Ipc CH 65B (L)

SINGLE USER LICENSE - NOT FOR USE ON A NETWORK OR ONLINE
IPC-CH-65B
2011 - July
Guidelines for Cleaning of
Printed Boards and Assemblies
Supersedes IPC-CH-65A
September 1999
A standard developed by IPC
Association Connecting Electronics Industries
®
The Principles of In May 1995 the IPC’s Technical Activities Executive Committee (TAEC) adopted Principles of
Standardization Standardization as a guiding principle of IPC’s standardization efforts.
Standards Should: Standards Should Not:
• Show relationship to Design for Manufacturability • Inhibit innovation
(DFM) and Design for the Environment (DFE) • Increase time-to-market
• Minimize time to market • Keep people out
• Contain simple (simplified) language • Increase cycle time
• Just include spec information • Tell you how to make something
• Focus on end product performance • Contain anything that cannot
• Include a feedback system on use and be defended with data
problems for future improvement
Notice IPC Standards and Publications are designed to serve the public interest through eliminating mis-
understandings between manufacturers and purchasers, facilitating interchangeability and improve-
ment of products, and assisting the purchaser in selecting and obtaining with minimum delay the
proper product for his particular need. Existence of such Standards and Publications shall not in
any respect preclude any member or nonmember of IPC from manufacturing or selling products
not conforming to such Standards and Publication, nor shall the existence of such Standards and
Publications preclude their voluntary use by those other than IPC members, whether the standard
is to be used either domestically or internationally.
Recommended Standards and Publications are adopted by IPC without regard to whether their adop-
tion may involve patents on articles, materials, or processes. By such action, IPC does not assume
any liability to any patent owner, nor do they assume any obligation whatever to parties adopting
the Recommended Standard or Publication. Users are also wholly responsible for protecting them-
selves against all claims of liabilities for patent infringement.
IPC Position It is the position of IPC’s Technical Activities Executive Committee that the use and implementation
Statement on of IPC publications is voluntary and is part of a relationship entered into by customer and supplier.
Specification When an IPC publication is updated and a new revision is published, it is the opinion of the TAEC
Revision Change that the use of the new revision as part of an existing relationship is not automatic unless required
by the contract. The TAEC recommends the use of the latest revision. Adopted October 6, 1998
Why is there Your purchase of this document contributes to the ongoing development of new and updated industry
a charge for standards and publications. Standards allow manufacturers, customers, and suppliers to understand
this document? 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.
IPC spends hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to support IPC’s volunteers in the standards
and publications development process. There are many rounds of drafts sent out for review and
the committees spend hundreds of hours in review and development. IPC’s staff attends and par-
ticipates in committee activities, typesets and circulates document drafts, and follows all necessary
procedures to qualify for ANSI approval.
IPC’s membership dues have been kept low to allow as many companies as possible to participate.
Therefore, the standards and publications revenue is necessary to complement dues revenue. The
price schedule offers a 50% discount to IPC members. If your company buys IPC standards and
publications, why not take advantage of this and the many other benefits of IPC membership as
well? For more information on membership in IPC, please visit www.ipc.org or call 847/597-2872.
Thank you for your continued support.
©Copyright 2011. IPC, Bannockburn, Illinois, USA. All rights reserved under both international and Pan-American copyright conventions. Any
copying, scanning or other reproduction of these materials without the prior written consent of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited and
constitutes infringement under the Copyright Law of the United States.
IPC-CH-65B
®
Guidelines for Cleaning

of Printed Boards and
Assemblies
Developed by the Cleaning and Alternatives Subcommittee (5-31) of the

Cleaning and Coating Committee (5-30) of IPC
Supersedes: Users of this publication are encouraged to participate in the

IPC-CH-65A - September 1999 development of future revisions.
IPC-CH-65 - December 1990
SC-60A - August 1999 Contact:
SA-61A - June 2002
AC-62A - January 1996 IPC
SM-839 - April 1990 3000 Lakeside Drive, Suite 309S
Bannockburn, Illinois
60015-1249
Tel 847 615.7100
Fax 847 615.7105
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B
Acknowledgment
Any standard involving a complex technology draws material from a vast number of sources. While the principal members
of the Cleaning and Alternatives Subcommittee (5-31) of the Cleaning and Coating Committee (5-30) are shown below, it
is not possible to include all of those who assisted in the evolution of this standard. To each of them, the members of the
IPC extend their gratitude.
Cleaning and Coating Cleaning and Alternatives Technical Liaisons of the

Committee Subcommittee IPC Board of Directors
Chair Chair
Douglas O. Pauls Dr. Mike Bixenman Peter Bigelow
Rockwell Collins Kyzen Corporation IMI Inc.
Sammy Yi
Aptina Imaging Corporation
Cleaning and Alternatives Subcommittee
Greg Marszalek, 3M Meaghan Munson, Foresite Dean May, NSWC Crane

Edward DePauw, 3M Bill Kenyon, Globle Centre Michhael Savidakis, Petroferm
David Hesselroth, 3M Consulting Rich Kraszewski, Plexus Corporation
Doug Shueller, AbelConn Carlyn Smith, Harris Dale Lee, Plexus Corporation
Ronald McLinay, American General Amy Van Ollefen, HF Wentworth Bill Barthel, Plexus Corporation
Consulting Electrolube
Joe Russeau, Precision Analytical
Mike Konrad, Aqueous Technologies Hector Valladares, Honeywell Services
Kevin Buckner, Aqueous Joseph Slania, Honeywell Bill Vuono, Raytheon
Technologies Kara Warrensford, Honeywell Martin Scionti, Raytheon
William Adams, Astronautics Corp. Mark Northrup, IEC Electronics Amy Hagnauer, Raytheon
Fritz Byle, Astronautics Corp. Ning Chen Lee, Indium Corp Francis Fortin, Raytheon
Steve Stach, Austin American Andy Mackie, Indium Corp Tiffany Madsen, Raytheon
Technology Runsheng Mao, Indium Corp Brian Maheu, Resys
Greg Hurst, BAE Systems James Maguire, Intel Bev Christian, RIM
Barbara Kangesburg, BFK Consulting Mike Bixenman, Kyzen Corporation Chris Mahanna, Robisan Laboratory
Ed Kanegsburg, BFK Solutions JoAnn Quitmeyer, Kyzen Corporation Doug Pauls, Rockwell Collins
Thomas Carroll, Boeing Carolyn Leary, Kyzen Corporation Dave Hillman, Rockwell Collins
Ed Lamm, Branson Debbie Carboni, Kyzen Corporation Dave Adams, Rockwell Collins
Jeff Kennedy, Celestica Chuck Sexton, Kyzen Corporation Eddie Hofer, Rockwell Collins
Jason Keeping, Celestica Tom Forsythe, Kyzen Corporation Lamar Young, Specialty Coatings
Prakash Kapadia, Celestica Dirk Ellis, Kyzen Corporation John Neiderman, Speedline
Greg Vorhis, Coastal Technologies Jack Reinke, Kyzen Corporation Technology
Karen Tellefsen, Cookson Electronics Tom Gervascio, Lockheed Martin Mel Parrish, STI Electronics
David Steele, Da-Tech Linda Woody, Lockheed Martin Jim Timler, Stoelting
John Stemniski, Draper Labs Dock Brown, Medtronic Thomas Ellison, Symphony
Joan Bartelt, DuPont Tom Tattersal, MicroCare Consulting
Peter Braiton, ECI Technology David Norton, Moog Julie Fields, Technical Devices
Lou Van, Electronic Source Company Robert Ruszanowski, Moog Lee Wilmot, TTM Technologies
Craig Hood, Florachem Jeannette Plante, NASA Harald Wack, Zestron
Terry Munson, Foresite Joseph Sherfick, NASA Crane Mike McCutchen, Zestron
Eric Camden, Foresite Brian Flemming, National Sal Sparacino, Zestron
Paco Solis, Foresite Instruments
iii
IPC-CH-65B July 2011
iv
Table of Contents
1 OVERVIEW ................................................................ 1 2.3 Other .................................................................. 6
1.1 Scope ................................................................. 1 2.3.1 American Standards for Testing Materials ....... 6
1.2 Purpose .............................................................. 1 2.3.2 Standard Specification of Materials .................. 7
1.3 Background ........................................................ 1 2.3.3 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) .. 7
1.4 Current and Emerging Cleaning-Related 2.3.4 American National Standards Institute
Challenges ......................................................... 1 (ANSI), American Society for Quality
Control (ASQC) ................................................ 7
1.5 Document Chapters ........................................... 1
2.4 Other Considerations ......................................... 7
1.5.1 Section 2: Applicable Documents .................... 1
2.4.1 ISO Standards .................................................... 7
1.5.2 Section 3: Assembly Cleaning Value and
Applicability ...................................................... 2 2.4.2 REACH .............................................................. 7
1.5.3 Section 4: Designing Assemblies for 2.4.3 Cal/OSHA .......................................................... 7
Cleaning ............................................................. 2 2.4.4 FDA/EU cGMP ................................................. 7
1.5.4 Section 5: Materials Compatibility .................. 2 2.5 Terms and Definitions ....................................... 7
1.5.5 Section 6: Process Development and 2.5.1 Solvent Cleaning ............................................... 8
Verification ......................................................... 2 2.5.2 Defluxing ........................................................... 8
1.5.6 Section 7: Contamination and Its Effects 2.6 Solvent Cleaning Steps ..................................... 8
on PWBs ............................................................ 2
2.6.1 Wash or Washing ............................................... 8
1.5.7 Section 8: Assembly Residues/Cleaning
Considerations ................................................... 3 2.6.2 Rinse or Rinsing ................................................ 8
1.5.8 Section 9: Environmental Considerations ........ 3 2.6.3 Drying ................................................................ 8
1.5.9 Section 10: Solvent Cleaning Agents .............. 3 2.6.4 Solvent Cleaning Agent Recovery
and Recycle ....................................................... 8
1.5.10 Section 11: Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents,
Equipment, and Process Optimization .............. 3 2.6.5 Solvent Agitation Methods ............................... 8
1.5.11 Section 12: Aqueous Cleaning Agents, 2.6.6 Solvent Cleaning Agent Acronym
Equipment, and Process Integration ................. 3 Definitions ......................................................... 8
1.5.12 Section 13: Cleaning for Rework, Repair, 2.7 Solvent Cleaning Process Definitions ............... 9
and Restoration Operations ............................... 3 2.7.1 Carbon Adsorption ............................................ 9
2.7.2 Combustible ....................................................... 9
2 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS .................................... 4
2.7.3 Co-solvent (Bi-solvent) ..................................... 9
2.1 Industry Standards ............................................. 4
2.7.4 Dragout .............................................................. 9
2.1.1 IPC Standards .................................................... 4
2.7.5 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning .................................... 9
2.1.2 Joint Industry Standards .................................... 5
2.8 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Steps Definitions ....... 9
2.1.3 Telcordia Technologies ...................................... 5
2.8.1 Hydrocarbon-Surfactant (HCS, HC/S, HC-S)
2.2 U.S. Federal Regulations .................................. 5 Cleaning ............................................................. 9
2.2.1 Federal Laws ..................................................... 5 2.8.2 Wash or Washing ............................................... 9
2.2.2 Federal Standards .............................................. 5 2.8.3 Emulsion or Emulsification ............................... 9
2.2.3 Department of Defense ..................................... 5 2.8.4 Rinse or Rinsing ................................................ 9
2.2.4 Occupational Safety and Health 2.8.5 Dry or Drying .................................................... 9
Administration (OSHA) .................................... 6 2.8.6 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agent Acronym
2.2.5 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ......... 6 Definitions ....................................................... 10
2.2.6 Department of Transportation ........................... 6 2.9 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Process
Definitions ....................................................... 10
2.2.7 American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) ......................... 6 2.9.1 Carbon Adsorption .......................................... 10
2.2.8 National Institute of Occupational Safety 2.9.2 Combustible ..................................................... 10
and Health (NIOSH) ......................................... 6 2.9.3 Decanting ......................................................... 10
v
2.9.4 Dragout ............................................................ 10 3.6.6 Reliability Risks .............................................. 21

2.9.5 Emulsion .......................................................... 10
4 DESIGNING ASSEMBLIES FOR CLEANING ........ 23
2.9.6 Organic Solvent Emulsions in Aqueous 4.1 Design of Assemblies for Effective
Media ............................................................... 10 Cleaning ........................................................... 23
2.9.7 Water Softening ............................................... 10 4.2 Design for Cleaning ........................................ 23
2.10 Environmental Definitions ............................... 11 4.2.1 Substrate .......................................................... 23
2.10.1 BOD Biological Oxygen Demand .................. 11 4.2.2 Assembly Components .................................... 24
2.10.2 COD Chemical Oxygen Demand ................... 11 4.2.3 Assembly Contaminants .................................. 24
2.10.3 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) .............. 11 4.2.4 Thermal Gradients ........................................... 25
2.10.4 HAPs Hazardous Air Pollutants ...................... 11 4.3 Cleaning Agent Design Options ..................... 26
2.10.5 Global Warming .............................................. 11 4.3.1 Solvent Cleaning Materials ............................. 26
2.11 Aqueous Cleaning ........................................... 11 4.3.2 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Materials ................. 26
2.11.1 Aqueous Cleaning Steps Definitions .............. 11 4.3.3 Aqueous Cleaning Materials ........................... 26
2.11.2 Aqueous Cleaning Agent Acronym 4.3.4 Cleaning Equipment Design Options ............. 27
Definitions ........................................................ 11
4.3.5 Defining ‘‘An Optimized System’’ ................. 28
2.12 Other Definitions ............................................. 12
4.4 The Rs + Rd Balance ....................................... 28
2.12.1 Assembly ......................................................... 12
4.5 Environmental Factors .................................... 29
2.12.2 Batch Cleaning ................................................ 12
2.12.3 Fine Cleaning .................................................. 12 5 MATERIALS COMPATIBILITY ................................ 30
2.12.4 In-Line Cleaning ............................................. 12 5.1 Material Compatibility Considerations ........... 30
2.12.5 Manual Cleaning ............................................. 12 5.1.1 Cleaning Process Effectiveness ....................... 30
5.2 Reliability Considerations ............................... 30
3 ASSEMBLY CLEANING VALUE AND
APPLICABILITY ...................................................... 12 5.3 Material Compatibility Testing ....................... 30
3.1 Introduction ..................................................... 12 5.3.1 Compatibility and Functionality ..................... 31
3.2 Technology Innovation .................................... 12 5.3.2 Selecting Materials to be Tested for
3.3 Process Residues and Their Impact on Compatibility ................................................... 31
Product Reliability ........................................... 13 5.3.3 Test Methods: Examples ................................. 32
3.4 No Clean vs. Clean ......................................... 14 5.3.4 ASTM and Other Testing Standards .............. 35
3.4.1 Factors Involved with Implementing No 5.4 The Effects of Lead-Free on PCB
Clean Technology ............................................ 14 Assembly ......................................................... 35
3.4.2 Cost Drivers ..................................................... 15 5.4.1 PCB Fabrication .............................................. 35
3.4.3 Selecting Materials for No Clean; Product 5.4.2 Components ..................................................... 35
Design .............................................................. 15 5.4.3 Board and Component Finishes ...................... 36
3.4.4 What are the Perceived No-Clean Cost 5.4.4 Assembly Materials ......................................... 36
Benefits and Drivers? ...................................... 15 5.4.5 Assembly Equipment ...................................... 36
3.4.5 What are the No-Clean Cost Drivers? ........... 15 5.5 Design Issues and Compatibility .................... 36
3.5 What are the Costs of Cleaning? .................... 16 5.5.1 The Effects of Miniaturization ........................ 37
3.5.1 Cost per Cleaned Part ..................................... 16 5.5.2 Density of Components ................................... 37
3.5.2 Cost Modeling 5.5.3 Specific Compatibility Examples .................... 37
3.6 What are the Costs of Ignoring 5.5.4 Black Oxide ..................................................... 39
Cleanliness? ..................................................... 20 5.5.5 Inductor Coil Attack ........................................ 40
3.6.1 Lead Free Soldering ........................................ 20 5.5.6 Solder Masks ................................................... 40
3.6.2 Miniaturization ................................................ 20 5.5.7 Flex Circuits .................................................... 41
3.6.3 Flux Changes ................................................... 21 5.5.8 Solder Joint Attack .......................................... 41
3.6.4 Electrical Failure Mechanisms ........................ 21 5.5.9 Part Marking/Labels ........................................ 42
3.6.5 Electrochemical Migration .............................. 21 5.5.10 Adhesives ......................................................... 42
vi
5.5.11 Conformal Coating Adhesion ......................... 42 6.7.8 Periodic Product Qualification ........................ 58
6.7.9 Quality Information ......................................... 58
6 PROCESS DEVELOPMENT AND
VERIFICATION ........................................................ 43 6.7.10 Field Performance Data .................................. 58
6.1 Introduction ..................................................... 43 6.7.11 Process Monitoring ......................................... 58
6.2 Phase 1 Tests ................................................... 44 6.7.12 Data Collection and Reporting ....................... 58
6.3 Phase 2 Tests and Considerations ................... 45
7 CONTAMINATION AND ITS EFFECTS
6.3.1 Phase 2 Test Vehicles ...................................... 46 ON PWBS ................................................................ 60
6.3.2 IPC-9202 .......................................................... 49 7.1 Scope ............................................................... 60
6.3.3 IPC-9203 .......................................................... 50 7.1.1 Purpose ............................................................ 60
6.4 Phase 3 Tests and Considerations ................... 50 7.1.2 Background ...................................................... 60
6.5 Cleaning Process Qualification ....................... 51 7.2 Terms and Definitions (Items noted with
6.5.1 Applicable Documents .................................... 51 an * are quoted from IPC-T-50) ..................... 60
6.5.2 Initial Feasibility Assessment Phase 1 ........... 52 7.2.1 *Anode ............................................................. 60
6.5.3 Material Analysis ............................................. 52 7.2.2 Anion ............................................................... 60
6.5.4 Process Considerations .................................... 52 7.2.3 *Bridging ......................................................... 60
6.5.5 Technical Business Assessment ...................... 53 7.2.4 Cathode ............................................................ 60
6.5.6 Documentation of Process Plan ...................... 53 7.2.5 Cation ............................................................... 60
6.5.7 Material and Process Testing Phase 2 ............ 53 7.2.6 *Conductivity .................................................. 60
6.5.8 Test Vehicles .................................................... 53 7.2.7 *Conductor Spacing ........................................ 60
6.5.9 Test Methods ................................................... 54 7.2.8 Corrosion ......................................................... 60
6.5.10 Benchmark Testing Report .............................. 54 7.2.9 *Corrosive Flux ............................................... 60
6.6 Printed Board Assembly Evaluation 7.2.10 Creep Corrosion .............................................. 60
Phase 3 ............................................................. 54 7.2.11 *Dendritic Growth ........................................... 61
6.6.1 Confirm Testing on Applicable Hardware 7.2.12 Dendritic Migration ......................................... 61
Phase 3 ............................................................. 54
7.2.13 Dipole .............................................................. 61
6.6.2 Confirm Cleaning on Most Challenging
Assemblies Phase 3 ......................................... 54 7.2.14 Dipole Moment ............................................... 61
6.6.3 Develop and Document Process Range 7.2.15 Dissolution of Metallization ........................... 61
Phase 3 ............................................................. 54 7.2.16 Electrochemical Migration .............................. 61
6.6.4 Material Compatibility Testing on Actual 7.2.17 Electromigration (EM) .................................... 61
PWB Hardware Phase 3 ................................. 54
7.2.18 Flux .................................................................. 61
6.6.5 Verification ....................................................... 55
7.2.19 *Flux Activity .................................................. 61
6.6.6 Visual Inspection ............................................. 55
7.2.20 Flux Residue .................................................... 61
6.6.7 Mechanical ....................................................... 55
7.2.21 Galvanic Corrosion ......................................... 61
6.6.8 Chemical .......................................................... 55
7.2.22 Halide Content ................................................. 61
6.6.9 Residue Analysis ............................................. 56
6.6.10 Functional Performance Testing ..................... 56 7.2.23 *Inorganic Flux ............................................... 61
6.6.11 Confirmation Run ............................................ 56 7.2.24 Ionic Cleanliness ............................................. 61
6.7 Quality Program .............................................. 56 7.2.25 Ionic Contamination ........................................ 61
6.7.1 Documentation of the Quality System ........... 57 7.2.26 *Leakage Current ............................................ 62
6.7.2 Control of Procured Material .......................... 57 7.2.27 *Metal Migration ............................................. 62
6.7.3 Manufacturing Controls .................................. 58 7.2.28 *Non-activated Flux ........................................ 62
6.7.4 Completed Item Inspection ............................. 58 7.2.29 *Nonionic Contaminant .................................. 62
6.7.5 Control of Nonconforming Materials ............. 58 7.2.30 Organic Contamination ................................... 62
6.7.6 Corrective Action Program ............................. 58 7.2.31 Organic Flux .................................................... 62
6.7.7 Storage, Handling, and Packaging .................. 58 7.2.32 *Packaging Density ......................................... 62
vii
7.2.33 Polar Matter ..................................................... 62 8.3.20 Resin ................................................................ 76

7.2.34 Residue ............................................................ 62 8.3.21 Resin Flux ....................................................... 76
7.2.35 Short ................................................................. 62 8.3.22 Rosin ................................................................ 76
7.2.36 *Stand-Off ........................................................ 62 8.3.23 Rosin Flux ....................................................... 76
7.2.37 Whisker ............................................................ 62 8.3.24 Solder Ball ....................................................... 76
7.3 How Clean is Clean? ...................................... 62 8.3.25 Temporary Solder Resist ................................. 76
7.3.1 A Discussion of ‘‘No Clean’’ Terminology 8.3.26 Solvency .......................................................... 76
and Flux History ............................................. 63 8.3.27 Reactants .......................................................... 76
7.4 Ionic Residues ................................................. 66 8.3.28 Stand-Off .......................................................... 76
7.4.1 Electrochemical Migration (ECM) ................. 67 8.3.29 Synthetic Resin ................................................ 77
7.4.2 Electromigration .............................................. 71 8.3.30 Water Soluble Flux .......................................... 77
7.5 Creep Corrosion .............................................. 71 8.4 Post Cleaning Residues ................................... 77
7.5.1 Creep Corrosion and Miniaturization ............. 71 8.4.1 Rosin Based Fluxes ......................................... 77
7.5.2 Creep Corrosion and PCB Board Finish ........ 72 8.4.2 Water Soluble Fluxes ...................................... 78
7.5.3 Creep Corrosion and Circuit Board 8.4.3 Synthetic Activated (more accurately
Cleanliness ....................................................... 72 ORH0 or ORH1) Fluxes ................................. 79
7.5.4 Locations Prone to Sulfide Creep ................... 73 8.4.4 Low Solids (No-Clean) Fluxes ....................... 79
7.5.5 Corrosion Prevention Strategies ..................... 73 8.4.5 Lead-Free and Miniaturization Influences
7.6 Tin Whiskers and Circuit Board on Assembly Residues .................................... 79
Cleanliness ....................................................... 73 8.4.6 Solder Pastes ................................................... 81
7.7 Marine Corrosion ............................................ 74 8.4.7 Inorganic Acid Fluxes ..................................... 81
8 ASSEMBLY RESIDUES/CLEANING 8.4.8 Solder ............................................................... 82
CONSIDERATIONS ................................................. 75 8.4.9 Wave Solder Pot Additives ............................. 82
8.1 Scope ............................................................... 75 8.5 Other Residues ................................................ 83
8.2 Purpose ............................................................ 75 8.5.1 Handling Soils ................................................. 83
8.3 Terms and Definitions ..................................... 75 8.5.2 Marking ........................................................... 83
8.3.1 Acid Flux ......................................................... 75 8.5.3 Work Place and Ambient Storage
8.3.2 Activated Rosin Flux ...................................... 75 Conditions ........................................................ 84
8.3.3 Activator .......................................................... 75 8.5.4 Component Packaging as a Source of
8.3.4 Adhesive .......................................................... 75 Contamination ................................................. 84
8.3.5 Adsorbed Contaminant .................................... 75 8.5.5 Temporary Solder Stops/Masks/Resists/
Tapes ................................................................ 84
8.3.6 Conductor Pitch ............................................... 76
8.5.6 Lubricants and Greases ................................... 84
8.3.7 Conductor Spacing .......................................... 76
8.5.7 Adhesives ......................................................... 85
8.3.8 Conformal Coating .......................................... 76
8.6 Cleaning Considerations ................................. 85
8.3.9 Corrosive Flux ................................................. 76
8.3.10 Depth from Board Surface to the Bottom 8.6.1 Visual Inspection Criteria ............................... 85
side of a Component ....................................... 76 8.6.2 Component Geometries ................................... 85
8.3.11 Dross ................................................................ 76 8.6.3 Standoff Height and its Influence on
8.3.12 Flux .................................................................. 76 Cleaning ........................................................... 86
8.3.13 Flux Residue .................................................... 76 8.6.4 Trapped Fluids ................................................. 86
8.3.14 Leadless Surface Mount Components ............ 76 8.6.5 Component Issues and Residues ..................... 86
8.3.15 Non-activated Flux .......................................... 76 8.6.6 Wetting of Surfaces ......................................... 87
8.3.16 Organic Flux .................................................... 76 8.6.7 Surface Tension and Capillary Force ............. 87
8.3.17 Packaging Density ........................................... 76 8.6.8 Filled vs. Un-Filled Gaps ................................ 87
8.3.18 Paste Flux ........................................................ 76 8.6.9 Flux Residue Variability .................................. 87
8.3.19 Reflow Temperature ........................................ 76 8.6.10 Wash Chemistry Effects .................................. 88
viii
8.7 White Residue Post Soldering ........................ 91 9.4.2 Spent Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agent ........... 110
8.7.1 White Residue Formation Mechanisms .......... 91 9.5 Spill Reporting ............................................... 111
8.8 Cleaning Process Controls .............................. 92 9.6 Superfund General ......................................... 111
8.8.1 Process Variables ............................................. 92 9.7 Toxic Release Inventory Reporting
8.8.2 Cleaning Agent ................................................ 93 Requirements ................................................. 111
8.8.3 Setting Process Control Limits ....................... 93 9.8 Health and SAFETY Issues .......................... 111
8.8.4 Avoiding Unwanted Material Effects ............. 93 9.8.1 Hazards and Controls .................................... 111
8.9 Cleaning Equipment Considerations ............... 93 9.8.2 Materials Safety Data Sheets ........................ 112
8.9.1 Driving Forces Time, Temperature, 9.8.3 Hazardous Materials Labeling Systems ........ 112
Concentration, and Energy .............................. 93 9.8.4 Personnel Exposure ....................................... 112
8.9.2 Static and Dynamic Cleaning Energy ............ 93 9.8.5 Flammable Liquid Issues .............................. 113
8.9.3 Efficiency Improvements with Dynamic 9.9 Water Resources and Quality ........................ 113
Energy .............................................................. 93 9.9.1 Measurement of Water Purity ....................... 113
8.9.4 Excessive Energy ............................................ 94 9.9.2 Definitions ...................................................... 113
8.10 Monitoring Wash Baths ................................... 94 9.9.3 Water Purity Standards .................................. 114
8.10.1 Titration ........................................................... 94 9.9.4 Water Purification Methods ........................... 114
8.10.2 Refractive Index .............................................. 94
10 SOLVENT CLEANING AGENTS ........................ 116
8.10.3 Non-Volatile Residue ...................................... 95
10.1 Purpose .......................................................... 116
8.10.4 Other Bath Monitoring Methods .................... 95
10.2 Terms and Definitions ................................... 116
8.10.5 Tank Foaming .................................................. 95
10.2.1 Solvent Cleaning ........................................... 116
8.11 Cleanliness Testing .......................................... 98
10.2.2 Kauri-Butanol value (KB Value) .................. 116
8.11.1 ROSE Testing .................................................. 99
10.2.3 Azeotrope ....................................................... 116
8.11.2 ROSE Testing Limitations .............................. 99
10.2.4 Wash or Washing ........................................... 116
8.11.3 ROSE Test Equipment .................................... 99
10.2.5 Rinse or Rinsing ............................................ 116
8.11.4 Ion Chromatography ..................................... 100
10.2.6 Drying ............................................................ 116
8.11.5 Localized Contamination .............................. 100
10.2.7 Defluxing (Flux Removal or Post Solder
8.11.6 Conformal Coating Adhesion and Wetting ... 100 Cleaning) ........................................................ 116
9 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS .............. 103 10.2.8 Chemical Material Acronym Definitions ...... 116
9.1 Safety ............................................................. 103 10.3 Solvent Cleaning Background and
9.1.1 Environmental Considerations ...................... 103 Overview ........................................................ 117
9.1.2 Environmental Issues .................................... 103 10.3.1 Overview of Solvent Cleaning ...................... 117
9.2 Air Emissions ................................................ 104 10.3.2 Process Map ................................................... 117
9.2.1 Volatile Organic Compounds ........................ 104 10.4 Solvent Cleaning Agent Technology ............ 117
9.2.2 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) ................. 105 10.4.1 Single Solvent System ................................... 117
10.4.2 Blended Solvent Systems .............................. 117
9.2.3 Ozone Depleting Substances ......................... 106
10.4.3 Co-Solvent Blends ......................................... 118
9.3 Waste Water ................................................... 106
10.4.4 Hansen-Engineered Solvent Blends
9.3.1 Type of Flux and Contaminants to
(Non-Azeotrope) ............................................ 118
be Removed ................................................... 107
10.4.5 Summary ........................................................ 119
9.3.2 Metals Removal ............................................. 108
10.5 Properties of Cleaning Solvents ................... 121
9.3.3 pH Adjustment ............................................... 108
10.5.1 Introduction ................................................... 121
9.3.4 BOD/COD Reduction ................................... 108
10.5.2 Physical Properties Examples for
9.3.5 Water Use Reduction .................................... 108 Common Solvents ......................................... 121
9.3.6 Total Toxic Organics ..................................... 109 10.5.3 Effectiveness .................................................. 121
9.4 Solid Waste .................................................... 109 10.5.4 Multiple Components .................................... 121
9.4.1 Spent Solvent Wastes .................................... 110 10.5.5 Degradation ................................................... 121
ix
10.5.6 Residues ......................................................... 121 10.10.9 Solvent Monitoring ....................................... 136

10.5.7 Suspended Matter .......................................... 122 10.10.10 Summary ........................................................ 137
10.5.8 Dissolved Contaminants ................................ 122 10.11 Environmental Considerations ...................... 137
10.5.9 Reclaimed Solvents ....................................... 122 10.11.1 Introduction ................................................... 137
10.5.10 Stability .......................................................... 122 10.11.2 The Clean Air Act ......................................... 138
10.5.11 Resistance to Chemical Decomposition ....... 122 10.11.3 The Clean Water Act ..................................... 139
10.5.12 Resistance to Thermal Decomposition ......... 122 10.11.4 RCRA - General ............................................ 140
10.5.13 Safety ............................................................. 122 10.11.5 Superfund - General ...................................... 141
10.5.14 Workplace Exposure ...................................... 123 10.11.6 Toxic Release Inventory Reporting
10.5.15 PEL/STEL ...................................................... 123 Requirements ................................................. 141
10.5.16 Workplace Exposure Monitoring .................. 123 10.11.7 Influencing the Regulatory Process .............. 141
10.5.17 Environmental ............................................... 124 10.11.8 Applicability .................................................. 141
10.5.18 Cost ................................................................ 125 11 SEMI-AQUEOUS CLEANING AGENTS,
10.5.19 Summary ........................................................ 125 EQUIPMENT, AND PROCESS
OPTIMIZATION .................................................... 142
10.6 Solvent Specific Material Compatibility
11.1 Purpose .......................................................... 142
Considerations ............................................... 125
11.1.1 Terms and Definitions ................................... 142
10.6.1 Polymer and Marking Compatibility ............ 125
11.2 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents ................... 142
10.6.2 Compatibility with Conformal
Coating Solvents ........................................... 125 11.2.1 Semi-Aqueous Overview .............................. 142
10.6.3 Metals Compatibility and Solvent 11.2.2 Science of Semi-Aqueous ............................. 143
Stability .......................................................... 125 11.2.3 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents ................... 144
10.7 Solvent Classifications and Characteristics .. 126 11.2.4 Properties of Semi-Aqueous Cleaning
10.7.1 Hydrocarbon Solvents ................................... 126 Agents ............................................................ 146
10.7.2 Halogenated Solvents .................................... 126 11.2.5 Compatibility of Cleaning Agents ................ 146
10.8 Solvent Cleaning Equipment/Processes ........ 127 11.2.6 Properties of Water for Rinsing in a
Semi-Aqueous Process .................................. 146
10.8.1 Introduction ................................................... 127
10.8.2 Batch Vapor Cleaning ................................... 127 11.3 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Processes ............... 147
10.8.3 Conveyorized Spray Cleaning ...................... 128 11.3.1 Introduction ................................................... 147
10.8.4 Ultrasonics in Cleaning Machines ................ 129 11.3.2 Process Parameters ........................................ 148
10.8.5 Cold Cleaning Equipment ............................. 130 11.3.3 Wash Section ................................................. 148
10.8.6 Soak Tanks .................................................... 130 11.3.4 Temperature ................................................... 148
10.8.7 Equipment Retrofitting (Upgrading) ............. 130 11.3.5 Agitation ........................................................ 149
10.9 Process Integration ........................................ 131 11.3.6 Rinse Section ................................................. 151
10.9.1 Cleaning After Manual Soldering ................. 131 11.3.7 Rinse Section for Water-Soluble (Type II)
Cleaning Agent .............................................. 152
10.9.2 Vapor Defluxing (Vapor Only) ..................... 132
10.9.3 Cleaning Protocol .......................................... 132 11.3.8 Drying Section ............................................... 152
10.10 Process Control ............................................. 132 11.4 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Equipment ............. 153
10.10.1 Introduction ................................................... 132 11.4.1 In-Line Cleaning Machines ........................... 153
10.10.2 Equipment Options and 11.4.2 Combustibility Protection ............................. 153
Recommendations ......................................... 132 11.4.3 Batch Cleaning Machines ............................. 153
10.10.3 Conveyorized Cleaning System .................... 133 11.5 Process and Quality Control ......................... 154
10.10.4 Equipment Location and Operation. ............. 133 11.5.1 Wash Section ................................................. 154
10.10.5 Hot Vapor Systems ........................................ 134 11.5.2 Rinse Section ................................................. 156
10.10.6 Maintaining the Cleaning System ................. 134 11.6 Environmental Controls and
10.10.7 Proper Still Practices ..................................... 134 Considerations ............................................... 156
10.10.8 Still Solvent Drying Unit .............................. 136 11.6.1 Introduction ................................................... 156
x
11.6.2 Waste Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agent .......... 157 12.6.3 Aqueous Neutral ............................................ 166
11.6.3 Rinse Water ................................................... 157 12.6.4 Saponified Cleaning Agents .......................... 167
11.6.4 Water Recycling ............................................ 158 12.6.5 Organic Solvent Emulsions in Water ........... 168
11.6.5 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) .......... 159 12.7 Aqueous Cleaning Agent Designs to
11.6.6 Greenhouse Effect ......................................... 160 Support Specific Processes ........................... 168
12.7.1 Bench-top Cleaning ....................................... 168
12 AQUEOUS CLEANING AGENTS, EQUIPMENT,
AND PROCESS INTEGRATION ......................... 160 12.7.2 Stencil Cleaning ............................................ 168
12.1 Scope ............................................................. 160 12.7.3 Aqueous-Base for Removing Uncured
Solder Paste and Double-Sided Misprints .... 169
12.2 Purpose .......................................................... 160
12.7.4 Batch Cleaning .............................................. 169
12.3 Terms and Definitions ................................... 161
12.7.5 Immersion Ultrasonic .................................... 169
12.3.1 Aqueous Cleaning ......................................... 161
12.7.6 Immersion Centrifugal .................................. 169
12.3.2 Wash or Washing ........................................... 161
12.7.7 Spray-in-Air (Single or Multiple
12.3.3 Rinse or Rinsing ............................................ 161 Chambers) ...................................................... 169
12.3.4 Drying ............................................................ 161 12.7.8 Maintenance Cleaning ................................... 169
12.3.5 Gross Drying ................................................. 161 12.7.9 Wave Solder Finger Cleaning ....................... 169
12.3.6 Defluxing (Flux Removal or Post Solder 12.7.10 Aqueous Cleaning Machines ........................ 170
Cleaning) ....................................................... 161
12.7.11 Batch Cleaning Machines ............................. 170
12.3.7 Fine Cleaning ................................................ 161
12.7.12 Batch Immersion ........................................... 170
12.3.8 Screen and Stencil Cleaning ......................... 161
12.7.13 Ultrasonic ....................................................... 170
12.3.9 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning ................................ 161
12.7.14 Spray-under-Immersion ................................. 171
12.3.10 Organic Solvent Cleaning ............................. 161
12.7.15 Centrifugal ..................................................... 171
12.3.11 Functional Additives ..................................... 161
12.7.16 Batch Spray-in-Air ........................................ 172
12.3.12 Reactive Additives or Reactants ................... 161
12.7.17 Single and Multiple Autonomous
12.3.13 Organic Solvent Emulsions in Aqueous Chambers ....................................................... 172
Media ............................................................. 161
12.7.18 Progressive Chambers ................................... 173
12.3.14 Manual Cleaning ........................................... 161
12.7.19 Inline Spray-in-Air ........................................ 174
12.3.15 Batch Cleaning .............................................. 161
12.8 Process Integration ........................................ 176
12.3.16 In-Line Cleaning ........................................... 161
12.8.1 Designing the Process to Meet the
12.3.17 Saponification ................................................ 162 Cleaning Need ............................................... 176
12.3.18 pH .................................................................. 162 12.9 Cleaning Equipment Selection ...................... 177
12.4 Aqueous Cleaning Background .................... 162 12.9.1 Process Variable ............................................ 178
12.4.1 History ........................................................... 162 12.10 Ventilation ...................................................... 186
12.4.2 Overview of Aqueous Processing ................. 162 12.10.1 Balancing the Ventilation for Inline
12.4.3 Process Map of Aqueous Processes ............. 163 Systems .......................................................... 186
12.5 Aqueous Cleaning Agent Technology .......... 163 12.10.2 Batch Systems ............................................... 187
12.5.1 Solvency ........................................................ 164 12.10.3 Drying ............................................................ 187
12.5.2 Activators (Reactants) ................................... 164 13 CLEANING FOR REWORK, REPAIR, AND
12.5.3 Functional Additives ..................................... 164 RESTORATION OPERATIONS .......................... 187
12.5.4 Surface Tension ............................................. 164 13.1 Introduction ................................................... 187
12.5.5 Viscosity ........................................................ 164 13.2 Terms and Definitions ................................... 187
12.5.6 Corrosion Inhibition ...................................... 165 13.2.1 Rework ........................................................... 188
12.5.7 Defoaming ..................................................... 165 13.2.2 Repair ............................................................. 188
12.6 Aqueous Cleaning Product Designs ............. 166 13.3 Rework in the Factory .................................. 188
12.6.1 Matching the Cleaning Agent to the Soil ..... 166 13.4 Rework and Repair in the Field ................... 188
12.6.2 Pure De-Ionized Water (DI-Water) ............... 166 13.5 Reconditioning and Restoration .................... 189
xi
13.6 Repair, Rework and Restoration Impact Figure 8-6 Organic-Water Phase ...................................... 95
on Reliability ................................................. 189 Figure 8-7 Typical Stages of an In-line PCB Cleaning
13.6.1 Conformal Coating ........................................ 189 Process ............................................................ 96
13.6.2 Reapplication of Conformal Coating ............ 190 Figure 8-8 Foam Beginning to Overflow Two Different
Wash Stages .................................................... 96
13.7 Cleaning for Rework, Repair and
Reconditioning Operations ............................ 190 Figure 8-9 Adjust the Air Knives Away from Rinse ........... 97
Figure 8-10 Rinse stage foam before Exhaust
13.8 Methodology for Reconditioning
Adjustment ....................................................... 98
Electronics Assemblies .................................. 190
Figure 8-11 Rinse Stage Foam after Exhaust
13.8.1 Data Gathering .............................................. 190 Adjustment ....................................................... 98
13.8.2 Analysis ......................................................... 191 Figure 8-12 External Exhaust Damper ................................ 98
13.8.3 Cleaning Process Selection Considerations Figure 8-13 Internal Exhaust damper .................................. 98
for Reconditioning Circuit Card
Figure 8-14 Foam in the wash ............................................ 99
Assemblies ..................................................... 191
Figure 8-15 Foam in the wash/rinse chamber impeding
Figures drainage between sequential rinses ................ 99
Figure 8-16 Electronic Assembly Process ......................... 100
Figure 5-1 DI Water Sealed vs. Not Sealed ..................... 39
Figure 5-2 Cleaning Chemistry Attack ............................... 39 Figure 8-17 Conformal Coating Upstream/Downstream
Process Considerations ................................. 101
Figure 5-3 Polyurethane Coating Attack by Cleaning
Solution ............................................................ 40 Figure 8-18 Conformal Coating Cause and Effect
Factors ........................................................... 101
Figure 5-4 UV Solder Mask Curing Problem Example ..... 40
Figure 11-1 Generalized Overall Semi-Aqueous
Cleaning Process ........................................... 148
Figure 11-2 Semi-Aqueouos Cleaning Machine
Figure 5-7 Dry Film Lifting and Removal Post Cleaning .. 41 Schematic ...................................................... 150
Figure 5-8 Extended Aqueous Cleaning Chemistry Figure 11-3 Centrifugal Batch Cleaner Configuration ....... 150
Exposure .......................................................... 41
Figure 11-4 Two-Stage Rinse Process ............................. 152
Figure 5-9 Solder Joint Appearance Examples ................. 42
Figure 11-5 Continuous Rinse Process ............................ 153
Figure 6-1 Solder Paste with Beads ................................. 44
Figure 11-6 Specific Gravity vs Rosin Flux Loading ......... 155
Figure 6-2 IPC-B-36 test Board ......................................... 46
Figure 6-3 Umpire Board ................................................... 47 Figure 12-1 Post Solder Assembly Cleaning Processes .. 163
Figure 6-4 Flawed BGA Pattern ........................................ 48 Figure 12-2 Factors that Influence the Effectiveness of
the Electronic Assembly Cleaning Process ... 176
Figure 6-5 Systems Test Coupon ...................................... 48
Figure 6-6 SMTA Saber Board .......................................... 49
Tables
Figure 6-7 IPC-B-52 Test Board ........................................ 50
Figure 6-8 Three-Phase Approach to Process Table 4-1 Bare Printed Board Ionic Contamination
Validation .......................................................... 52 Maximum Limits (µg/cm2) ................................. 24
Figure 7-1 Electrochemical Migration ................................ 61 Table 4-2 Electronic Assembly Cleaning Agent Design
Options .............................................................. 27
Figure 7-2 Electromigration ............................................... 61
Table 4-3 Static versus Dynamic Design Options
Figure 7-3 Electrochemical Failure Diagram ..................... 63
(data findings are supported by several
Figure 7-4 Evaluation of Solder Balls on Printed Wiring research studies) ............................................... 29
Boards with Dry Film Solder Resist ................. 65
Table 6-1 Material Qualification Specifications
Figure 7-5 Sodium Atom and Ion ...................................... 67 and Methods ..................................................... 43
Figure 7-6 Chlorine Atom and Ion ..................................... 67 Table 6-2 Performance Specifications .............................. 43
Figure 7-7 Void in Single Glass Fiber ............................... 68
Table 6-3 Reference Documents ...................................... 52
Figure 8-1 Flux Residue Trapped Under Component ....... 87
Table 6-4 Contamination Levels Per IPC-TM-650,
Figure 8-2 Examples for Amorphous Crystalline 2.3.28 ................................................................ 56
Structures ......................................................... 88
Table 6-5 Minimum SIR Values ......................................... 56
Figure 8-3 Phase Transitions and Tg ................................ 88
Table 6-6 Elements of a Quality Assurance Program ....... 57
Figure 8-4 SEM of White Residue Remaining on
Solder Joint Following Cleaning ...................... 91 Table 6-7 Documentation Hierarchy .................................. 57
Figure 8-5 Refractive Index ............................................... 94 Table 7-1 Flux Classification System ................................ 64
xii
Table 7.2 Energy Levels and Maximum Number of Table 10-3 Solvent Classifications and
Electrons ........................................................... 66 Characteristics ................................................. 127
Table 8-1 IPC-A-610 Table 1-3 ......................................... 85 Table 11-1 Cleaning Properties Based on Semi-
Aqueous Product Family ................................. 146
Table 8-2 Cleaning Chemistry Guidelines ......................... 89
Table 11-2 Cleaning Processing Parameters for
Table 8-3 Dynamic Energy Associated with Solder Water-Insoluble (Type I) Semi-Aqueous
Cleaning Process .............................................. 93 Cleaning Agents .............................................. 148
Table 9-1 Wash Media, Typical Cleaning Capability ....... 107 Table 11-3 Cleaning Processing Parameters for
Water-Soluble (Type II & III) Semi-
Table 9-2 Heavy Metal in Effluent ................................... 108 Aqueous Cleaning Agents ............................... 148
Table 9-3 Ratings for Reactivity ...................................... 112 Table 11-4 Flash Point Considerations (According to
U.S. Regulations) ............................................ 149
Table 10-1 Relative Cleaning Effectiveness ..................... 120
Table 12-1 Cleaning Agents .............................................. 165
Table 10-2 Electronic Assembly Contaminants Table 12-2 Stencil Cleaning Agent Designs ...................... 168
(Residues) ....................................................... 126
xiii
xiv
Guidelines for Cleaning of

