably the
easiest and lowest technology method available. Many of the coatings
contain a material that fluoresces blue under long-wavelength UV light,
which can be used by the operator to assess and ensure coverage. The
operator can use this fluorescence, manual dexterity, and an inherent
feedback loop to add additional material as needed to ensure good cover-
age is achieved. Areas that are not to be coated can simply be ignored
by the operator, although masking may be required if there is not much
distance between an area to be coated and a do-not-coat area.

The main drawbacks to brush coating are that it is a manual process, the
coverage achieved is highly operator-dependent, and it is not particularly
repeatable. It is also labour-intensive and applied thickness is usually on
the higher side, which can cause problems with solvent entrapment, stress
cracking, reduced solder joint lifetimes, etc. The technique probably works
best with solvent-based materials where the solvent content helps ensure
a bubble-free finish.

Manual Spray
The use of a manual spray gun to apply the conformal coating is common
in high-reliability/harsh environment electronics, especially with solvent-
based or water-based coatings. The spray gun atomises the coating (breaks
the material into very small particles) and projects it toward the board.

39
The small particle size increases the surface area enormously so that the
solvent begins to evaporate during its travel to the board. Ideally, the
coating would contain just enough solvent to coalesce with other particles
when deposited on the surface being coated. This process results in the
ability to apply a thin, uniform, and well-covered layer of coating. Similar to
brush coating, the operator can use the materials fluorescence to assess
and adjust coverage as they work.

However, this process is wasteful because of the evaporating solvent and

the necessity to overspray beyond the perimeter of the board to ensure
coverage. Further, due to the small particle sizes, good extraction and/
or protective equipment, such as a respirator, is necessary to protect the
operator. It is a labour-intensive process, especially because any areas that
do not require coating must be well masked off prior to coating. Naturally,
as a manual process, the result depends entirely on the operator. As a
result, repeatability and reproducibility suffer. However, a well-performed
manual spray application is likely to yield the best degree of coverage, and
the thinnest, most uniform coating possible from liquid applied coatings.
Manual spray may be the most appropriate application method for some
assemblies that can be difficult to coat well with a selective spray machine
(e.g., highly-figured power supplies with tall components).

Dipping
In this process, the board is immersed in liquid
coating and withdrawn at a constant slow rate
to deposit the coating film. The main advantage
of dip coating is its fast cycle time. Many parts
can be coated in one dip cycle. Both sides are
coated simultaneously and the nature of the
immersion process helps ensure coverage of
the backside of the component leads, etc. If the
board is well designed for dip coating and has
all the connectors and keep-out areas on the same edge of the assembly,
masking can be ignored and the dip-coating process can be ideal.

Often, this is not possible and extensive masking of do-not-coat areas is

required. There is a natural tendency for the liquid coating to flow with
gravity and produce a wedge thickness profile where the coating is thinner
at the edge that was withdrawn first, and thicker at the trailing edge. The
final main drawback is that coating penetration under devices such as BGA

40
is likely to be total. Depending on the coating material, this can significantly
reduce the solder joint reliability of such components, as well as provide
solvent entrapment issues that result in bubble formation during curing.

Selective Dipping
This is an interesting variation on the simple dip-coating process. A tool is
produced specific to an assembly that mechanically masks areas that must
not be coated. The tool is gasketed to the board surface. Then, material is
pumped into the tool and pumped back out at a controlled rate to simulate
the dipping process. There is no need to mask the board and the process
can be automated. It fits well with single-piece flow and results can be
excellent.

The main issues are a dedicated tool must be made for each assembly to
be coated, and storage, cleaning, and management of these tools is likely
to be similar to stencils used in paste printing. The process relies on being
able to gasket the tool to the board surface, which can be difficult with very
dense componentry. However, in a line dedicated to producing just a few
types of assemblies, the process can be very effective.

Selective Spray
In this process, a robot replaces the human operator. A more efficient spray
valve is used that minimises the amount of overspray and applies a well-
defined line of coating. The robot can be programmed to coat required
areas and ignore areas that must not be coated. Unlike the human opera-
tor, the robot will do (essentially) the exact same thing every time. Thus, a
much higher level of repeatability and reproducibility is ensured.

Somewhat counterintuitively, however, the flexibility afforded by the

operator in a manual process to add additional coating (if required),
repair small defects, and adjust angles of application, etc., can result in
less coating uniformity and a lower degree of coverage than, for example,
manual spray.

Selective coating machines are more complicated and require a highly

skilled programmer. Programming and program optimisation can take
time. However, selective spray coating is now the dominant application
method in high-reliability applications for many reasons: ongoing labour
savings by largely eliminating masking, ability to situate selective coating
machines in the production line, reduced cycle times, and the overall
improved level of traceability, reproducibility, and repeatability.

41
Comparison of Application Processes

Selective
Manual Brush Manual Spray Selective
Dip Coating Selective Dip Atomised Vacuum
Airless Spray
Spray
Good but Very Good
Coverage Operator but Operator Very Good Very Good Poor Poor Very Good
Dependent Dependent

Thickness Higher Low – High Lower Lower Medium Lower Lower

Coating
Lower Higher Medium Medium Medium Medium / High High
Uniformity

Reproducibility Low Medium Medium/High Medium / High High High High

Masking
Low High Very High Low Low Low Very High
Requirements

One Piece Flow Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Table 7.1: Inductive ratings/descriptions are based on the author’s experience and observations.