Printed Boards and Assemblies
1 OVERVIEW
1.1 Scope This manual will only include assembly process printed wiring assembly cleaning. The corresponding informa-
tion on printed wiring board cleaning will be contained in a separate companion document.
1.2 Purpose The purpose of this document is to collect and update all the pertinent information on printed wiring assem-
bly (PWA) cleaning in a single, easy to revise/updated document.
1.3 Background Information on cleaning printed circuit boards (PCBs), printed wiring boards (PWBs), and printed wir-
ing assemblies (PWAs) during manufacture could be found within a number of IPC documents and handbooks, specifically:
• CH-65 Guidelines for Cleaning of Printed Boards and Assemblies
• SM-839 Pre and Post Solder Mask Application Cleaning Guidelines
• SC-60 Post Solder Solvent Cleaning Handbook
• SA-61 Post Solder Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Handbook
• AC-62 Aqueous Post Solder Cleaning Handbook
While collecting relevant information in various places was recorded for its members to use, one was never sure that one
had all the needed information at hand.
1.4 Current and Emerging Cleaning-Related Challenges With the advent of low residue (i.e., no-clean) flux/paste in the
early 1990s, many concluded that cleaning was no longer needed. This conclusion neglected the continued drives toward
tighter spacing, higher reliability requirements, higher density packaging, underfill adhesion and reduced costs. Since post
assembly cleaning normally removed all upstream soils as well, the industry had to convert to clean printed wiring board
and clean component manufacturing processes, clean packaging and ultraclean workplaces. Often this became more cum-
bersome and complicated than post assembly cleaning had been.
Recently, the conversion of soldering processes to lead-free platings/finishes and soldering alloys, often with much higher
soldering process temperatures, have further complicated the demands made on solder flux/paste compositions, to accom-
plish a no clean joining operation, while burning away completely without voids, solder balls or other reliability issues.
The advent of halogen-free laminates, as well as other possible restrictions on the industry’s processing chemicals, will gen-
erate new processing challenges to be met.
The ability to effectively clean stencils has become significantly more important. Greater demands on stencil printing have
emerged with the advent of fine and ultrafine parts, as well as ball grid arrays. Clean stencils are a must in delivering the
proper amount of paste. A partially or fully obstructed aperture on a stencil is more likely to occur with today’s finer pitch
devices. It has been estimated that approximately 70% of SMT solder defects are due to solder paste printing problems.
Stencil cleaning processes are covered in a separate document.
Environmental and worker safety issues are very much a part of today’s cleaning picture. Assemblers must consider factors
such as VOCs, BODs, CODs (Volatile Organic Compounds, Biological Oxygen Demand and Chemical Oxygen Demand,
respectively), waste water treatment, heavy metals, close-looping and pH. Because of demanding official regulations (fed-
eral and/or local), it can be one or more of these factors that determine the choice of a cleaning process and associated
equipment.
1.5 Document Chapters
1.5.1 Section 2: Applicable Documents This section contains references to industry standards, federal regulations, test
methods and vehicles that are applicable to post solder cleaning of electronic assemblies. Not all of these are cross-
referenced in the text. They are listed below for the convenience of the readers.
1
1.5.2 Section 3: Assembly Cleaning Value and Applicability This section discusses the pace of surface mount technol-
ogy development and innovation in response to market pressures for higher functionality, cost reduction, cycle time reduc-
tion, and improved quality. To achieve increased functionality, today’s circuit assemblies pack more performance into
smaller board designs. Advanced package designs require an increasing number of interconnects to support power require-
ments and bandwidth. With active and passive component size reduction as well as many area array pitches and standoff
heights also reducing, this increases the risk of dendrite formation and electrochemical migration. At the same time, there
is also expanded functionality driving package sizes and I/O counts higher on the boards. The critical metric for consider-
ation is the surface area to z-height ratio which as this ratio increases, makes getting into and removing residue from large
area/tight z-height spaces more difficult.
Technology-based market pressures increase reliability demands as electronic assemblers move upstream from conventional
designs and toward threshold and leading edge technologies. Over the past two decades, conventional surface mount tech-
nologies successfully adopted low residue no-clean soldering practices. Today’s challenge for printed circuit board manu-
facturers hinges on density, lead-free, and miniaturization. High performance electronic assembly designs will be driven by
multilayer and stacked package density, increasing number of I/Os, decreased area array pitches, and tighter component
standoff heights. Additional demands include control of costs, process restrictions and changes impelled by safety and envi-
ronmental regulatory constraints (including national and international constraints as well as the local regulatory micro-
climate), and the need to control the processes performed by an ever-increasing supply chain.
1.5.3 Section 4: Designing Assemblies for Cleaning Designing printed circuit assemblies for cleanability has become an
extremely challenging task due to the miniaturization as well as the complexity of leading-edge products. Design for manu-
facturability (DFM) includes a set of techniques to modify and improve printed circuit and cleaning process designs in order
to match the cleaning process to the substrate, contaminant, and available cleaning methods. The desire to make electronic
products smaller and lighter drives designers toward highly dense assemblies with reduced spacing between components.
The objective of this section is to provide design rule methodologies for cleaning leading edge printed circuit designs.
1.5.4 Section 5: Materials Compatibility Engineers responsible for the cleaning process must be aware of possible mate-
rial compatibility problems. The information contained in this section seeks to provide the process engineer with awareness
of the material compatibility risks when cleaning electronic hardware. Factors of concern are circuit board laminates, sur-
face finishes, components, metal alloys, adhesive bond strength, part markings, plastics, the mix and configuration of mate-
rials in the assembly and the impact of entrapped contaminants. Other factors must also be considered, such as the chemical
characteristics of the cleaning material, cleaning temperature, impingement energy, and exposure time to the cleaning pro-
cess, including rework cycles. The possible interactions of all these factors are especially challenging today with the much
wider availability of board and component lead finishes, as well as joining metals. The difficulty of locating data on each
and every possible combination of factors associated with this issue creates a high level of complexity.
1.5.5 Section 6: Process Development and Verification In any manufacturing process, it becomes necessary, from time
to time, to change the materials of construction or the manufacturing processes/parameters used to make printed assemblies.
This may be due to many possible factors:
• A material becomes unavailable, either through environmental regulation, through market factors or the material formula-
tion changes.
• New materials, representing improved performance or price, become available.
• Manufacturing equipment wears out, requiring replacement.
• Buying less expensive materials in an attempt to save money could result in an inferior product.
• All materials must be qualified prior to entry into the manufacturing process.
Consequently, a manufacturer is faced with the task of determining whether the ‘‘new’’ assembly material/process produces
products that are as good as or better than the ‘‘old’’ or ‘‘qualified’’ assembly materials/processes, and generating data to
support such an evaluation. There are many elements which should go into this decision. The approach outlined in this
chapter works best in a Process A vs. Process B comparison evaluation, rather than development of a completely new pro-
cess, though it can be used as such.
1.5.6 Section 7: Contamination and Its Effects on PWBs Increased electronic device functionality results from smaller
spacing between conductors and requires more active circuitry within small, high-functionality devices. Contamination and
its effects become more problematic as the spacing between adjacent conductors decreases. The purpose of this section is
to discuss the risks of contamination and its effects on printed wiring assemblies.
2
1.5.7 Section 8: Assembly Residues/Cleaning Considerations Assembly materials consisting of adhesive, fluxes, and
solder alloys may vary depending on the mounting, attachment of components, assembly type and component grouping.
When considering soldering and cleaning, assembly residues result from the choice of soldering method and the use of lead
or lead-free solder. The choice of flux that is compatible with the solder method and solder will itself determine the clean-
ing methods used. Final cleanliness will be determined by the end-use environment, and in some cases, the contract quality
requirements.
The electronic assembly process ranges from the very simple to the very complex, and involved a wide range of materials.
Each step in the process, and each material used will have some impact on the assembly, most affecting the chemical resi-
dues remaining on the assembly surface. Materials to be considered include fluxes, cleaning solutions, labels, adhesives,
masking materials, component residues, out-gassing residues, etc. This chapter covers many of the common materials used
in most manufacturing processes.
The purpose of this section is concerned with the types of residues which accumulate during the printed circuit board fab-
rication and during the assembly processes; especially as they apply to post solder cleaning. Additionally, issues pertaining
to inspection of remaining residues, root cause of those residues, and preventative actions are discussed.
1.5.8 Section 9: Environmental Considerations Although this section focuses primarily on US legislation and codes of
practice, most other nations have similar regulations. These may be considerably more or less severe and may be applied
differently. The general theme of this section is universally applicable, but it should be read with an understanding that local
regulations require primary compliance, and that state and federal compliance is a parallel requirement to any regulated
operation. The selection of the cleaning agent must incorporate the inherent impact on air emissions, water discharges and
waste generation from the facility. Each of these three environmental mediums may require a permit depending on the usage
rate and existence of other air emissions, water discharges and waste generation at the facility.
1.5.9 Section 10: Solvent Cleaning Agents This section addresses solvent cleaning of electrical/electronic assemblies,
parts and application tools after soldering. The content of this text is intended to provide a basic understanding of the sub-
ject and to serve as a guide to users or prospective users of solvent cleaning technology, allowing selection or improvement
of solvent cleaning processes.
1.5.10 Section 11: Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents, Equipment, and Process Optimization This section addresses
semi-aqueous cleaning of electrical/electronic assemblies, parts and application tools after soldering. Semi-aqueous cleaning
is a process in which flux residues and other contaminants are removed from printed wiring assemblies by first washing the
assemblies in an organic solvent and then rinsing the organic solvent from the assemblies with water. Type I uses a water-
insoluble organic solvent, while Type II uses a water-soluble organic solvent. Type I features an emulsion phase formation
step following the wash and first rinse, while Type II systems do not. (The semi-aqueous process specifically does not
include cleaning with aqueous solutions of organic or inorganic saponifiers or detergents; these are included in the section
on aqueous cleaning processes.) Other objectives are removal of process residues and materials used as production aids, such
as water soluble maskants.
1.5.11 Section 12: Aqueous Cleaning Agents, Equipment, and Process Integration This scope of the aqueous section
addresses aqueous cleaning agents, aqueous cleaning machines, and process integration when cleaning electrical/electronic
assemblies, packages, components and application tools after soldering. The content of this text is intended to provide a basic
understanding of aqueous cleaning agents, cleaning equipment, and process integration and to serve as a guide to users or
prospective users of aqueous cleaning technology, allowing selection or improvement of aqueous cleaning processes.
1.5.12 Section 13: Cleaning for Rework, Repair, and Restoration Operations Normal cleaning operations that circuit
card assemblies go through during production operations have been outlined in proceeding sections of this guideline. The
cleaning operations that occur as part of rework, repair and restoration operations can be much different than those found
in production. Assemblies are often built up to include components that are sensitive to heat, chemicals and water. In addi-
tion, assemblies can be conformally coated, components can be staked down with adhesives, marking and labels can be
applied to assemblies that were not intended to be subjected to production cleaning operations. Attention to details become
increasingly more important during the cleaning operations associated with rework, repair, and reconditioning of circuit card
assemblies. Most electronic assemblies at this point in the process have achieved their highest level of functionality as well
as maximum value. Cleaning with poor methods and improper process and materials can result in scrapping high value
assemblies.
3
2 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
This section contains references to industry standards, federal regulations, test methods and vehicles that are applicable to
post solder cleaning of electronic assemblies. Not all of these are cross-referenced in the text. They are listed below for the
convenience of the readers.
The following documents, of the issue in effect on the date of contract agreement, form a part of this handbook to the extent
provided herein:
2.1 Industry Standards
2.1.1 IPC Standards1

IPC-B-24 Surface Insulation Resistance Test Board
IPC-B-25 Multipurpose 1 & 2 Sided Test Board
IPC-B-36 Cleaning Alternatives Test Board
IPC-T-50 Terms and Definitions for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits
IPC-B-52 Standard Test Board
IPC-TP-383 Organic Surface Contamination Its’ Identification, Characterization, Removal, Effects on Insulation Resistance
and Conformal Coating Adhesion
IPC-TR-580 Cleaning and Cleanliness Test Program Phase 1 Test Results
IPC-A-600 Acceptability of Printed Boards
IPC-A-610 Acceptability of Electronic Assemblies
IPC-TM-650 Test Methods Manual2
2.3.1.1 Chemical Cleaning of Metal Clad Laminates
2.3.25 Detection and Measurement of Ionizable Surface Contaminants by Resistivity of Solvent Extract
2.3.27 Cleanliness Test - Residual Rosin
2.3.27.1 Rosin Flux Residue Analysis-HPLC Method
2.3.28 Ionic Analysis of Circuit Boards, Ion Chromatography Method
2.3.30 Solvent pH Determination in Anhydrous Fluorocarbon Solvents
2.3.38 Surface Organic Contaminant Detection Test
2.3.39 Surface Organic Contaminant Identification Test (Infrared Analytical Method)
2.5.27 Surface Insulation Resistance of Raw Printed Wiring Board Material
2.6.3 Solder Masks - Moisture and Insulation Resistance
2.6.3.3 Surface Insulation Resistance, Fluxes
2.6.9.1 Test to Determine Sensitivity of Electronic Assemblies to Ultrasonic Energy
2.6.9.2 Test to Determine Sensitivity of Electronic Components to Ultrasonic Energy
2.6.13 Assessment of Susceptibility to Metallic Dendritic Growth: Uncoated Printed Wiring
2.6.14 Resistance to Electrochemical Migration, Solder Mask
IPC-PE-740 Troubleshooting for Printed Board Manufacture and Assembly
IPC-2223 Sectional Design Standard for Flexible Printed Boards
IPC-4202 Flexible Base Dielectrics for Use in Flexible Printed Circuitry
IPC-4203 Adhesive Coated Dielectric Films for Use as Cover Sheets for Flexible Printed Circuitry and Flexible Adhesive
Bonding Films
IPC-4204 Flexible Metal-Clad Dielectrics for Use in Fabrication of Flexible Printed Circuitry
IPC-6012 Qualification and Performance Specification for Rigid Printed Boards
IPC-9191 General Guideline for Implementation of Statistical Process Control (SPC)
1. www.ipc.org
2. Current and revised IPC Test Methods are available on the IPC Web site (www.ipc.org/html/testmethods.htm)
4
2.1.2 Joint Industry Standards3
J-STD-001 Requirements for Soldered Electrical and Electronic Assemblies

J-STD-002 Solderability Tests for Component Leads, Terminations, Lugs, Terminals and Wires
J-STD-003 Solderability Tests for Printed Boards
J-STD-004 Requirements for Soldering Fluxes
J-STD-005 Requirements for Soldering Pastes
J-STD-006 Requirements for Electronic Grade Solder Alloys and Fluxed and Non-Fluxed Solid Solders for Electronic Sol-
dering Applications
2.1.3 Telcordia Technologies4
GR-78-CORE Physical Design and Manufacture of Telecommunications Products
2.2 U.S. Federal Regulations5
2.2.1 Federal Laws
CAA Clean Air Act

CWA Clean Water Act
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
SARA Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act
SNAP Significant New Alternatives Program
2.2.2 Federal Standards
O-A-51 Acetone, Technical

O-E-760 Ethyl Alcohol (Ethanol) Denatured Alcohol; Proprietary Solvents and Special Industrial Solvents
O-M-232 Methanol (Methyl Alcohol)
O-T-236 Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene); Technical
O-T-620 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane, Technical, Inhibited (Methyl Chloroform)
O-T-634 Trichloroethylene, Technical, Inhibited
TT-B-848 Butyl Alcohol, Secondary, (For Use in Organic Coatings)
TT-I-735 Isopropyl Alcohol Grades A & B
TT-M-261 Methyl Ethyl Ketone
TT-N-95 Naphtha, Aliphatic
TT-N-97 Naptha, Aromatic Types 1, 2, and 3 (Grade A)
TT-T-548 Toluene Technical
2.2.3 Department of Defense6
MIL-C-81302 Cleaning Compound, Solvent, Trichlorotrifluoroethane

MIL-C-85447 Cleaning Compounds, Electrical & Electronic Components
MIL-N-15178 Naphtha, Solvent
MIL-T-81533 Trichloroethane 1,1,1 (Methyl Chloroform) Inhibited, Vapor Degreasing
3. www.ipc.org
4. www.telcordia.com
5. www.sae.org
6. www.mil-standards.com
5
2.2.4 Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)7
OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1000 Air Contaminants

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 Respiratory Protection
OSHA 29 CFR 1910.106 Flammable and Combustible Liquids
2.2.5 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)8
EPA 40 CRF 63 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories
EPA 40 CFR 82 Protection of Stratospheric Ozone
EPA 40 CFR 117.3 Determination of Reportable Quantities for Hazardous Substances
EPA 40 CFR 131.36 Toxic Criteria for those States not Complying with Clean Water Act Section 303(c) (2) (B)
EPA 40 CFR 261 Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste
EPA 40 CFR 302.4 Designation of Hazardous Substances
EPA 40 CFR 355.30 (b) Emergency Release Notification
EPA 40 CFR 370.20 Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Community Right-to-Know - Applicability
EPA 40 CFR 370.21 Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Community Right to Know - MSDS Reporting
EPA 40 CFR 370.25 Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Community Right to Know - Inventory Reporting
EPA 40 CFR 372 Toxic Chemical Release Reporting: Community Right-to-Know
EPA 40 CFR 423 Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category
EPA 40 CFR 433 Metal Finishing Point Source Category
EPA-453/R-94-081 Guidance Document for the Halogenated Solvent Cleaner NESHAP (updated 2007)
2.2.6 Department of Transportation9
DOT 33 CFR 153.203 Procedure for the Notice of Discharge
2.2.7 American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH)10

Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices
2.2.8 National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)11

Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) (eight-hour exposures) Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL)
2.3 Other
2.3.1 American Standards for Testing Materials12
ASTM Method D-56 Standard Test Method for Flash Point by tag Closed Cup Tester
ASTM Method D-92 Standard Test Method for Flash and Fire Points by Cleveland Open Cup tester
ASTM Method D-93 Standard Test Methods for Flash Point by Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester
ASTM Method D-1078 Standard Test Method for Distillation Range of Volatile Organic Liquids
ASTM Method D-1133 Standard Test Method for Kauri-Butanol Value of Hydrocarbon Solvents
ASTM Method D-1320 Method of Tensile Strength of Paraffin Wax (withdrawn without replacement)
ASTM Method D-2106 Standard Test Methods for Determination of Amine Acid Acceptance (Alkalinity) of Halogenated
Organic solvents
7. www.osha.gov
8. www.epa.gov
9. www.dot.gov
10. www.acgih.org
11. www.cdc.gov/niosh
12. www.astm.org
6
ASTM Method D-2109 Standard Test Methods for Nonvolatile Matter in Halogenated Organic Solvents and their Admixtures
ASTM Method D-2111 Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and their
Admixtures
ASTM Method D-2942 Standard Test Method for Total Acid Acceptance of Halogenated Organic Solvents (Non-reflux
Methods)
ASTM Method D-2989 Standard Test Method for Acidity-Alkalinity of Halogenated Organic Solvents and their Admixtures
ASTM Method D-3401 Standard Test Methods for Water in Halogenated Organic Solvents and their Admixtures
ASTM Method D-3443 Standard Test method for Chloride in Trichlorotrifluoroethane
2.3.2 Standard Specification of Materials
ASTM D 329 Acetone

ASTM D 362 Toluene (withdrawn without replacement)
ASTM D 740 Methyl Ethyl Ketone
ASTM D 1153 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
ASTM D 1836 Commercial Hexanes
ASTM D 3622 n-Propyl Alcohol
ASTM D 4079 Vapor-Degreasing Grade Methylene Chloride
ASTM D 4080 Trichloroethylene, Vapor-Degreasing Grade
ASTM D 4081 Dry-cleaning Grade Perchloroethylene
ASTM D 4126 Vapor-Degreasing and general Solvent Grade 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
ASTM D 4376 Vapor-Degreasing Grade Perchloroethylene
ASTM D 4701 Technical Grade Methylene Chloride
ASTM D 5309 Cyclohexane 999
ASTM D 6368 Vapor-Degreasing Solvents Based on normal-Propyl Bromide and Technical Grade normal-Propyl Bromide
2.3.3 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)13
NFPA 30 Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code

NFPA 35 Standard for the Manufacture of Organic Coatings
2.3.4 American National Standards Institute (ANSI), American Society for Quality Control (ASQC)14
ANSI/ASQC Z-1.15 Generic Guidelines for Quality Systems
2.4 Other Considerations
2.4.1 ISO Standards especially for medical devices
2.4.2 REACH Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/

LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R1907:EN:NOT)
2.4.3 Cal/OSHA (and other local restrictions)
2.4.4 FDA/EU cGMP for medical devices
2.5 Terms and Definitions All terms and definitions used throughout this handbook are in compliance with IPC-T-50.
Other basic terms and definitions, essential for the discussion of the subject, are provided below or are defined in appropri-
ate sections of this handbook.
13. www.nfpa.org
14. www.ansi.org
7
Note: Any definition denoted with an asterisk (*) is a reprint of the definition defined in IPC-T-50
2.5.1 Solvent Cleaning The removal of organic, inorganic and particulate soils from printed wiring assemblies using a
blend of polar and non-polar organic solvents. In solvent cleaning, drying is application and equipment dependent. In vapor
defluxing (solvent cleaning in the electronics industry), spot-free drying is accomplished by evaporating residual liquid sol-
vent on the part being cleaned into the vapor zone generated by the boiling solvent, taking care to keep the vapor in air
levels within recommended limits. Correct matching of the equipment design and work throughput is required to maintain
solvent levels in the workplace within desired limits.
2.5.2 Defluxing The cleaning process designed to remove solder flux and by-products. Other objectives are removal of
process residues and materials used as production aids, such as solvent soluble maskants. Impurities left by board or com-
ponent fabrication processes or other operations may be removed during the process, thus the defluxing process widens the
process window for printed wiring assemblers.
2.6 Solvent Cleaning Steps
2.6.1 Wash or Washing The primary cleaning operation that removes undesirable impurities (contaminants) from surfaces
by chemical and physical effects, mainly dissolution of the contaminants. In the case of stubborn residues or very mild sol-
vents, a pre-wash or soak step may precede the wash step. Various methods of qualified ultrasonic agitation can be employed
in the wash step to enhance contaminant removal.
2.6.2 Rinse or Rinsing A cleaning operation (usually following the wash step), where fresh solvent replaces—via a dilu-
tion mode—any residual contamination, leaving surfaces wet with pure solvent.
2.6.3 Drying The process of removing and recovering any residual liquid solvent on the surface of the washed and rinsed
parts. In a vapor defluxing process, drying is accomplished in the vapor zone created by the boiling solvent in the wash zone
of the cleaning machine. Drying can be augmented by passing superheated solvent vapor across the surface of the parts, to
ensure complete removal of residual liquid solvent. This technique is especially effective with complex geometries that can
entrap liquid solvent.
2.6.4 Solvent Cleaning Agent Recovery and Recycle Dirty solvents can often be sent to a recovery still for distillation
and reuse, while concentrating the contaminants for disposal. If several pieces of cleaning equipment are used on a site for
removal of the same soil with the same solvent, all the solvent can be piped to a single still for recovery.
2.6.5 Solvent Agitation Methods Typical agitation methods can involve boiling solvent, high pressure or high volume
sprays or both, single frequency ultrasonics, sweep frequency or several combined frequency ultrasonics. All these agitation
methods are carried out below the vapor blanket to minimize solvent losses into the workplace.
2.6.6 Solvent Cleaning Agent Acronym Definitions
2.6.6.1 HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbon
2.6.6.2 HFC Hydrofluorocarbon
2.6.6.3 HFE Hydrofluoroether
2.6.6.4 nPB Normal Propyl Bromide
2.6.6.5 CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
2.6.6.6 TCA Trichloroethane
2.6.6.7 TCE Trichloroethylene
2.6.6.8 PCE Perchloroethylene
8
2.6.6.9 Trans -1,2-dichloroethylene
2.6.6.10 Alcohols Any class of chemical compounds having the general formula ROH, where R represents an alkyl group
and -OH a hydroxyl group, as in methyl alcohol, CH3OH or ethyl alcohol C2H5OH.
2.6.6.11 Esters A class of organic compounds formed by the reaction of alcohols with organic acids.
2.8.6.12 Hydrocarbon An organic compound containing only hydrogen and carbon.
2.6.6.13 Ketones A class of organic compounds in which the carbonyl group is attached to two alkyl groups. Ketones are
used as solvents, and some common examples are acetone and methyl ethyl ketone.
2.7 Solvent Cleaning Process Definitions
2.7.1 Carbon Adsorption A technique to remove impurities from liquid or gas streams by absorbing the contaminants in
the stream on activated carbon.
2.7.2 Combustible This term is applied to liquid materials that have flash points greater than 38°C [100°F] by the closed
cup method.
2.7.3 Co-solvent (Bi-solvent) Using a second solvent as a rinse agent for the first solvent. Co-solvent can refer to two sol-
vents in the same tank but sometimes is used to refer to sequential operations; bi-solvent is a trade term that refers specifi-
cally to sequential application in separate tanks.
2.7.4 Dragout A liquid cleaning agent which adheres to assemblies or transport devices and which is carried from one
section of a cleaning machine into another section of the machine and ultimately out into the workplace atmosphere.
2.7.5 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning A process in which flux residues and other contaminants are removed from printed wiring
assemblies by first washing the assemblies in an organic solvent and then rinsing the organic solvent from the assemblies
with water. Type I uses a water-insoluble organic solvent, while Type II uses a water-soluble organic solvent. Type I features
an emulsion phase formation step following the wash and first rinse, while Type II systems do not. (The semi-aqueous pro-
cess specifically does not include cleaning with aqueous solutions of organic or inorganic saponifiers or detergents; these are
included in the section on aqueous cleaning processes.) Other objectives are removal of process residues and materials used
as production aids, such as water soluble maskants.
2.8 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Steps Definitions
2.8.1 Hydrocarbon-Surfactant (HCS, HC/S, HC-S) Cleaning An alternative nomenclature, synonymous with semi-
aqueous cleaning, preferred by some international authorities.
2.8.2 Wash or Washing The primary cleaning operation that removes undesirable impurities (contaminants) from surfaces
by chemical and physical effect.
2.8.3 Emulsion or Emulsification This step is found following the first water rinse in a Type I process. The first rinse
converts the organic solvent wet surface to a water wet surface by forming a water-in-oil type emulsion. Upon settling in
the emulsion tank, the heated organic cleaning agent/water emulsion then separates and the two materials are returned to
their respective reservoirs in the cleaning equipment for reuse. Emulsification/separation minimizes any organic material sent
to the waste stream. Type II processes do not employ the emulsion step since all the chemicals are water soluble.
2.8.4 Rinse or Rinsing A cleaning operation (usually following the wash step) where fresh pure rinse water replaces any
residual emulsion, leaving a water-wet surface. Several rinses are usually employed to minimize any residual contamination.
Rinses are also employed with co-solvent or bi-solvent cleaning.
2.8.5 Dry or Drying The process of removing any residual water or solvent from the washed and rinsed surfaces. The sur-
faces should be spot-free after drying.
9
2.8.6 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agent Acronym Definitions
2.8.6.1 Alcohol, Non-Linear Non-Linear alcohols are derived naturally from spent rice hulls, sugar cane or corncobs.
When referring to this alcohol as non-linear, the term denotes that this compound has a ring structure. Such organic com-
pounds have low molecular weights and contain both an alcohol group and an ether linkage. The alcohol and ether groups
enhance this compounds effectiveness in removing polar soils and provide hydrogen bonding sites which allows the com-
pound to be completely soluble in water.
2.8.6.2 Alcohol, Synthetic The synthetic alcohol derived for semi-aqueous electronic cleaning processes has both the
ether group and the alcoholic hydroxyl group in its molecular structure which forms intramolecular and intermolecular
hydrogen bonds and exhibits hydrophobic (water-insoluble) and hydrophilic (water-loving) properties. This molecule has
low toxicity, low odor and a flash point ranging from 66-77°C [150-170°F].
2.8.6.3 Esters A class of organic compounds formed by the reaction of alcohols with organic acids.
2.8.6.4 Hydrocarbon An organic compound containing only hydrogen and carbon.
2.8.6.5 Hydrocarbon-Surfactant A hydrocarbon which exhibits hydrophobic (water-insoluble) and hydrophilic (water-
loving) properties. It alters the wettability of surfaces and hence, is useful as a cleaning agent.
2.8.6.6 Ketones A class of organic compounds in which the carbonyl group is attached to two alkyl groups. Ketones are
used as solvents, and some common examples are acetone and methyl ethyl ketone.
2.8.6.7 Propylene Glycol Ether Propylene Glycol Ethers are oxygenated hydrocarbons that provide formulation flexibil-
ity due to the wide range of chemical structures available. Selection of the structures that fit the evaporation rate, solvency
characteristic, flash point and water solubility desired is available. For semi-aqueous cleaning products two chemical struc-
tures have been selected which have low vapor pressures, flash points ranging from 74-110°C [165-230°F] and are com-
pletely water-soluble. Glycol ethers in general have good solvency for both polar and non-polar soils, which allow them to
be good candidates for electronic cleaning processes. The propylene-series glycol ethers offer lower toxicity than the
ethylene-series products.
2.8.6.8 Terpene An unsaturated hydrocarbon based on the isoprene unit with the general formula C10H16. Terpenes are
commonly found in citrus fruits or pine trees.
2.9 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Process Definitions
2.9.1 Carbon Adsorption A technique to remove impurities from liquid or gas streams by absorbing the contaminants in
the stream on activated carbon.
2.9.2 Combustible This term is applied to liquid materials that have flash points greater than 38°C [100°F] by the closed
cup method.
2.9.3 Decanting The process separating two immiscible liquids by drawing a top layer of liquid material off of another
layer of liquid without disturbing the lower liquid layer.
2.9.4 Dragout Liquid cleaning agent or water which adheres to circuit assemblies or transport devices and which is car-
ried from one section of a cleaning machine into another section of the machine.
2.9.5 Emulsion A mixture of two or more immiscible liquids, such as oil and water, which is stable and uniform under
conditions of use in the cleaning process.
2.9.6 Organic Solvent Emulsions in Aqueous Media Uniform dispersions of small amounts of organic solvents in water.
2.9.7 Water Softening A water treatment process used to remove calcium and magnesium salts from water.
10
2.10 Environmental Definitions
2.10.1 BOD Biological Oxygen Demand The amount of oxygen required for the biochemical degradation of organic
material under controlled test conditions.
2.10.2 COD Chemical Oxygen Demand The amount of oxygen required to oxidize organic materials to carbon dioxide
and water, reported in mg of oxygen/liter of tested solution.
2.10.3 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) United States EPA defines VOCs as any compound of carbon, excluding car-
bon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides, or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates
in atmospheric photochemical reactions.(40CFR51.100(s)) Regulatory agencies may differ on what constitutes a VOC.
2.10.4 HAPs Hazardous Air Pollutants Air pollutants that can cause serious health and environmental hazards
2.10.5 Global Warming Common term for Climate Change. Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate
that can be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that
persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer.
2.11 Aqueous Cleaning A process in which flux residues and other contaminants are removed from printed wiring assem-
blies by first washing the assemblies in either pure water or a solution of organic or inorganic saponifier and then rinsing
the contaminant bearing water from the assemblies with pure water. Other objectives are removal of process residues and
materials used as production aids, such as water soluble maskants. Should specify (or not and make separate) water-soluble
organics.
2.11.1 Aqueous Cleaning Steps Definitions
2.11.1.1 Wash or Washing The primary cleaning operation that removes undesirable impurities (contaminants) from
surfaces by chemical and physical effect. The wash can consist of either pure water or water containing mildly alkaline
chemicals.
2.11.1.2 Rinse or Rinsing A cleaning operation (usually following the wash step) where fresh pure rinse water replaces,
typically by dilution, any residual contaminated wash solution. Several rinses are usually employed to minimize any residual
contamination.
2.11.1.3 Dry or Drying The process of removing any residual water from the washed and rinsed surfaces. The surfaces
should be spot-free after drying.
2.11.2 Aqueous Cleaning Agent Acronym Definitions
2.11.2.1 Non-Reactive Additives Compounds which do not react chemically with solder flux and other process residues.
These additives may serve to lower surface tension, assist in the removal of water insoluble residues, exercise foam control,
or inhibit wash medium attack on construction materials.
2.11.2.2 Propylene Glycol Ether Propylene Glycol Ethers are oxygenated hydrocarbons that provide formulation flexibil-
ity due to the wide range of chemical structures available. Selection of the structures that fit the evaporation rate, solvency
characteristic, flash point and water solubility desired is available. For semi-aqueous cleaning products two chemical struc-
tures have been selected which have low vapor pressures, flash points ranging from 74-110°C [165-230°F] and are com-
pletely water-soluble. Glycol ethers in general have good solvency for both polar and non-polar soils, which allow them to
be good candidates for electronic cleaning processes. The propylene-series glycol ethers offer lower toxicity than the
ethylene-series products.
2.11.2.3 Reactive Additives or Reactants Water soluble chemical compounds which react chemically with the contami-
nants that are to be removed by the wash medium. Examples are chelating agents, saponifiers, or chemical neutralizers, etc.
11
2.11.2.4 Saponifier Saponifiers were typically formulated using mono-ethanol amine (MEA), which reacted chemically
with rosin to form a water-washable ‘‘soap’’ or with an inorganic equivalent formulation. Since this is a chemical reaction,
the concentration of MEA (or inorganic equivalent) should be carefully monitored to ensure maximum cleaning efficiency
at the design cleaning line speed.
2.12 Other Definitions
2.12.1 Assembly A number of parts of subassemblies or any combination thereof joined together.
2.12.2 Batch Cleaning The cleaning of multiple parts or ‘‘batches of parts’’ as a group where process cycle times are
controlled.
2.12.3 Fine Cleaning A final cleaning step that removes contaminants introduced after defluxing and or which improves
the degree of surface cleanliness achieved by defluxing or other previous cleaning operations and to improve conformal
coating adhesion.
2.12.4 In-Line Cleaning The cleaning method where parts are processed continuously on a conveyor and process cycle
time is controlled by the conveyor speed.
2.12.5 Manual Cleaning A cleaning step where parts are processed manually with process cycle time controlled by opera-
tor.
3 ASSEMBLY CLEANING VALUE AND APPLICABILITY
3.1 Introduction The pace of surface mount technology development and innovation is a response to market pressures for
higher functionality, cost reduction, cycle time reduction, and improved quality.1 To achieve increased functionality, today’s
circuit assemblies pack more performance into smaller board designs. Advanced package designs require an increasing
number of interconnects to support power requirements and bandwidth. With active and passive component size reduction
as well as many area array pitch and standoff height also reducing, this increases the risk of dendrite formation and elec-
trochemical migration.2 At the same time, there is also expanded functionality driving package sizes and I/O counts higher
on the boards. The critical metric for consideration is the surface area of the component to z-height ratio which as this ratio
increases, makes getting into and removing residue from large area/tight z-height spaces more difficult.
Technology-based market pressures increase reliability demands as electronic assemblers move upstream from conventional
designs and toward threshold and leading edge technologies.3 Over the past two decades, conventional surface mount tech-
nologies successfully adopted low residue no-clean soldering practices. Today’s challenge for printed circuit board manu-
facturers hinges on density, lead-free, and miniaturization.1 High performance electronic assembly designs will be driven by
multilayer and stacked package density, increasing number of I/Os, decreased area array pitches, and tighter component
standoff heights. Additional demands include control of costs, process restrictions and changes impelled by safety and envi-
ronmental regulatory constraints (including national and international constraints as well as the local regulatory micro-
climate), and the need to control the processes performed by an ever-increasing supply chain.
3.2 Technology Innovation The pace of technology development and innovation has created an expectation that products
will perform upon demand.4 Technology advances create the need for highly complex circuitry driven by improved perfor-
mance, improved reliability, miniaturization, and circuit density. Manufacturing complexity increases with the continuous
drive for smaller, lighter, and more advanced features. In order to pack more circuits into a smaller device, everything within
the device has to shrink in size.5 Intelligent and interactive electronic devices create a renewed focus on reliability.
Semiconductor devices can be embedded practically everywhere: in vehicles to monitor the need for replacement parts, in
humans to detect heart beats and brain activity, and even in growing plants to communicate needs for water or fertilizer.
With no end in sight to ubiquitous computing and embedded networks and controls, the complexity of electronic devices
continues to grow. The following examples illustrate the complexity and challenges faced by product designers:
• Military/Defense: The demands for reliability in the military/defense sector are unprecedented. Mission-critical informa-
tion systems, weapons systems, and other critical assemblies represent complex electronic devices needed to secure the
world from terrorists. Highly dense circuit designs must hold up to ruggedness and reliability when operating in harsh
environments or after prolonged periods of storage. There are increasing drivers to eliminate Hazardous Air Pollutants
12
(HAPs), to minimize Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), and to avoid using chemicals that have an unfavorable worker
safety profile. Coordination of processes among the military services is growing; and defluxing processes might produc-
tively be harmonized with efforts of the Joint Services Solvent Substitution Working Group (JS3WG).29
• Aerospace: Avionics technology demands operational efficiencies in materials and failure avoidance.6 Future aerospace
demands increase the use of chip scale avionics, in an effort to reduce size, weight, power, and cost while improving reli-
ability. Safety improvements are needed to detect, predict, and avoid hazards. Meeting safety and environmental regulatory
requirements represents another challenge. For example, regulatory constraints are decreasing the availability of cleaning
agents with the appropriate wetting characteristics and efficacy in removing flux residues. Restrictions on VOCs will also
limit the availability of effective cleaning agents.
• Medical: Medical device innovations improve the quality of life and reduce health care costs. Advanced packaging has
been instrumental in the progression of reduced size, increased functionality, and improved reliability. Electronic technol-
ogy is a critical enabler for treating chronic diseases. Remote monitoring and disease management devices rise from elec-
tronic innovations that integrate logic to expand the range of remote monitoring options for patients. Integrating electron-
ics assemblies into implantable devices magnifies the importance of reliability, compatibility, and surface cleanliness/
surface quality issues.
• Automotive: The automotive sector is in the midst of significant change, with increasing challenges in consumer demands,
technology development, globalization, and integration. Consumers are becoming more empowered and sophisticated with
their wants and needs evolving at an exponential pace. Consumers will expect their vehicles to provide information, enter-
tainment, safety, and convenience. To meet these demands vehicles will become more intelligent, offer greener operation,
and be customizable to greater buyer self-expression.
• Networks and Information Technology: Enterprise system innovations provide improved interface for connecting people
around the world. Enabled by common IT standards, the lines between telecommunications, media/entertainment, and
electronics industries are blurring as next generation networks enable consumer-friendly and industry efficient crossovers.
These converged providers are expected to demand more and more electronic solutions such as Internet videos on mobile
telephones and MP3 music downloads. Reliable networks and information technology are also required by industry, law
enforcement, medical, government agencies, and national/international security. In those areas, reliable, secure, long-term,
and readily-accessible storage of information is a must.
• Mobile Devices: Market penetration of mobile devices is worldwide. The market penetration for mobile telephones in
developed nations is at an incredibly high 90 percent. Mobile devices will be increasingly important in underdeveloped
and third world countries where there is a paucity of traditional ‘‘wire’’ technology. Technology and features have evolved
to the point where device makers are able to integrate hardware and software with network providers. Mobile Internet
devices will deliver the mobile Internet with smaller, lighter, and powerful Internet-enabled devices that ultimately fit right
into ones pocket.
3.3 Process Residues and Their Impact on Product Reliability Product reliability represents the functionality of a device
under environmental conditions for a given time period. Higher density, larger, smaller and stacked components, and lower
standoffs are changing the definition of circuit board cleanliness. The traditional view of quality assurance equated circuit
board reliability to visual residue and the resistivity of solvent extract measurements. With the reduction in component size
and low standoff clearances, the ability to extract and see measurable residues that correlate to product quality is much more
suspect. Alternative tests may need to be qualified.
As the complexity of circuit board designs increase, there are greater risks for reliability concerns.6 Notable industry changes
increasing the value of cleaning include6:
• Increased circuit sensitivity with tighter spacing (small amount of contamination, both visible residue and gaseous con-
tamination can shift the circuit output).
• Chemical changes in fluxes that reduce the level of high solids rosin needed to seal and encapsulate fabrication residues.
Many of today’s flux compositions use less resistant activators. Low solid flux compositions, commonly formulated with
weak organic acids, leaves a chemical residue that does not directly correlate to the ionic conductivity/resistivity testing
measurements.
• Assembly board integration that subjects assemblies to multiple assembly operations which may bake residues onto the
surfaces prior to cleaning. For example, it is not uncommon for an assembly to see SMT reflow for top and bottom com-
ponents, wave soldering, selective soldering, underfill applications, rework, and localized brush cleaning that may allow
pockets of residue in precise and critical areas due to secondary processing.
• The risk of residue sources coming from the bare board, components, and secondary processing residues.
13
• Climatic reliability concerns from high-power devices designed to work in harsh environments.24
• The impact of non-ionic residues will need to be assessed; appropriate test protocols will have to be established.
3.4 No Clean vs. Clean Driven by the advent of low solids flux/paste (sometimes referred to as ‘‘no-clean’’), there is a
common misconception that cleaning has become a concern of the past. The reality is that the overall need for cleaning has
not diminished. Cleaning needs have either shifted or remained where they were and, in addition, new needs have devel-
oped. More specifically, a no-clean process does not mean cleaning is not necessary. Cleaning plays a key role in the suc-
cessful implementation of a no-clean process. Low residue (‘‘acceptable dirt’’) assembly has shifted cleaning from the
assembly stage, back to the bare board fabrication and even the component manufacturing stages. Meeting the reliability
demands of today’s electronic circuits very often require cleaning. In fact, the no-clean approach is often not a viable option.
Many users now clean low residue soldered assemblies prior to shipment. Contract assemblers performing low residue sol-
dering have found that some customers demand cleaned assemblies, regardless of the nature of the flux used to perform the
assembly operation. While some flux/paste manufacturers state that low residue fluxes/pastes need not be cleaned, the real-
ity is that there are assemblers who are cleaning ‘‘no-clean materials’’ with specific cleaning agents to meet design and per-
formance requirements.
Continuing developments in the area of surface mount (SMT) have brought about additional cleaning needs. Spaces on elec-
tronic assemblies have become increasingly confined. Cleaning under standard BGAs does not appear to be a problem
because of their relatively high standoff height. However, with increased size, density, and lower stand-off heights, cleaning,
rinsing or drying will become a significantly greater challenge. There is also a rapidly emerging need for cleaning under
flip-chips in order to ensure the adherence of underfill. Similarly, cleaning is still an important operation for the optimum
adherence and performance of conformal coatings.
Environmental and worker safety issues are very much a part of the today’s cleaning picture. Fabricators and assemblers
alike must consider factors such as HAPs (Hazardous Air Pollutants), and other air toxics, PELs (Permissible Exposure
Limits) and other worker safety requirements, VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds), BOD ( Biological Oxygen Demand)
COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand), waste water treatment, heavy metals, close-looping and pH. Because of Federal and/or
local regulations, one or more of these factors can determine the choice of a cleaning system.
Conformal coating provides a protective layer over conductions to prevent water molecules from migrating to metallic sur-
faces.25 Protective coatings help prevent electrochemical migration, retard tin whisker growth, and protect against dust, dirt,
and other contaminants. Post assembly cleaning prior to conformal coating improves wetting and adhesion. Poor adhesion
and de-wetting occurs when coating over contaminants from flux or maskant residue, and ionic contamination around com-
ponents.26
3.4.1 Factors Involved with Implementing No Clean Technology No-clean trends were adopted when parts were much
bigger and spacings were much greater.2 Everyone jumped on the band wagon to save both operating and capital costs plus
eliminate having to find and qualify new, non-ozone depleting cleaning processes in the early ’90s. Today, it appears that
no-clean may no longer be the assembly process of choice with the propagation of CSP and flip chip assemblies; and per-
haps no-clean processing should be reserved for the low voltage, large pitch, disposable, consumer products (Classes 1 and
2). Cleaning of no-clean flux residues for higher reliability applications (Class 3) may be required to meet cleanliness and
reliability needs.
No-clean technology is no different from other manufacturing approaches from the standpoint that the user must intimately
know the materials, how they change during the manufacturing process, and how they impact the form, fit, function, and
reliability of the product in the end-use environment.
Electronics manufacturers are now employing combination processes such as ‘‘reduced clean’’ in which some flux residues
are left on, usually hand soldering in a connector that is cleaning agent intolerant.7 In some cases, a true no-clean assem-
bly, where it simply does not make sense to clean is used. In the latter case, it is prudent to optimize the process to mini-
mize residues, and verify effects on product robustness in the end-use environment. No-clean processes can also be a real
source of concern in the high RF application where residual flux acts as a dielectric material and can alter wave shape and
propagation characteristics.
Rework and repair represents an area that requires consistent training to accepted workmanship standards. Industry leaders
address this by intensive operator training, especially those operators who are in the ‘‘reduced clean’’ or ‘‘true no-clean’’
programs. The training modules and workmanship standards should all emphasize adding as little additional flux as possible.
Post-solder rework cleaning must be accomplished with the defined processes. That is, the cleaning agents and cleaning
14
techniques must be clearly specified and defined; and personnel must be trained and educated to perform the rework pro-
cesses in a correct, consistent manner. Any flux used must be fully activated during soldering to minimize or eliminate any
problems.
3.4.2 Cost Drivers The usual cost driver cited is elimination of the cleaning process including materials, equipment, per-
sonnel and training. The assumption is that cleaning is a ‘‘zero value added’’ process. While this ‘‘zero value added’’ claim
was often cited, it totally ignores any possible associated reliability and possible warranty repair issues. These issues include
excessive rework, the costs of product that cannot be reworked, and the costs and company liability associated with in-use
failure including catastrophic product failure.
3.4.3 Selecting Materials for No Clean; Product Design Anything associated with the assembly must be considered as
part of an integrated system. Thus, laminate, solder mask, legend ink, components and conformal coating comprise the sys-
tem. Since solder flux and solder paste residues are not removed, but stay on the assembly for its design lifetime, the resi-
dues must be compatible with any of the materials comprising the system. There should be appropriate demonstration of
such compatibility, for example by testing after accelerated aging.
Both the designer and the assembler must keep this in mind during the entire process from concept prototype to final release
to the ultimate customer. The assembler must also take into account any materials added during ‘‘parts add’’ processes,
rework, repair or engineering upgrades for long lifetime assemblies. We now have updated tools (SIR, IC, etc.) to more
effectively assess the performance characteristics of assembly ‘‘systems.’’ Additional analytical testing may be required,
depending on the end-user requirements. Users can quantitatively compare various combinations of soldering materials and
coatings to ensure the completed assembly meets design goals in the end-use environment.
3.4.4 What are the Perceived No-Clean Cost Benefits and Drivers?
3.4.4.1 What are the (Perceived) Cost Benefits of No-Clean?

• Elimination of the costs associated with cleaning equipment, materials and process steps.
• Improve factory throughput by eliminating the cleaning process step and process times.
• Recover expensive manufacturing floor space.
• Ability to use cheaper components which do not have to be robust enough to survive cleaning processes.
3.4.5 What are the No-Clean Cost Drivers?

• Qualification program to choose and preferably standardize no- clean flux and paste.
• Qualification program to choose and standardize on rework and repair flux and paste.
• Qualification program to choose board and component suppliers that are in compliance with user cleanliness testing and
standards for no- clean flux and paste processes.
• Optimize all soldering processes to leave a minimum of flux residues so that it does not interfere with in-circuit testing
and conformal coating adhesion.
• Recalibrate automated optical inspection machines, standards, protocols plus all workmanship and inspection standards and
institute new training and inspection programs. (Note: Flux residues change visual appearance.)
• Qualify new process with current customers and modify contracts accordingly.
• Review compliance with all existing and anticipated environmental air, water and solid waste regulations. Review compli-
ance with all waste disposal regulations.
• Determine compatibility with present and future designs, especially if high frequency or optical fiber circuits are included
or anticipated.
• OEMs must assure proper training and documentation of assemblies manufactured by contract assemblers or at multiple
sites in current or future plans. Can alternative sites comply with main factory requirements?
• Are the circuits designed for best performance or to overcome possible problems, such as cleaning, soldering (J-STD-002
solderability), or dielectric oil cleanliness where the industry may not have sufficient information to guarantee process
success?
• Determine process window limits through statistical testing.
• Requirement or verification of incoming parts to meet initial cleanliness requirements.
• Handling of no-clean products through manufacturing operations.
15
3.5 What are the Costs of Cleaning?
3.5.1 Cost per Cleaned Part

Cost assessment includes many more factors than just the cost per gallon or liter of a particular cleaning agent. A complete
cleaning cost analysis should take into account the following items:
• Equipment cost.
• Fixturing costs.
• Capital cost to purchase the equipment vs. investing the funds.
• Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost for development and validation of the cleaning process.
• Depreciation.
• Floor space.
• Ventilation.
• Installation, equipment validation, and commissioning costs including testing materials and lab analysis including compat-
ibility analysis for other assembly process materials and components which may have sensitivity issues related to the new
process.
• Operator training costs.
• Operator labor costs.
• Water costs (if water used for cooling the cleaning system).
• Water filtration and treatment costs for associated cleaning process rinsing (ion beds, plumbing, neutralization or treatment
depending on local regulations).
• Maintenance costs (labor, filling, draining, replacement equipment parts as necessary).
• Cleaning agent costs (including water if used as the cleaning agent. If water is used, as or with the cleaning agent, and
discharged, include the variable sewer use cost.)
• Process performance monitoring costs including concentration measurement, ROSE equipment, and/or Ion Chromatogra-
phy analysis costs as well as associated labor to perform those tasks.
• Costs associated with post-clean board assembly baking to ensure moisture level appropriate for downstream assembly
processes like conformal coating, etc.
• Costs associated with cleaning agent selection and qualification per J-STD-001.
• Wastewater permit cost if spent cleaning agent is discharged to public sewer system.
• Cleaning agent recycle costs.
• Cleaning agent disposal costs (including evaporation costs, if evaporators are used).
• Cleaning agent storage costs and transportation (labor) to the equipment.
• Total electrical costs to operate cleaner, provide ventilation, added heating or cooling, recycle, and disposal equipment.
• Labor costs and fees associated with filing and maintaining required environmental reports.
• Labor costs associated with inspection, rework, repair, documentation.
• Production volume or throughput.
• Air emissions permit if cleaning agent contains a volatile organic compound (VOC) and emissions are above permit
threshold for air district.
• Capital and operating costs for air emissions control device if required to meet air permit requirements.
• Industrial hygiene costs to determine baseline employee exposures to cleaning agent (if other than water) and to confirm
ongoing compliance with worker hygienic standards.
• Calibration, testing, and maintenance of process control equipment per contract requirements.
16
3.5.2 Cost Modeling
Cleaning Cost Modeling

Cleaning Machine Parameter
Cleaning Machine Cost in Dollars
Shipping and Integration Cost in Dollars
Cleaning Solvent Process Control System Cost in Dollars
DI Water Close Loop System Cost in Dollars
Service and Maintenance Dollars per year
Spare Parts Dollars per year
Ionic Contamination Tester Cost in Dollars
Cleaning Equipment Cost before Depreciation Cost in Dollars
Use of Baskets or Hold Down Mechanism Cost in Dollars
Cleaning Material Parameter
Working Concentration % Cleaning Solvent Concentration
Cost Per Gallon $/gallon
Cost Per Gallon of Cleaning Solvent in Working Solution % Cleaning Solvent Concentration * $/gallon
Wash Bath Volume (Gallons) Gallons
Cost to Change Wash Bath with Cleaning Solvent % Concentration * Wash Bath Volume * cleaning solvent $/gallon
Cost to Charge Wash Bath with DI Water % Concentration * Wash Bath Volume * DI water $/gallon
Frequency of Bath Change outs (Weeks) # of weeks
Working Weeks per Year # of weeks
[# of weeks per year - # of weeks per bath change out] *
Gallons of Concentrate for Change outs per Year
[% Cleaning Solvent Concentration * Wash Bath Volume]
Gallons of DI Water for Change outs per Year
[% DI water Concentration * Wash Bath Volume]
Annual Cost of Cleaning Solvent from Wash Bath [# of weeks per year - # of weeks per bath change out] *
Change outs [% Cleaning Solvent Concentration * Wash Bath Volume * $/gallon]
Annual Cost of DI Water from Wash Bath Change outs
[% DI Water Concentration * Wash Bath Volume * $/gallon]
Wash Batch Operating Temperature °C/°F
Average Exhaust Loss of Water gallons/hour
Average Exhaust Loss of Cleaning Fluid gallons/hour
Average Total Exhaust Loss (water plus cleaning fluid) gallons/hour
Machine Operational Hours per Day # of hours per day with the machine in operation
Exhaust loss of DI water in gallons/hour * Machine operational hours
Annual DI Water Lost from Exhaust
per day * Operational days per year
Exhaust loss of cleaning fluid in gallons/hour * Machine operational
Annual Cleaning Solvent Lost from Exhaust
hours per day * Operational days per year
Cleaning Solvent replacement from exhaust per hour * Machine
Annual Cost of Chemical Loss Due to Exhaust operational hours per day * Operational days per year * Cleaning
Solvent cost per gallon
DI water replacement from exhaust * Machine operational hours per
Annual Cost of DI Loss Due to Exhaust
day * Operational days per year * DI cost per gallon
Average Dragout of the Wash Solution to Rinse Gallons/hour
Average drag out of the wash * % of DI water in the wash * # of
Average annual DI Water lost from Wash Dragout
operational hours per day * # of days per year
Average annual Cleaning Solvent Lost from Wash Average drag out of wash * % of cleaning solvent in the wash * # of
Dragout operational hours per day * # of days per year
Operational Days per Year # of days
Cleaning Solvent lost from exhaust per day + Cleaning Solvent lost
Annual Cost of Cleaning Solvent Lost from Exhaust and
from dray out per day * # of operational days per year * Cost of
Dragout
cleaning solvent per gallon
17

Cleaning Machine (cont.) Parameter (cont.)
DI Water lost from exhaust per day + DI water lost from dray out per
Annual Cost of DI Water Lost from Exhaust and Dragout
day * # of operational days per year * cost of DI water per gallon
Annual cost of cleaning fluid lost from exhaust and dragout + Annual
Total Annual Cost of Exhaust and Dragout per Year
cost of DI water lost from exhaust and dragout
Annual cost of DI from Wash Bath Change outs + Annual Cost of DI
Total DI Water Cost per Year
water lost from exhaust and drag out
Annual cost of Cleaning Solvent from Wash Bath Change outs +
Total Cleaning Solvent Cost per Year
Annual Cost of Cleaning Solvent lost from exhaust and dragout
Total Cost of DI Water and Cleaning Solvent from the
Total DI-water cost per year + Total Cleaning Solvent Cost per year
Wash per Year
DI Water Parameter
Annual DI Water Consumption from Wash Gallons per year
DI Water/hour into Final Rinse Gallons per hour
Gallons per hour * # of operational hours per day * # days of operation
Annual Rinse DI Water Consumption
per year
Annual DI water consumption form wash + annual rinse DI water
Total Annual DI-Water Needed
consumption
Cost to Treat One Gallon of DI Water $/gallon
Total Cost of DI water Cost to treat one gallon of DI water * Total annual DI water needed
Replenishment/Replacement of Ion Exchange Columns Hidden Costs to generate DI Water
Energy Parameter
Pumps KW/Hr.
Heaters KW/Hr.
Dryers KW/Hr.
Exhaust KW/Hr.
Air Conditioning KW/Hr
Total KW/Hr. * # operational hours per day * # of operational days per
Annual Cost of Electricity
year
External Sump Pumps to Push Water Pre-treatment KW/Hr
Waste Disposal Parameter
Rinse water to drain Gallons/day
Solvent from Dragout to Drain Gallons/day
Total Annual Cost to Dispose Water and Solvent to (Rinse water to drain + Solvent to drain) * # of operational hours per
Drain day * # of operational days per year
Pretreatment of Water and/or Chemistry Prior to
Cost/Gallon*KW/Hr$ per month/quarter/year
Disposal including Evaporation
Containerization and Transportation Cost/Gallon*mileage $ per month/quarter/year
Other Disposal Costs Cost/Gallon
Wastewater Permit Fees and Permit Monitoring $/permit and capital investment, consumables, training, education
Total Annual Cost of Disposal $
Air Emissions Parameter
Grams per liter of cleaning solvent * 3.78 liters/gallon * gallons of
VOCs Emitter per Year
cleaning solvent lost to exhaust
Air Emissions Permit $/permit
$ for water if water scrubbed; media replacement if absorbed, or fuel is
Air Emission Control Device
thermal oxidizer
Grams of cleaning solvent emitted per year/454 grams per pound/
Total Annual Cost per Ton of VOCs Emitted
2000 pounds/ton
Air Emission Controls Capital investment, consumables, training, education
18

Footprint Parameter
Total Equipment Length Meters (Feet)
Total Equipment Width Meters (Feet)
Total Equipment Height Meters (Feet)
Total Square Foot of Manufacturing Area Square Meters (Square Feet)
Cost per Square Foot of Manufacturing Area
Through-Put Parameter
Cleaning Machine Inline or Batch
Cleaning Cycle Time Meters (Feet) per minute or Minutes per batch
Production Need Quantity of boards per day
Cycle Time Belt Speed or Minutes in Wash
Cleaning Machine Capacity Boards per Day at Machine Parameters
Required Cleaning Equipment # of Cleaning Machines
Total Operating Costs Parameter
Total Annual Cost of Cleaning Chemistry Cost in Dollars
Total Annual Cost for Industrial Hygiene Services Cost in Dollars
Total Annual Cost of DI Water Cost in Dollars
Total Annual Cost of Energy Cost in Dollars
Total Annual Cost of Waste Disposal Cost in Dollars
Total Annual Cost of Air Emissions Cost in Dollars
Total Annual Cost of WW Discharge Cost in Dollars
Total Annual Depreciation Cost in Dollars
Total Cost of Cleaning Operation Cost in Dollars
Return on Investment Net Operating Income from Cleaning/Average operating assets
Labor, Hours Required + Overhead per Day Cost in Dollars
Other Considerations Parameter
Noise Abatement Decibels of environmental noise
Specialized Conveyors or Hoists Materials handling
Specialized Sump Pumps for pretreatment Materials handling
Positive Benefit of recirculated DI water vs. water to drain or new water
Benefit of Recycled DI Water
needs
Cost for Cleaning Agent Qualification and Optimization Boards, SIR Testing, J-STD-001
3.5.2.1 Cost Model History Cost models have been generated by equipment or cleaning agent suppliers but they are usu-
ally incomplete, i.e., including only the supplier’s favored process and most significant competitor, instead of all possible
options. Often such models were used only to justify the purchase of new equipment, not to optimize economics of manu-
facturing operations.
The first interactive model published was generated by Hollis Engineering and included cleaning with saponifiers, pure
water, or Type I semi-aqueous agents.30 It was later modified by DuPont using actual semi-aqueous cleaning data gathered
from field experience. Neither model included solvent cleaning data or no-clean data.
3.5.2.2 Cost Model Value While these models attempted to allow manufacturers to choose the optimum process based first
on post-soldering cleanliness testing and secondly on the cost per cleaned part, they generally did not provide a comprehen-
sive model that included all the major cleaning options. Further, the interactive nature of the models would allow assem-
blers to ‘‘plug in’’ utility and labor costs at each factory location to decide on the optimum overall cleaning process.
3.5.2.3 Future Work Industry accepted interactive cost models need to be generated that includes all the post-soldering
cleaning processes in use today. The goal would be to strengthen our industry members by ensuring that they remain cost-
competitive in the global marketplace. Such interactive models are not to be used as sales or marketing tools against other
suppliers.
19
3.6 What are the Costs of Ignoring Cleanliness? High reliability electronic products require performance on demand and
miniaturization accelerating the need for thinner and highly dense circuitry.8 A common threat to the production of highly
dense electronic assemblies is the growth of dendrites and intermetallics that ultimately cause short circuits. Literature on
reliability risks of electronic circuit assemblies reports that this phenomenon appears to occur more frequently with lead-free
electronics.9
The speed of electronic interconnection innovations outpace testing, regulatory, and standards bodies serving the industry.10
Miniaturization is constantly imposing new criteria and challenges on the soldering materials.11 With decreasing size of pad,
through-hole, microvia, 3D manufacturing (multilayer chips and package on package) and pitch, the makeup of substrates
and components becomes more delicate, which increases the vulnerability of solder joints.12
Increased functionality and smaller devices represent significant drivers in innovative circuit designs7. Manufacturing com-
plexity increases with the continuous drive for smaller, lighter and more advanced features. In order to pack more circuits
into a smaller device, everything within the device has to shrink in size.11 As packages continue to shrink, while at the same
time package size and I/O counts increases, the convergence of circuit board and advanced packaging drive designers and
component engineers to develop board level features that improve reliability. The costs of avoiding cleaning could result in
loss of life on the far end of the spectrum and costs associated with product performance.
3.6.1 Lead Free Soldering Lead-free is a disruptive change that requires manufacturing process change in a fundamental
element of an electronics assembly - the connections between components.13 Higher I/O counts, progressive miniaturization,
more reliable performance, and other demands are being impeded by circuit board cleanliness effects.27 The relevance of
clean lead-free assemblies must be considered to mitigate stray leakage and electrochemical migration reliability risks.14
The change to lead-free manufacturing urges tighter process control.9 The higher soldering temperatures necessary for lead
free alloys creates additional cleaning challenges. Whereas previously an engineer could tune the process by increasing flux
activity, changing conveyor speed, or increasing preheat ad hoc, high-tin/high melting point alloys are a different matter.
Slight changes from a well-defined tin-lead process can result in an increase level of board failures.
A tightened lead-free SAC process window increases cleaning relevance. With increased soldering temperatures, and
decreased component stand-offs, use of a no-clean process may no longer be tolerated.9 If the flux oxidizes or chars during
the soldering process, the board will experience high levels of ionic contaminants. During high lead-free processing tem-
peratures, the board laminate expands with the risk of absorption of contaminants in the mask. Such risks can and do cause
electrochemical reactions and reliability problems.
3.6.2 Miniaturization Miniaturization imposes a great challenge on the chemistry of fluxes, due to the increasing amount
of oxides and requirements for no-clean lead-free applications.9 The size of the component and the conductor spacing gen-
erates more heat during operation.15 Problems arise from boards with greater design density resulting in ionic interference,
metal migration, and reduction of surface insulation resistance.
Miniaturization often results in reduced wetting.11 The oxide thickness does not decrease in proportion to pad size, thus con-
sequently results in poorer wetting. A reduced joint size is also more prone to void formation, mainly due to a greater dif-
ficulty in wetting, resulting in an increase in vulnerability toward tombstoning or skewing. (See 3.6.3 Flux Changes.)
It stands to reason that a smaller solder joint will be depleted by corrosion sooner than a larger joint.11 Oxidation of fine
solder powder increases with reduced particle size due to the increasing exposure surface area of powder. Changing from
SnPb solders to lead-free solders further worsens the problem since lead-free solders have higher melting points and less
wetting than SnPb solders.
The ability to prevent materials that can cause corrosion is reduced as package standoffs decrease.16 & 28 Condensation of
water and contaminants onto the surface of an IC package occurs because of surface tension when the temperature passes
through the dew point.16 & 28 In a humid environment and in the presence of electrical bias, excessive ionic contaminants
on an assembly can cause problems. At 60% relative humidity, a layer of water two to four molecules thick can form. Along
with the water are contaminants, which increase the risk of other chemical reactions. When the relative humidity reaches
80%, the water layer is from five to 20 molecules thick and ions can flow freely on the surface. At this point moisture and
organic acids can form a corrosive cell. The issue is increased from tight board traces, board density, and higher voltage.28
At constant voltage, the electrical field between the conductors rises inversely with the conductor spacing.12 As a result,
electrochemical migration and the formation of dendrites are more susceptible from narrow conductor spacing. The toler-
ance of electronic products toward dendrite formation diminishes rapidly.11 Shorts between traces are due to electrolytic
dendrite growth, erosion of conductors, or loss of insulation resistance.9
20
3.6.3 Flux Changes Compatibility of lead-free alloys with a variety of flux chemistries is considered essential, and is
determined for performance in handling ability, shelf life, and soldering capability, such as solder balling, wetting, and sol-
der joint appearance.17In general, SAC lead-free alloys exhibit a poor wetting ability. More aggressive flux chemistries are
needed in order to achieve wetting comparable with eutectic tin-lead alloys.18More aggressive flux chemistries can lead to
more corrosive flux residues, thus requiring more use of effective cleaning processes to meet design reliability requirements.
Lee3 cited desirable characteristics of lead-free no-clean flux compositions.11 With a no-clean process the objective is for
the residue to form a hard barrier that seals the circuit from exposed ionic contamination. However, as soldering tempera-
tures rise, the flux materials undergo changes in their physical and chemical properties such as the evaporation of volatile
fractions, surface energy, and melt viscosity.19 While manufacturers did not want to clean assemblies, they couldn’t risk
exceeding the prescribed contamination threshold. Such systems will impart more residues, reduced SIR, and an increased
need to clean.
The science of flux compositions for eutectic SnPb is well understood and mastered.19At higher soldering temperatures
required for lead-free SAC alloys the organic solvent must be thermally stable to reduce the level of activator needed to
solder the component. One critical problem is the lack of thermal stability, thus requiring more active flux compositions.
This leaves a residue that no longer fits the no-clean categorization.
3.6.4 Electrical Failure Mechanisms Electronic assemblers use surface insulation resistance (SIR) testing when adapting
to changes in processes, materials, and manufacturing equipment. SIR is defined as electrical resistance between two elec-
trical conductors.20SIR can be thought of as a systems ability to resist surface shorting of leads or traces. Performance of
SIR test samples are directly related to cleanliness.
SIR measures an aggregate of different resistance of both contaminated and non-contaminated values in parallel.2 The
growth of dendrites or the presence of conductive solutions between the conductors of the patterns affects the resistance
between them. Higher SIR values are the result of cleaner boards that do not form dendrites. Lower values are a result of
the presence of conductive dendrites or salts.20
3.6.5 Electrochemical Migration Electrochemical migration is an occurrence of a conductive metal bridge forming
between conductors when they are subjected to a DC voltage bias.10 Metal conductors grow from a positively charged con-
ductor (cathode) to a negatively charged adjacent conductor (anode) creating a short circuit between the conductors. Elec-
trochemical migration consists of metals plating in reverse.21 An ionic contaminant combines with water, generally forming
a localized source of acid, which dissolves metal ions. Under the influence of the electrical potential, the metal ions move
across the intervening space, plating out on the laminate as it goes, forming a metal filament. A more contaminated assem-
bly has greater risk than a clean assembly.
Electrochemical migration provides a measure of contaminants and their effect on assembly reliability.2 Metallic salts and
conducting ions, such as chloride and bromide commonly found in fluxes and PCB substrates, can create shorts across the
leads or traces. These ions within the electrolyte may derive from corrosion or the metal conductors or from improperly
cleaned circuit board substrates. Contamination may derive from the manufacturing of the bare PCB, subsequent handling,
or from the application of corrosive fluxes without adequate cleaning. Studies have determined that failure due to electro-
chemical migration and corrosion is based primarily on the cleanliness of the parts.10 Ionic residues surrounding metal leads
will begin electrochemical migration when voltage is applied to the circuit in the presence of moisture.21Even before metal
leads are corroded through, corrosion alters its conductivity.
3.6.6 Reliability Risks High risk of reliability problems can occur, especially in high-reliability end-use environments.
Loss of process control within the facility in a no-clean environment increases risk especially when process control adjust-
ments can be made in real time. No-clean implementation moves the cleaning and associated process controls out to mul-
tiple lowest bidder suppliers. Potential reliability issues are corrected prior to final tests and shipment to the customer. This
is especially important if the assemblies are conformally coated.
When processing no-clean assemblies, both equipment and manpower are needed to perform testing and analyses needed to
ensure cleanliness of incoming components and boards. Qualification of all suppliers manufacturing processes to ensure
incoming parts meet manufacturing process standards. This problem becomes more cumbersome as the number of suppli-
ers and supplier manufacturing sites increases. OEMs require Supplier/User/Customer agreements on existing industry per-
formance and test method documents; or generation of any such documents that do not presently exist.
References
1. Fisher, J. (2008, Oct). IPC Technology Roadmap Future of Interconnection Technology and Its Impact on Cleaning and
Reliability. IPC/SMTA High Performance Cleaning Symposium.
21
2. Oosterhof, A., Ellis, B., Pauls, D., & Naisbitt, G. (2008, Jan). What is involved with going no-clean? Retrieved from
http://listserv.ipc.org/scripts/wa.exe?A0=TechNet
3. Lee, N.C. (2008, Oct). Lead-Free Flux Technology and the Influence on Cleaning. IPC/SMTA High Performance Elec-
tronic Assembly Cleaning Symposium.
4. Russeau, J. (2008, Oct). Utilizing and understanding the various methodologies for evaluating cleanliness of printed
wiring assemblies. IPC/SMTA High Performance Cleaning Symposium.
5. Bixenman, M., Ellis, D., & Neiderman, J. (2009, April). Collaborative cleaning process innovations from managing
experience and learning curves. IPC Printed Circuits Expo, APEX.
6. Munson, T. (2008). Process residues and their impact on product reliability. Forsite Labs, Kokomo, IN.
7. Hillman, D. (2008, Oct). A reduced cleaning of printed circuit boards: The science of leaving residues alone. IPC/SMTA
High Performance Cleaning Symposium.
8. Bixenman, M., (2008, April). Quantifying cleaning relevance when manufacturing lead-free printed circuit board assem-
blies. SMTA Conference on Soldering and High Reliability. Toronto, Canada.
9. Naisbitt, G. (2008, March). Cleanliness testing on the shop floor. Surface Mount Technology.
10. Cullen, D.P., & O’Brien, G. (2004). Implementation of immersion silver PCB surface finishes in compliance with
underwriters laboratories. IPC Printed Circuits Expo, San Diego, CA.
11. Lee, N.C. (2008). Future lead-free solder alloys and fluxes: Meeting the challenges of miniaturization. IPC Printed Cir-
cuits Expo. Las Vegas, NV.
12. Takemoto, T., Latanision, R.M., Eagar, T.W., &Matsunawa, A. (1997). Electrochemical migration tests of solder alloys
in pure water. Corrosion Science. 38(8), 1415-1430.
13. Seatman, K., & Nishimura, T. (2008). Properties that are important in lead-free solders. IPC Printed Circuits Expo. Las
Vegas, NV.
14. Munson, T. (1998, Nov.). Eliminating metal migration failures. Printed Circuit Fabrication. 21(11), 32.
15. Rudra, B., Pecht, M.J., & Jennings, D. (1996). Electrochemical migration in multichip modules. Circuit World. 22(1),
67.
16. Hawes, A. (2000). Causes and effects of corrosion in plastic IC packages. Electronic Engineering.
17. Toleno, B., &Maslyk, D (2008). Process and assembly methods for increased yield of package on package devices. IPC
Printed Circuits Expo. Las Vegas, NV.
18. Lee, N.C., & Bixenman, M. (2001). Lead Free: How flux technology will differ for lead-free alloys. Nepcon West.
Anaheim, CA.
19. Triggelen-Aarden, I.V., & Westerlaken, E. (2008). Performing flux technology for Pb-free SN100C solders. IPC Printed
Circuits Expo. Las Vegas, NV.
20. Partee, B. (2004, Feb). SIR Testing. EMPF. Retrieved from http://www.empfasis/feb04/sirtesting.htm.
21. Pauls, D., & Munson, T. (2000, Jan). Questions and answers 1. Circuits Assembly. 11(1), 72.
22. Schweigart, H., & Wack, H. (2001, April). Humidity and pollution effects on Pb-Free assemblies. Circuits Assembly.
18(4), 34.
23. Zestron Corporation, (n.d.) ‘‘Cost per cleaned part’’ is a term that was pioneered by Zestron Corporation with the intro-
duction of non-surfactant, modern aqueous product technologies.
24. GfKORR Working Group (n.d.). Corrosion protection in electronics and micro-system technology. Ingolstadt, Germany.
25. Richie, B. (2008, Oct.). To Clean... or Not To Clean. IPC/SMTA High Performance Cleaning Symposium.
26. Keeping, J. (2008, Oct.). Critical considerations for selecting a conformal coating process. IPC/SMTA High Perfor-
mance Cleaning Symposium.
27. Schweigart, H. (2003). The reliability of silver-based solders. EPP Europe, 3⁄4 - 2003.
28. Schweigart, H., & Muehlbauer, A. (2002, Mar). Preventing contamination-caused assembly failure. www.smtmag.com
29. Joint Services Solvent Substitution Working Group (JS3WG). http://www.jgpp.com/projects/JS3/JS3_main.htm
30. James J. Andrus, Hollis Automation, Inc., ‘‘PWA Aqueous and Semi-Aqueous Cleaning: System Approaches and
Tradeoffs,’’ NEPCON West Proceedings, pp 281-291, 1991 (also published as NWC TP-7110, pp 35-48, 1991)
22
4 DESIGNING ASSEMBLIES FOR CLEANING
4.1 Design of Assemblies for Effective Cleaning Designing printed circuit assemblies for cleanability has become an
extremely challenging task, due to the miniaturization as well as the complexity of leading-edge products.1 Design for
manufacturability (DFM) includes a set of techniques to modify and improve printed circuit and cleaning process designs
in order to match the cleaning process to the substrate, contaminant, and available cleaning methods. The desire to make
electronic products smaller and lighter drives designers toward highly dense assemblies with reduced spacing between com-
ponents. The objective of this section is to provide design rule methodologies for cleaning leading edge printed circuit
designs.
Technology advances, use of smaller components, high density layouts, material changes, and environmental conditions
renew heightened importance of circuit board cleanliness.3 Designing printed circuit assemblies for ease of manufacture
needs to begin with the CAD designer’s awareness of the manufacturing process and its limitations. As a general rule,
through-hole assemblies offer fewer problems than surface mount assemblies do and, in particular, those on high-density
interconnection structure (HDIS) substrates. The problem is that the driving force toward smaller components increases the
complexity of component features and functions.2 This complexity makes effective removal of residues more difficult.
In some cases, there may be a conflict between the requirements for a good electrical design, a good layout for soldering
and a good layout for cleaning. In these cases, the designer should attempt to find an adequate compromise. As with all pro-
cess changes, cleaning processes must be evaluated relative to the proposed design. The selected cleaning process must be
validated prior to production of the new assembly. Designers, engineers, quality control personnel, shop floor personnel,
safety/environmental advisors, and other key personnel should be involved in the cleaning process evaluation. The cleaning
process includes the cleaning agent, the cleaning equipment, and the cleaning protocol. The cleaning process should be
acceptable to show personnel; otherwise, the new process is less likely to be successful.
Team meetings, including key personnel are often helpful in educating the designer; this approach may be the most expe-
ditious approach to DFM. When cleaning high-density surface mount assemblies, the CAD system should be tuned to ensure
that every opportunity is taken to enhance the ability to clean. This may mean that components should be oriented in a spe-
cific direction and, in order to achieve this, it may be necessary to have one or more extra signal layers. If this is undesir-
able for economic reasons, then it may be necessary to insert signal conductors in voltage or ground plane layers. In the
case of HDIS circuits with micro-vias, it is usual to have the vias in the soldering pads. This eliminates the need of com-
ponent fan-out (dog bones), permitting much higher component densities, which may seriously compromise the cleaning
process with the present state of technology.
4.2 Design for Cleaning Printed circuit board design, assembly, and quality control follow defined industry standards. To
mitigate risks of product failure due to contamination, the cleaning process must provide a defined process window that is
repeatable across a wide range of variables encountered in the assembly process. To achieve a high yield cleaning process,
many factors influence the cleaning process window: substrate, contaminant, available cleaning technologies, cleaning
equipment, and environmental factors.
4.2.1 Substrate The first step in designing the cleaning process is a thorough review of PWB Layout to identify PTH
holes, aspect ratios of the holes, any applicable plugging or tenting of the vias, and solder mask material selection. Part
composition, size, and geometry can create low clearances and sandwiched components with little egress resulting in resi-
dues that are very difficult to remove. Small and light weight parts increase the need to fixture assemblies as they track
through the cleaning process. Cleaning process design first starts with consideration of board surface, metallization, and
compatibility constraints. Part unique restrictions may limit some components from being subjected to the cleaning process.
4.2.1.1 Bare Board Cleaning Requirements After plating and chemical etching processes, ionic contaminants leave an
electrically conductive residue remaining on the PCB surface. Conductive ions are derived from metal cleaners, etchants,
plating chemicals, fusing and leveling fluids, processing equipment, and human contact. Fluxes used in the HASL process
may become entrapped in the spaces between the pads and solder mask or in tented vias. For incoming bare boards, con-
sideration of the design for areas of tight mask-to-metal spacing and tented vias have little influence on the ability to clean.
Bare boards often have unacceptable process residues from the fabrication process. IPC-5704 states: As received, single or
double-sided and multilayer printed boards shall conform to the stated ionic cleanliness requirements listed for the respec-
tive surface finish in Table 4-1, when tested in accordance with IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.28.2. Unsuitable design and lay-
out of assemblies often cause difficulties in cleaning. Incompletely cured solder mask and/or legend inks can also negatively
affect post-soldering and cleaning appearance.
23
Table 4-1 Bare Printed Board Ionic Contamination Maximum Limits (µg/cm2)
Ions Non-OSP OSP
Chloride (Cl) 0.75 0.75
Bromide (Br) 1.0 1.0
Sodium (Na) + Potassium (K) 2.0 4.0
Total Inorganic 3.8 5.9
4.2.2 Assembly Components The drivers to make electronic products smaller and lighter are component miniaturization,
the reduction of spacing between components, increased complexity of features and functions2. Highly dense assemblies use
low feature (Z-height) components that occupy a significant area on the PCB. Examples of these components are Package-
on-Package, Chip Capacitors, QFN, CSPs, etc. Reducing the component size and spacing increases cleaning difficulty on
both component terminations and under the components.
The use of miniature components, such as resistors and capacitors pose increased cleaning challenges. The 01005 resistor
is extremely small in size with dimensions of 0.4 x 0.2 mm [0.016 in x 0.008 in]. During the soldering process, surface
tension of flux fills the underside of the component. The component stand-off height is less than 0.001 mm [0.00004 in]
from the surface of the PCB. Products built with these small components report the need for all residues to be removed from
under the component for the circuit boards to function properly.6
Component packages with high pin counts also present highly difficult cleaning challenges, in particular, cleaning under ball
grid arrays (BGAs) and chip scale packages (CSPs). With pin counts of several hundred to more than one thousand, an
understanding of the flux options, heat gradients, cleaning materials, and mechanical delivery of the cleaning materials (i.e.,
spray nozzles) is necessary.
Flip chip packages and packages like DFN, QFN, and land grid arrays (LGAs) are being used in greater numbers in manu-
facture of high volume electronics. In these cases, the designer should be warned that every effort must be made to ensure
that cleaning is not impeded. Formation of designer-assembler teams to maximize electronic performance with high yield
manufacture is critical to success. Designer assembler teams should validate the ability to clean under parts with small Z-axis
clearances.
Multi-module advanced packages create a different set of challenges. Vented caps are used on some packages to protect flip
chip die and passive components. The small vent hole allows cleaning fluid to permeate and potentially be entrapped under
the protective cap. Assemblers are concerned that cleaning fluid entrapped under the protective cap may dry as an ionic resi-
due and potentially cause a reliability concern. As devices increase in complexity, such as the flip chip example illustrates,
component designers, assemblers, and materials suppliers must develop creative approaches to addressing this concern.
Designer assembler teams should validate the ability to clean under parts with small Z-axis clearances. New lid designs were
introduced at the 2010 IPC/SMTA Cleaning & Coating Conference. The paper referencing this development is available
from either IPC or SMTA (Vuono, Bill, 2010, Cleaning Fluid Entrapment under Vented Flip Chip Packages, IPC/SMTA
Cleaning and Coating Conference).
(Refer to Section 5 for a discussion on sensitive components.)
4.2.3 Assembly Contaminants With a clear understanding of the unique part consideration and restrictions, the next step
in the design for manufacturability considers the effects of contamination left on the circuit board after the assembly (typi-
cally soldering) process. To understand the risk of contamination, designers consider the flux residue composition, physical
properties, and quantity, the ability of the cleaning material to remove the soldering residues. Interaction of the soldering
materials, i.e., the flux with the thermal processes associated with assembly and the dwell time between the thermal pro-
cesses and the cleaning process have an effect on the resulting cleanliness of the assembly. Subsequent processing steps may
also influence product cleanliness.
Solder flux performs a number of important functions simultaneously:7
• Removes surface oxidation.
• Prevents re-oxidation - Keeps the resulting surface oxide-free.
• Promotes generation of a metallurgical and mechanically strong joint.
• Reduces surface tension to eliminate bridges and shorts.
• Flux also promotes thermal stability during the metal jointing process.
24
• Flux reactions occur through acid-base and oxidation-reduction reactions with the metal/metal oxide/electrolyte solution
interface. As component features decrease, greater activator levels and thermal stability become paramount. An additional
factor impacting the electronics industry is the switch to low solids solders.2 High tin alloys exhibit poor wetting proper-
ties and higher melting points that require flux compositions with higher levels of activation and increased thermal stabil-
ity, which increases the level of flux residue.
• The size and pitch of the component with regards to the conductor spacing could increase the risk of electro-migration and
corrosion.8 The DFM metric for metal to metal spacing becomes more sensitive with the transition to lead-free soldering.
Smaller solder joints are depleted by corrosion sooner than a larger joint.9 Oxidation of fine solder powder increases with
reduced particle size due to the increased surface area of the powder. Changing from tin-lead solders to lead-free solders
further worsens the problem, since lead-free solders are more prone to oxidization than tin-lead solders.9 Problems arise
from boards with greater levels of ionic flux residues, which increase the risk of electrochemical reactions, metal migra-
tion, and reduction of surface resistance, thus creating the need to clean post soldering.8 For more information reference
IPC-5702.
• Solder pastes, paste fluxes, and wave fluxes influence the level and difficulty of residue removal after the soldering pro-
cess. Flux residues clean at different rates based on the flux make-up, time after reflow, and reflow temperature. All of these
reflow factors must be considered for each board design with the importance of following reflow parameters. Solvation
involves different types of intermolecular interaction: hydrogen bonding, ion-dipole, and dipole-dipole attractions. As flux
residues change, the cleaning rate also varies. For all cleaning activities, the cleaning agent and the cleaning system -
including time, temperature, and force influence cleaning efficacy.
7
4.2.4 Thermal Gradients The soldering reflow profile is one of the most important factors in the soldering process. Den-
sity of component distribution on the PCB greatly affects the reflow profile. Heavy or large components should be equally
distributed on the PCB. Cleanability issues may occur due to the need to set the reflow profile based on the highest ther-
mal need component on the assembly.
Designers and Process Engineers are challenged to develop and follow a reflow profile across the assembly in all directions
to maximize soldering efficiency while not overheating or charring, and/or oxidizing flux residue to an un-cleanable state.
The reflow profile represents an important factor in defect rates in the form of component cracking, tombstoning, wicking,
solder balling, bridging, solder beading, cold joints, and intermetallic formation. Considering cleaning and the number of
reflow process conditions before cleaning will influence the ease of cleaning flux residues.
The time above liquidus exposes the flux constituents to oxidation-reduction reactions needed to facilitate the joining pro-
cess.11 The time above the peak temperature has a significant influence on the cleanability of the flux residue. At the peak
temperature, the flux flows away from the solder joint. As the flux flows away from the solder, the residue thins to its low-
est point, from which the flux residue can oxidize or char from overheating. These thin flux films create an extremely dif-
ficult cleaning challenge.
4.2.4.1 Multiple Process Cycles In an effort to create one piece flow in the production of double sided surface mount and
through hole mixed technology circuit assemblies, the board may see multiple soldering and therefore thermal cycles before
the cleaning process. Each additional thermal cycle hardens the flux residue by degassing lower molecular solutes from the
resin structure thus increasing the cleaning challenge. Additionally, some of the higher molecular weight resins may undergo
thermal oxidation rendering a much different residue (polymerizing or cross-linking) set to clean.
Flux technology used with eutectic tin-lead solders, cleaning chemistry, and mechanical equipment innovations have opened
the process window to a point where flux residue is still cleanable. With the trend of high density population, low standoff
components, and low solids soldering, the difficulty of cleaning flux residues exposed to multiple reflow cycles may require
aggressive cleaning conditions that may affect board compatibility and its assembled components.
4.2.4.2 Lead-Free Soldering Lead-Free soldering creates a new challenge from a cleanability perspective. High tin lead-
free alloys exhibit poorer wetting properties, higher melting points, and higher molecular weight flux compositions to
improve thermal stability. The deficiency in alloy wetting has to be compensated with a flux that facilitates improved wet-
ting. This results in flux compositions with lower surface tension by increasing flux activation and synthetic polymers.12 To
reduce voiding, the reflow profile requires longer soak time to dry out volatiles, which requires a flux composition with
higher oxidation resistance, oxygen barrier capability, high thermal stability, and low volatility.12 These effects translate into
a greater level of high molecular weight flux residue that is harder to clean.
When designing lead-free processes, a pre-existing cleaning process designed for tin-lead materials may not be sufficient for
removing lead-free flux residues. Cleaning materials may require new or combinations of solvating materials to improve
25
dissolution of high molecular weight polymers. Cleaning materials may require increased levels of reactive saponifying
agents, which can create and exacerbate compatibility concerns. Some cleaning machines for such processes may be modi-
fied to increase mechanical action and the length of the wash sections may be increased to facilitate longer exposure time
to the cleaning agent. These design related factors require an increased responsibility on the part of the assembler to vali-
date that these changes still meet the desired result.
4.3 Cleaning Agent Design Options Electronic assembly cleaning material design options cover three classes that include
solvent, semi-aqueous, and aqueous compositions. During the pre-ozone depletion era, CFC-113 and rosin-based flux com-
positions were the standard. Currently, the cleaning agent of choice is selected based on the soil to be cleaned, through-put,
readily available cleaning equipment, compatibility with materials of construction, cost, and environmental regulations. All
cleaning material types comprise strengths and weaknesses. In most cases, the application drives the cleaning material type.
Certain flux materials are not designed to be cleaned. Some of the no-clean flux products are classified as cleanable
no-cleans. On the design side, the soldering material selected by the assembler needs to consider a product that is cleanable.
Clients should inquire about the cleaning properties with their soldering materials supplier.
4.3.1 Solvent Cleaning Materials Solvent cleaning materials use one to three of the four building blocks: solvency, minor
ingredients, and wetting. Several classes of solvents have been identified as alternatives for ozone depleting chemicals. A
key property of solvent cleaning is the composition’s evaporation after use, when cleaning the circuit assembly or advanced
package. Heat of vaporization transforms the solvent into a vapor state from the liquid phase. Some solvent cleaners are
mixtures that form azeotrope or azeotrope-like constant boiling properties. Compositions that exhibit low heat of vaporiza-
tion, dispersive, and polar properties are desirable printed wiring board vapor degreasing candidates. They may be self-
rinsing and have low residue. Volatility and ease of vaporization can be drawbacks that include containment, flammability,
toxicity, and local regulations on emissions. It is necessary to balance the positive and negative aspects of the cleaning agent.
Solvent cleaning materials are commonly used on parts that cannot tolerate water during the cleaning process or where bet-
ter wetting is required. The contaminant (flux residue) requiring removal must disperse and dissolve in the cleaning solvent
mixture. As flux evolved from rosin-based materials, the properties of water soluble, low residue and synthetic compositions
may or may not disperse and dissolve into the solvent cleaner. Solder paste and wave flux must be selected on the basis of
solvent dissolution.
4.3.2 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Materials Semi-Aqueous is the process of solvent washing/water rinsing. Semi-Aqueous
products use three of the building blocks-solvency, wetting, and minor ingredients-in the formulation design. The objective
is to solvate the soils from the surface of the assembly or component. Once the wash step is completed, the parts go through
a series of DI water rinse steps to remove wash chemistry, spot mask and ionic residues. The parts are dried free of water
and typically have contamination levels that are undetectable.
A broad array of product choices exists when choosing a semi-aqueous cleaning solvent. Each uses organic solvent mixtures
but with different chemical structures. Most are a combination of low vapor pressure solvents, wetting agents and inhibitors.
They are designed to remove both polar (flux, ionic salts) and non-polar (light oils, fingerprints, dust) soils. Semi-Aqueous
cleaning agents have a typical bath life from two months to one year due to their stable structures and tendency to hold high
levels of soil. Application temperatures are between 24° and 71°C [75° and 160°F], depending on the solvent’s activity level
versus temperature and the solvent’s flash point. Semi-aqueous chemistries have good compatibility with most components
used in electronic assembly.
4.3.3 Aqueous Cleaning Materials Aqueous cleaning materials are engineered concentrated fluids that dissolve with
water. Aqueous cleaning materials are non-flammable and commonly processed in high energy machines (Table 4-2). High
energy machines deliver the cleaning agent with velocity, pressure, spray channels, and flow. Aqueous concentrated prod-
ucts work based on the ‘‘Cleaning Rate Theorem’’ that holds: The static cleaning rate (rate at which the cleaning material
dissolves the flux residue at its temperature and concentration in the absence of impingement energy) plus the dynamic rate
(energy and time in the cleaning machine) equals the process cleaning rate.13
26
Table 4-2 Electronic Assembly Cleaning Agent Design Options