Vacuum
Vacuum-deposited conformal coatings, such as paraxylylene, provide
complete and uniform coverage. Deposition takes up to 8–12 hours per
batch in a highly specialised reactor. Coverage is not the main issue with
these coating types. Rather, anything that must not be coated has to be
masked 100% effectively, or it will be coated. These materials can be diffi-
cult to rework and are usually repaired with other coating materials.

In theory, the deposition process should be the same from batch to batch.
However, in practice, nominal thickness and lead coverage can still range
by more than 10%.

The application of conformal coating is as important as the coating material itself. Incorrect
application can cause problems with the coating and result in inadequate levels of protection.
In the above video, we discuss the different application methods and the pros and cons associ-
ated with each method.

42
Conclusion

Conformal coating materials are used to provide protection against humid-

ity, condensation, and corrosive gases. They also provide additional dielec-
tric properties to enable more dense packing of components than would
otherwise be possible. In addition, conformal coatings are used as a tin
whisker mitigation strategy.

It is important to understand the reasons for using the conformal coating

to ensure that a suitable protective chemistry is chosen. The user must
ensure the selected materials are compatible with the other process
chemistries, or that a cleaning process is used to minimise the number of
potentially deleterious interactions. Specifically, one must ensure that the
solder resist has a high enough surface energy to enable the coating to
wet uniformly and adhere well to its surface to provide the required anti-
corrosion protection.

The challenges of achieving complete coverage of component leads and

exposed metal surfaces, along with sufficient thickness to provide the
required protection, has been outlined as a key determinant of the level of
protection that can be afforded by conformal coating under any of these
use scenarios.

Lastly, commonly used application methods were reviewed along with the
relative strengths and weaknesses of each process with regard to high-
reliability applications. Despite potentially offering reduced edge coverage
compared to manual methods, selective coating has become the dominant
technology for conformal coating application due to the minimisation of
variation between coated assemblies, traceability, inline nature, and poten-
tial cost-savings from the minimisation of masking and masking removal
(zero value-added processes).

43
Further Reading

IPC Resources: http://shop.ipc.org

• J-STD-001E
• IPC-CC-830B-WAM1
• IPC-9201A
• IPC-HDBK-830A

Corrosive Gas Testing

Mixed Flowing Gas Testing Introduction and CALCE MFG Capability

Creep Corrosion of Electronic Assemblies in Harsh Environments

Silver and Sulfur: Case-Studies, Physics, and Possible Solutions

The Surface Finish Effect on the Creep Corrosion in PCB

Tin Whisker
Evaluation of Conformal Coatings as a Tin Whisker Mitigation Strategy

Evaluation of Conformal Coatings as a Tin Whisker Mitigation Strategy

(Part II)

NASA: Tin Whisker (and Other Metal Whisker) Homepage

Assessment of Tin Whisker Mitigation for Conformally Coated SnPb

Assemblies

Tin Whisker Risk Management by Conformal Coating

NPL Report on Sn Whisker Testing with Conformal Coating

Condensation
Qualifying for Moisture-Containing Environments

Condensation Testing: A New Approach

General Resources
The Toughest Conformal Coatings for the Harshest Environments

44
About Electrolube
Electrolube is among the world’s foremost experts in the formulation and appli-
cation of conformal coatings designed to meet international approvals including
European and American military specifications. The range of products comprises
acrylics, silicones, polyurethanes, hybrid chemistries, and environmentally friend-
ly options. The range also includes ancillary products to complement the use of
their conformal coatings including thinners, removers, peelable coating masks,
and thixotropic materials for dam and fill applications.

Electrolube’s award-winning range of conformal coatings enables greater

electronics reliability under increasingly adverse conditions. Their commitment
to innovating greener chemical formulations has resulted in the development
of a solvent-free range of higher performance protective coatings, which have
been demonstrated to provide significant performance improvements on model
PCB test assemblies for resistance to thermal shock, condensation, and salt-mist
environments over traditional conformal coatings.

Conformal coatings are particularly important in automotive, domestic, and mobile

electronics as well as military, aerospace, marine, lighting, industrial, and green
energy applications. Electrolube has made significant investments in state-of-the-
art testing equipment to evaluate electrical performance, accelerated humidity
testing, and test performance in severe conditions. Electrolube puts all of their
conformal coatings through stringent test conditions to ensure the coatings meet
the requirements of even the harshest environments.

Electrolube has provided bespoke solutions and off-the-shelf products since 1941.
The company now manufactures on three continents and has a strong internation-
al presence in over 55 countries. With an expansive range of conformal coatings,
resins, thermal management, contact lubricants, cleaning solutions, and mainte-
nance and service aids, Electrolube provides the world’s leading manufacturers of
electronic, industrial, and domestic devices with a complete solution at all levels
of production.

45