Organic
Solvency Reactant
Cleaning Capability Saponifying Minor Polar Non-polar Process
Agent Design (Dissolution) Agents Wetting Ingredients (Water Soluble) (Water Insoluble) Application
Bench Top
Cleaning
Organic-based Some are water Some are Under Stencil

Solvent soluble and non-polar and Wipe
High None Yes Yes
Cleaning others are not others may be Stencil Cleaning
Agents water soluble partially polar
Pallet Finger
Cleaning
Wafer Level Pkg.
Solvent Vapor
High None Yes Yes Poor Good PCB Defluxing
Degreasing
PCB Defluxing
Semi-Aqueous Advanced
High None Yes Yes Poor Good
Water-Insoluble Packaging
Wafer Level Pkg.
PCB Defluxing
Good cleaning Good cleaning
Semi-Aqueous Advanced
High Low Yes Yes performance on performance on
Water-Soluble Packaging
polar soils non-polar soils
Wafer Level Pkg.
Stencil Cleaning
Aqueous Uncured Solder
High None Yes Yes performance on performance on
Solvent Blend Paste
SMT Adhesives
Aqueous High
Low High Yes Yes performance on performance on PCB Defluxing
Saponification
PCB Defluxing
Aqueous Good cleaning Good cleaning
Advanced
Medium Medium Medium Yes Yes performance on performance on
Packaging
Saponification polar soils non-polar soils
Stencil/Misprint
PCB Defluxing
Aqueous Low Advanced
High Low Yes Yes performance on performance on
Saponification Packaging
Stencil/Misprint
PCB Defluxing
Aqueous Good cleaning Good cleaning
Advanced
Neutral No High None - Low Yes Yes performance on performance on
Packaging
Saponification polar soils non-polar soils
Stencil/Misprint
4.3.4 Cleaning Equipment Design Options Cleaning equipment designs are categorized into two classifications: batch and
inline. The cleaning industry is constantly challenged to improve cleaning processes, staying ahead of the ever-advancing
technology curve as it applies to increasingly new fields of application.13 Processes are commonly represented as mechani-
cal and chemical energy, temperature and time. Increased complexity of board and component geometry coupled with more
difficult solder paste and flux formulations and cost of ownership concerns increased the demand on both static and
mechanical driving forces. As a result, mechanical and chemical energy must make up for reduced temperatures and shorter
process times.
To achieve a high production rate and an optimized process requires an accurate model to predict performance.13 It has been
suggested that most cleaning systems are governed by two fundamental principles: the solubility/reactivity rate of the resi-
due in the cleaning solution and the physical energy available in the cleaning system. Equation 1 describes this relationship.
27
Equation 1: Process cleaning rate equation13: Rp ∼/= Rs + Rd

Where;
Process cleaning rate = Rp
Static cleaning rate = Rs
Dynamic cleaning rate = Rd
In equation 1, Rp, Rs and Rd are the rates of removal of contaminate per unit of time.13 Units will vary depending on the
residues being cleaned. Rates for cleaning flux residue, rinsing wash chemistry, or drying water from a circuit assembly can
be expressed as thickness or mass removed/second, volume flushed/second or mass removed/second. If solder balls or other
particles were in the soil, then balls/second or particles/second would be appropriate units. When comparing rates of differ-
ent cleaning processes, it may be appropriate to specify rates at the same temperature since rates are temperature depen-
dent.13
An EMS company is contracted to build a lead-free assembly using SAC 205 no-clean solder paste. The high density device
is populated with numerous leadless components. The OEM requires that all flux residues be removed from under compo-
nent gaps. Static testing provides insight into the cleaning properties of all soils used to assemble the device. With this
knowledge, the assembler gains an understanding of the difficulties that may be encountered when cleaning production
assemblies. The next step is to select cleaning equipment that provides kinetic and thermal dynamic driving forces for deliv-
ering the cleaning agent to the soil. The process cleaning rate, which is the time required to clean the part, is a sum of the
static and dynamic rates.
4.3.5 Defining ‘‘An Optimized System’’ The objective of mechanical cleaning systems is to reduce time by maximizing
the physical energy delivered at the surface to be cleaned.13 An optimized cleaning system is not overpowered or oversized.
An optimized cleaning system delivers the necessary chemistry and energy to clean the most difficult or sensitive areas, at
a rate that will meet the process time requirement using minimal chemical, energy and floor space consumption. In this defi-
nition of an optimized spray in air or batch cleaning system, it is important to note that the system should be designed to
clean the toughest or most electrically sensitive areas of the parts to be manufactured. Minimum gap (space between assem-
bly surface and bottom side of component), largest, or most complex components usually leads the way to identifying these
areas.13
4.4 The Rs + Rd Balance Understanding the balance of Rs and Rd is key in predicting and optimizing process performance
at each step of the washing, rinsing, and drying process.13 Suppose for a minute that we washed our clothes by throwing
them in a bucket of soapy water overnight. The water would dissolve the salts and sugars thoroughly and rapidly because
of the high solubility rate (Rs). The oils and greases would disappear slower and perhaps incompletely due to marginal solu-
bility and low dissolution rates. Earth’s persistent gravity (9.8m/sec) would be the only energy available to the static bucket
cleaner to remove insoluble dirt and other adherent soils and some of it might drop off, but most would remain behind.
Understanding the nature of the soil and the chemical and physical needs for removing it, allow us to select the bucket for
a silk blouse with a coke stain or the heavy-duty cycle on our washing machine for kids’ play clothes.1
The static cleaning rate is a function of the cleaning agents solubility at the defined operating temperature and concentra-
tion. The dynamic cleaning rate is a function of the kinetic energy forces used to deliver the cleaning agent, penetrate mini-
mum gap areas (space between assembly surface and bottom side of component), high component density (distance between
components in X and Y directions), the surface area under the component, and the solubility characteristics of the soil being
removed. Spray-in-air cleaning machines deliver direct impingement using nozzle flow, angles, and pressure.
Static immersion in the absence of dynamic energy relies totally on the cleaning agent. Dishwasher style cleaning machines
provide high flow, directional forces, and pressure. Planarized batch machines track the spray manifold over a stationary
surface designed to hold parts. Inline spray-in-air machines track the boards on a moving conveyor with spray manifolds
impinging the surface through-out the process. (Table 4-3)
28
Table 4-3 Static versus Dynamic Design Options

(data findings are supported by several research studies)
Static/Dynamic Design Options
System Design Wash Rinse Dry
Static Rate Dynamic Rate Static Rate Dynamic Rate Static Rate Dynamic Rate
Driver Chemical Mechanical Chemical Mechanical Mechanical
Convection
Forces Forces Forces Forces Forces
Static Immersion 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0%
Ultrasonic
50% 50% 70% 30% 70% 30%
Immersion
Spray Under
80% 20% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Immersion
Dishwasher
60% 40% 70% 30% 70% 30%
Style
Planarized
50% 50% 40% 60% 40% 60%
Batch
Normally, Rs or Rd dominates a given cleaning process step. Inline ‘‘air spray’’ cleaners and planarized batch cleaners are
examples of cleaning processes dominated by high mechanical energy. Dip tanks, ‘‘spray under immersion,’’ ‘‘dishwasher
style’’ batch ‘‘air spray’’ cleaners and vapor degreasers are examples of cleaning processes dominated by high chemical
forces. There is the potential for any application of force to damage components or substrates. High pressure spray is not
always safe for the assembly. Ultrasonic action is not always detrimental.
4.5 Environmental Factors Environmental laws must be incorporated with Designing for Manufacturing.
The following questions need to be considered when selecting a cleaning agent:

• Will air emissions require permitting (federal/state/local)?
• Will cleaning agent result in a waste water discharge that require permitting (generally Local requirement)?
• Will cleaning agent generate a ‘‘new’’ hazardous waste stream that must be registered and profiled?
• Will the cleaning agent require annual release reporting (air/water/off-site waste) under EPA Toxic Release Program?
• Are the substances of the cleaning agent ‘‘acceptable’’ to customers?
• Will the manufacturing process (no-clean processing) leave a residue that must be considered under REACH or RoHS
directives?
Section 9 of this document provides a comprehensive overview of Environmental Considerations.
References
1. Design for Manufacturing (PCB). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_for_manufacturability_(PCB)
on February 13, 2009.
2. Lin Y., & Johnson, W. (2007). Optimization of lead free solder 01005 component assembly. Soldering & Surface Mount
Technology, 19/1 (2007), 15-27.
3. Gillespie, B., & DeBenedetto, M. (2007, Feb). Conformal coating and board cleanliness. Circuit Assembly, Retrieved
from www.circuitassembly.com
4. Printed Circuit Board. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printed_Circuit_Boards on February 13, 2009.
5. Goering, R. (2006, August 7). Board Complexity Dogs Designers. Electronic Engineering Times, Retrieved from
www.eetimes.com
6. Hugh, S. (2008, Oct). Challenges in Cleaning Pb-Free Medical Electronics. IPC/SMTA High Performance Cleaning
Symposium.
7. Lee, N.C. (2002). Reflow Soldering Processes and Troubleshooting SMT, BGA, CSP and Flip Chip Technologies.
Newnes, Woburn, MA.
8. Takemoto, T., Latanision, R.M., Eagar, T.W., &Matsunawa, A. (1997). Electrochemical migration tests of solder alloys
in pure water. Corrosion Science. 38(8), 1415-1430.
9. Lee, N.C. (2008). Future lead-free solder alloys and fluxes: Meeting the challenges of miniaturization. IPC Printed Cir-
cuits Expo. Las Vegas, NV.
29
10. Dishart, K.T. (2008, Oct). Using Hansen Solubility Parameters to Match the Cleaning Agent to the Pb-Free Residue.
IPC/SMTA High Performance Cleaning Symposium.
11. Reflow Soldering. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflow_Soldering on February 15, 2009.
12. Lee, N.C. (2008, Oct). Lead Free Soldering and the Influence on Cleaning. IPC/SMTA High Performance Cleaning
Symposium.
13. Stach, S., & Bixenman, M. (2004, Sep). Optimizing Cleaning Energy in Batch and Inline Spray Systems. SMTAI Tech
Conference. Donald Stephens Convention Center, Rosemont, IL
14. Electronics and Computer Industry (SIC 36). Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/
assistance/sectors/notebooks/elecmpsnpt1.pdf on February 15, 2009.
15. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCAQMD on February 15,
2009.
16. REACH. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reach on February 15, 2009.
5 MATERIALS COMPATIBILITY
Engineers responsible for the cleaning process must be aware of possible material compatibility problems. The information
contained in this section seeks to provide the process engineer with awareness of the material compatibility risks when
cleaning electronic hardware. Factors of concern are circuit board laminates, surface finishes, components, metal alloys,
adhesive bond strength, part markings, plastics, the mix and configuration of materials in the assembly and the impact of
entrapped contaminants. Other factors must also be considered, such as the chemical characteristics of the cleaning material,
cleaning temperature, impingement energy, and exposure time to the cleaning process, including rework cycles. The pos-
sible interactions of all these factors are especially challenging today with the much wider availability of board and com-
ponent lead finishes, as well as joining metals. The difficulty of locating data on each and every possible combination of
factors associated with this issue creates a high level of complexity.
5.1 Material Compatibility Considerations Critical material compatibility considerations when designing the cleaning
process are components, assembly materials, cleaning agents, impingement energy applied during the cleaning process,
anticipated process time, temperature and equipment design. Cleaning factors that may impact the effectiveness of the clean-
ing process include the cleaning agent, wash bath concentration, flux loading, cleaning equipment, spray pressures, fluid
flow, speed, and process temperatures. These same factors may influence materials compatibility. Consideration also may be
given to interactions that occur as a function of cleaning bath lifetime due to contaminants from potentially incompatible
materials built up in the bath.
5.1.1 Cleaning Process Effectiveness Design and material factors that impact the effectiveness of the cleaning process
include circuit density, component standoff height, flux residue compositions, reflow temperatures, and number of thermal
exposures before the cleaning process. Assembly materials that may be materially affected by the cleaning process include
board laminates, surface finishes, plastics, components, labels, part markings, metallic alloys, coatings, non-hermetic sealed
components, and adhesives. Process chemicals (including cleaning and surface preparation processes) used in preparation of
the components and materials of construction may be materially affected during assembly cleaning process. Process chem-
istries that may impact the effectiveness of the cleaning process include SMT solder paste, SMT solder flux, wave solder
bar, wave solder flux, rework solder wire, rework solder flux or any other material that must be removed during the clean-
ing process.
5.2 Reliability Considerations Factors important to ensuring the reliability of PCB assemblies requires an understanding
of the raw material properties and characteristics from which electronic components and assemblies are made. An apprecia-
tion of potential negative impacts of the cleaning process on the surface qualities and even on overall component structure
is fundamental for successful design engineering when selecting fluxes, paste, adhesives, substrates, cleaning materials, con-
formal coatings, and other common interconnect materials. The actual behavior of a material can vary from the theoretical
or expected performance in various situations. Material properties vary from batch to batch and may impact material com-
patibility. Factors that affect the material behavior such as cleaning agent, cleaning time, cleaning temperature, number of
exposures to the cleaning process, and impingement energy should be tested to understand material interactions.
5.3 Material Compatibility Testing Compatibility testing procedures to assure the printed wiring assembly materials of
construction are compatible with the cleaning process are necessary during the process design phase. All chemicals have the
potential to adversely affect substrates, components and equipment.
30
Compatibility testing is usually carried out for two time periods. The short test is the anticipated cleaning cycle time, which
is often equipment or operator dependent. The time for the long test should be determined by the assembler/manufacturer.
For example, the long exposure test could mimic the exposure time to the cleaning agent if the assembly fell off the con-
veyor belt or out of the basket and remained in the sump during the entire shift. Long term testing is also needed to deter-
mine the influence of the cleaning agent with the cleaning equipment. Thus these test times could vary from 5 to 10 minutes
up to 8 hours. To simulate rework, multiple exposures need to be performed.
It is suggested that both Standards and controls be used. Because defluxing processes are always a balance between opti-
mizing removal of soil and avoiding materials damage, it is important to evaluate new processes with an eye to achievable
reality. In this regard, if the materials compatibility attributes of a new defluxing process are being evaluated, it is prudent
to, at the same time, test the existing process as a control or benchmark using the same performance and compatibility stan-
dards as are used for the new process. It is not uncommon to find that existing chemicals and processes that have been suc-
cessfully used for years do not pass the long-term materials compatibility requirements that a manufacturer has set. Using
controls as well as setting compatibility standards helps to avoid situations where it is erroneously determined that ‘nothing
works.’
5.3.1 Compatibility and Functionality Any cleaning or manufacturing process has the potential to result in materials
compatibility issues. In some cases, there may be subtle surface changes. Such changes may be beneficial or benign. The
definition of an acceptable surface depends in part on the end-use requirement of the assembly. The definition of compat-
ibility also depends on the specific application.
While there are many standard tests for compatibility, and while such standards should be cited where appropriate, compat-
ibility testing must be customized. There are many variables to consider. For this reason, while compatibility tables offered
by suppliers and vendors provide a good starting point, testing must be tailored to the application in question.
5.3.2 Selecting Materials to be Tested for Compatibility Material compatibility testing using standard test vehicles and
exposed product hardware is critically important when considering a process change. Compatibility studies during the design
phase are helpful in selecting the best cleaning agent choices, process temperatures, times, and impingement energy when
exposing product hardware to the cleaning process while not materially affecting the printed circuit assembly.
5.3.2.1 Assembly Materials All materials included in the assembly process, including flux residue and cleaning agents,
should be tested for compatibility. Designing compatibility tests requires judgment. To address these concerns, short term
exposure tests are recommended on the materials of construction used to build the printed wiring assembly. Short term
means a reasonable ‘‘stress test’’ of expected process conditions. Some examples include a reasonably anticipated increase
in temperature (somewhat beyond the expected process range), higher mechanical forces, and an increase in process time.
5.3.2.2 Fixturing, Tooling, and Process Adjuncts Longer term testing from 2-weeks to 3-months may be appropriate for
materials of construction typically found in cleaning systems such as tanks, fixtures, plumbing, filtration, water treatment,
ventilation, etc.
Some factors to consider in determining equipment compatibilities include:
• Temperature.
• Solvency.
• Plastics or metals used for plumbing and long term exposure.
• O-rings, pumps, ball valves, etc.
In addition, the adverse impact of swelling, cracking and aging on fixtures must be considered, because such fixtures may
not perform properly and may recontaminate the product. Equipment vendors should be able to assist with general equip-
ment compatibility. In evaluating equipment, be sure to clearly communicate expected process conditions.
5.3.2.3 Evidence of Incompatibility Typical parameters used are weight gain or loss, elongation after exposure and
recovery of original dimensions, dimensional changes, change in color or texture of the component, and change in color or
opacity of the surrounding process fluid. In addition, surface finish, contact angle, and/or surface analysis may be deemed
appropriate.
If the product is to be used for medical applications, proximal to or within a living host, it may be prudent to consider the
impact of surface change or product changes on the host, referring to the appropriate ASTM, AAMI, and ISO standards
(especially the ISO-10993 series). This is important where the texture of the surface is crucial to functionality and where
leaching or outgassing of residue from the component could cause a problem.
31
5.3.2.4 Test Design It is generally preferable to conduct compatibility testing using the combination of materials for a
given assembly rather than to test each individual material separately. This may seem counterintuitive in that in an academic
sense it would be preferable to test each material separately; however, given the complexity of interaction among materials,
the impact of a given cleaning agent or cleaning process on a single material of construction does not reliably predict the
behavior when an entire assembly is exposed to the same cleaning agent or process.
In addition to determining process compatibility, dynamic compatibility is more likely to yield practical information than is
determining compatibility by exposure to the chemistry under static conditions.
5.3.2.4.1 Controls If the fluxing or defluxing process is to be changed but the product and/or product requirements remain
the same, and if processes exist that have been historically deemed acceptable, it is instructive and prudent to use the cur-
rent process as a control or benchmark during new process development.
5.3.3 Test Methods: Examples Standard test methods can be used for components and product hardware. Examples are
provided below; they are not meant to be exclusive or exhaustive. The test methods may not be adequate for all end-use
requirements. The appropriate method should be selected by the manufacturer.
5.3.3.1 Example: Material Compatibility on Non-Metallic Materials and Components
Scope: To measure the effect exposure to a chemical has on non-metallic substrates after 2 hours (short-term) and/or 168
hours (long-term), based on hardness and volume.
Reference: Pratt & Whitney Specification: PWA 36604 Revision B Revised 06-08-98; Compatibility with Non-Metallic
Materials.
Terminology:
• Density Change: Difference between Density after exposure minus Density before exposure.
• Hardness Change: Durometer B minus Durometer A.
• % Volume Change: Final mass less initial mass divided by initial mass X 100.
Summary of Method: This procedure records the a) density change, b) volume change and c) hardness changes of a non-
metallic substrate when exposed to a chemical for 2 hours (Short-term exposure) and 168 hours (long-term exposure).
Apparatus:
• Balance; capable of measurement to the nearest 0.1 mg.
• Durometer.
• Beaker or jar large enough to hold sample specimens.
Reagents and Materials:

• Test solution at specified concentration and temperature.
• DI water.
Procedure:
• Measure the hardness of sample substrate and record as Durometer ‘‘A.’’
• Weigh sample in air and record as ‘‘a.’’
• Weigh sample in DI water and record as ‘‘b.’’
• Expose sample substrate to the solution to be tested for 2 hours (short-term) or 168 hours (long-term) at room tempera-
ture unless otherwise specified.
• Rinse thoroughly with DI water.
• Weigh sample substrate in DI water and record as ‘‘c.’’
• Dry and measure hardness of tested substrate and record as Durometer ‘‘B.’’
32
• Calculate:
wgt in air
Initial Density: =a
wgt in air − wgt in water a−b
wgt in air
Density after exposure: = a
wgt in air − wgt in DI after exposure a−c
Density Change: Density after exposure minus density before exposure.
Hardness Change: Durometer B minus Durometer A.
(M3 − M4) − (M1 − M2)
% Volume Change: X 100
(M1 − M2)
Where: M1 = Mass of sample in air (grams) initial
M2 = Mass of sample in water (grams) initial
M3 = Mass of sample in air (grams) final
M4 = Mass of sample in water (grams) final
Notes and Comments: For long-term compatibility, expose the sample substrate to the chemical for 168 hours before tak-
ing final readings. Use separate specimens if both short-term and long-term compatibility is required.
Additional Considerations: In the case of porous samples it is essential to completely dry the sample prior to weighing to
eliminate all moisture.
5.3.3.2 Example: Material Compatibility on Metallic Alloys
Scope: To measure the effect exposure a chemical has on metallic substrates after 24 hours (Short-term) and/or 168 hours
(Long-term), based on weight change and visual observations.
Reference: ASTM F-483; Standard Test Method for Total Immersion Corrosion.
Terminology:
• Discoloration: A lightening, darkening or color change of the substrate versus a control.
• Etching: A roughening or change in the morphology of the specimen surface.
• Pitting: Holes or gouges on the substrate surface.
Summary of Method: This procedure measures the weight change and visual differences of metallic specimens after expo-
sure to specified chemicals.
Apparatus:
• Balance; capable of measurement to the nearest 0.1mg.
• Beaker or jar large enough to hold sample specimen. Use a separate jar for each metal substrate tested.
Reagents and Materials:

• Test solution at specified concentration and temperature.
• DI water.
• Acetone.
• Approximately 1 inch X 2 inch metal coupons, 2 each per alloy to be tested.
• Non-metallic abrasive pads. (Mike B to check spec)
Calculations: Report weight loss as mg/cm2/24 hours.
Procedure:
• Coupon preparation:
– Using a wet 3M abrasive pad, lightly scrub both surfaces of the metal coupon.
– Rinse with warm tap water followed by a rinse in DI water.
– Using a wash bottle, rinse with a stream of acetone.
33
– Oven dry at 120°C [248°F], then desiccate until cooled to ambient temperature.
– Weigh one of two specimens of each alloy to the nearest 0.1 mg. (Use the second specimen as a visual control.)
– Immerse the weighed specimen of each alloy in the test solution (use a separate jar for each substrate tested), at room
temperature unless otherwise specified, for 24 hours.
– Remove the test specimen and rinse with warm tap water followed by a rinse in DI water.
– Using a wash bottle, rinse with a stream of acetone.
– Oven dry at 120°C [248°F]; then desiccate until cooled to ambient temperature.
– Weigh and record.
– Calculate weight loss as mg/cm2/24hrs. (Short-term corrosion)
– Examine for and record the following visible changes in comparison to the unexposed control.
– Discoloration and dulling
– Etching
– Pitting or localized attack
– For Long-term corrosion, immerse the same coupons in the same test solution for a further 144 hours.
– Repeat steps c, d, e, f and g.
– Calculations: Report weight loss as mg/cm2/24hrs. (Long-term corrosion).
Notes and Comments:

• It is not necessary to remove specimens after 24 hours if only long-term corrosion is needed.
• In general for non-catalytic reactions the reaction rate doubles for every 10°C [50°F] temperature rise.
5.3.3.3 Product Hardware per J-STD-001 The protocols defined in the IPC Joint Industry Standard, J-STD-001 Appen-
dix, Material and Process Compatibility Testing applies for:
• Validation of all flux material changes regardless of the J-STD type designation.
• When cleaning agents are changed.
• When changes to qualified processes are proposed that include major equipment or method changes. Examples of these
types of changes include:
– Cleaning equipment changes
– Fluxing Methods
– Reflow Processes
5.3.3.3.1 Material Compatibility on Test Vehicles Test vehicles used in the material compatibility evaluation shall meet
the requirements defined in J-STD-001 Appendix, Material and Process Compatibility Testing, section titled, ‘‘Test
Assembly.’’
• Test Vehicles* selected shall provide for assessment of various component technologies and packages with both through-
hole and surface mounted components, including fine pitch and BGA devices. To facilitate testing the test vehicles shall
include ‘‘Y’’ and Comb patterns defined by IPC and Telcordia Technologies specifications. Test vehicles shall be fabricated
with the same type substrate, metallization, and solder-resist that represent the actual product.
• Manufacturing of the test samples shall represent the proposed production processes. Samples built with an isolated pro-
cess may not adequately represent the true production environment. Residues from other process steps may cause interac-
tions that must be considered in the total test.
• Minimum sample size for each material/process combination tested shall be 10 vehicles, consistent with J-STD-001
Appendix section titled, ‘‘Sample Size,’’ unless otherwise agreed to between the assembler and OEM.
• Testing shall include substrate materials and finishes per IPC-SMA-840. To establish baseline data, at least one bare board
for each substrate and/or mask type shall be tested.
*Note: In the context of compatibility studies Test Vehicles can mean any material, alloy, or component that may be used
on your assembly.
34
5.3.3.3.2 Material and Process Compatibility Testing of Actual PCB Samples Several input facts may have significant
impact on PCB performance, quality, and long-term reliability. Effects of these factors are important since they would only
become evident on actual product hardware. These factors include the following:
• Actual manufacturing processes, equipment, methods, production conditions, and skills.
• Variation within the materials and processes.
• Actual board layouts and conditions affecting soldering and cleaning results.
• Component and substrate conditions.
• Interactions between the raw materials, processes, and chemistries.
PCBs selected shall represent the most challenging assemblies of each product hardware type including through-hole, sur-
face mount, fine pitch, BGA, mixed technology, high frequency, and power circuits. Suggested sample size is 10 units.
Note: Where possible it would be beneficial to test actual customer samples.

The materials, methods of application, equipment, and processes used to produce the test samples shall be consistent with
actual production hardware. Testing of PCBs shall include optical, mechanical, and surface evaluations.
Note: Where appropriate, extractive techniques should also be used. If materials with expected high batch to batch vari-
ability are used, it may be appropriate to identify those critical or sensitive materials and to expand the tests to include more
than one batch number.
5.3.4 ASTM and Other Testing Standards ASTM publishes standards to assist design engineers, manufacturing/industrial
engineers, and process engineers in selecting the best fit cleaning agent and process.7 To determine materials compatibility
with the cleaning process, the ASTM Standards in Section 2 document material compatibility requirements.
It should also be noted that there are many other corrosion standards. A web search yields a large number of entries. Some
are functional; others involve direct detection of products of corrosion. Examples include NACE (National Association of
Corrosion Engineers), ISO, and EFC (European Federation of Corrosion), GfKorr (German Association on Corrosion). The
appropriate test for corrosion may be customer-driven.
5.4 The Effects of Lead-Free on PCB Assembly Lead-free soldering has the potential to increase material compatibility
concerns. Many of the PCB assembly board finishes, laminates, and components will change to withstand soldering tem-
peratures of up to 260°C [500°F]. PCB board finishes are moving away from hot-air-solder leveling to coplanar require-
ments for fine-pitch surface mount assemblies. Coplanar boards finishes such as OSP over copper, immersion silver, immer-
sion tin and electroless nickel over immersion gold exhibit a shorter shelf life and are more susceptible to corrosive effects.
Flux compositions will be based on higher molecular weight materials that improve thermal stability, decrease surface ten-
sion, and greater fluxing capacity.2
Higher soldering temperatures, miniaturization, and increased fluxing power will change flux residues. Higher molecular
weight flux residues may be more difficult to clean due to thermal effects, more complex ingredients, and increased side
reactions during reflow. Cleaning materials, cleaning equipment and process conditions may also change. Assemblies may
be exposed to longer wash cycles (i.e., longer chemistry exposure), increased impingement energy, heat and time. These
factors will influence material compatibility concerns.
The following sub-sections will discuss compatibility concerns relevant to PCB Fabrication, Components, Board & Compo-
nent Finishes, Assembly Materials, and Assembly Equipment. Design Issues are discussed in a separate section.
5.4.1 PCB Fabrication In general, from a ‘‘user’’ cleaning standpoint there should be a seamless transition from traditional
tin-lead to lead-free based materials of construction. However, solder mask used and board finishes may be affected by the
higher temperatures used in lead free PCB fabrication. See Paragraph 5.5.6 regarding improper solder mask cure.
5.4.2 Components In a manufacturing process using tin-lead soldering materials, concern was focused on component
geometry and process capability in the areas of solder paste printing, component placement, and reflow soldering. Rarely
were the temperature tolerances or maximum ramp rates of the components a consideration. Tin-lead reflow temperatures
almost never exceeded the maximum allowable temperature and seldom exceeded the maximum allowable ramp rate. Lead-
free materials require a clearer understanding of the component specification. Assuming the temperature tolerance or mois-
ture sensitivity level of a component is compatible with a lead-free manufacturing process can be a costly mistake.
35
Component cleaning issues include part marking removal, metallic alloy attack, surface coating removal, and entrapment by
non-hermetically sealed components. Assemblers need to assure that the component construction is compatible with the
cleaning process. Post cleaning process; verify component performance, part mark marking adhesion, component finish per-
manency, moisture sensitivity level (MSL per J-STD-020) and pH levels should be considered.
5.4.3 Board and Component Finishes Common lead-free PCB surface finishes include electroless nickel/immersion gold
(ENIG), immersion tin (ImSn), immersion silver (ImAg), and organic solderability preservative (OSP). These surface fin-
ishes will be more susceptible to corrosion and shelf life concerns. In contrast, HASL (hot-air-solder leveling) finishes offer
good corrosion protection due to the high thickness of sacrificial metal. Roughly 50 microns of relatively passive tin-lead
separates copper circuitry from environmental effects, including the cleaning process. Alternative coplanar finishes protect
the metal from corrosive effects by using a thin protective coating. Organic protective coatings used over copper and silver
finishes can be compromised during the soldering, reflow and cleaning process.
5.4.4 Assembly Materials Tin, silver, and copper alloys are the predominant choice to replace tin-lead alloys. Lead-free
materials must be able to survive multiple 260°C [500°F] reflow cycles without impacting reliability. Extreme temperatures
can break chemical bonds, and weaken materials. Multiple reflow cycles may create a material compatibility concern to sol-
dering materials that are exposed to the cleaning process. Higher temperature flux resins and activators may require stron-
ger cleaning agents and higher impingement energy to clean.
When exposing laminates to higher temperatures, glass transition temperature (Tg), coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE)
and decomposition temperature are data points to consider. The glass transition temperature of the resin system is the tem-
perature at which the material transitions from a rigid state to a softened state. CTE measures the material expansion both
below and above the Tg glass transition. Overheating laminates and components can cause some materials elements to
decompose. These effects often become apparent when the parts are subjected to the cleaning process.
Many factors influence solder paste selection, including printability, stencil life, pin testability, tack, reflow window, joint
cosmetics, and cleaning. Assemblers must determine which factors are most important and prioritize their selection accord-
ingly. Long, hot thermal excursions present a worst-case scenario for flux residues. An assembly should be tested under an
anticipated fast thermal excursion, using a shorter time above liquidus and lower peak temperature. Changes in paste and
potentially flux chemistries may require changes in cleaning chemistries, for both wet paste (stencil & misprint cleaning)
and post-assembly cleaning. A further consideration of misprint cleaning is second side misprints on double-sided SMT
boards. In this case, it is important to characterize the interaction of the misprint cleaning chemistry with the reflowed flux
residues and board finish.
As industry transitions to lead-free, communication and collaboration between material suppliers and customers is needed
to understand and plan for the material effects to support high temperatures required for assembly. Assemblers will need to
understand the reflow process and profile - peak temperatures, ramp and effects on reliability and cleaning. Where assem-
blies are further incorporated into higher-level assemblies or products that have specific performance requirements, commu-
nication between the assembly supplier and the customer is also needed.
5.4.5 Assembly Equipment Transitioning to lead-free assembly will require equipment upgrades to support the process.
Cleaning equipment may require longer wash sections and mechanical impingement considerations. Production hardware
may be exposed to higher chemical and mechanical effects, which can include highly alkaline and caustic materials. The
impact on the assembly of the combination of cleaning agent and the cleaning equipment must be considered. Optimizing
the process creates an increased level of importance on design for cleaning. Materials selection for ease of cleaning will be
an important consideration.
Peripheral equipment such as wave soldering pallets should be part of material considerations. Wave pallets will be exposed
to longer thermal cycles with slower to longer thermal cycles, slower conveyor speeds and longer contact times in wave.
They may need more frequent cleaning.
Printability of solder pastes depend heavily on flux formulation. Cleanliness of the stencil increases due to the concern of
lead-free print accuracy. Lead-free alloys do not spread or wet as well as tin-lead alloys. The lead-free solder paste that is
not accurately printed onto the printed circuit board does not self-center like tin-lead solder paste did and may stay close to
where it was printed after the reflow soldering process.
5.5 Design Issues and Compatibility The following sub-sections discuss the implications of component and assembly
miniaturization, plus the effects of increased density.
36
5.5.1 The Effects of Miniaturization The next generation in packaging is ever expanding to meet the emerging needs of
products based on digital technologies. Assemblers are increasingly concerned with the surrounding thermal management
and robustness for physically smaller systems. Compatibility between materials systems used in silicon fabrication, first-level
packaging, and electronic systems is becoming challenging.
Materials challenges exist in developing new materials and using existing materials in new applications. Packaging innova-
tions are moving toward heterogeneous integration of various silicon types into one component. Using existing materials in
new combinations invokes design and processing considerations that push the envelope of materials compatibility. This may
require more integrated development across design, process, and materials disciplines.
Large advances in power control at the silicon level are being made. The shrinking of packages for mobility and stacking
of memory makes heat dissipation more difficult at the individual package level, as does the tight packing of multiple devices
into one mobile application. Similar concerns about low viscosity, improved adhesion, moisture resistance, moisture entrap-
ment compliancy, toughness, and CTE are being addressed for molding compounds and die-attach adhesives and films used
for stacked-die packages. Indirect materials used in processing such as temporary adhesives, fluxes, cleaning materials, and
coatings during assembly processes are increasing in complexity. Tailoring the chemistries of such materials has become
crucial to eliminate detrimental interactions of these materials with in situ direct materials or residues left after processing.
5.5.2 Density of Components Assemblies that are densely populated and that have low standoff are more likely to require
a rigorous, cleaning process, including extended time, higher temperature, stronger cleaning force, and more active chemis-
tries. It is also more likely that flux residue and even some cleaning agent residue will remain trapped under the component,
which could lead to corrosion or electrochemical migration. The impact on surface quality and component integrity should
be considered.
5.5.3 Specific Compatibility Examples A number of different materials and sub-assemblies such as assorted components,
labels, part markings, coatings, bonding materials, and solder masks are associated with post solder cleaning processes. It
is very difficult to locate data on each and every possible combination of process chemicals and component finishes. The
following sub-sections provide examples of compatibility issues. These examples highlight the importance of testing the
suitability of hardware with the cleaning agent and process before production begins.
5.5.3.1 Anodized Aluminum and Conversion Coatings The first example comprises an in-depth discussion of anodized
aluminum and chemical conversion coating problems that can be encountered during the cleaning process, especially dur-
ing the manufacture of Class 3 assemblies. Examples encountered with solder masks, adhesives, inks and coatings are also
described to help the reader prevent cleaning agent/electronic assembly materials problems in their production facilities.
The annodization of aluminum is applied on heat sinks and some components on Class III circuit assemblies for corrosion
resistance, abrasion resistance, electrical insulation, adhesion, and aesthetic enhancement.8 Anodizing is the development and
control of a natural oxidation coating to protect aluminum from atmospheric conditions using electrochemical process to
produce a hard, transparent surface.9
5.5.3.2 MIL-A-8625F Anodic Coatings for Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys
1.1 Scope: This specification covers the requirements for six types and two classes of electrolytically formed anodic coat-
ings on aluminum and aluminum alloys for non-architectural applications.
1.2 1 Types: Six types are called out in the specification.

Type I: Chromic acid anodizing, conventional coatings produced from chromic acid bath (see 3.4.1)
Type IB: Chromic acid anodizing, low voltage process, 22 ± 2V. (see 3.4.1)
Type IC: Non-chromic acid anodizing, for use as a non-chromate alternative for Type I and IB coatings (see 3.4.1 and 6.1.2)
Type II: Sulfuric acid anodizing, conventional coatings produced from sulfuric acid bath (see 3.4.2)
Type IIB: Thin sulfuric acid anodizing, for use as a non-chromate alternative for Type I and IB coatings (see 3.4.2 and 6.1.2)
Type III: Hard Anodic Coatings (see MIL-A-8625F 3.4.3)
37
Important requirements in this standard (MIL-A-8625F) that apply to electronic assemblies:
3.3.1.2 Anodizing of assemblies: The processing method used shall not result in subsequent damage to the assembly.
3.3.4 Touch up (mechanical damage and contact marks): Mechanical damage areas (from the cleaning process) shall not
exceed 5% of the total anodized area or touch up shall not be permitted.
3.4.3 Type III Coatings (Commonly applied to electronic hardware): Type III coatings shall be prepared by any process
operation to produce a heavy dense coating of specified thickness on aluminum alloys (see 3.7.2.1).
3.8.2 Type III: Sealing for Type III coatings shall be accomplished by immersion in a medium, such as boiling DI water,
in a hot aqueous 5% sodium dichromate solution, or other suitable chemical solutions.
4.3.4 Failure: Failure to conform shall result in immediate halt of production.
6.11 Duplex Sealing: The corrosion resistance may be enhanced by treatment in a sodium dichromate solution either dur-
ing or after conventional sealing with nickel acetate.
6.15 Sealing: Hot DI water seal is advantageous.
5.5.3.3 MIL-DTL-5541E Chemical Conversion Coatings on Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys
1.1 Scope: This specification covers the requirements for two classes of chemical conversion coatings formed by the reac-
tion of chemical conversion materials and the surfaces of aluminum and aluminum alloys. This specification is intended
specifically to provide components of military weapon systems with maximum corrosion resistance. The coating also pro-
vides a surface having better paint adhesion than uncoated aluminum.
Important requirements in this standard that apply to electronic assemblies:
1.2 Class 3: Class 3 chemical conversion coatings are intended for use as a corrosion preventive film for electrical and
electronic application where lower resistance contacts, relative to Class 1A coatings, and anodic coatings in accordance with
MIL-A-8625. The primary difference between Class 1A and Class 3 coating is thickness, since current passes more readily
through a thinner current resistant barrier. Coating thickness is varied by immersion time. Because Class 3 is thinner, the
coating is more susceptible to corrosion than Class 1A coatings.
1.3 Cleaners: Use of a non-etch cleaner is preferred, particularly on wrought alloys. If an etch is used, caution should be
taken to prevent pitting or intergranular attack. This is particularly important when using an alkaline etch because the alu-
minum tends to be more soluble than its alloying elements and existing intermetallics, such as copper, may be further
exposed. As a result, alkaline etching should be avoided (particularly when cleaning assembled structures). If an alkaline
etch is used, it should always be followed by an acid neutralization step.
1.4 Visual appearance: The simplest way to evaluate a conversion coating is to observe color, uniformity of appearance,
smoothness, and adhesion to the base metal. Note: For Type I (hexavalent chromium containing) coatings, Cr+6 can be
leached from the coating but loss of color is not necessarily a cause for concern or failure.
1.5 Temperature effects on corrosion protection: Unpainted conversion coatings will commence losing corrosion resis-
tance properties if exposed to temperatures of 140°F [60°C] or higher, during drying, subsequent fabrication, or service.
As temperatures and exposure times increase, the corrosion protection of unpainted conversion coated parts decreases.
The reduction is believed to result from the coating dehydrating and the resulting insolubility of the chromates within the
coating.
5.5.3.4 Anodize Structure The anodic coating (typically a form of Al2O3 -aluminum-oxide) consists of a hexagonal cel-
lular structure and within each cell is a pore. The density of the coating is the size and number of cell and pores within a
given surface area. This can often be indirectly measured by using coating weights and number of cycles on a Taber Abra-
sion tester, prior to breakthrough. The pore size and cellular structure are determined by electronic field effects. The pore
size depends linearly upon the anodic voltage and upon the electrolyte pH. The number of cells is due to the current den-
sity, as is the rate of growth.
38
Hardcoat anodizing allows a higher current density to be applied without the parts burning (increases the rate of growth/cell
density), and slows down the rate of dissolution, thus allowing thicker and more dense coatings. Anodizing additives work
by reducing the rate of dissolution and at the same time allowing higher current densities, thus still causing a dense/thick
coating. Additives work by affecting the pH and conductivity of anodizing electrolyte at the surface of the part.
5.5.3.5 Root Cause of Anodized Attack The common mode of attack on an anodized surface is based on a chemical
interaction between the cleaning agent and the aluminum oxide/hydroxide which is amphoteric and therefore soluble in
acidic as well as alkaline solutions. Various inhibitors are currently being used with alkaline products. pH neutral products
also eliminate the attack of anodized materials.
5.5.3.6 Improper Seal during Application Coating Anod-

ized coating that is not properly sealed using hot sodium
dichromate, nickel acetate, and hot DI water will fade, and/or
be removed during the cleaning process. Figure 5-1 illustrates
a board that was properly sealed using hot DI water on one
side and the other side not sealed. The board was exposed to
an aqueous spray-in-air cleaning process.
5.5.3.6.1 Cleaning Agent Attack on Anodized Coatings

Alkaline cleaning solutions tend to dissolve anodized coatings
and chemically attack the exposed aluminum. Electronic
assembly aqueous cleaning fluids that drive with high levels
of alkalinity increase the rate of attack. Other factors such as
exposure time and temperature can accelerate the chemical
attack. The anodized seal breaks down at the top of the oxide
cell, which can trap moisture into the hexagonal cellular struc-
ture. The cleaning process slowly eats away at the anodized
structure. Once dried, the annodization will fade, and in extra-
neous attacks, expose the aluminum surface. Figure 5-2 illus-
trates an example of chemical attack to the anodized heat sink
Figure 5-1 DI Water Sealed vs. Not Sealed
from exposure during post solder cleaning.
5.5.3.6.2 pH neutral and Low Alkalinity Cleaning Solu-

tions Alternative cleaning agents formulated with pH neu-
tral, low levels of alkalinity, and DI water can be less likely
to attack anodized aluminum and other sensitive metals.
While traditionally high alkaline products have been known to
be very effective at flux removal, technologies low in alkalin-
ity improves material compatibility on anodized coatings.
5.5.4 Black Oxide (Conversion Coating) MIL-F-495E calls

out the specification for Black Oxide coating to protect Cop-
per Alloys. This uniform black corrosion retarding coating for
copper and copper alloys is used for some components used
in military and space hardware. The MIL-spec indicates that
the finish shall show no more than a slight change in color or
appearance post cleaning on electronic hardware.
Similar to anodized coatings over aluminum, black oxide
coating is susceptible to attack when exposed to highly alka-
line electronic cleaning fluids. Aqueous cleaning materials that
are formulated with high levels of alkalinity tend to attack and
remove black oxide from components during the post clean-
ing process. It is suggested that users investigate alternative Figure 5-2 Cleaning Chemistry Attack
products to achieve more favorable materials compatibility
properties.
39
5.5.5 Inductor Coil Attack The inductor coil has a polyurethane coating over the wire coils. The cleaning agent softened
and blistered the polyurethane coating during the cleaning process. Figure 5-3 illustrates before and after cleaner exposure.
Figure 5-3 Polyurethane Coating Attack by Cleaning Solution
5.5.6 Solder Masks Solder Masks are subjected to a wide array of both short and long term testing before their arrival at
the assembler/user. The current industry accepted document for qualification and performance of permanent solder mask is
IPC-SM-840C. When issued in January 1996, IPC-SMT-840C changed from three Class Designations (Class 1, 2, & 3) to
two Class Designations - Class T (Telecommunications) and Class H (High Reliability). Class T is equivalent to Class 2 and
Class H is equivalent to Class 3. Class 1 was not adopted under a new class since it was found that the majority of ven-
dors and fabricators qualified/tested mainly to Classes 2 and 3. Class T was primarily structured from the input of Telcordia
(formerly known as Bellcore) representatives to image the TR-NWT-000078 (new revision of GR-78-CORE), Section 13.2
Polymeric Coatings and Adhesive Materials.
5.5.6.1 UV Solder Masks UV cured solder masks can be a problem if users do not monitor the decreasing UV lamp out-
put over the life of the lamps. While incandescent lamps go from full to zero light all at once, UV lamps lose intensity
gradually over time. Users can compensate for this by increasing the time under the lamps as intensity drops. Incompletely
cured masks can finish curing by heat during exposure to molten solder, where they can bind solder dross and other resi-
dues to the mask surface that are not readily removed by cleaning processes.
Figure 5-4, 5-5, and 5-6 illustrate the appearance of solder
mask after one, two or three factory standard UV cure cycles,
followed by soldering. The UV lamp output had decreased to
the point that three standard cure cycles were required to get
the proper cure. The lesson here is that the solder mask may
not be incompatible with the cleaning process, but the cure
process is the root problem.
5.5.6.2 Dry Film Solder Masks Dry Film Solder Masks

were initially used to protect copper traces (Solder Mask Over
Bare Copper, SMOBC), but cleaning materials have been
known to penetrate under the dry mask film causing the film
to blister and lift away from copper traces. This generally
occurs in areas where the solder mask coverage is the thinnest Figure 5-4 UV Solder Mask Curing Problem Example
such as the corners of circuit lines or tented/plugged via pads,
or at the mask sidewall interface to a circuit line on a devel-
oped out pad.
The solder mask chemistry and thickness are significant in determining the dwell time the masks can withstand exposure to
different cleaning processes and materials before the mask breaks down and lifts. Generally, multiple cleaning cycles which
include both the chemical and mechanical energy can have a cumulative effect on the solder mask. A second condition could
be moisture entrapment after the cleaning process; a drying or bake out process can alleviate the problem.
40
Figure 5-5 UV Solder Mask Curing Problem Example Figure 5-6 UV Solder Mask Curing Problem Example
DuPont conducted testing on dry film solder mask and found the amount of time that the solder mask is exposed to the
cleaning process is critical. If multiple cleaning cycles are used, or if the cleaning cycle dwell times exceed normal cycles,
the solder mask may be attacked or lifted off the board. DuPont’s testing indicates that dry film solder masks will hold up
to fluorinated vapor degreasing electronic cleaner for 15-30 minutes, to semi-aqueous cleaners for 15-60 minutes, and alka-
line aqueous cleaners for 1-5 minutes. Figure 5-7 illustrates examples of dry film solder mask lifting and removal post
cleaning.
Figure 5-7 Dry Film Lifting and Removal Post Cleaning
5.5.7 Flex Circuits Medical Electronics implantable circuitry requires miniaturized components and circuit assemblies.
The example in Figure 5-8 illustrates the effect of exposure of flex components to cleaning chemistries for 24 hours at double
the concentration and at a temperature of 71°C [160°F]. This experiment exposed the circuits to aqueous cleaning chemis-
tries to gain an understanding of a worst case scenario should an assembly be overexposed to the cleaning process. A note
of caution is needed since many components can be damaged when exposed to cleaning agents and processes outside their
design limitations. Long term testing is also useful in identifying material sets that interact and impact material properties
from overexposure.
Figure 5-8 Extended Aqueous Cleaning Chemistry Exposure
5.5.8 Solder Joint Attack Highly alkaline cleaning agents react with soft metals, such as solders, and with exposure time
form an oxidation layer on the surface of the solder joint. The attack is a function of wash time, concentration, and the level
of alkalinity. Alkaline cleaner attack can be reduced using inhibition technology within the cleaning composition. Properly
formulated inhibitor packages protect the solder alloy during the wash process by forming a protective skin layer over the
41
alloy. Poorly inhibited cleaning agents turn solder joints bluish grey. Alkaline, non-inhibited cleaning agents turn the solder
joint dark grey and even black if exposed for an extended period of time. Figure 5-9 illustrates examples of solder joint
appearance post cleaning.
Figure 5-9 Solder Joint Appearance Examples
5.5.9 Part Marking/Labels Emerging industry trends toward higher temperature reflow, higher solvency cleaning materi-
als, longer wash cycles, and higher impingement. These factors increase the demands on part marking and label stock. Test-
ing response data indicate the following:
• Higher thermal reflow profiles may break down the label stock. Polyester and some polyimide label stocks may not hold
to the higher temperature reflow.
• Higher solvency cleaning materials may affect ink/ribbon combinations commonly used in the assembly process.
• Aqueous chemistries with increased alkalinity may affect ink/ribbon and label stock combinations commonly used in the
assembly process.
• High impingement energy in combination with longer wash cycles and elevated wash temperatures may soften label adhe-
sives, thus causing the label to be removed during the cleaning process.
On the positive side of this problem, label stock and ink/ribbon suppliers are aware of these issues and have developed
alternative materials that will hold up to these more demanding cleaning processes. Polyimide and Kapton« label stock
materials show good chemical resistance but there may still be a concern with the adhesive used to apply those labels. Heat
cure of the adhesive has been shown to improve resistance. As for ink/ribbon, the selection of the ink/ribbon needs to be
based on whether the ink will see a heat exposure before cleaning (reflow). The heat exposure helps to set the ink and
improve its permanency during the cleaning process. If the label and/or component do not see a heat exposure, the selec-
tion of ink is more critical. Cleaning material companies and label/ink suppliers work collaboratively to test label stock and
ink/ribbon materials and combinations.
Prior to selecting a label or ink marking for your application, these materials need to be tested for compatibility with the
cleaning material, wash temperature, wash time, and impingement energy delivered during multiple cleaning processes.
5.5.10 Adhesives PCB assemblers used a range of adhesives to attach components on various parts of the circuit board.
Material types such as RTV, epoxy, cyanoacrylate, acrylic, urethane, potting compounds, and anaerobic materials are com-
monly used. These material types may be attacked, with the bond weakened during cleaning operations. Similar to labels
and part markings, these materials need to be properly cured or applied prior to testing for compatibility with the cleaning
material, wash temperature, wash time, and impingement energy delivered during the cleaning process.
5.5.11 Conformal Coating Adhesion Conformal coating material, application process, and curing are the critical factors
in the conformal coating process. Factors resulting in failures to conformal coating and wetting are improper cleaning,
bubble/voids, and poor adhesion. Ionic contaminant left behind post cleaning can cause conformal coating mealing. Process
defects, due to poor cleaning, can cause poor adhesion/dewetting of conformal coating to the component and component
leads. Residue beneath components, on solder joints, and assembly surface can lead to poor adhesion/dewetting of confor-
mal coatings to component and component leads. Various labels use different adhesive types that can lead to poor adhesion/
dewetting of conformal coatings around the label.
In addition, if the conformal coating will be reworked, compatibility of the cured coating with the cleaning process should
be determined. (See Sections 13.3 and 13.4 for rework information.)
42
6 PROCESS DEVELOPMENT AND VERIFICATION
6.1 Introduction In any manufacturing process, it becomes necessary, from time to time, to change the materials of con-
struction or the manufacturing processes/parameters used to make printed assemblies. This may be due to many possible
factors:
• A material becomes unavailable, either through environmental regulation, through market factors or the material formula-
tion changes.
• New materials representing improved performance or price become available.
• Manufacturing equipment wears out, requiring replacement.
• Changes in the quality of materials provided by suppliers All materials must be qualified prior to entry into the manufac-
turing process.
Consequently, a manufacturer is faced with the task of determining whether the ‘‘new’’ assembly material/process produces
products that are as good as or better than the ‘‘old’’ or ‘‘qualified’’ assembly materials/processes, and generating data to
support such an evaluation. There are many elements which should go into this decision. This chapter focuses on the deter-
mination of the cleanliness of manufactured assemblies and materials compatibility considerations. The approach outlined in
this chapter works best in a ProcessA vs. Process B comparison evaluation, rather than development of a completely new
process, although it can be used as such.
Table 6-1 is a listing of IPC specifications that are used for testing, qualification, and evaluation of the most common elec-
tronics building materials. A process professional should be familiar with each of these documents.
Table 6-2 is a listing of IPC performance specifications that often relate how materials are evaluated on electronic assem-
blies, and define how materials must perform, especially for Class 3, high performance electronics.
Table 6-1 Material Qualification Specifications and Methods

Standard Requirements
ANSI/JSTD-004 Requirements for Solder Fluxes
ANSI/JSTD-005 Requirements and Test Methods for Solder Paste
Requirements for Electronics Grade Solder Alloys and Fluxed and Non-fluxed Solid Solders for Electronic
ANSI/JSTD-006
Soldering
IPC-TM-650 IPC Test Methods Manual
IPC-9201 Surface Insulation Resistance Handbook
Telcordia GR-78-CORE Electro-migration Testing
IPC-SM-840 Qualification and Performance of Permanent Solder Mask
IPC-CC-830 Qualification and Performance of Electrical Insulation
Table 6-2 Performance Specifications

IPC-A-600 Acceptability of Printed Circuit Boards
ANSI/JSTD-001 Requirements for Soldered Electrical and Electronic Assemblies
Test Methods for Electronic Materials, Interconnection Structures and Assemblies - Part 5: Test Methods for
IEC 61189-5
Printed Board Assemblies
There is no one single method for determining validation of a new manufacturing process. The amount and nature of the
data generated depends on the product being produced, the consequences of failure (e.g., life support), and the end-use cus-
tomer. In general, a three phase approach is considered by many as a sound method of evaluation:
• Phase 1 - Screening experiments with inexpensive test vehicles.
• Phase 2 - Validation experiments with more representative test vehicles.
• Phase 3 - Verification runs on manufactured assemblies (e.g., first article inspection).
• Phase 4 - Technology and materials never stand still.
Conceptually, when a manufacturing process is improved and validated, there is always more work that should be done in
terms of continuous improvement, process control, closed loop controls, operator controls, etc. The improved process should
43
be integrated into the company’s quality system and workmanship standards, and statistical process control methods should
be implemented. See IPC-9191 for more information on statistical process control methods.
Including the customer in the design and evaluation of these efforts is highly recommended as it ensures that the experimen-
tal approach is acceptable.
For the purposes of this document, there is no standard definition of ‘‘validation,’’ ‘‘verification,’’ ‘‘screening,’’ or other such
terms. Different people and organizations use these terms differently. As an example, NASA refers to Phase 1 experimenta-
tion as ‘‘Characterization’’; Phase 2 work as ‘‘Performance and Context’’; and Phase 3 work as ‘‘Screening.’’ Similarly,
terms like ‘‘pilot program’’ may mean a few units, or a single manufacturing line, or an entire manufacturing facility. It is
important to come to a consensus on terminology whenever these kinds of test programs are initiated.
Another important consideration is the documentation that goes along with a process development/validation effort. The
documentation should be complete enough that another company could exactly reproduce the testing five years in the future.
The documentation should include dates for all testing, especially the dates when the manufacturing changes become imple-
mented on manufactured products. This becomes invaluable if field failures need to be tracked back to the root cause.
The following sections are provided to give the reader an idea of the primary elements of a Phase 1-3 validation effort.
6.2 Phase 1 Tests In a Phase 1 test, the main effects for materials interactions are examined. Only the grossest incom-
patibilities are found. A Phase 1 test is designed to answer the question - does it work?
By far, the most common Phase 1 test vehicle is the IPC-B-24
standard test board, shown in Figure 6-1. The IPC-B-24 board
was originally designed in the early 1990s as a test vehicle
that could be used to test the interactions among laminate,
surface metallizations, and fluxes primarily in a wave solder
application. The test board was first used in the IPC CFC
replacement experiments to evaluate various fluxes as alterna-
tives to high solids rosins. IPC-TP-1043 and -1044 contain
more historical data. The choice of 16 mil lines and 20 mil
spaces was chosen by the researchers as a spacing that could
be consistently wave soldered in the face down orientation
without solder bridging from the wave. The values of 16 and
20 were 0.4 mm and 0.5 mm [0.016in and 0.02in] respectively
and showed that Americans can occasionally use metric val-
Figure 6-1 Solder Paste with Beads
ues, if absolutely necessary. The contact fingers were designed
to be 50 mil pads on 100 mil centers, such that hardwire
attachment and edge card connectors could be used to test
these boards.
The B24 board has worked well for flux/substrate interactions, as well as interactions between fluxes, such as solder paste
residues and liquid rework fluxes.
One lesson learned to pass along regards the design of stencils for evaluating printed solder paste on the B-24 (or similar)
boards. If the paste is printed ONLY in the area of finger overlap, the solder paste will often exhibit a tendency to bead, as
shown in the photo. This can be remedied by extending the printed paste up onto the common bus bars of each comb. Dur-
ing reflow, the solder paste will wet out onto the copper bus bars and the solder thieving will prevent the beading. This is
true of many of the IPC test boards with inter-digitized contact fingers.
Advantages
• Very simple board (print and etch).
• Ground circuits isolate the combs.
• Least expensive test board in the IPC inventory.
• Results compare to other programs which use this board.
• SIR data for this board already exists, if a flux/paste is J-STD-004 qualified,
• Acceptable SIR test vehicle for both IPC and Bellcore materials testing.
• No component assembly (easy to process, nearly goof-proof).
44
Disadvantages
• Very simple board (may not reflect product complexity).
• 20 mil spacings may not be representative of product.
• Solder mask not normally part of this board (but can be added).
• J-STD-004 qualifications done only on unprotected bare copper.
• Technically cannot be used for Bellcore electromigration resistance testing.
• No component assembly (no reflow or cleaning challenges).
While J-STD-004 specifies epoxy-glass laminate with bare copper surface finish, it is not uncommon for process investiga-
tors to have this test board fabricated from other resin systems (e.g., polyimide), with solder mask applied, and with vari-
ous surface finishes (e.g., immersion silver) applied. While not exactly proper, the 100 megohm pass-fail criteria of J-STD-
004 is often used for these alternate material B24 evaluations.
The use of the B24 board as a Phase 1 test vehicle is common because it has the following characteristics:
• It is inexpensive, so large numbers (more replicates) can be used to examine a wider range of materials or interactions. It
is recommended that three replicates be used as a minimum to get some idea of variability.
• Each test board has four identical comb patterns, increasing the statistical strength of the generated data.
• The Gerber files are public domain and so the boards can be built by any desired fabricator.
• Most independent test labs that service the electronics industry are fixtured to do SIR testing on this board.
The B24 board has been used for:
• Surface finish qualification.
• Surface finish interactions with solder fluxes and solder pastes.
• Interactive effects of solder paste residues and liquid/paste fluxes used in rework.
• Studies of topical cleaning chemicals and hand cleaning processes.
• Compatibility studies between flux residues and conformal coating.
Whatever test vehicle is used, the investigator should be looking for the following:
• Electrochemical failure mechanisms.
– Excessive leakage currents in humid environments
– Electrolytic corrosion or other visual evidence of attack
– Electrochemical migration or dendritic growth.
• Visual degradation to the test vehicle using evaluation criteria such as IPC-A-610.
For a more extensive coverage of available SIR test vehicles, the reader is referred to IPC-9201, The SIR Handbook,
Appendix C.
6.3 Phase 2 Tests and Considerations In a classic three Phase evaluation, Phase 2 is often where people need the most
guidance. The processing of elementary boards, such as an IPC-B-24 test board used in Phase 1 investigations, is well known
and well documented. Many manufacturers are very familiar with their own manufactured hardware and the tests used to
qualify them for a customer, Phase 3 considerations are almost entirely product specific.
Therefore, more information is needed on test vehicles, which are more complex than materials qualification boards, but
which yield good information on materials/process compatibility.
In a Phase 2 analysis, there are several overall goals:
• Make the assembly materials of construction more representative of product and sources of supply.
• Evaluate the chemistry set to assure that it will clean, before adding in factors of more complex circuitry, segregating
chemical effects from hardware effects.
• Perform an initial materials compatibility assessment with a standard test vehicle with accepted pass-fail parameters before
moving on to the more complex and more expensive Phase 3 work.
• Gain customer concurrence before moving on to the more complex and more expensive Phase 3 work.
• Identify the residue which results.
45
6.3.1 Phase 2 Test Vehicles Over the past 20 years, there have been a number of test vehicles used for Phase 2 types of
analysis. The more commonly used vehicles are outlined here.
6.3.1.1 IPC-B-36 The IPC-B-36 test board (see Figure 6-2)

was originally designed as part of the IPC CFC replacement
experiments run in the late 1980s. IPC-TR-580 shows much
of the research done with this test vehicle. IPC-TP-831 spe-
cifically talks to the design of this test vehicle. The test
vehicle was double sided with many through-holes, and was
designed for SIR testing. The success of the CFC alternatives
testing (IPC-TR-580, -581, -582) led the DoD MIL-STD-2000
committee to use this test vehicle to qualify new fluxes or
cleaning processes for military hardware. The qualification
protocol can be found in archive versions of Appendix A of
MIL-STD-2000A. The DoD MIL-STD-2000 committee also Figure 6-2 IPC-B-36 test Board
was active in the development of J-STD-001, and so became

an accepted test vehicle for the earliest revisions of that IPC
specification.
MIL-STD-2000A was cancelled without replacement in 1995. However, use of the B-36 test vehicle continued for several
years in order to satisfy requirements of older military contracts. Even though MIL-STD-2000 was cancelled long ago,
defense contractors are often held to the specification requirements due to contractual requirements established during that
time period. Qualifying to old MIL-STD-2000 requirements is often the more cost efficient path to take for low volume
products when the alternatives would call for a massive requalification effort.
While more current version of J-STD-001 allow for other test vehicles, many defense contractors still use the B-36 test board
for qualification purposes. The contact fingers of the board are normally gold plated for compatibility with edge card con-
nectors. The remaining metallization is normally bare copper, but could be any surface finish. A very limited amount of sol-
der mask is used (dots or bumps) to give the LCCs a 5 mil standoff.
The advantages and disadvantages of this test vehicle for a Phase 2 test are outlined below:
Advantages
• Mixed technology board - can test both solder paste and wave solder effects.
• Has ground/guard circuits to isolate all SIR test patterns.
• Relatively inexpensive with both SMT and through holes.
• Can compare results to other programs which use this board.
• Fair amount of process qualification information is available using this vehicle.
• Can test for cleaning effects and flux entrapment.
• Presents a thermal challenge or thermal shadow area.
• 6 mil patterns more representative of actual product.
• Can use to test rework or touch-up soldering.
Disadvantages
• Difficult to process if you have no SMT capabilities (e.g., wave solder only).
• Solder mask only in very limited areas (8 dots).
• Generally more expensive to test (if paying by the connection).
• Generally more expensive materials and to process.
• Alternative orientation of the 6 mil comb patterns made bare board fabrication yields smaller.
Subsequent test vehicles, such as the CSL/Foresite Umpire board or the IPC-B-52 test vehicle, were designed using the les-
sons learned from the IPC-B-36 based test programs. Considering the availability of superior test vehicles for Phase 2 work,
the IPC-B-36 test assembly is not recommended as a Phase 2 test vehicle.
46
6.3.1.2 CSL/Foresite Umpire Test Vehicle This test vehicle was originally designed by Contamination Studies Laborato-
ries (now Foresite) in 1998-99 time frame as a test vehicle that included components and which would represent improve-
ments over the simpler bare boards available from the IPC or Bellcore. The intent was a relatively inexpensive test vehicle
which could be used to examine residue aspects of assembly processes. An image of the Umpire board is shown in Figure
6-3.
Figure 6-3 Umpire Board
Test Patterns
• Three IPC-B-24 test patterns.
• No mask (laminate/flux interactions) to correlate with J-STD-004 SIR tests.
• Striped mask (solder mask developing check and entrapment effects).
• Full mask (effects of flux on solder mask properties).
• Row of 0805 chips (1.0 megohm, 0.1 watt) - used for checking for electromigration under caps and adhesive
characteristics.
• Row of 1206 chips - same.
• Three header patterns - used to study paste qualities, effects of peelable latex mask, or touch-up soldering operations.
• One BGA test pattern using an isolated die (tests for residues under BGAs).
• One QFP test pattern using an isolated die (residues under QFPs).
• One LCC test pattern (tests for low standoff cleaning challenges) - identical to IPC-B-36 quadrant D patterns.
• One row of DIPs for through hole processes (checks for fillet formation).
• One PGA socket - used to examine entrapment effects of sockets.
• Snap-off coupon containing a Bellcore pattern with cross-hatched mask - used to test SIR per Bellcore GR-78-CORE for
telecommunications assemblers.
• Snap-off coupon containing an IPC-B-36 Quadrant D pattern - used for military and IPC Class 3 customers for J-STD-001
qualification.
Advantages
• Represents a significant improvement over IPC test boards at that time as a test vehicle to examine assembly materials and
processes.
• Could be made from the OEM/EMS chosen set of materials.
• Single snap off coupon could be used for MIL-STD-2000A correlation efforts.
• Second snap off coupon could be used for Bellcore studies for telecommunication suppliers.
• Main SIR test board contained SMT components, BGAs, and connectors as significant entrapment sites.
• Board designed for SIR testing.
• Several large OEMs use as their qualification vehicle.
Disadvantages
• The board required special isolated components for selected patterns.
• The SOT-23 components did not work as originally projected.
47
• The designer forgot the first rule of adding resistors in parallel, so the bottom side SMT chips appear in SIR testing as a
1 megohm resistance.
• The capacitance of the electrolytic capacitor affected rise
time of the signal and so resulted in ‘‘odd’’ measurements
for that pattern.
• The fixturing for testing the board was complex.
• The providers of the dummy chips, at that time, did not have
good control of the standard chips (containing blown die or
daisy chains) and the isolated chips (no internal connections)
so some assembly runs had bad components causing shorts
of some patterns.
• It was found after the fact that the BGA pattern was flawed
(Figure 6-4). The BGA package chosen had 16 balls in the
center of the package that were used purely for thermal
transmission and were consequently shorted together on the
inside of the package. Those internal shorts caused a short
on the board SIR pattern. The 16 solder bumps on the BGA
Figure 6-4 Flawed BGA Pattern
had to be removed prior to assembly operations.
• The Umpire board continues to be used at present for process investigations and qualification efforts. Many of the lessons
learned from this test vehicle went into the design of the IPC-B-52 test vehicle.
6.3.1.3 Gen3 Systems Test Coupon This test coupon (Figure 6-5) was developed by GEN3 Systems Ltd. (formerly Con-
coat Systems, Ltd.), in the United Kingdom (UK), as a small, inexpensive test vehicle for examine the effects of residues
between QFP lead and under fine pitch components. As such, it has been used in Phase 1 and Phase 2 types of analyses.
Figure 6-5 Systems Test Coupon
Advantages
• Inexpensive test vehicle, easy to fabricate in high yields.
• Low cost of assembly so larger sample sizes could be accommodated.
Disadvantages
• Solder mask not usually involved (but could be, as shown in photo on the right).
6.3.1.4 SMTA Saber Board The Surface Mount Technology Association (SMTA) Saber board (Figure 6-6) has been avail-
able as a stock evaluation tool since the 1990s. The test board offers a representative mix of through-hole and surface mount
components and is most often used for solder profile optimization work. The board has a single SIR test pattern (5 segment)
similar to the Bellcore style of patterns that is under a large quad flat pack device. The terminations of the 5 segmented
comb come out to surface mount pads for hard ware attachment. The test pattern terminations are close to each other and
care has to be taken during wire attach to make sure that the attachment flux does not bridge contact pads. The test pattern
is not connected to any component leads, so no special components are required. The Saber is generally inexpensive as a
bare board. The Gerbers for the board are available from several vendors and so the board can be made with any combina-
tion of board materials. The test board can also be used for solder joint reliability studies if daisy chained components are
48
used. It should be noted that the top and bottom sides are ‘‘mirrored’’ and that daisy chained components may work on the
top side of the board and not on the bottom side
The SMTA Saber board has been used in manufacturing studies for many years and is available from several vendors. There
is one dedicated SIR test pattern to this assembly (under the large QFP), so SIR testing can be done on this board if hard-
wiring is being used. The most common use of this assembly is for solder evaluations and as such, is often bought as a
‘‘kit’’ item using whatever materials of construction the kit provider uses. If Phase cleanliness evaluations are being per-
formed with a Saber board, it is advisable to obtain the Gerber information for the assembly, and have the board made with
the materials of construction, and by the preferred fabricators, that represent finished product.
Figure 6-6 SMTA Saber Board
6.3.1.5 The IPC-B-52 Test Vehicle While the test vehicles outlined above have been used for Phase 2 types of analyses,
they all leave something to be desired. A test vehicle was desired, which could be used for both ion chromatography and
surface insulation resistance testing, and which was more representative of mainstream manufacturing materials and pro-
cesses. The desired test vehicle could then be used as both an investigative tool for process optimization work, and for pro-
cess qualification such as for IPC-J-STD-001 or IEC-61189-5.
The IEC-TB-57 test board, designed by the National Physical Laboratory and Gen3 System Ltd., both in the United King-
dom was the result. In a collaboration effort between NPL, Gen 3, and Rockwell Collins, the IPC-B-52 (Figure 6-7) test
board, mirroring many of the features of the IEC-TB-57, was the result. As developmental work continued on the IPC-B-52
board, the IEC-TB-57 was modified accordingly. Version 8 of the IEC-TB-57 is identical to the IPC-B-52 (hereafter B52)
standard test assembly. The IEC-61189-5 specification has been modified to refer to the IPC-B-52. Consequently, the B52
is considered as a world standard and is the preferred vehicle for cleanliness evaluation. The SIR test board is on the left
and the ion chromatography coupon is on the right.
6.3.2 IPC-9202 IPC-9202, ‘‘Material and Process Characterization/Qualification Test Protocol For Cleanliness,’’ was writ-
ten with a Phase 2 type of analysis in mind, and addresses two uses for the B-52 assembly.
49
Figure 6-7 IPC-B-52 Test Board
The first use is as a process investigation tool, where the materials of construction are of lesser impact. Such a use would
be to compare Cleaning Process A with Cleaning Process B. In such a relative comparison, the two processes can be evalu-
ated as long as the test substrate is constant. For this application, test kits can be used. IPC committees have determined that
a sample size of five is acceptable for a process investigation.
The second use is as a process qualification tool, where the board materials of construction, as well as the board fabricator,
are critical. In such a case, the use of board kits is not advisable. It has been widely established that bare board residues,
and bare board fabrication methods are critical to process qualifications. Therefore, it is very important that the B52 test
boards mimic a manufacturer’s chosen material set as closely as possible, and provided from the vendors established sup-
ply base. In addition, the sample size for qualification is higher, with a sample size of 10 required.
IPC-9202 has its pass-fail requirements based on surface insulation resistance (SIR) testing. Ion chromatography also is
required, but no pass-fail criteria is given for IC data.
There is always the question of how much test data is appropriate. The use of SIR data, based on frequent monitoring meth-
ods, shows the impact of residues on insulation resistance in humid environments, but is often a long term (4-7 days) test.
Ion chromatography data can be generated much more quickly, and is invaluable when doing process troubleshooting or
during future process optimization work. For this reason, the IC data is required when a manufacturer establishes the quali-
fication baseline.
It is recommended that anyone pursuing a Phase 2 type of qualification become acquainted with IPC-9202. are also useful
when designing a Phase 2 protocol.
6.3.3 IPC-9203 Because a Phase 2 investigation/qualification effort can be complex, the IPC committees have generated
a companion document to the IPC-9202, which is the IPC-9203, ‘‘The IPC-B-52 Users Guide.’’ This should be in the library
of anyone who evaluates manufacturing processes from a materials compatibility or residue assessment standpoint.
6.4 Phase 3 Tests and Considerations Phase 3 is probably the most difficult phase to accomplish successfully, though
laying a proper foundation with Phase 1 and 2 work makes Phase 3 much easier.
In Phases 1 and 2, those performing the evaluation use standard test boards and some industry standard tests to generate
predictive data on residues and their effects. But in Phase 3, it gets much more complex as you being to add in complicat-
ing factors such as:
• High frequency or radio frequency effects where residues can affect waveform shape or introduce propagation delays.
• High voltage or high power stresses which can lead to corona discharges.
• High impedance circuitry where small leakage currents cannot be tolerated.
• Tighter lines and spaces, lower component standoffs, specialty components.
• Shadowing effects from tall components.
50
The intent of a Phase 3 effort is to determine if a high performance or high reliability product can be produced with the
candidate material set and proposed manufacturing parameters, and whether that product can meet the engineering drawing,
the contractual requirements and customer expectations for quality and reliability.
For a Phase 3 effort, communication and consensus with the end customer, and/or regulatory agencies, is crucial. One of the
key discussion topics should be whether any proposed changes in materials or manufacturing process constitutes a Class 1
or a Class 2 change.
A Class 1 change is one where the change does not impact the form, fit, or function of the product. An example may be a
change in a microprocessor chip from Company A to Company B where the chip has the same functionality and reliability.
A Class 2 change is where the form, fit, or function of the unit is changed. An example may be a redesign of the circuit
board or significant addition of modification wires.
A Class 1 change may only require simple paperwork notifications or minor engineering change orders (ECOs) to effect the
changes. A Class 2 change may often result in a full or at least a partial requalification effort for the hardware, which can
be very expensive and time consuming.
The reason that discussions with the customer are critical is that there is no consistent interpretation of Class 1 or Class 2
changes in any electronics industry. A change in cleaning chemistry or cleaning process could be viewed as a Class 1 change,
as the cleaning material is not delivered in the final product and ‘‘should’’ not impact form, fit, or function. On the other
hand, if the new cleaning chemistry or process is not thoroughly evaluated, it could impact the long term reliability (i.e.,
function) and so could potentially be a Class 2 change. In the high performance realm, for mission critical or safety critical
hardware, most customers tend to be very conservative and assume everything is a Class 2 change unless data shows oth-
erwise. This is why a Phase 1 and Phase 2 data package is so important, as it can lay down the foundation for the less costly
Class 1 change argument.
6.5 Cleaning Process Qualification The following sections show a process validation method, used by an Aerospace
OEM, as one illustration of an overall process validation effort for a change in manufacturing for Class 3 hardware. This
approach incorporates all of the phases outlined above.
Quality of product, in terms of performance and reliability, is affected by cleanliness. Printed board contamination may cause
problems such as non-adherence of solder masks, delamination in multilayer boards, poor solderability, electrical leakage
between conductors, and high resistance in connectors.
Quality assurance involves periodic inspection or process checks. Testing for cleanliness can either be direct detection of
contaminants or simulation of potential reliability problems by accelerated testing on test coupons or actual product.
A comprehensive quality program also includes ongoing process monitoring, qualification, and inspection of materials used
in manufacture, such as soldering fluxes.
The extent of the quality assurance program, frequency of inspection, and end-point requirements is related to product
application and expected performance (i.e., class of service).
Quality data should be collected in a form suitable to track process trends, and to make rapid corrective action if necessary.
The data should be recorded to inform suppliers of incoming material and customers of product.
This section sites a standard process used to qualify an electronic assembly Class 3 cleaning process. When assemblers
change soldering materials (solder paste, paste flux, and wave flux), cleaning materials, and cleaning equipment steps need
to be taken to qualify or re-qualify the process. The testing should be documented and incorporated in a site-based transi-
tion plan that approves supplier and materials.
Figure 6-8 shows a conceptual diagram of a three-phase approach to process validation for cleanliness aspects of the manu-
facturing change.
6.5.1 Applicable Documents Table 6-3 shows a list of reference documents that may be of use in determining the effects
of residues on electronic assemblies.
51
Figure 6-8 Three-Phase Approach to Process Validation
Table 6-3 Reference Documents

ANSI/JSTD-001 Requirements for Soldered Electrical and Electronic Assemblies
ANSI/JSTD-004 Requirements for Solder Fluxes
ANSI/JSTD-005 Requirements and Test Methods for Solder Paste
Requirements for Electronics Grade Solder Alloys and Fluxed and Non-fluxed Solid Solders for Electronic
ANSI/JSTD-006
Soldering
IPC-TM-650 IPC Test Methods Manual
IPC-9201 Surface Insulation Resistance Handbook
Telcordia GR-78-CORE Electro-migration Testing
IPC-A-600 Acceptability of Printed Circuit Boards
IPC-SM-840 Qualification and Performance of Permanent Solder Mask
IPC-CC-830 Qualification and Performance of Electrical Insulation
Test Methods for Electronic Materials, Interconnection Structures and Assemblies - Part 5: Test Methods for
IEC 61189-5
Printed Board Assemblies
6.5.2 Initial Feasibility Assessment Phase 1 Prior to evaluating solder materials, an initial feasibility needs to be per-
formed to assure that solder flux, solder paste, and solder alloys meet applicable standards.
The material supplier should be included in this selection as it has the most in-depth knowledge of their material, as well
as possible interactions with other materials.
It may be reasonable to ask why a manufacturer could not simply use the vendor’s data, such as flux qualification to J-STD-
004, to reduce the cost of the testing. The majority of the qualification documents shown in Table 6-3 are designed to pro-
duce a normalized baseline to produce repeatable results. They use standard test substrates, such as the IPC-B-24 test board
for J-STD-004, such that the data on different materials/vendors can be directly compared. The material vendors, who are
very familiar with the test protocols, do the test processing. Consequently, the data usually represents a best case condition
and there is no guarantee that the individual manufacturers will get the same results. So it is always advisable to repeat criti-
cal tests, rather than rely on vendor data sheets.
6.5.3 Material Analysis Each material under investigation should include an analysis of material technical specifications,
manufacturer’s test results, material safety data sheets, and material supplier’s quality assurance and process control
methods.
6.5.4 Process Considerations Prior to committing resources to qualify new cleaning materials, an initial feasibility
assessment should include the following:
• Occupational, safety, and environmental impacts.
• Manufacturers’ testing, quality, service, and support.
• Equipment compatibility and capability.
52
• Cost impact.
• Waste generation and disposal.
• Process capability and robustness.
• Process control requirements.
• Cleanliness monitoring (type of contaminants, cleanliness levels and measurement).
• Measurement system capability evaluation.
• Customer’s requirements and expectations.
6.5.5 Technical Business Assessment Electronic assemblers need to assure that the exposed hardware will be compat-
ible with all exposed cleaning materials at the specified wash concentration range, wash temperature, wash time, and
impingement energy.
6.5.6 Documentation of Process Plan A documented plan that describes the proposed changes and data from testing is
needed to warrant the decision to move forward.
6.5.6.1 Benchmark Evaluation Following the initial feasibility assessment (Phase 1), the cleaning process qualification
should include material and process compatibility testing, test vehicles, and formal test plan (Phase 2). While the test
vehicles for Phase 2 could be production hardware, the more common approach is to use industry standard test vehicles that
are more representative of actual product.
6.5.7 Material and Process Testing Phase 2 A Phase 2 materials and process compatibility test should include:
• Validation of all flux material changes.
• Validation of cleaning chemistries.
• Validation of changes arising in flux application, reflow profiles, or changes in cleaning equipment or cleaning parameters.
The designed experiments need to test the proposed materials and processes to assurance acceptability with the end-item
performance specifications.
As indicated previously, there are many acceptable ways to determine materials process compatibility. One of the more
common approaches in the industry has been to use the protocol called out in the IPC Joint Industry Standard J-STD-001,
usually included in one of the appendices to that standard.
It is a common misconception that the testing listed in the J-STD-001 Appendix was required for an assembler to be com-
pliant to J-STD-001. This is not the case. J-STD-001 required an assembler to have objective data on hand showing mate-
rials and process compatibility. The test protocol in the appendices was one possible way of generating such data. However,
because this testing was listed in the J-STD-001 standard, it was often a test approach agreeable to both the manufacturer
and customer, with known pass-fail criteria.
6.5.8 Test Vehicles Assemblers commonly prefer designed test kits. The benefits include board and component combina-
tions to run a standardized test. Before locking in on a specific test board, assemblers need to assure that the boards will be
representative of the assemblies being produced.
• Test vehicles should provide an assessment of various component technologies and packages with both through-hole and
surface mounted components, including fine pitch and BGA devices. To facilitate electrical testing, the test vehicles should
include ‘‘Y’’ and Comb patterns defined by IPC and Telcordia Technologies specifications. Test vehicles should be fabri-
cated with the same type substrate, metallization, and solder-resist that represent the actual product.
• Manufacturing of the test samples should represent the proposed production processes. Samples built with an isolated pro-
cess may not adequately represent the true production environment. Residues from other process steps may cause interac-
tions that must be considered in the total test.
• Minimum sample size for each material/process combination tested should be a minimum of 10 vehicles. Additional
samples should be included in the test plan for visual inspection as per the approved test plan. If the materials and pro-
cesses are to be used for various types of substrate materials and finishes, tests must be conducted on all types (as shown
by type by IPC-SMA-840, i.e., LPI, dry film, not brand) as agreed upon with the OEM. To establish baseline data, at least
one bare board for each substrate and/or mask type should be added to the sample lot.
53
6.5.9 Test Methods Testing of alternative materials and processes should include optical, electrical, and chemical
evaluations.
• Optical - Visual inspection conducted under a minimum magnification of 10X, and 30X for investigation of findings at
10X. Units should include inspection for residues, contamination, corrosion, solder mask and substrate condition; solder
joint formations; discoloration; solder balls or splatters; presence of wet chemicals, oils, dirt, finger prints, particulate mat-
ter; or any other anomalies. Any findings should be analyzed to determine causes. Negative inspection results may negate
the need for further testing.
• Electrical - The minimum tests should be as follows:
– SIR (Surface Insulation Resistance) per IPC-TM-650 2.6.3.3 A(reference IPC-9201).
– Electrochemical Migration per IPC Test Method TM-650 2.6.14 and 2.6.14.1 (reference Telcordia GR-78-CORE).
• Chemical - The minimum tests to be conducted should be as follows:
– Ionic Cleanliness Level 1 (Omega meter or equivalent) - ionic cleanliness must be tested per IPC-TM-650 Test method
2.3.25.
– Ionic Cleanliness Level 2 (Ion Chromatography) - ionic analysis per IPC-TM-650 2.3.28.
– Surface Organic Contamination - non-ionic analysis per IPC-TM-650 2.3.38 and 2.3.39.
– Conformal Coating Adhesion Test - per IPC-TM-650 2.4.1.6 and Ref IPC-CC-830 Handbook for additional information.
– Component Compatibility Test - Analysis must be conducted to ensure all component types are not adversely affected
with the proposed chemistries or processes. Results of this analysis should be recorded and available for review.
– Residue Analysis - As required, if not visible residues, only Ionic Cleanliness tests (level 1 and level 2) are required:
– Surface Analysis - Scanning Electron Microscopy/Energy Dispersive Spectrometry (SEM/EDX).
– Extractions - (FTIR) Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy.
– High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or IC Test.
6.5.10 Benchmark Testing Report Test results should be analyzed with data findings documented into a written report.
6.6 Printed Board Assembly Evaluation Phase 3 Following the Phase 2 benchmark testing, a second test plan should
include qualification testing on representative printed circuit assemblies using the defined production processes and materi-
als. The test plan should be made available to applicable test sites. Feedback should include definition of any additional site
specific test samples that may be required, along with any additional information pertinent to the acceptance criteria of the
assembler. Processes should be mapped and failure modes analyzed prior to running sample lots.
6.6.1 Confirm Testing on Applicable Hardware Phase 3 Detailed process descriptions identifying the process window
should be available for review prior to assembly of production units.
6.6.2 Confirm Cleaning on Most Challenging Assemblies Phase 3 The test assemblies should represent the most chal-
lenging assemblies of each type currently being processed.
From a cleaning process perspective, look especially for configurations where cleaning chemistry can become entrapped,
such as large cavity connectors, where the cleaning solution may not be fully rinsed or removed. Consider the long term
reliability effects of entrapped cleaning solution.
6.6.3 Develop and Document Process Range Phase 3 Leadless components such as QFNs, chip cap arrays, Land Grid
Arrays, Flip Chip Devices and their packages represent a needed but highly difficult cleaning challenge. As the distance
between conductors narrows, flux residues have a tendency to bridge conductors. Component gap is critical when cleaning
under low clearance components. Standoffs heights greater than 2 mils improve the ability for the cleaning agent to pen-
etrate, wet, create a flow channel and clean all residues under the component. Two significant variables are wash time and
nature of the residues. Longer wash times are needed when cleaning under low clearance components. Softer flux residues
dissolve at a faster rate and reduce wash time; conversely, hard flux residues require longer time to dissolve while requir-
ing longer wash times. The process window should define wash concentration range, wash temperature range, wash time,
and cleaning equipment effects.
6.6.4 Material Compatibility Testing on Actual PWB Hardware Phase 3 Several input factors may have significant
impact on printed circuit performance, quality, and long term reliability. Such affects would only become evident on actual
printed circuit assemblies. These factors include:
54
• Actual manufacturing processes, equipment, methods, production conditions, and skills.

• Variation within the materials and processes (e.g., repeated exposure to the cleaning process).
• Actual board layouts and conditions affecting soldering and cleaning results.
• Component and substrate conditions.
• Interactions between the raw materials, processes, and chemistries.
• Conformal coating on designated assemblies.
6.6.5 Verification Printed Circuit Board Assembly testing should include optical, mechanical, and chemical evaluations.
6.6.6 Visual Inspection A minimum magnification of up to 4x should proceed other testing. Based on the findings, rec-
ommendations shall be made to continue with, discontinue, or modify existing test and qualification plan. Visual inspection
criteria:
• Workmanship per IPC-A-610 and J-STD-001 Class III.
• Solder Joint Quality as per IPC-A-610 and J-STD-001 Class III.
• Residues No visible residues at 4x magnification. These residues may be a product of different materials and/or processes
used in the assembly of the units. If residues are found they should be analyzed to determine cause and effect.
• Solder Balls/Splashes Test units should be free of dirt, oils, dross, solder splashes, solder whiskers, webbing, or lead or
plating fragments. Solder Balls should be considered unacceptable for any of the following conditions:
– Solder balls violate minimum electrical spacing.
– Solder that is not physically connected and fused to a metallic surface.
• Refer to IPC-A-610 for solder ball inspection criteria.
• Solder Resist Discoloration of solder resist or any evidence of reactions with processes and processing materials are
considered undesirable. If this condition is present, analysis should be performed to determine the cause and the potential
effects. The requirements for solder resist should meet IPC-A-610, IPC-A-600, and IPC-SM-840.
6.6.7 Mechanical Solder joints on various Surface Mount Components should be tested for tensile and shear strengths as
applicable. The joint selection should be such that the widest variety of termination types/shapes are tested, (i.e., gull wing,
J-lead, rectangular lead, cylindrical lead, leadless, etc.).
6.6.8 Chemical Minimum tests to be conducted on solder mask resist, conformal coating adhesion, component compat-
ibility, and ionic cleanliness.
6.6.8.1 Solder Mask (Resist) IPC-SM-840 defines test methods.
6.6.8.2 Conformal Coating Testing Analysis of the compatibility of the conformal coat, with solder mask, fluxes, and
cleaning materials should be conducted. IPC-CC-830 Conformal coat adhesion test including thermal cycling should be per-
formed. See IPC-HDBK-830 for further information.
6.6.8.3 Component, Process, and Material Compatibility Components used on the printed circuit assemblies should be
evaluated to ensure compatibility with all materials and processes. Any components found to be non-compatible must be
identified and an alternative processing method presented. Data from the compatibility studies should be recorded and docu-
mented.
6.6.8.4 Ionic Cleanliness Level 1 (Ionic ROSE or equivalent) Ionic cleanliness should be tested per IPC-TM-650, Test
Method 2.3.25.
Note: Samples used for chemical residues tests, such as ionic cleanliness, cannot be used for other tests as the test meth-
ods reduce or eliminate the residues of interest.
6.6.8.5 Ionic Cleanliness Level 2 (Ion Chromatography) Ionic cleanliness must be tested per IPC-TM-650, Test Method
2.3.28.
55
Note: Analytical results from IPC TM-650 2.3.28 (ion chromatography) are expressed in micrograms per unit area of each
ionic species (e.g., chloride, bromide, sulfate). Analytical results from IPC TM-650 2.3.25 (ROSE tests) are expressed in
terms of micrograms of sodium chloride (NaCl) equivalence per unit area. These two measures are NOT equivalent and are
frequently misunderstood. The ROSE method test equipment measure resistivity of the extract solution - it does not directly
quantify the ionic species found in the test solution. The NaCl equivalence refers to the amount of sodium chloride needed
to produce a solution of the same conductivity. The results are used as a process control tool for detection of bulk or gross
ion contamination. Ion Chromatography provides a method for process evaluation, characterization, and qualification. (Table
6-4 and 6-5)
Table 6-4 Contamination Levels Per IPC-TM-650, 2.3.28

Minimum Ionic Species Micro Grams/Square inch Micrograms/Square Centimeter
2
Bromide <10 µg/in <1.55 µg/cm2
2
Chloride <6 µg/in <93 µg/cm2
Fluoride <3 µg/in2 <47 µg/cm2
2
Sulfate <3 µg/in <47 µg/cm2
2
Phosphates <7 µg/in <1.09 µg/cm2
Nitrates <3 µg/in2 <47 µg/cm2
2
Weak Organic Acids <25 µg/in <3.88 µg/cm2
Table 6-5 Minimum SIR Values

Minimum Surface Insulation Resistance Ohms
SIR Values at 85°C [185°F] and 85% Relative Humidity 1.00E+08
6.6.9 Residue Analysis Only applicable when visible residue is present.
6.6.9.1 Surface Analysis Scanning Electron Microscopy/Energy Dispersive Spectrometry images the sample surface by
scanning it with a high-energy beam of electrons in a raster scan pattern. The electrons interact with the atoms that make
up the sample producing signals that contain information about the sample’s surface topography, composition and other
properties such as electrical conductivity.
6.6.9.2 Extractions Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR)/High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)/
Ion Chromatography (IC) methods are used to separate compounds based on their relative solubility in two different immis-
cible liquids, usually water and an organic solvent.
FTIR is a measurement technique for collecting infrared spectra. Instead of recording the amount of energy absorbed when
the frequency of the infra-red light is varied, the IR light is guided through an interferometer to collect multiple wave fre-
quencies.
HPLC is used to separate, identify, and quantify compounds using column chromatography.
6.6.10 Functional Performance Testing These tests subject subassemblies or end products to thermal, humidity, vibra-
tion, or other environmental stress conditions
6.6.11 Confirmation Run Process verification should be run prior to cleaning process production. Product should be
monitored and validated for output quality, process conformity, and process control.
6.7 Quality Program Inspection and control of cleanliness should be part of an overall quality plan for manufacturing.
Examples of elements of a quality plan relating to cleanliness are listed in Table 6-6, derived from the American National
Standard Z1.15, prepared by the American Society for Quality Control. Each of these elements are expanded in more detail
as follows.
56
Table 6-6 Elements of a Quality Assurance Program

Paragraph Element
6.7.1 Documentation
6.7.2 Control of Procured Material
6.7.3 Manufacturing Controls
6.7.4 Completed Item Inspection
6.7.5 Control of Nonconforming Materials
6.7.6 Corrective Action Program
6.7.7 Storage, Handling and Packaging
6.7.8 Periodic Product Qualification
6.7.9 Quality Information
6.7.10 Field Performance Data
6.7.11 Process Monitoring
6.7.12 Data Collection and Reporting
6.7.1 Documentation of the Quality System Documentation of the entire manufacturing process and quality system is
critical. It should cover all manufacturing processes and quality/reliability-related activities, not only those performed by the
Quality Organization.
A typical hierarchy of documentation is shown in Table 6-7, ranging from policy statements of company commitment to
quality, to detailed shop floor instructions. A majority of this information may be available electronically. IPC test methods
are available on the IPC website at www.ipc.org.
Table 6-7 Documentation Hierarchy

Document Function Content
Company policy
Quality Manual Administrative and Procedural Organization and responsibilities
Activities related to Table 4
Drawings
Procurement Material Purchase orders
Specifications Control Incoming inspection
Qualification procedure
Control points in-process
Sampling procedure
Process Manufacturing Test/inspection methods
Specifications Control Accept/reject criteria
Workmanship standards
Shop floor aids
6.7.2 Control of Procured Material Ordering information for materials, whether included as special instructions on a pur-
chase order, a contractual agreement, notes on a drawing, or preferably in a procurement specification, should contain
requirements pertaining to cleanliness. This could be a direct cleanliness requirement for materials used in assembly, such
as printed boards and components, or specific properties of process chemicals, such as boiling point of a cleaning agent.
Vendors of material should be qualified initially to a specification and periodically re-qualified based on analysis of quality
data.
On-going quality of procured material must be determined by one or more of the following: vendor quality data, inspection
at the source, or by incoming inspection.
An approved vendor list should be maintained by the engineering organization. Parts and materials should only be purchased
from vendors on this list.
57
6.7.3 Manufacturing Controls Inspection standards and process limits should be established for each step in manufactur-
ing. A flow chart of the process will be helpful in determining these steps. Sampling and data summarization should be sta-
tistically based (see IPC-PC-90 for information on statistical process control (SPC)). Test coupons, either boards from the
production or separate boards processed in parallel with production boards, may be appropriate for tests such as insulation
resistance.
A maintenance procedure for equipment, including periodic calibration, and schedule for changing process chemicals such
as plating baths, solder fluxes, and cleaning agents, should assure the process operation within the established limits.
6.7.4 Completed Item Inspection Finished products, printed boards, or assemblies, should be inspected to ensure that
products are not shipped unless all quality and performance requirements are met.
Final test should simulate customer use of the product. The quality organization should run a separate audit on final test to
provide independent estimates of outgoing quality.
6.7.5 Control of Nonconforming Materials Nonconforming material, determined at incoming inspection, in-process or
final test, should be clearly marked and segregated from conforming materials and products.
6.7.6 Corrective Action Program Corrective action is the response to nonconforming material or a quality deficiency. For
example, components with poor solderability due to contamination could be subjected to pre-cleaning, or would be rejected
and returned to the vendor. Corrective action in process could be part of an SPC plan.
6.7.7 Storage, Handling, and Packaging Storage conditions should be clean, and preferably humidity controlled. Han-
dling procedures should avoid contamination with fingerprints, using gloves or mechanical pick-up where appropriate. Paper
packing materials should be sulfur-free.
Printed boards with a temporary organic protective coating over bare copper are storage sensitive and should be used on a
first-in-first-out basis.
6.7.8 Periodic Product Qualification Product qualification testing assesses the ability to meet all design requirements.
These tests are more extensive than those regularly performed in process or with final testing. They include environmental
stress such as high temperature/high humidity exposure for printed boards to accelerate effects from residual contamination.
6.7.9 Quality Information Quality records should be kept for all inspections performed, to aid the quality personnel to
identify deficiencies, and to demonstrate effective operation of the quality system. Data may be handled electronically, and
it should be summarized periodically (say weekly) in report form for presentation to management. Reports should use con-
trol and/or trend charts for variables/attributes data.
6.7.10 Field Performance Data Where possible there should be feedback of information from users of the product on
in-service problems. Cleanliness problems at the board level can affect yield at assembly. The assembler would notify the
board vendor in this case. An original equipment manufacturer of electronic assemblies should analyze customer defect rates
for their dominant cause, which could be due to improper cleaning.
6.7.11 Process Monitoring In addition to inspection and tests on materials, boards, and components, the cleaning process
itself should be monitored for temperature and contamination levels. The supplier of cleaning equipment should be consulted
for necessary control parameters.
6.7.12 Data Collection and Reporting Effective data analysis is a keystone to efficient, economic control of quality. There
are a wide range of statistical methods available, which fall into two broad categories: attributes and variables.
References
1. Pauls, Douglas. Test Board Selection for Cleaning Evaluations, Proceedings - IPC Cleaning Conference 2008
2. IPC-9201, The Surface Insulation Resistance (SIR) Handbook, Appendix C.
3. IPC-TP-1090: The Layman’s Guide to Qualifying New Fluxes for MIL-STD-2000A or MT-0002
4. IPC-TP-1114: The Layman’s Guide to Qualifying A Process to J-STD-001B
5. Pauls, Douglas. The Effects of Solder Mask Selection on Cleanliness, Conference Proceedings, Apex 2006
58
6. Pauls, Douglas. The Consequences of Ignoring Residues, Conference Proceedings Apex 2006
7. Adcock, R. (2010). Assembly Cleaning Equipment and Integration. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference,
Renaissance, Schaumburg, IL.
8. Binfield, S. (2010). A High Reliability Perspective on Organic Fluxes and Cleanliness. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coat-
ing Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
9. Bixenman, M. (2010). Development of Inline Aqueous Cleaning Equipment and Process Requirements for Ultra-low
Standoff Components. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
10. Oxx, G., Brooks R., & Bixenman, M. (2010). Cleaning Lead-Free Misprinted Circuit Boards. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and
Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
11. Camden, E. (2010). Effective Spot Cleaning Regardless of Material Selection. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Con-
ference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
12. Flaherty, L., Knar, R., & Austin, J. (2010). Building High Reliability Electronic Hardware within the California Air
Regulatory Environment. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
13. Hafstad, G. (2010). Assembly Configurations and Process Design Considerations for Solvent Centrifugal Cleaning.
IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
14. Hillman, D. (2010). The Role of Ionic Contamination as a Tin Whisker Initiator. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Con-
15. Pauls, D. & Hillman, D. (2010). Cleaning and Cleanliness in IPC Specifications. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating
Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
16. Kanegsberg, B. (2010). Doing it all with Less - Sustainable, Eco-Centric, Reliable, Economically Superior Defluxing
Processes. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
17. Keeping, J. (2010). Critical Considerations for Conformal Coating Reliability. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Con-
18. Kim, B. (2010). Accuracies of Concentration Measurement Methods and Their Implications. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and
19. Konrad, M. (2010). Best Practice Design for Batch Aqueous Cleaning Systems. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Con-
20. Konrad M. (2010). Chemical, Mechanical, Environmental, and Ergonomic Considerations of a Stencil and Misprint
Cleaning Process. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
21. Kraszewski, R. (2010). Implementing Two Part Urethane Materials and Processes for Conformal Coating or Printed
Circuit Assemblies. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
22. Kumar, R. (2010). Advances in Adhesion Solutions for Electronic Assemblies. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Con-
23. Richie, B. (2010). Conformal Coating over Process Residue. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renais-
sance, Schaumberg, IL.
24. Russo, J. (2010). Encouraging Water and Energy Conservation: Driving Forces. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Con-
25. Schueller, R. (2010). Creep Corrosion. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
26. Snugovsky, P. Meschter, S., Kapadia, P., Romansky, M., Kennedy, J., & Kosiba, E. (2010). Influence on Board and
Component Cleanliness on Whisker Formation. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaum-
berg, IL.
27. Tosun, U. (2010). Advances through pH Neutral Cleaning Agent Formulations. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Con-
28. Valladeras, H. (2010). Standardization of Electric Conformal Coatings in Aerospace OEM. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and
29. Vuono, B., Bixenman, M., Russeau, J., & Zohni, N. (2010). Cleaning Fluid Entrapments under Vented Flip Chip Pack-
ages. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Renaissance, Schaumberg, IL.
59
7 CONTAMINATION AND ITS EFFECTS ON PWBS
7.1 Scope Increased electronic device functionality results from smaller spacing between conductors thus requiring more
active circuitry within highly dense devices. Contamination and its effects are more problematic as electronic circuit spac-
ing between conductors decreases.
7.1.1 Purpose The purpose of this section is to discuss the risks of contamination and its effects on printed wiring
assemblies.
7.1.2 Background Electronic assembly reliability concerns increase with device miniaturization, closer spacing, and elec-
tric field attraction between conductors.1 Process and service related contaminations accelerate the potential for device fail-
ures. Corrosion problems decrease product life and reduce functionality due to conductive ions migrating across device leads
leading to current leakage, galvanic coupling, and/or formation of electrochemical cells.1
Driven by cost pressures and the difficulty of cleaning high density assemblies with fine-pitch and low-profile components,
many electronic products are processed using low residue (no-clean) flux technology.2 The quantity of post-reflow flux resi-
due will vary, depending on the application:
• Standard Residue: >40%.
• Low Residue (LR): Between >10% to 40%.
• Ultralow Residue (ULR): Between >2% to 10%.
• Near Zero Residue (NZR): Between 0 to 2%.
However, the long-term effects of no-clean processing on reliability of printed circuit boards continues to be a source of
concern, especially when coupled with reductions in lead pitch and conductor spacing. Further reliability risks are introduced
with the transition to lead-free solder technology, since these alloys typically include silver and are processed at higher tem-
peratures than eutectic tin-lead solder.2
Proper cleanliness levels on assemblies built with highly dense component placements, component configurations (low
clearance with a lot of flux underneath) and miniaturized components have become more difficult to achieve. Assemblers
must better understand the long term effects of these assembly residues.9 The smaller spacing between conductors yields a
larger electric field, which in conjunction with insufficient cleaning, can lead to device failures. Current industry specifica-
tions for cleanliness may be inadequate for the next generation of electronic assemblies.9
7.2 Terms and Definitions (Items noted with an * are quoted from IPC-T-50)
7.2.1 *Anode: The electrode from which the forward current flows within the device.
7.2.2 Anion: An ion with more electrons than protons, giving it a net negative charge.
7.2.3 *Bridging: The unintentional formation of a conductive path between conductors.
7.2.4 Cathode: A cathode is an electrode through which electric current flows out of a polarized electrical device.
7.2.5 Cation: An ion which fewer electrons than protons, giving it a net positive charge.
7.2.6 *Conductivity: The ability of a substance or material to conduct electricity.
7.2.7 *Conductor Spacing: The distance between adjacent edges of isolated conductive patterns in a conductor layer.
7.2.8 Corrosion: The oxidation of base metals from chemicals, flux, and flux residues.
7.2.9 *Corrosive Flux: Flux that contains levels of halides, amines, or organic acids that cause corrosion of the base metal.
7.2.10 Creep Corrosion: Creeping corrosion is characterized by growth of copper and silver sulfide crystals from copper
and silver features on the outer surfaces of the PCB.
60
7.2.11 *Dendritic Growth: Metallic filaments that grow between conductors in the presence of condensed moisture and an
electrical bias.
7.2.12 Dendritic Migration: Migration that proceeds through an insulator in ‘‘treeing/needle’’ propagation.
7.2.13 Dipole: An assemblage of atoms or subatomic particles separated by finite distances that have different charges
(positive/negative).
7.2.14 Dipole Moment: Molecules in which the atoms, their electrons, and their nuclei that are so arranged that one part
of the molecule has a positive electrical charge while the other part is negatively charged.
7.2.15 Dissolution of Metallization: The process of dissolving metal, usually by introduction of chemicals, alloys or con-
taminants.
7.2.16 Electrochemical Migration: 7.2.16 Electrochemical

Migration (ECM): [Not to be confused with Electromigration
(EM) - see below] Electrochemical migration is phenomenon
in which metal ions migrate through a suitable medium (e.g.,
flux residues bridging conductors) under the influence of an
electrical field. Electrochemical failure mechanisms are com-
prised of three elements: (1) an ionic residue; (2) an electrical
potential or voltage gradient; and (3) moisture or humidity.
(Figure 7-1)
7.2.17 Electromigration (EM): [Not to be confused with

Electrochemical Migration (EM) - see above] The movement
of metal atoms in a metallic conductor due to momentum Figure 7-1 Electrochemical Migration
transfer from electrons moving under the influence of an
applied potential. Key elements are: (1) a high current density
(2) mobile metal atoms (3) elevated temperatures. (Figure 7-2)
7.2.18 Flux: A chemically and physically active compound

that when heated is designed to react with metal oxides on
solder and on solderable surfaces, to promote the wetting of a
substrate metal surface by molten solder.
7.2.19 *Flux Activity: The degree or efficiency with which a

flux promotes wetting of a surface with molten solder.
7.2.20 Flux Residue: The post-reflow remains of a solder

flux. Figure 7-2 Electromigration
7.2.21 Galvanic Corrosion: Corrosion associated with the current of a galvanic cell consisting of two dissimilar conduc-
tors in an electrolyte or two similar conductors in dissimilar electrolytes.
7.2.22 Halide Content: The ratio of the mass of free ionic halides (fluorides (F-), chlorides (Cl-) or bromides (Br-), if
present) to the mass of flux, expressed in equivalent mass percent of free chloride ion. This may found to be significantly
lower than the halogen content.
7.2.23 *Inorganic Flux: An aqueous flux solution of inorganic acids and halides.
7.2.24 Ionic Cleanliness: The degree of surface cleanliness with respect to the number of ions or weight of ionic matter
normalized per unit area of the substrate. Expression of surface cleanliness may depend on the test method being used.
Expressed as sodium chloride equivalents.
7.2.25 Ionic Contamination: An ionic compound, usually a processing residue that dissolves in water as free ions. Sodium
chloride dissolves readily in water: lead chloride does not.
61
7.2.26 *Leakage Current: The undesired flow of electrical current over or through an insulator.
7.2.27 *Metal Migration: The electrolytic transfer of metal ions along an electrically conductive path from one metal sur-
face to another when an electrical potential is applied to the two metal surfaces.
7.2.28 *Non-activated Flux: Low or no flux/flux residue activity.
7.2.29 *Nonionic Contaminant: A residue that does not readily ionize in water.
7.2.30 Organic Contamination: A type of contamination derived from an organic (carbon-based) substance.
7.2.31 Organic Flux: Flux primarily composed of organic acids (e.g., carboxylic acids) other than rosin or resin.
7.2.32 *Packaging Density: The relative quantity of functions (components, interconnection devices, mechanical devices,
etc.) per unit volume.
7.2.33 Polar Matter: A substance that can dissolve in water and polar solvents.
7.2.34 Residue: Any visible or measurable form of material remaining after a process step. Usually refers to material left
after reflow has completed.
7.2.35 Short: A fault that connects two or more points that are designed to be electrically insulted from each other.
7.2.36 *Stand-Off: A post or protrusion used to facilitate raising a surface mounting device above the surface of the sub-
strate.
7.2.37 Whisker: A slender, needle shaped metallic growth filament that may be found between or connecting adjacent
conductors.
7.3 How Clean is Clean? Electronics manufacturers are faced with the dilemma of determining the level of cleanliness
needed to produce reliable hardware. The question of ‘‘how clean is clean enough’’ is more challenging as conductors and
circuit traces are increasingly narrower. What is acceptably clean for one segment of the industry (such as SMT wave sol-
dering for a toy) may be unacceptable for more demanding segments (such as flip-chip packaging).
Residues on a printed board, component, or printed board assembly increase the risk of premature failure or improper func-
tion, complicate manufacturing processes, and represent a decrease in quality. Unfortunately, many of those who have to
deal with cleanliness related issues have no background in chemistry, chemical interactions or chemical analytical test meth-
ods, and so do not know how to measure or define cleanliness, nor can they recognize process problems related to residues.
In the rare case where cleanliness and its determination is well understood by the process professional, the challenge still
remains to correlate the residues to one or more aspects of long term reliability or determining the impact of residues on the
functionality of hardware. The following factors need to be considered:
• The end use environment (aerospace, medical, military, automotive, information technology etc.).
• The design/service life of the product (90 days, 3 years, 20 years, 50 years, warranty life + 1 day).
• The technology involved (high frequency, high impedance, power supplies).
• The consequences of failure (e.g., cell phone vs. pace maker), which can generally relate to IPC end product Class 1, 2,
and 3.
Considering the staggering number of possible combinations involved, it is clear that each Original Equipment Manufac-
turer (OEM) must determine the answer on a case by case, or product family by family basis. This is why no single
‘‘golden’’ number is possible that can be applied to all products, nor should it be pursued. Cleaning requirements for Class
3 High Reliability hardware may not be required in less demanding applications.
One area to start is with a company quality manual. What validation and verification tests does the company use to deter-
mine if the hardware will perform in the end use environment for the design life of the product? Do those tests include
humidity as an environmental stress? Do the tests look for infant mortality kinds of failures, or end of life wear out failures?
How varied or consistent are the incoming materials and/or assemblies? How varied or consistent is the supplier base?
62
With the understanding that there are many acceptable approaches to correlating residue levels with functional life tests,
there are two primary arenas for test selection. The first is standard laboratory testing, such as surface insulation resistance
testing or electrochemical migration testing, performed on standard test substrates. The second are environmental stress
screening methods, often called burn-in-tests, on actual hardware.
Whatever test is chosen, it is very important that humidity be present, usually in amounts greater than 70% relative humid-
ity (RH) as an environmental stress condition. To understand why this is critical, it is important to first understand that a
significant number of electronics failures have been related to electrochemical failure mechanisms arising from ionic resi-
dues. These electrochemical failures include electrolytic corrosion, electrochemical migration, or electrical leakage under
humid conditions.
Electrochemical failure mechanisms are comprised of three Electrochemical
elements: (1) an ionic and/or non-ionic residue; (2) an electri- Failure Region
cal potential or voltage gradient; and (3) moisture or humid-

ity. All three must be present at some minimum level, which
varies based on spacing and voltage, for electrochemical fail- Humidity Bias
ures to occur. The Venn diagram shown in Figure 7-3 is use-
ful in understanding the relation between these three factors.
The amount of impact can be visualized by considering the
diameter of the individual circles to be proportional to the Ionic
Contamination
forcing function. As an example, if a device is operating in a
very humid environment, the diameter of the humidity circle
grows larger as does the electrochemical failure region. Figure 7-3 Electrochemical Failure Diagram
The diagram illustrates why environmental stress testing must have humidity present if electrochemical failures are to be
detected. In the absence of either bias or humidity, failures do not manifest and a correlation to cleanliness cannot be estab-
lished. As such, the OEM may have a false sense of security that no contamination issues exist.
Figure 7-1 shows ionic contamination as a forcing function, which is correct, but non-ionic contaminants can also contrib-
ute to the failure mechanisms. Non-ionics, such as surfactant chemicals or finger oils, are often hydrophilic and so attracts
water to a contamination site, fueling the electrochemical failure mechanism. Therefore, an OEM must be mindful of both
ionic and non-ionic residues.
7.3.1 A Discussion of ‘‘No Clean’’ Terminology and Flux History If you examine the flux and solder paste markets of
today, you would see product names containing phrases like ‘‘cleanable no-clean,’’ ‘‘water washable no-clean,’’ or ‘‘water
rinsable no-cleans.’’ Such phrases seem to be oxymorons or conflicts in terms, leading to great confusion in the industry. If
one looks at the flux classifications of J-STD-004, none of them are labeled as ‘‘no-clean.’’ A frequently asked question in
the industry is ‘‘why would anyone clean a no-clean flux’’?
To better understand fluxes and flux terminology, a brief overview of fluxes and flux history in the electronics industry may
be of benefit. Fluxes generally consist of a carrier, a diluent, an activator, and some trace materials designed to optimize
application and minimize soldering defects.
In the early stages of the modern electronics industry, the majority of the fluxes were engineered with rosin (from pine tree
sap or stumps) as the carrier, 2-propanol (isopropyl alcohol or IPA) as the diluent, and diethylamine hydrochloride or bro-
mide as the activator. The trace ingredients included foaming agents and surfactants to minimize solder bridging and other
defects. The carriers held the activator and related materials in place for optimum soldering results during the preheating
and solder bath application steps. During preheating, the activator was designed to dissociate into the volatile free amine
and acidic hydrohalide which removed any surface oxides to enhance solder joint quality. The organic parts of solder paste
formulations were similar, except they had to have lower activator strength to prevent attack on the metallic solder powder
portion of the paste during storage. Such formulations also had to contain rheology control agents. These agents allowed to
solder paste to drop in viscosity when a shear force was applied (e.g., just in front of the blade during solder paste print-
ing, then immediately regain their original viscosity once the shear force is removed). Such agents thus prevent slumping
and other soldering defects. Fluxes of that era had a 35% solids rosin content. Any activator residues had to be cleaned from
the assembly after wave soldering or reflow operations, or severe corrosion would result.
The military specifications of that time (e.g., U.S. MIL-F-14256), which dominated the industry, classified these rosin (Type
R) fluxes depending on how much of the active compound it contained. A Type R flux contained a very small level of acti-
vator. The more common RMA or Rosin Mildly Activated flux had a higher level of activator and was more aggressive. If
63
an even higher activator level was used, for very hard to solder applications, the RA, or Rosin Activated class flux was used.
Most flux formulators provided ‘‘high solids’’ rosin fluxes that fit in one of these three rosin flux classes. Type RA-MIL con-
tained less activator than a full RA, but allowed a path to military acceptance of fluxes with higher activator levels than
RMA. Some commercial applications used Rosin Super Activated (RSA) fluxes, which could contain activator levels 50%
greater that RA. In the late 1970s/early 1980s one of the solvent cleaning agent suppliers developed the Synthetic Activated
(SA) flux concept and shared it at no cost to all members of the flux and solder paste supplier sector. The resulting flux
residues were easily cleaned in the preferred mild solvents without compatibility concerns, possessed high soldering power
to cope with poor solderability and eliminated ‘‘white residues.’’ Certain formulators found excellent results extending the
concept to experimental fusing fluids for board fabrication, as well as in experimental solder pastes.
In the 1980s, the Department of Defense (DoD) mandated the adoption of industry specifications wherever practical. A panel
of ISO and IPC flux experts from commercial and military backgrounds worked jointly on the development of J-STD-004,
which often mirrored the requirements of the military flux standards. In 1995, the military cancelled MIL-F-14256 and
directed users to J-STD-004.
J-STD-004, the predominant international specification on fluxes, classifies a flux based on the chemical nature of the flux,
the activity level of the flux, and whether or not the flux contains a halide (fluoride, chloride, bromide, and iodide). The
J-STD-004 flux classification system (J-STD-004, Revision B) is shown in Table 7-1.
Table 7-1 Flux Classification System

Flux/Flux Residue
Flux Composition Activity Levels % Halide1 (by weight) Flux Type2 Flux Designator
Rosin (RO) Low <0.05% L0 ROL0
<0.5% L1 ROL1
Moderate <0.05% M0 ROM0
0.5-2.0% M1 ROM1
High <0.05% H0 ROH0
>2.0% H1 ROH1
Resin (RE) Low <0.05% L0 REL0
<0.5% L1 REL1
Moderate <0.05% M0 REM0
0.5-2.0% M1 REM1
High <0.05% H0 REH0
>2.0% H1 REH1
Organic (OR) Low <0.05% L0 ORL0
<0.5% L1 ORL1
Moderate <0.05% M0 ORM0
0.5-2.0% M1 ORM1
High <0.05% H0 ORH0
>2.0% H1 ORH1
Inorganic (IN) Low <0.05% L0 INL0
<0.5% L1 INL1
Moderate <0.05% M0 INM0
0.5-2.0% M1 INM1
High <0.05% H0 INH0
>2.0% H1 INH1
1. Halide measuring
2. The 0 and 1 indicate the absence or presence of halides, respectively. (Since some flux components may have naturally occurring halides, the absence of
halides is taken to mean no halides were added deliberately by the flux formulator.)
64
ROM1 flux has a rosin chemistry, medium activity level, and containing halides. INH1 flux was inorganic based, high activ-
ity, and halide containing (e.g., zinc chloride activated flux). So where do the ‘‘no cleans’’ come from?
In the late 1980s, the Montreal Protocol was enacted, which mandated the elimination of ozone depleting compounds
(ODCs), which were the predominant cleaning materials for rosin-based fluxes. This dramatically opened up alternatives in
the flux market to the rosin fluxes, and fluxes such as water soluble fluxes, low residue fluxes, and synthetic fluxes were
placed on the market. Many manufacturers chose to examine new material sets and new manufacturing methods as alterna-
tives to the high solids rosin fluxes and ODC cleaning. One of these avenues was to use low residue fluxes and to not clean
the assemblies. These low residue fluxes were designed to have stable and benign residues after soldering processes, which
was a stark contrast to the corrosive fluxes used previously. In this case, the manufacturer made a choice to use low resi-
due fluxes in a no-clean assembly process. Flux marketers began selling these low residue fluxes as ‘‘no clean fluxes.’’
Which returns us to the question of why would any electronics assembler choose to clean a low residue (proper term) or
no-clean (incorrect term) flux?
One of the biggest hurdles that the no-clean assemblers faced was bare board cleanliness. When everyone cleaned, this was
not a major issue as fabrication residues were often addressed by the robust cleaning systems used. When the assembly
cleaning processes were eliminated, the fabrication residues often resulted in electrochemical failures, such as dendritic
growth, electrolytic corrosion, and electrical leakage currents in humid conditions. Often times during this era, the bare
boards had passed the existing cleanliness specifications, based on resistivity of solvent extract testing, and yet still resulted
in high failure rates for OEMs. Such failures could often be traced back to the non-ionic water soluble fusing and hot air
solder leveling fluid residues from fabrication processes. (see IPC-TM-650; TMs 2.3.38 and 2.3.39.) Ion chromatography
testing for electronic assemblies was adopted by our industry during this time period as well.
Today, bare board residues and their impact on electronic assemblies are better understood, and there are better tools for
measuring bare board cleanliness, but the need to clean may still be required by OEMs. When an OEM chooses to imple-
ment a no-clean assembly process, they have not really eliminated the need for cleaning, but have moved the cleaning
requirement upstream to the board fabricator and component makers. This may not be always understood by either the OEM
or the chosen fabricators or especially the customer. In addition, with any profit squeezed out of the board fabrication sec-
tor, board fabricators and assemblers may no longer have technical staff members that understand the critical parameters for
board cleanliness, or may shortcut bare board cleaning to get a lower price or higher profit. OEMs may not understand how
to specify or measure cleanliness in procurement contracts, and so cleaning in the OEM assembly process may remain a
viable safety net for fabrication and ultimately assembly residues.
Using similar reasoning, OEMs may choose to clean because of residues that remain on components. At present, there are
no industry standards for component cleanliness. This may be especially true where components have to be re-tinned for
solderability restoration. Such re-tinning may require a much more active flux which cannot remain on the components.
Cleaning processes also have secondary benefits, such as removal of solder balls, allowing the use of water soluble mask-
ing agents, and changing surface energy of assemblies for conformal coating.
Flux residues can bind solder balls to solder mask, as shown
in Figure 7-4.
An OEM also may choose to clean because of assembly ascet-
ics, especially in the high performance or military realm. A
defense contractor often has to deal with contractual language
and boilerplate language that may be decades old, referring to
obsolete specifications or with customers whose experience
with fluxes was back in the ‘‘good old days’’ of high solids
rosin fluxes. In those days, a visible flux residue was always
potentially a bad flux residue. A popular misconception is that
visible flux must be ‘‘contamination’’ and undesirable. That Figure 7-4 Evaluation of Solder Balls on Printed Wiring
mentality carries through for many programs simply because Boards with Dry Film Solder Resist23
so many military programs have been experienced field fail-
ures attributed to harmful effects of flux residues or lack of cleaning. It is not uncommon for an OEM to choose to continue
to clean a low residue flux because it is far easier than changing the mindset of the customer. Without any quantitative mea-
surement techniques and appropriate pass/fail limits, it was extremely difficult to convince anyone that the dreaded white
residues were merely cosmetic or that the invisible but very damaging hydroscopic non-ionic residues were a source of real
disaster, especially at elevated humidity levels.
65
An increasing reason for cleaning ‘‘no clean’’ residues is the effect of flux residue distortion of the assembly surface topol-
ogy, resulting in degraded electrical performance, especially at increased frequencies. (See Effect of Post-Reflow, No-Clean
Solder Paste Residues on Electrical Performance; A. Beikmohamadi, 43rd Electronic Components and Technology Confer-
ence, June 1-4, 1993.) In this case, the distortion of an impressed square wave on a test circuit card with different levels of
flux residue at various frequencies was quantitatively measured.
All of these factors lead to perhaps the most subtle reason why an OEM may choose to clean a low residue flux - it is easy
to change a material or process, compared to the effort needed to change a culture. Implementing a true no-clean assembly
process involves dozens, if not hundreds of changes, each of which can have a detrimental effect on assembly reliability if
not addressed. It involves placing controls on vendors, selection of new material sets and possibly new equipment, imple-
mentation of controls on storage and handling, and a massive retraining of personnel. One of the greatest forgotten elements
of a successful no clean process is implementation of rigorous board and component solderability standards to cope with the
very mild soldering materials used. Thus, the ’no clean’ assembler lost the process flexibility of stepping up to more aggres-
sive fluxes and pastes to compensate for marginal solderability, knowing any residues could be essentially completely
removed in the cleaning process. None of these factors are trivial or inexpensive, although the elimination of the cleaning
process, cleaning agents, and personnel was often hastily implemented by management perception that it would result in
huge cost savings.
IPC J-STD-001 clearly places the burden of materials compatibility testing on the shoulders of the OEM. When a low resi-
due flux or solder paste is chosen, the OEM must choose a flux/paste that is cleanable with a chosen cleaning chemistry.
Not all low residue fluxes can be cleaned or at least, cleaned adequately to acceptable levels.
So, there are many valid reasons why OEMs continue to implement cleaning processes, even when using low residue or
‘‘no clean’’ fluxes.
7.4 Ionic Residues The nuclei of atoms are surrounded by electrons that are arranged in a series of shells, or energy lev-
els based on the atomic number of an element.10 The closer an energy level is to the nucleus, the more strongly the elec-
trons in that level are attracted to the nucleus because the electrostatic force of attraction between particles of opposite elec-
trical charge increases rapidly with decreased distance of separation. The orbital electrons are classified in terms of their
energy levels, on the firmness with which they are bound to the nucleus in the atom. The energy levels, or shells, are des-
ignated by either the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,and 7 or the letters K, L, M, N, O, P, and Q starting with the one nearest the
nucleus. The maximum number of electrons found to occupy each of the various electron shells is 2n2, where n is the num-
ber of the shell counting from the nucleus. Hence the shell nearest the nucleus, for which n=1, can contain a maximum of
2(1)2 or 2 electrons; the second shell from the nucleus (n=2), or 8 electrons; and the third shell from the nucleus 2(3)2 or
18 electrons.10
Table 7.2 Energy Levels and Maximum Number of Electrons

Energy Levels or Shells
Letter Designation n Maximum Number of Electrons, 2n2
K 1 2
L 2 8
M 3 18
N 4 32
O 5 50
For atoms or molecules whose electrons in the valence shell are not equal to the total number of protons exhibit a net posi-
tive or negative charge.11 Electrons are negatively charged and protons are positively charged. An anion is an ion with more
electrons than protons, giving it a net negative charge.12 Conversely, a cation is an ion which fewer electrons than protons,
giving it a net positive charge.13 Ionic bonding, commonly known as chemical bonding, arises from the mutual attraction of
oppositely charged ions. Since ions of like charge repel each other, they do not usually exist on their own. Ions of opposite
charge form a crystal lattice, in which ions of opposite charge are bound to each other. For example, the sodium ion (Na+)
is attracted the (Cl-) ion resulting in the sodium chloride (NaCl) compound. The resulting compound is called an ionic com-
pound, and is said to be held together by ionic bonding (positive and negative charges).
The most common type of ionic bonding is seen in compounds of metals and non-metals.15 Metals are characterized by an
excess of electrons in the valance shell. They have a tendency to lose these extra electrons in order to attain a stable con-
figuration resulting in an electro-positive ion. Non-metals are characterized by a valence shell with a few electrons short of
66
a stable configuration resulting in an electro-negative ion. When a highly electropositive metal is combined with a highly
electronegative nonmetal, the extra electrons from the metal atoms are transferred to the electron-deficient nonmetal atoms.
This reaction produces metal cations and nonmetal anions, which are attracted to each other to form a salt.
Consider sodium, which in its atomic form has one valence
electron.13 With one electron in its outer energy level, sodium
tends to lose one electron, leaving the sodium ion with one
more proton then electron. As a result, the sodium ion has a
+1 charge. (Figure 7-5)
Anions are atoms or groups of atoms that have gained elec-
trons. With more negatively charged electrons than positively
charged protons, they are negatively charged. Halides (chlo-
rine, bromine, fluorine, and iodine) are atoms that commonly
form ions most easily since they have 7 electrons in the
valence shell. Since 8 electrons in the valence shell is a more
stable state, the halide will gain an extra electron resulting in
a negative charge since there is one more electron than Figure 7-5 Sodium Atom and Ion
photon.
The electrostatic attraction between the sodium ion with one
extra proton and the chloride ion with one extra electron
results in the sodium chloride molecule (Figure 7-6). Ionic
residues are formed based on the strength of ion-dipole forces
of attraction with water and the strength of the interionic bond
of the ionic compound.14 For an ionic compound to form a
solution, the ion-dipole forces between water and ionic com-
pound must be greater than the interionic bond. When the
ionic compound is surrounded by moisture, the water dipoles
surround the clustered structure of the ionic crystal. The nega-
tive ends of the water dipole are attracted to the positive
dipoles of the ion and the positive ends of the water’s dipole
are attracted to the negative dipoles of the ion. If the force of
this attraction is stronger than the interionic bonds, the interi-
onic bonds of the crystal will be broken, and then hydrated by Figure 7-6 Chlorine Atom and Ion
water molecules.
Ionic residues create a reliability risk when the interionic bond is hydrated with monolayers of water. In the classic case of
an ionic residue such as sodium chloride, water hydrates and dissolves the ions. In the case of the sodium ion, the positive
charge attracts the negative end of the water molecule’s dipole (OH-). The negative charge of the chloride ion attracts the
positive end of the water molecule’s dipole (H+). Each ion is encased in a shell of water molecules. The shells insulate the
ions from each other, allowing the oppositely charges particles to separate.
These ions encased in water spread across conductors on the circuit assembly. The metals present in the electrolyte form
filaments that propagate and grow in a tree like fashion between conductors when the circuit board is powered up. The
stronger the electrical bias, the faster the filament growth propagates. With time, the filament will bridge the conductors
causing an electrical short.
7.4.1 Electrochemical Migration (ECM) Several factors have an influence on ECM including temperature, relative humid-
ity, voltage bias conductor material, conductor spacing, contamination type, and contamination amount.3
Ionic contaminates have a significant effect on corrosion.2 There are a number of process conditions that have the potential
to leave assembly residues both on the surface and under component gaps. Multiple contamination sources commonly occur
starting with incoming components, soldering processes, solder flux residues, process cleaning, conformal coating, handling
and packaging. Susceptibility to electrochemical-migration, dendrite morphology, and dendrite resistance is a function of
ionic contamination and bias. An increased level of chlorides or other ions further accelerates the migration process. The
probability of experiencing a failure increases at higher ionic contamination levels.2
ECM occurs in three stages: path formation, initiation, and dendritic growth.3 The occurrence of ECM requires an electro-
lyte, a voltage bias and migrating metal.4 Initiation transpires through the dissolution of the metal at one conductor, the
67
transport of the metal ions through the electrolytic solution, and deposition of the metal at an oppositely biased conductor.
The electrolyte comprises dissolved ions and a solvent, typically water. For the electrolyte to dissolve contaminants and
transport ions at least three monolayers of absorbed moisture is required.5 Twenty monolayers of absorption can make the
electrolyte sufficiently thick to dissolve and move ions over the PCB surface.6 The voltage bias between metallization on the
board acts as a driving force for metallic filaments to migrate.4
7.4.1.1 Path Formation Current leakage starts with migration of metallic species present on the PCB surface or within
the PCB laminate (see Humidity Threshold Variations for Dendrite Growth on Hybrid Substrates, A. der Madersosian, IPC-
TP-156; April, 1977). Leakage reduces surface insulation between adjacent conductors. Path forming electrodes are formed
from metallic ions that migrate from metallic traces (e.g., copper, silver, tin, lead etc.), board finishes, and solder alloy com-
binations.3 Electro-dissolution takes place when surface metals oxidize and migrate from the cathode toward the anode. As
the metallic dendrites grow, surface insulation decreases. Once the dendrites fully span the gap between adjacent conductors
and touch the anode a short may occur. The current flowing through a dendrite may burn out part of the dendrite due to
Joule heating. This phenomenon can lead to intermittent failures, which can be recurrent if re-growth and fusing occur in a
cyclical fashion. Current leakage can lead to intermittent or permanent failures.3
The formation path starts from metal ions dissolving in an electrolyte solution.3 The corrosion leakage is a function of the
PCB material composition, board surface topography, ionic residues, distribution of ions, and environmental conditions. The
porosity of the surface finish, scratches, and cavities render higher surface energies, which increases their hydroscopic nature
to absorb monolayers of water. Surface contamination, such as flux residues or fibers, on the board surface increases the
tendency to absorb moisture. Once dendrites bridge the gap between adjacent conductors, a sudden drop in resistance occurs,
often leading to system faults.3
The nature of the ionic residue can often affect the onset or speed of metal dissolution or the formation of the electrolyte.
Chloride and bromide residues can combine with water to form weak acids which more easily dissolve metals, leading to
metal filament formation. Other ionic contaminants, such as nitrates, when combined with water, may form electrolyte solu-
tions, but not result in filament formation. In such cases, this may lead to electrical leakage currents that come and go with
humidity, often resulting in No Trouble Found (NTF) failures in electronics.
Several factors have an influence on ECM including temperature, relative humidity, voltage bias conductor material, con-
ductor spacing, contamination type, and contamination amount.3 Flux residues on a PCB can either inhibit or boost mois-
ture absorption depending on the composition and thickness of the residues.
Intra-laminate dendrites normally grow along the fiberglass
bundles where there has been poor adhesion to the laminate
resin, resulting in a void. This void can absorb water and pro-
vide space for the dendrite formation to take place, often from
one PTH or via to another. (The void in Figure 7-7 is along
the top of the single glass fiber.)
Electrochemical migration that occurs inside the board along
glass bundles is more appropriately called conductive anodic
filament (CAF) growth.
Surface dendrites tend to be brittle, often tapping or striking
the ‘defective PWB’ on a tabletop will break the dendrite and
restore the PCB to service. However, this does not cure the
root cause of the dendrite origin in the manufacturing process.
7.4.1.2 Initiation Electro-dissolution involves the solvation

of metals to become cations (negative electrode) at the anode Figure 7-7 Void in Single Glass Fiber
(positive electrode) through oxidation.4 Under a DC bias volt-
age, metal cations migrate to the cathode (the ion transport step), get reduced into neutral metal, and deposit onto the cath-
ode (electro-deposition). As more and more metal deposits on the cathode, a dendritic structure grows from the cathode
toward the anode.4
Hygroscopic and service-related residues increase the risk of forming a water layer that becomes the catalyst for spreading
contamination on the PCB surface. Under humid conditions, assembly residues attract monolayers of water, which allows
conductive salts to dissolve and spread across conductors. As residues come in contact with conductors, current can flow
from the anode to the cathode thereby establishing an electrochemical cell between two points on the PCB.
68
7.4.1.3 Dendritic Growth Dendrites grow through the repeated deposition of metal ions.1 Growth tends to take more time
at lower potentials due to slow dissolution and deposition kinetics. High voltage increases the current flowing through a
component, which results in heat and increases migration kinetics. With dissimilar material combinations present at the
interconnection, thermodynamic forces drive dendrite formation across metallic growth filaments. Growth of dendrites
finally leads to electric shorts between two points on the PCB, which cause component failure or malfunction.1
At higher potentials, dendrites tend to be thinner, grow at faster rates and less branched compared to low potentials. This
behavior is believed to be due to the higher electric field acting between terminals, which results in subsequent deposition
of the metal ions at the tip of the dendrite rather than branching.
7.4.1.4 Density and Spacing The spacing of the conductors, which are the electrodes in an electrochemical migration
process, affects both the ion migration time and the incubation time.1 Migration occurs from the movement of metal ions
from anode to cathode within the electrolyte layer on the board surface. Ions must travel further when there are larger spac-
ings between conductors, which contributes to longer time-to-failure. A larger spacing also results in a lower electrostatic
force on the ions, reducing the driving force for migration. Smaller spacing increases the probability that flux residues or
surface contamination will be sufficient to bridge all or most of the gap between electrodes, allowing moisture to absorb and
form the continuous electrolyte medium required for ECM. Higher density board designs increases the risk of ECM, which
must be mitigated through appropriate selection of other design and process factors.4
Current density is of primary concern in corrosion rate.1 Voltage and conductor spacing exert a significant influence on
time-to-failure by ECM. The applied voltage is directly related to the driving force for ion migration. Conductor spacing
also affects the driving force for migration as well as determining the distance over which ions must travel in order to reach
the cathode and form dendrites. The spacing also affects path formation, which can be the rate-limiting step for ECM under
many circumstances. Higher applied voltage and smaller spacing create greater concern from assembly residues left on the
PCB surface.1
Miniaturization at all levels opens the pathway for assembly residues to form a conductive cell between two points on the
PCB.1 Over the last ten years (2000-2010), the size of electronics has reduced by over 70%. For flip-chip ICs, miniaturiza-
tion amounts to 90% closer pitch between conductors. The closer spacing increases the electric field (E = v/d, where E is
the electric field, V is the applied potential, and d is the distance between the terminals), which increases the risk of corro-
sive cell formation in the presence of ionic contamination and moisture. The electrostatic force is proportional to the ionic
charge and applied voltage.1
At constant voltage, the electric field between conductors rises inversely with the conductor spacing, increasing the poten-
tial for failure. The voltage bias is directly proportional to the force applied on a charged metallic ion within the field.9 The
force applied on a charged particle may affect the time it takes an ion to move through the electrolytic solution. With no
reduction in line voltage, these factors contribute significantly to higher e-fields than have been experienced previously in
more mature technology.9
The problem is that current spacing trends can yield spacing between printed circuit board traces as small as 48µm (1.92
mils).9 Common applied voltages can be close to 5V, creating an electric field of approximately 2.5 V/mil. This is close to
1.5 times the maximum electric field tested. As the electric field increased from 0.4 V/mil to 1.6 V/mil, the occurrence of
dendrites increased. Fundamentally, this may be due to the forces on a charged particle being directly proportional to e-field.
As the e-field increased, the force on the metallic ions increased.9
Bumiller et al (2010) reported ECM data findings with dendritic growth found on boards ranging all contamination levels,
including ‘‘0’’µg/in2 chloride ion. At low chloride contamination levels (‘‘0’’ and 2 µg/in2), dendritic growth was found on
the 6.25 mil spacing comb structure, with infrequent appearances on the 12.5 mil comb structure, with infrequent appear-
ances on the 25 mil comb spacing. At 5µg/in2 to 20µg/in2 chloride ion, dendritic growth was found on both the 6.25 and
12.5 mil spacing comb structures. At 50µg/in2 chloride ion, dendritic growth was no longer distinguishable on 6.25, 12.5,
and 25 mil comb spacing.
Applying this to current spacing and applied voltage trends, an electric field of 2.5 V/mil may have ECM issues at lower
contamination levels than previously considered.9 The ‘‘0’’ µg/in2 boards at an electric field of 1.6 V/mil showed the pres-
ence of ECM with contamination amounts under the currently recommended standards for bromine contamination. Chloride
is widely accepted as a more reactive ion than bromine. As spacings continue to be reduced, cleanliness standards must
become more stringent.9 Due to the effect of electric field, as spacing reduces, for a given contamination level, the likeli-
hood of ECM will increase.9
7.4.1.5 Halide Ions Halide ions serve as catalysts in the dissolution of metallic ions, with chloride ions having the stron-
gest effect.9 The minimum levels necessary to induce corrosion are uncertain, with several sources specifying a range of
69
recommended contamination limits (no standard exists), from 2µg/in2 to 10µg/in2 for chloride ions. Bromide ions, which are
also known to be a problem, have reported a recommended limits range from 15µg/in to 20µg/in2.
The presence of chloride ions in solutions readily dissolves metal ions necessary for migration. Many field failures show
signs of chloride contamination on components. Such contamination on the PCB can arise from the use of halide-containing
flux, human handling, or from service environments. Material makeup, surface morphology of electrode layer, and assem-
bly cleaning play a big role in controlling migration due to combined effects.
At lower contamination levels, less metal is dissolved. With less metal ion levels, the forces on metallic ions are driven by
the electric field. The electric field vector has a direction toward any deformities on the surface of a conductor. Surface dis-
locations and other defects can cause localized focusing on the electric field. The electric field will be higher at the defect
location, driving metallic ions to this defect and causing dendritic growth.9
7.4.1.6 Effect of Solder Alloy: SnPb vs. SAC The solder alloy and soldering process represent two synergistic factors that
determine the susceptibility to ECM. Tin-lead soldered PCBs tend to show better overall reliability than do SAC lead-free
PCBs. The SIR of reflowed processed PCBs with SnPb solder generally show an increased SIR followed by a gradual sta-
bilization. In contrast, the SIR of reflowed processed PCBs with SAC solder show a stable or increasing SIR followed by
a prolonged decline.
7.4.1.7 Effect of Solder Mask Solder mask is a thin, heat resistant polymeric layer commonly applied to PCBs to define
wettable regions during the soldering process.8 It prevents solder from being deposited onto undesired areas such as the area
between copper metallization traces. However, the solder mask needs to be cured properly and cleaned since solder mask
on its own contains ionic residues. Solder mask controls outer layer impedance and protects PCBs from handling damage
during assembly. Boards with solder mask protect the underlying copper trace and help prevent ion migration between traces.
Solder mask materials improve chemical, heat and moisture resistance. When there is no solder mask, the flux sticking to
the edge of copper traces effectively reduces the non-conductive spacing. With reduced gaps between conductors, weak
organic acids in flux, such as glutaric and adipic acids, are more likely to build up a continuous conductive leakage path due
to their hydroscopic nature.
Improperly cured solder mask is being found to be an increasingly severe contributor to electrochemical failures, especially
for assemblies manufactured in no-clean assembly processes. Incompletely cured solder mask, which is difficult to detect,
is relatively porous and will absorb later process chemicals that come into contact with the mask [reference 29]. Process
chemicals include solder mask etching and developing solutions, final finish plating chemicals, and fluxes. Inadequately
cured solder mask can then also absorb process chemicals in the OEM assembly process. Residues that are absorbed into
the solder mask are extremely difficult to remove in a cost effective manner. It is critical that the bare board vendor moni-
tor the strength of the ultraviolet (UV) radiation used to cure the solder mask.
If an ionic assay of unpopulated circuit assemblies shows high levels of ammonium or potassium, it is an indication that
there may be an issue with either the solder mask cure state, or very poor rinsing following solder mask imaging and devel-
oping. Solder mask developing chemistries are often based on ammonium or potassium salts. Another indication that solder
mask cure may be inadequate is the leaching of the solder mask pigment into ionic assay extraction solutions. Coloring pig-
ments should not be extractable from properly cured solder masks.
The issue of inadequately cured solder mask is a critical one for many Class 3 OEMs as it is very hard to detect prior to
end item product burn-in testing, when significant amounts of time and money have been invested into the assembly.
Absorbed residues will not be detected by resistivity of solvent extract (ROSE) tests except in the grossest cases. Even the
more rigorous ion chromatography analysis may not catch this problem. Pauls29 presented case studies where process
chemicals were absorbed into solder masks, which were then ‘‘sealed in’’ by the hot air solder leveling process. Conven-
tional ionic contamination assay methods did not detect the condition. When the assemblies went through a solder reflow
process, taking the solder mask above the glass transition temperature (Tg), the contaminants were free to come out of the
mask, resulting in extensive electrochemical failures.
One method of testing for absorbed residues is the use of ‘‘heated controls.’’ If an unpopulated circuit board is exposed to
an OEMs solder reflow processes, but with no components and no exposure to process chemicals, the ionic assay of the
heated control can be compared to the ionic assay of the unheated control. The assay is best performed with ion chroma-
tography. If there is little difference between heated and unheated samples, then there is a much lower risk of absorbed
materials. If the difference in residues is significant, then there may be a solder mask cure issue and the bare boards should
be considered as suspect.
70
7.4.1.8 Controlling ECM The primary method for controlling ECM is through aggressive control of board-level cleanli-
ness, specifically halides such as bromides and chlorides. Conformal coatings are commonly utilized to protect the board
and components from environmental effects. Controlling the environment from gaseous contaminants is also important since
airborne contaminants may also contribute to ECM failures. As component pitch reduces in size, the use of leadless pack-
ages increase, and high density/high impedance designs become more common place. As such, the occurrence of ECM can
be expected to rise.3
With proper cleanliness measures in place, dendritic growth can be eliminated. How clean is clean becomes more difficult
to define as spacings on circuit boards and component lead pitch decrease. The reduction in spacing also increases the elec-
tric field, which is a primary driver of dendritic growth.
7.4.2 Electromigration Electromigration occurs when interconnected conductors within semiconductor packages are
closely spaced by the movement of electrons flowing through a metal conductor.27 The movement of electrons flow from
the cathode (negative charge) and toward the anion (positive charge). When the electrons momentum is transferred to a
nearby activated ion, a break or gap can develop in the conductors, preventing the flow of electricity resulting in an open
circuit.
As the number of interconnects increase within a limited space, flux residues can bridge conductors. Flux residues bridging
conductors creates a pathway for the gradual movement of ions due to momentum transfer between conducting electrons
and diffusing metal atoms.28 Metallic particles present in the flux residue can propagate through the flux residue when
devices are power up. Heat can increase propagation.
As the structure size in electronics and integrated circuits decrease, the risk of electromigration increases.28 Electromigra-
tion leads to the eventual loss of one or more connections and intermittent failure. With increasing miniaturization, the prob-
ability of failure increase due to the increases in power and current density. To address this problem, packagers removed
flux residues from under flip chip devices and other integrated circuit packages.
7.5 Creep Corrosion Creep corrosion is an increasing phenomenon on printed circuit boards present in environments that
contain abnormal levels of sulfur or other pollutant gasses. Elemental sulfur is regulated by OSHA as a nuisance dust, and
is allowed in a human working environment at part per million (ppm) levels. Sulfur in ppm levels can cause computer sys-
tems to fail within 2 months of use. Planar board finishes, such as immersion silver and OSP over copper, are especially
susceptible to this type of corrosion.17 Creep corrosion does not require an electrical potential to occur making is subtly dif-
ferent from electrochemical migration.
Creep corrosion can occur on any surface finish. Similar to electrochemical migration, creep corrosion requires a source of
contamination and moisture.16 Creep differs from ECM in that the corrosion does not require an electrical field, but occurs
from airborne contaminants, particularly sulfur. If a circuit board is exposed to humid environments rich in airborne con-
tamination containing sulfur, creep corrosion will occur.20 Sulfur based air borne contaminates react with silver and copper
to form silver and copper sulfides. These contaminates grow in all directions equally.
Creep corrosion can cause electrical opens in very fine line circuitry, as well as the creation of electrical shorts when the
corrosion creeps across conductors.21 Corrosion failure rates raise when three factors intersect: increased airborne pollutants,
reduced circuit protection, and miniaturization. The severity of the problem is due to less robust materials and more inter-
action opportunities. In this extreme corrosion mechanism, the surface finish is corroded. The corrosive ions form copper
salts. Monolayers of water can carry the conductive salts across conductors. With heat generation, the electrolyte dries leav-
ing behind a crystallized salt. If more humidity comes in contact with circuitry, the cycle repeats, with the formation of rings
of crystalline deposits.21
7.5.1 Creep Corrosion and Miniaturization The reduction of circuit board feature sizes and the miniaturization of com-
ponents necessary to improve hardware performance increase corrosion risks. Airborne contaminants are generally high in
ionic content such as chlorine bearing salts.16
Creep corrosion is of increased concern due to hardware failures in IT data centers. Computer performance improvements
are made possible due to the decreased size of transistors and the distances electrical signals have to travel to accomplish
the tasked assigned them.18 Increased packaging density in combination with miniaturized electronic components increase
the risk of detrimental effects on hardware reliability due to:
• Increased heat load per unit volume requires increased air flow to maintain hardware within acceptable temperature limits.
• Increased air flow exposes electronics to airborne contaminants.
71
• Higher packaging density does not always allow the hermetic sealing of components.
• Decreased spacing between printed circuit board voltages increases the possibility of ion migration.
• Component features that approach the size of corrosion products become more prone to the ill effects of corrosion.
Creep corrosion failures are also found in industrial control electronics and aerospace, where the surrounding air contains
high levels of pollutant gasses. It is critical to understand the end-use environment when electronic assemblies are designed.
7.5.2 Creep Corrosion and PCB Board Finish Printed circuit boards have conducting layers on the surface typically made
from thin copper foil. Copper, being a reactive metal, readily oxidizes in atmospheric environments.19 Traditionally, exposed
copper on the PCB was plated with a tin-lead based solder using hot air solder leveling (HASL) process. The move away
from lead and miniaturization reduced the use of HASL finishes.
Creep corrosion is more prevalent today due to the increase use of planar board finishes. HASL finish on tin-lead boards
protected the underlying copper from exposure to atmospheric conditions. The transition to lead-free soldering, low profile
components, manufacturing defects and miniaturization create the need for planar surfaces. If the solder joint poorly wets
the surface metal, copper is exposed. Increased airflow for thermal management increases the creep corrosion risks. Elec-
tronics in harsh environments where moisture is present increases creep corrosion risks. Air cooling in data centers is also
a contributing factor.16
Planar boards finishes such as OSP over copper and ENIG (electroless nickel immersion gold) have a limited shelf life.19
Due to these issues, immersion silver finishes are becoming the standard PC board finish in the electronics industry. With
the change to immersion silver board finishes, PC board failures relating to sulfur air borne contamination levels have
increased. The increased failure rate starts with the propensity of silver and copper to react with sulfur. This issue is further
complicated by the fact that there are areas on immersion silver circuit boards that contain exposed silver and copper, such
as the inside of via barrels.17 When the via hole is not complete coated with immersion silver, copper metal is vulnerable
to atmospheric attack that leads to galvanic corrosion.19
When a metal, such as copper, is coated with a more noble metal, such as silver, galvanic corrosion can occur in the pres-
ence of a suitable electrolyte. In the presence of humidity, the galvanic cell creates a potential for metal reduction. When
electrochemical reactions occur between copper and silver, the anode in the electro chemical cell will be copper since it is
the more active metal. Copper corrodes significantly faster than silver in a sulfur based oxidizing environment. This high
corrosion rate environment contains metallic growth that is highly conductive.17
There are numerous sources of copper which need to be protected, especially when immersion silver board finish is used.20
The first is at the copper-solder mask interface. In this area, copper does not exchange with silver, but in presence of humid-
ity and airborne contamination, exposed copper can react with silver resulting in solder mask interface corrosion. The sec-
ond source of copper is from voids within the silver plating. During heat cycling, copper can migrate to the surface of the
silver finish. Thin solder mask also can lead to exposed copper, especially after assembly. Additional sources of copper
include partially plugged via holes and cracks within the solder mask. Exposed copper becomes a ready source for reac-
tion.20 Immersion silver is often a material of choice for high frequency applications due to the radio frequency (RF) propa-
gation characteristics of silver.
7.5.3 Creep Corrosion and Circuit Board Cleanliness The final PCB needs to be clean. Ionic materials can corrode the
conductor directly, or the ions may combine with humidity, flux, or other materials leading to corrosion.21 Xu and Fleming
(2009) examined the effect of flux residues on creep corrosion. When copper vias were completely covered with lead-free
solder, there was no evidence of creep corrosion. On assemblies with exposed silver, severe corrosion occurred over time,
but the corrosion was not considered creep corrosion. In boundary areas where silver was exposed to flux residues, severe
creep corrosion occurred. The flux residues exposed to the silver boundary areas promoted silver corrosion that migrated
onto the solder mask surface.
When using active fluxes that were not cleaned post soldering, Xu and Fleming reported creep corrosion occurring within
5 days. Rosin flux showed only localized corrosion. The problem is that active fluxes remove copper oxides while leaving
behind copper salts within the flux residue. In humid environments, the corrosion grows and creeps from the circuitry to the
solder mask. The failure also occurs in industrial areas where the presence of sulfur exists.
Proper handling, shipping, and storage procedures are very important.21 Fingerprints transmit a variety of contaminants,
including chlorides. Packaging materials should be certified as ‘‘sulfur-free.’’ Once open to assembly, unused PCBs need to
be returned to original packaging and vacuum sealed if stored for an extended time.21
72
PCB storage locations are critical to sulfur induced tarnishing, especially of silver or high-silver finishes. PCB storage adja-
cent to the cafeteria where eggs were often served resulted in sulfur based tarnishing. Industrial control electronics in a
Vidalia onion processing plant experienced severe corrosion as Vidalia onions contain very high levels of sulfur.
7.5.4 Locations Prone to Sulfide Creep Sulfur is present in raw materials used to manufacture oil, coal, and ore that con-
tain common metals like Al, Cu, Zn, Pb, and Fe.16 Sulfur dioxide gases are formed when fuel containing sulfur is burned
or when gasoline is extracted from oil, or when metals are extracted from ore. About 1/3 of the mass of particulate matter
in pollution consists of sulfur compounds.16
Sulfur sources include hydrogen sulfide used in water treatment, swamp gas, fertilizer, geothermal, agriculture, automotive
exhaust and smelting. Sulfur dioxide is commonly found in coal and oil burning, cement manufacturing, and other heavy
industries. Mercaptans are used in rubber manufacturing. Organic sulfur compounds are present in clay. Locations prone to
sulfide creep include rubber, mining, smelting, cement, asphalt, paper mills, fertilizer and farms, waste water treatment, pet-
rochemical, clay, and companies located in areas where sulfur levels are high.16 One of the combustion byproducts of natu-
ral gas is sulfur gas, and is often emitted by forklifts which run on natural gas.
7.5.5 Corrosion Prevention Strategies Corrosion prevention can be viewed in three steps: reinforcement, remediation,
and relocation. Protection can be at the PCB level, such as improved finishes. At component assembly, conformal coating
or full coverage by soldering of all features is effective. Protection at box-build includes the use of filtering and hermetic
sealing of devices. Very difficult environments can be improved with filtering, air conditioning, humidity control, and gen-
eral housekeeping.
7.6 Tin Whiskers and Circuit Board Cleanliness Lead-free solder tin whiskers are a growing area of concern. Extensive
research studies characterize the chemical and physical parameters involved for whisker formation. Tin alloys exposed to
elevated temperature and humidity form a thin tin oxide films at low density levels.25 The low density and resulting increase
in volume of tin oxide layers causes an increase in exerted pressure at the deposit grain boundaries, giving rise to internal
stress. Tin whiskers grow to relieve the compressive stress in tin. The concern is that these whiskers can bridge the gap
between two conductors causing a short circuit.26
Researchers find that whiskers grow from the bulk solder when exposed to ionic contamination.23,24,25,26 The corrosion effect
is significantly accelerated when exposed copper is present immediately adjacent to tin, as is the case at based of the sol-
der joint formation.26 The greatest incidence of whiskers occurs at the base of the solder joint where there is the greatest
concentration of flux residue.26 Whiskers and hillocks protrude through flux residue and grow up to 140µm length. Corro-
sion propagates through eutectic regions in the inter-dendritic spaces of the solder. Diffusion in the bulk solder depletes Ag
and Cu in SAC alloy. The depleted solder area may experience compressive stresses from the rest of the solder. Compres-
sive stress between the underlying based copper and tin-based alloy creates a condition for whiskers to grow.23
Solder flux flows away from the solder joint during the reflow process while solidifying at the base of the solder joint. Flux
residues rich in chloride and bromide ions created whiskers while areas low in contamination whiskers did not grow.23 To
understand this effect better, Snugovsky et al. designed an experiment to test the impact of contamination on tin whisker
formation. The experiment evaluated components as received, components cleaned, and components contaminated with a
solution containing sodium chloride and sodium sulfate. The components were exposed to 500 hours conditioning at 85°C
[185°F]/85% RH. The components as received resulted in short whiskers; components cleaned resulted in no whiskers, and
contaminated components resulted in long whiskers. A second subset of the test components were assembled with SAC305
onto a test substrate. Components cleaned after assembly resulted in no whiskers while components used as received and
not cleaned resulted in short whiskers. Intentionally contaminated components resulted in long whiskers. The authors con-
cluded that the use of clean components and post assembly cleaning significantly reduces propensity of whisker formation
in Pb-free assemblies.23
Hillman (2010) reported on research that evaluated the potential of tin whisker growth induced by chloride contamination.
Samples of electroplated tin on a stressed copper substrate were subjected to three different chloride solutions for 72 hours
followed by high temperature/high humidity conditioning. Sample 1 was immersed in a sodium chloride saturated solution.
Sample 2 was immersed in a half saturated sodium chloride solution. Sample 3 was immersed in a 0.001M HCl solution.
The test coupons were suspended for a period of 72 hours followed by rinsing and drying. The test samples were placed in
a test chamber at 85°C [185°F] at 85% relative humidity. Five designated locations were examined optically using a Scan-
ning Electron Microscope. The data findings found whiskers were impacted by ionic contamination levels with higher ionic
levels resulting in greatly whisker density.24
73
Research studies find a relationship between the incidence of tin whiskers and the extent of ionic contamination and corro-
sion. Heat, humidity, and ionic contamination contribute to corrosion and compressive stress. A secondary effect is the vol-
ume and distribution of flux residues.
7.7 Marine Corrosion Another atmospheric contaminant that can dramatically decrease the service life of an electronic
assembly is exposure to salt air. Salt water contains significant levels of chloride (from sodium chloride and potassium chlo-
ride). Salt air tends to be very corrosive to many unprotected metal surfaces. Electronics which go into marine environments
(e.g., Coast Guard helicopters) should either be hermetically sealed or conformal coated.
For other articles on the effects of chemical residues on electronic circuits, Pauls and Munson authored monthly case stud-
ies in their Process Rx column of Circuits Assembly magazine from 1997 through 2000. References [29 ] through [34 ] are
additional articles by Pauls and Munson that may be useful.
References:
1. Minzari, D., Jellesen, M.S., Moller, P., Wahlberg, P., & Ambat, R. (2009, September). Electrochemical Migration on
Electronic Chip Resistors in Chloride Environments. IEEE Transactions on Device and Materials Reliability. 9 (3),
392-402.
2. Azarian, M.H. (2010, Feb.). Electrochemical Migration in Printed Circuit Board Assemblies. Telecom and Webex.
CALCE EPSC, University of Maryland. College Park, MD, 20742.
3. Bumiller, E., and Hillman, C. (2010). A Review of Models for Time-to-Failure Due to Metallic Migration Mechanisms.
DfR Solutions. College Park, Maryland, 20742.
4. He, X., Azarian, M.H., Pecht, M.G. Effects of Solder Mask on Electrochemical Migration of Tin-Lead and Lead-Free
Boards. University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742.
5. Cvijanovich, G. (1980). Conductivities and Electroltic Properties of Absorbed Layers of Water. Procedures of NBS/
TADC Works, Moisture Measure Technology for Hermitically Semiconductor Devices II. University of Maryland, Col-
lege Park, MD, 20742.
6. Zamanzadeh, M., Meilink, S., Warren, G., Wynblatt, B.Y. (1990). Electrochemical Examination of Dendritic Growth on
Electronic Devices in HCL Electrolytes. Corrosion, 46(8), 665-671.
7. Pecht, M., Ahukla, A.A., Hagge, J., and Jennings, D. (1999). Moisture Ingress into Organic Laminates. IEEE Electronic
Packaging Technology. 22(1), 104-110.
8. Zhu, H., Guo, Y., Li, W., Tseng, A., and Martin, B. (2000). Micro-Mechanical Characterization of Solder Mask Mate-
rials. IEEE Electronic Packaging Technical Conference. 148-153.
9. Bumiller, El, Pecht, M., Hillman, C. (2010). Electrochemical Migration on HASL Plated FR-4 Printed Circuit Boards.
CALCE Electronic Products and Systems Center. College Park, MD, USA.
10. Nebergall, W.H., Schmidt, F.C., & Holtzclaw H.F. (1976). College Chemistry with Qualitative Analysis. D.C. Heath and
Company, Lexington, MA.
11. Ion (2010). Wikipedia.
12. Anions (2010). Wikipedia.
13. Cations (2010). Wikipedia.
14. Solvent-Solute Interactions (2010). University of Southern Maine.
15. Formation of Ionic Solutions (2010). Chemwiki, University California Davis.
16. Schuller, R (2010). Creep Corrosion. IPC/SMTA Cleaning & Coating Conference. Chicago, IL.
17. Mazurkiewicz, P. (2006, Nov). Accelerated corrosion of printed circuit boards due to high levels of reduced sulfur gases
in industrial environments. International Symposium for Testing and Failure Analysis. Renaissance, Austin, TX.
18. ASHRAE Technical Committee. (n.d.). Gaseous and particulate contamination guidelines for data centers.
19. Muller, C. (n.d.). What’s creeping around your data center? Purafil, Doraville, GA.
20. Kenny, J., Wengenroth, K., Antoenllis, T., Sun, S.L., Wang, C., Kudrak, E., &Abys, J. (n.d.). PWB creeping corrosion
mechanism and mitigation strategy. Enthone, Inc. Cookson Electronics, West Haven, CT.
21. Cullen, D. (n.d.) Preventing corrosion of PCB assemblies. MacDermid.
22. Xu C., Franey, J., Fleming, D., &Reents, W. (2009). Creep Corrosion on Lead-Free PCBs. IPC APEX EXPO, 2009. Las
Vegas, NV.
74
23. M. Khutoretsky, Electronic Packaging and Corrosion in Microelectronics, pp 225-234, April, 1987
24. Snugovsky, P., Meschter, S., Kapadia, P., Romansky, M., Kennedy, J., & Kosiba, E. (2010). Influence of Board and
Component Cleanliness on Whisker Fromation. IPC/SMTA Cleaning and Coating Conference, Chicago, IL
25. Hillman, D. (2010, Nov). The role of ionic contamination as a tin whisker initiator. IPC/SMTA Cleaning & Coating
Conference. Renaissance Hotel, Schaumberg, IL.
26. Kurtz, O., Barthelmes, J., Martin, K. (n.d.) Anti-corrosion solution for reduction and prevention of corrosion whiskers.
Atotech.
27. Howell, K., Koshi, M., Masuda, J., Nishimura, T, Nozu, T., and Seatman, K. (2010, May). Effect of soldering method
and flux type on tin whisker growth in SAC305. SMTA International Conference on Soldering and Reliability. Toronto,
CN.
28. Mackie, A. (2009). Electromigration: Our mutual friend. SMTA Wafer Level Packaging Conference. Santa Clara, CA.
29. Electromigration (2010). Wikipedia.
30. Pauls, D. The Effects of Solder Mask Selection on Cleanliness, IPC Apex Expo 2000 Proceedings.
31. Pauls, D. The Consequences of Ignoring Residues, IPC Apex Expo 2000 Proceedings.
32. Pauls, D. Residues in Printed Wiring Boards and Assemblies. Proceedings of Surface Mount International, 1996. Paper
SMI-528.
33. Pauls, D. Examining BGA Attachment Processes using Ion Chromatography and Surface Insulation Resistance Testing,
Georgia Tech Flux Conference, 1996.
34. Pauls, D. Testing and No Clean Technology, First National Conference on No-Clean, 1993.
35. Pauls, D. Munson, T. Cleanliness Monitoring of a No-Clean Assembly Process, Nepcon Proceedings, 1995, Paper P4-2
36. Pauls D. IPC-TP-1077: Process Characterization and Verification, Proceedings of the Georgia Tech Flux Conference
1994, Proceedings of Electrocon (EMPF), May 1995
8 ASSEMBLY RESIDUES/CLEANING CONSIDERATIONS
8.1 Scope Assembly materials consisting of adhesive, fluxes, and solder alloys may vary depending on the mounting,
attachment of components, assembly type and component grouping. When considering soldering and cleaning, assembly
residues result from the choice of soldering method and the use of lead or lead-free solder. The choice of flux that is com-
patible with the solder method and solder will itself determine the cleaning methods used. Final cleanliness will be deter-
mined by the end-use environment, and in some cases, the contract quality requirements.
The electronic assembly process ranges from the very simple to the very complex, and involved a wide range of materials.
Each step in the process, and each material used will have some impact on the assembly, most affecting the chemical resi-
dues remaining on the assembly surface. Materials to be considered include fluxes, cleaning solutions, labels, adhesives,
masking materials, component residues, outgassing residues, etc. This chapter covers many of the common materials used
in most manufacturing processes.
8.2 Purpose The purpose of this section to discuss the types of residues that accumulate during the printed circuit board
fabrication and during the assembly processes; especially as they apply to post solder cleaning. Additionally, issues pertain-
ing to inspection of remaining residues, root cause of those residues, and preventative actions are discussed.
8.3 Terms and Definitions
8.3.1 Acid Flux: A solution of an acid and an inorganic, organic, or water soluble organic flux.
8.3.2 Activated Rosin Flux: A mixture of rosin and small amounts of organic-halide or organic-acid activators.
8.3.3 Activator: A substance that improves the ability of a flux to remove surface oxides from the surfaces being joined.
8.3.4 Adhesive: A substance such as glue or cement used to fasten objects together. In surface mounting, an epoxy adhe-
sive is used to adhere SMDs to the substrate.
8.3.5 Adsorbed Contaminant: A contaminant attracted to the surface of a material that is held captive in the form of a
gas, vapor, or condensate.
75
8.3.6 Conductor Pitch: The distance between the centers of adjacent conductors.
8.3.7 Conductor Spacing: The observable distance between adjacent edges (not center to center spacing) of isolated con-
ductive patterns in a conductor layer.
8.3.8 Conformal Coating: An insulating protective covering that conforms to the configuration of the objects coated pro-
viding a protective barrier against deleterious effects from environmental conditions.
8.3.9 Corrosive Flux: Flux that contains levels of halides, amines, or organic acids that cause corrosion of copper.
8.3.10 Depth from Board Surface to the Bottom side of a Component: The distance or standoff height from the bottom
side of the component to the board surface.
8.3.11 Dross: Oxide and other contaminants that form on the surface of molten solder.
8.3.12 Flux: A chemically and physically active compound that, when heated, promotes the wetting of a base metal sur-
face by molten solder by removing minor surface oxidation and other surface films and by protecting the surfaces from
re-oxidation during a soldering operation.
8.3.13 Flux Residue: A flux-related contaminant that is present on or near the surface of a solder connection.
8.3.14 Leadless Surface Mount Components: A surface mount component such as a OFN or chip cap whose external
connections consist of metallized terminations that are an integral part of the component body. The concern from a clean-
ing perspective is that the clearance under the component is extremely narrow with smaller components and no leads.
8.3.15 Non-activated Flux: A natural or synthetic-resin flux without activators.
8.3.16 Organic Flux: Flux primarily composed or organic materials other than rosin or resin.
8.3.17 Packaging Density: The relative quantity of functions (components, interconnection devices, mechanical devices,
etc.) per unit volume.
8.3.18 Paste Flux: A flux formulated in the form of a paste to facilitate its application.
8.3.19 Reflow Temperature: The temperature range of a reflow soldering process during which the solder is in its liqui-
dus phase.
8.3.20 Resin: A natural or synthetic resinous material.
8.3.21 Resin Flux: A resin and small amounts of organic activators in an organic solvent.
8.3.22 Rosin: A hard, natural resin, consisting of abietic and primaric acids and their isomers, some fatty acids, and ter-
pene hydrocarbons, which is extracted from pine trees and subsequently refined.
8.3.23 Rosin Flux: Rosin in an organic solvent or rosin as a paste with activators.
8.3.24 Solder Ball: A small sphere of solder adhering to a laminate, resist, or conductor surface.
8.3.25 Temporary Solder Resist: A heat resisting coating material applied to selected areas to prevent the deposition of
solder upon those areas during subsequent soldering.
8.3.26 Solvency: The removal of organic and inorganic soils using a blend of polar and nonpolar organic solvents.
8.3.27 Reactants: A substance that improves the cleaning agent’s ability to saponify flux residues from PCBs.
8.3.28 Stand-Off: The distance from the board surface to the bottom of the component.
76
8.3.29 Synthetic Resin: A synthetic organic polymer or a chemically treated natural resin.
8.3.30 Water Soluble Flux: An organic chemical soldering flux that is soluble in water.
8.4 Post Cleaning Residues The primary residue to be removed in post soldering cleaning is flux residue, which is gen-
erally a mixture of ionic, non-ionic and particulate soils. There are different types of flux residue that must be considered
when implementing a cleaning technology.
J-STD-004 categorizes flux based on chemistry makeup into rosin based (RO), resin based (RE), organic (OR), and inor-
ganic (IN) fluxes. These flux compositions are further classified according to their activity levels. Fluxes may come in the
following forms: liquid flux, paste flux, solder-paste, flux-cored wire, flux-coated preforms, and flux-cored preforms. Each
type removes oxides and promotes wetting by the solder. Fluxes are activated by heat before and during the actual solder-
ing step.
8.4.1 Rosin Based Fluxes Rosin is one of the oldest fluxing materials used in soldering. Rosin is found as one of the con-
stituent materials in the sap of pine trees. As a naturally occurring material, it is a mixture mostly of organic resin esters and
primary monobasic resin acids such as abietic, neo-abietic, primaric and palustric acids. These carboxylic acid structures
may be present in various proportions that differ between methods of preparation and sources, even between individual lots
of the same source.
In appearance, rosin is an amber-colored glassy material. It is not a true solid since it does not melt as a crystalline mate-
rial but rather undergoes continuous softening as temperature is increased until it reaches fluid consistency. Increasing wash
temperatures improves rosin cleaning properties due to softening to the point of fluidity.
Rosin alone has only a mild fluxing activity. Its ability to induce solder wetting of many metals with slight oxide deposit is
limited. To enhance the fluxing activity of rosin fluxes, chemical activators are commonly added to the rosin flux. The acti-
vators can be nonionic organic materials that become active only at the elevated temperatures of soldering, or more active
ionic materials such as amine halides or organic acids.
Rosin flux is often used as the solid core in solder wire. This can be incorporated in the wire directly in the extrusion pro-
cess of manufacturing. Rosin is also used extensively in liquid fluxes and as activators in solvent systems (usually alcohol
based).
As a flux material rosin has a number of important attributes:
• By itself, a mild fluxing material.
• Residues are non-corrosive to metals.
• Excellent electrical insulator at ordinary temperatures. Rosin residues left on circuit boards often result in higher surface
insulation resistance (SIR) levels than bare, fully cleaned boards22.
• Excellent moisture repelling encapsulant for more corrosive ionic halides and acids. Encapsulated ions of these materials
are effectively immobilized and not able to contribute to surface electrical leakage or corrosion at metallic interfaces.
• Soluble in a wide variety of organic solvents including many alcohols, ketones, glycol, ethers, chlorinated, brominated and
fluorinated solvents and hydrocarbons.
• Composed mostly of organic acids and esters, rosin can be removed in solvent, semi-aqueous and aqueous saponification
cleaning processes.
Despite these features, it is usually desirable to remove rosin flux residues after soldering to expedite electrical testing and
coating of the circuit assemblies, to eliminate unsightly sticky residues, and to remove ionic activators that may cause elec-
trical degradation.
A problem often encountered in removing rosin fluxes is the formation of white or tan residues. These residues are formed
by improper cleaning and could be made worse by excessive temperature and time exposure of the rosin in soldering opera-
tion. In such cases, some portions of the rosin may be converted at soldering temperatures by pyrolysis or oxidation to prod-
ucts which are not readily soluble in weaker organic solvents. The soluble portions of the rosin can then be leached out
leaving the insoluble portions as visible white residues. This residue, once formed, is extremely difficult to remove.
Rosin fluxes normally contain activators to remove oxide films from metal surfaces that are to be wetted by solder. These
activators are usually amine hydro halides, organic acids, or mixtures of the two. These materials may react under the heat
of soldering to form products that are not easily soluble in solvents or aqueous cleaning solutions. This can be one source
of white residue problems.
77
The acid and ester groups in rosin will react with alkaline cleaning agents to form soap-like materials that can be dispersed
in water. This process is called saponification. Rosin fluxes can be activated or made more aggressive by the addition of
activators, which are usually amine hydrohalides or organic acids. By their very nature, the activators can cause corrosion
to circuit elements if they are allowed to remain on the printed wiring assemblies after soldering. Users must be aware that
not all rosin molecules have the acid or ester groups needed for saponification. If these groups are not present, the unreacted
material is referred to as Non-Saponifiable Rosin (NSR), Resin, or Polymer. Levels of NSR in typical rosin range from
4-7%.
Some of the soils that remain on printed wiring assemblies after soldering are by-products of chemical reactions of the rosin
such as polymerization, pyrolysis, and combination with metal salts that can occur during the soldering process. In cases
where this is severe, a white or tan residue, referred to as white residue or white deposits, is sometimes observed. It is only
visible after the cleaning step or after exposure to water or humidity because the rest of the soldering residues have been
cleaned from the surface to expose its presence. Because of its various chemical forms, white residue is an extremely diffi-
cult material to remove. Its presence usually signals that the soldering process is outside its control limits, the soldering flux
or paste contains white residue precursors, an incompatibility exists between soldering materials and cleaning agents, or
contamination of either printing wiring boards or components. In some cases these residues are a by-product of incompletely
cured UV curable liquid solder masks.
Rosin fluxes also can have a discoloring effect on copper surfaces, resulting in a greenish appearance. Tellefsen21 concluded
that rosin-containing flux residue on copper can become green during exposure to elevated temperatures and humidity
because a strongly colored copper rosin salt is formed. The high SIR values obtained for a synthetic copper rosin salt indi-
cates that the material is hydrophobic and is an electrical insulator even under extreme temperature and humidity conditions.
This suggests that presence of green flux residues does not indicate a deterioration of printed circuit board electrical reli-
ability for many rosin-containing fluxes including those used in some solder pastes.
Dr. Tellefsen’s research showed that the greenish residue did not have a detrimental effect on electrical reliability. Other
research has shown similarly that white residues are not always detrimental. Visible residue alone, regardless of color, should
not be used as an indicator of acceptable cleanliness. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to tell the difference between a benign
visible residue and a harmful visible residue. The residue must be characterized chemically and then correlated to an elec-
trical test under humid conditions to determine if the flux residue is benign or aggressive.
8.4.2 Water Soluble Fluxes The term water-soluble does not necessarily mean that flux residues will be water-soluble
after heating or will be soluble in water alone. Reactions form organometallic compounds or mineral salts. For example,
lead salts are poorly soluble in water; but if left on the board, it will decompose slowly in the presence of humidity and
atmospheric carbon dioxide which may result in surface corrosion. A neutralizer similar to an engineered aqueous cleaning
agent can be used to remove lead salts.
Water-soluble (Type OR) organic fluxes consist of water-soluble organic acids such as citric acid or organic hydro halides
and surfactants. Their residues are generally poorly soluble in hydrocarbons and other non-oxygenated organic derivatives.
Water-soluble flux formulations vary greatly. They do not have a common element like the rosin in rosin fluxes. The chem-
istry of the residue, the materials and processes necessary to remove the residue is therefore related to rosin as the primary
consideration. The closest material that could be said to take the place of rosin would be a high molecular weight
poly-glycol, chosen to simplify removal of the residue by water. One common characteristic of most OA fluxes is that they
are extremely reactive. This allows good soldering yields with heavily oxidized components and boards. Because of this
reactivity, the residues after soldering must be completely and quickly removed to avoid long-term corrosion, SIR noise and
other problems. As is the case for rosin fluxes, abusive soldering conditions can alter the chemical structures of organic acid
flux residues making them insoluble in water. For this reason, some users add various products, such as neutralizers, chelat-
ing agents, or detergents to water to enhance its cleaning ability for water-soluble fluxes.
As their name indicates, this class of fluxes is water-soluble. However, the residues after soldering may not show the same
water solubility as exhibited by the flux prior to soldering. The soldering processes expose the flux to very high tempera-
tures (usually around 260°C [500°F]). At these temperatures, chemical reactions such as oxidation or pyrolytic decomposi-
tion may occur. This could be particularly problematic between the components and the laminate. Such reactions generally
give rise to products that are at best partially insoluble in water. The degree to which these reactions can occur is a func-
tion of time and exposure temperature, as well as the specific chemistry of the flux. These residues may be easily visible
without magnification but they can also be present on assemblies that appear to be completely clean under magnification.
In this case, their presence can be detected using ionic extract resistivity testing or measurement of surface insulation resis-
tance (SIR).
78
8.4.3 Synthetic Activated (more accurately ORH0 or ORH1) Fluxes Synthetic Activated (SA) fluxes are based on syn-
thetic materials which are not chemically related to rosin. They have been developed to improve on the performance of rosin
based fluxes. Rosin is a natural material with inherent variability in composition and properties. SA fluxes give excellent
performance in soldering but the residues must be removed. Originally formulated for removal with chlorofluorocarbon
(CFC) solvents, they can be removed with semi-aqueous or other solvent based cleaning agents. Activators for SA fluxes are
similar in nature to those found in rosin fluxes.
These fluxes are mixtures of two or more synthetic organic compounds. They are normally formulated to be active fluxes
and therefore, must be removed completely. The residues of SA fluxes are readily soluble in organic solvents and may or
may not be soluble in water. Care must be taken in the choice of cleaning agents as acidic flux residues may deplete acid
acceptors in organic cleaning solvents (if present) and lead to an acidic condition in the equipment.
High activity non-rosin based, SA fluxes were formulated to overcome the natural variability of rosin fluxes, to activate
heavily oxidized metal surfaces, to eliminate white residues and to maximize the cleaning with stabilized solvents equiva-
lent to CFC-ll3/methanol azeotrope. They do not contain rosin, and their residues are easily soluble in certain organic sol-
vents. The residues are quite reactive and should be removed completely after soldering to avoid corrosion failures. SA flux
residue, which does not become hard like rosin, should be removed within one hour of soldering to prevent corrosion.
8.4.4 Low Solids (No-Clean) Fluxes This class of fluxes consists of solids or nonvolatile content ranging from 2-5 wt.%.
The concept is that since the flux residues are not detrimental to electrical performance, pin testability, and/or are barely
visible, they may safely be left on the assembly. This is not necessarily a valid assumption. In order to ensure sufficient
activity, the ratio of activator to rosin may be much higher in some low residue fluxes in comparison with conventional
fluxes. Thus, it is critical to demonstrate that the residues for a specific flux are non-corrosive and remain so after exposure
to service conditions.
Unlike the fluxes discussed in previous sections, low solids fluxes are formulated to leave minimal or no post-soldering resi-
due. Because the intent is to avoid cleaning, these low solids fluxes should preferably meet the L, but no more than M activ-
ity designations as specified in J-STD-004. It is important to understand that for these low solids fluxes, the non-corrosive
or benign nature of the residues is predicated on the assumption that the fluxes reach a minimum temperature, usually
achieved during mass reflow, where the flux is transformed from a conductive liquid to a benign solid. For fluxes incorpo-
rated into solder pastes, this conversion is virtually guaranteed as the flux contacts molten solder during reflow. However,
if liquid flux is added as a soldering aid in a hand soldering operation, this is a much greater risk as much of the flux may
be beyond the thermal effects of the soldering iron tip.
Low solids/no-clean fluxes may be used in assembly processes which may, or may not incorporate a cleaning process.
Chapter 7 outlined reasons why a manufacturer would choose to clean a ‘‘no-clean’’ flux. It is critical to understand that
when a low solids flux is used as a true no-clean material, it must be part of an integrated, optimized, and tightly controlled
assembly process that minimizes all other forms of assembly residues. It is far more complex an issue than changing fluxes
and eliminating cleaning.
By maintaining a low solids content and ensuring sufficient flux activity, often the activator may be the major portion of flux
solids. Because of this unusual ratio, one cannot rely on the more inert solids to encapsulate activator residue. In fact, some
studies have shown that surface insulation resistance decreases as a function of original quantity of flux applied, inferring
that excessive post-soldering residue may cause electrical problems. Consequently, it is important to control the quantity of
flux applied. Normally, board’s cleanliness is controlled by the efficiency of cleaning material and cleaning process; here,
the control is directed at the flux application step since there is no post-soldering cleaning. A number of different applica-
tion techniques are commercially available, each with its own list of advantages and disadvantages.
8.4.5 Lead-Free and Miniaturization Influences on Assembly Residues Compatibility of lead-free alloys with a variety
of flux chemistries is considered essential, and is determined for performance in handling ability, including shelf life and
tack time, and soldering capability, including solder balling, wetting, and solder joint appearance.4 In general, SAC lead-free
alloys exhibit a poor wetting ability. More aggressive flux chemistries are needed in order to achieve wetting comparable
with eutectic tin-lead alloys.4
Solderability is a measure of the ease with which a joint substrate can be wetted by molten solder and it continues to an
important consideration in all soldering processes, particularly as the industry moves to lead-free.11 Flux is necessary to
remove surface oxides from PCBs and components to promote correct alloy formation and to act as a heat transfer medium
to ensure correct soldering temperatures. The cleaner the solder surface the less activator is needed to solder the compo-
nent.12
79
Lee4 cited desirable characteristics of lead-free no-clean flux compositions:

• Reduced volatility.
• Halide-free.
• Greater fluxing capacity.
• Higher residue resistivity.
• More resistant to oxidation and charring.
• More efficient oxidation barrier.
• Lower activation temperature.
• Slower wetting speed when solder begins to melt.
• Less spattering.
• Higher probe penetrability.
• Capability of inducing nucleation of solder upon cooling.
• Greater resistance to slump.7
With a no-clean process, the objective is for the residue to form a hard barrier that seals the circuit from exposed ionic con-
tamination. For high reliability product suppliers, many chose to clean no-clean flux residues. Cleaning agents have
advanced to the point where most no-clean flux compositions are cleanable.
Flux compositions designed for lead-free consist of multiple polymer species and property modifying additives.12 The addi-
tives affect the mobility of the system, solvent retention properties, long and short term dielectric properties, thermal behav-
ior, and cleaning properties. The key to maintaining all desired product attributes, as well as maximizing topside fillet per-
formance, lies in a thorough understanding of the interactions between these polymers and certain properties of the
modifying additives.
The science of flux compositions for eutectic Sn/Pb is well understand and mastered.12 At higher soldering temperatures
required for lead-free SAC alloys, the organic solvent must be thermally stable to reduce the level of activator needed to
solder the component. One critical problem is the lack of thermal stability, thus requiring more active flux compositions.
Consequently, flux residues that would have been sufficiently benign with eutectic tin-lean soldering processes, and used
in an optimized no-clean assembly process, may not be suitably benign at the higher lead free temperatures, necessitating
a return to cleaning, or at a minimum, the qualification of a different flux chemistry optimized for the higher reflow
conditions.
As soldering temperatures rise, the flux materials undergo changes in their physical and chemical properties such as the
evaporation of volatile fractions, surface energy, and melt viscosity.12 The consequence for the solder flux is early displace-
ment by the scrubbing action of the solder wave, and ultimately the thermal breakdown of the material. This results in loss
of the flux functionality as a protective blanket, and the loss of an insulating film over the liquid solder when it wicks up
the barrel of the via or through-hole. The latter result, in conjunction with the larger change in lead-free soldering tempera-
tures between the bottom and the top side of the printed circuit assembly passing through the wave, results in early solidi-
fication before the liquid solder is able to wick up the barrel and wet the top side of the pad.
In wave soldering operations, the activator systems must provide the ability for the molten solder to smoothly and reliably
separate from the non-metallic when the board exits the wave.12 Therefore, the solder flux must exhibit both detergency and
a highly controlled surface energy during the time that it is in contact with the solder wave. It must rapidly spread over the
surface, displace the contaminants, and build a uniform monomolecular film that presents the proper surface energy profile
to the wave. This done using a flux composition requires surface active materials whose characteristics have been optimized
for the acidic environment of the solder flux.
For the monomolecular flux film to be stable, it must wet and be absorbed on the surface in a stable configuration during
the high temperature excursions through the solder wave.12 A combination of several surfactants is required to control both
the surface tension and interfacial tension at the solid-liquid interface. The flux chemistry must improve wetting on non-
metallic surfaces, lower surface tension, and penetrate into the subsurface of the solder resist. Such a system needs to con-
trol the droplet size of the flux upon spraying, which is essential for controlled distribution of the flux and sufficient capil-
lary activity in vias and through-holes. Such systems will impart more residues, foaming, reduced SIR and the need to clean.
80
8.4.5.1 Lead Free Cleaning Relevance The change to lead-free manufacturing urges tighter process control. Higher I/O
counts, progressive miniaturization, more reliable performance, and other demands are being impeded by circuit board
cleanliness effects. The relevance of clean lead-free assemblies must be considered to mitigate stray leakage and electro-
chemical migration reliability risks.
Contamination can severely diminish the ability to resist shorting of leads and traces. Pre- and post-assembly ionic and non-
ionic contaminants are considered harmful residues to the electronics manufacturing process. Localized contamination might
not raise the contamination level of the overall assembly, but may have a detrimental localized effect.
Lead free processing temperatures, typically 30-40°C hotter than eutectic tin-lead, can also have an impact on the materials
of construction (e.g., laminate and solder masks) of an electronic assembly. If suitable materials are not selected, the higher
reflow temperatures may degrade the laminate/mask such they have less chemical resistance and so may be detrimentally
affected by a rigorous cleaning process. The same can be said of components. Many modern components are made of less
expensive thermoplastic materials which may not withstand high reflow temperatures.
8.4.5.2 Cleaning Lead-Free Flux Residues Lead-free, no-clean flux compositions are formulated with higher molecular
weight flux vehicles that improve thermal stability and oxygen barrier during the soldering process. The flux residues from
these higher molecular weight flux compositions have a greater degree of product to product variation from suppliers, form
hard resinous barriers, and increasingly more difficult to clean.
To remove these hardened lead-free flux residues from the surface and under components higher solvency cleaning agents,
increased wash time, wash temperature, wash concentration, and impingement energy may be needed. Numerous assembly
factors influence the lead-free flux residue cleaning properties. The amount of heat and time in the soak and liquidus zones
must be adjusted by the mass of associated components, proximity of neighboring components, size of the pads, and the
amount of heat that travels through the boards. The soldering process influences the level of heat exposure to the flux com-
position, which affects the hardness of the residue post soldering.
These higher molecular weight residues and the thermal transients that the residue may encounter during the soldering pro-
cess requires increased cleaning agent solubility and mechanical forces to enable the flux residue to dissolve into the clean-
ing agent. These forces of attraction depend on the nature of the cleaning agent and the flux residue. Penetrating low clear-
ance gaps requires a cleaning agent that matches up with the flux residue, impinging forces that can deliver the cleaning
agent to the residue, wash temperature, and wash time.
8.4.5.3 Amount and Location of Flux Residues In addition to the type of residue, the amount of residue and the location
of the residue are important. For surface mount assemblies that are reflow soldered, the residue will be concentrated around
solder joints and under components. The spaces between components and the printed circuit boards are often small and
cleaning can be difficult. For wave soldered assemblies, larger amounts of flux residue will be distributed over the entire
surface of the assembly, and the liquid flux will flow into tight spaces under components, or into component cavities. Liq-
uid flux can also flow through vias and under large components where it can be trapped. Users should be aware that flux
residue can consist of reacted flux, un-reacted flux and condensed flux vapors.
It should also be noted that when liquid flux constituents volatilize, they do not just disappear. They must go somewhere.
This may mean that they re-condense on nearby (cooler) surfaces on the assembly surface, or in the vents of the reflow
equipment. Over time, these residues can and do build up and should be addressed in a proper preventative maintenance
cleaning schedule for the equipment exhaust paths.
8.4.6 Solder Pastes According to J-STD-005 solder pastes are mixtures of solder particles, fluxes and solvents. Solder
particles are usually spherical, ranging in size up to 150 microns in diameter. Contamination involved is usually oxide or
carbonate on the surface of solder particles. Metal content of solder paste ranges from 85% to 95% by weight (35 to 50%
by volume). Fluxes are based on a wide range of technologies with various degrees of activation, the activators being simi-
lar to those in normal rosin fluxes. The function of solvent is to impart correct rheological properties to the mixture, in terms
of its method of application. Solvent compositions are proprietary, but usually include alcohols (in particular polyglycols,
derived esters and ethers), and additives. If not removed, residues may reduce surface insulation resistance under humid
conditions. In particular, polyglycols, esters, and ethers are difficult to remove with solvents. Additives also may produce
relatively insoluble residues after heating to soldering temperature.
8.4.7 Inorganic Acid Fluxes Inorganic acid fluxes are mixtures of inorganic acids and highly ionic, inorganic salts. These
fluxes often contain materials such as hydrochloric acid, zinc chloride and ammonium chloride. Their residues if left on a
81
board can be extremely corrosive, particularly in a moist environment. Zinc salts, especially, offer particular difficulties in
their complete removal by aqueous cleaning process since they readily form zinc oxychloride, Zn(OCl2), which is insoluble
in water. Subsequent reaction of this material with moisture could regenerate the acidic salt resulting in severe corrosion and
electrical leakage problems.
8.4.8 Solder Other types of residue could be derived from the solder itself, rather than from the chemicals used in the
soldering or cleaning processes. The primary residues are solder dross, solder balls, and solder oils. Additionally greases and
oils from wave solder chains are sources of contamination.
8.4.8.1 Solder Dross Dross is occasionally seen where a board has inadequate flux solids applied to it before it contacts
the hot solder. Such flux starved surfaces might skim dross from the surface as it passes over the solder without having suf-
ficient flux activity present to break it up. The oxides deposited would be seen as a dark smut or webbing which could gen-
erate electrical shorts between conductors.
8.4.8.2 Solder Balls Tiny, often microscopic, balls of shiny metallic solder could be left on insulating surfaces of a cir-
cuit board. The types and causes of solder balls are often associated with the solder paste quality, stencil printing, and reflow
processes. As the component features reduce, greater levels of accuracy and release from stencil apertures will be required.
Nano-coated stencils represent an emerging technology in an effort to improve transfer efficiency.
Solder balls can be deposited on some solder mask materials and in the transition areas between the mask and solder pad
locations, or under the components because of their surface forces and the degree of roughness of the solder mask surface.
They are seen on the board side which contacts molten solder (bottom-side) during wave soldering. Solder balls should be
evaluated for impact upon hermetic and radiation hardening performance of the component considering the intended perfor-
mance environment. Solder balls on the metalized surfaces may be acceptable if the extended electrical performance is not
required or compromised. Solder balls which are entrapped, encapsulated, or attached (e.g., in no-clean residue, with con-
formal coating, soldered to a metal surface, embedded in the solder resist or under a component) are acceptable.
8.4.8.2.1 Spattering In some instances, solder balls can be found on the opposite laminate surface away from solder
(board topside). This occurs where there are through-holes. If the flux which had been applied was insufficiently dried in the
pre-heat stage of the soldering process or the board contained large amounts of water entrapped in the laminate and was not
adequately baked prior to soldering, the remaining solvent or water vapor will cause spattering when it comes in contact
with hot solder bath. Such spattering is, in reality, micro-explosions caused by very rapid expanding vapors of the solvent
or moisture. This causes a percolation of solder up through the holes in the boards, spewing tiny solder balls on the board
topside. It is especially severe if traces of water were present in the flux and were not thoroughly evaporated in the preheat-
ing process before the board contacts the solder.
Prevention of solder balls requires a combination of correct drying procedures, use of a paste with minimum surface oxide
contamination, and a flux with sufficient activity to remove this contamination.
8.4.9 Wave Solder Pot Additives Additives used in the soldering process may help promote wetting of metallic surfaces,
as an antioxidant, and to improve wetting by reducing surface tension while keeping bridging, webbing, and icicle forma-
tion of the solder to minimum. These materials are used in various ways. In their simplest application, they can be floated
on a solder pot to limit the contact of the solder with air, thereby sharply reducing the amounts of dross formed. In some
equipment, they are also injected into solder wave where they similarly provide a protective anti-oxidizing film on the sol-
der wave that contacts the circuit board.
Heat stability is an important consideration when using an additive as a dross inhibitor or soldering assist fluid. When used
as a cover on a solder bath, it degrades with prolonged heating, resulting in reduced life and more difficulty in removing the
residue.
8.4.9.1 Water Soluble Oils These materials are usually polyglycols or high temperature surfactants such as ethoxylated
derivatives of octyl and nonyl phenol. They are entirely water-soluble and can be removed with hot water spray cleaning
after the soldering process.
A problem which may occur with water soluble oils is the deleterious effect of some of these materials on the electrical sur-
face insulation resistance (SIR). While it is not the universal case for all water-soluble oil materials, some oils may react
with and bond to the polymeric surface and be retained through even a severe water washing process. These materials may
82
also have the capacity to absorb moisture from humid air (hygroscopicity), which can result in a lowering of SIR by sev-
eral orders of magnitude.
8.4.9.2 Solvent Soluble Oils These are natural oils with inhibitors added to reduce oxidation or degradation at high tem-
peratures. With respect to SIR, this type of oil would be safer to use since the oil residue is water resistant in the end-use
environment.
Oils by themselves can be used for certain soldering/de-soldering processes.
8.5 Other Residues
8.5.1 Handling Soils Ideally, printed boards and components should not be handled at all during the manufacturing pro-
cess. However, in practice this is often impractical. The best that can be done is to minimize the accumulation of people-
related contaminants, by reducing handling to a minimum and ensuring that various cleaning steps are capable of removing
the contamination before it can do any harm. Handling occurs during shipping and receiving, transferring of boards through
process steps, inspection and manual assembly. Contaminants introduced by personnel handling is perhaps the most com-
plex to define. Human contact with the surface can introduce a wide variety of materials that include:
• Finger oils.
• Salts (from perspiration).
• Assorted dust and dirt.
• Food particles.
• Flaking skin.
• Hand creams and cosmetics.
• Lint or debris from gloves.
• Bodily fluids (may require disinfection).
Such contamination may be water-soluble, solvent soluble, or insoluble in either. For this reason, handling contaminants
often present challenging cleaning problems.
Fingerprints are a complex and potentially harmful source of contamination. Fingerprints contain not only oils, salts and
acidic body products, but also residues from soaps, hand lotions, and previously handled objects. Since they are so complex,
it is impossible to ensure complete removal by any specific cleaning process. Personnel should be trained to handle boards
as little as possible and only by the edges. Potential damage depends on the location of the fingerprints. On bare copper and
on laminate surfaces between copper traces, they reduce insulation resistance. Fingerprints on component bodies may do no
damage, but any accumulation of fingerprints will give higher ionic contamination readings in the solvent extract resistiv-
ity test. (See IPC-TM-650, Method 2.3.25, Detection and Measurement of Ionizable Surface Contamination.)
The use of gloves will protect against fingerprints, but gloves also can act as a source of contaminants. Plasticizers, talcum
powder, dust, and lubricants can be transferred from rubber gloves. Woven fabric gloves may contribute fibers. All gloves
could have been previously contaminated, if used for other purposes. Gloves which come into contact with other process
materials become contaminated and so must be kept clean or changed frequently. Operators must be trained that if wearing
gloves, the gloves themselves must be kept clean as well. This is frequently overlooked or misunderstood, leading to a false
sense of security. If using disposable gloves, frequent glove changes can become a significant expense, leading to pressures
to change gloves less often, leading to contamination.
Gloves should be chosen to be resistant to the process chemicals they contact. They also should be chosen to be comfort-
able to the operator. If not, they will either be used less or not at all. An alternative is to use cotton gloves with rubberized
palms and fingers, but with the back of the gloves untreated cotton. This allows for a glove that breathes and so is more
comfortable for the operator, while maintaining a tactile surface that is cleanable with suitable solvents. When properly cared
for, such gloves can last for months.
Food, drink, and tobacco products should be prohibited in all process, storage, and inspection areas.
8.5.2 Marking The marking of faults found during inspection should be done with suitable removable adhesive stickers.
Pencil marks or felt tip pens leave undesirable residues.
83
8.5.3 Work Place and Ambient Storage Conditions Ideally, components, laminates, and work-in-process should be stored
in an atmosphere free from contaminants with controlled temperature and humidity. Unfortunately, this is usually not the
case and materials will accumulate various forms of airborne particulates. Where possible, components should be kept in
their original containers, provided that the containers are not, themselves, sources of contamination. Floors and surrounding
areas should be kept clean.
It is a common practice to transport and store ‘‘work in progress’’ assemblies in electrostatic discharge (ESD) safe plastic
totes. However, periodic cleaning of such totes is seldom (if ever) done and can be a source of residue accumulation, con-
taminating items placed in them. It is also a common practice to have totes lined with ESD protective foams to cushion
assemblies. Sharp solder points and component edges will gradually shred these foams, leading to foreign object and debris
(FOD) particulate contamination. Some ESD bags and foams gain their ESD characteristics by chemical surfactants, which
can likewise transfer to an assembly surface. Such foams and chemically treated bags should be avoided wherever possible.
Another common practice is to include production paperwork (process travelers) along with manufactured assemblies, espe-
cially if they are small. Most common paper is bleached white using chlorine, a very undesirable residue for electronics.
Paper can also result in fibers (FOD) transferring to the assembly surface.
8.5.4 Component Packaging as a Source of Contamination The use of automatic component placement equipment
requires the components to be supplied in taped reels, trays or tubes. It is important to determine whether the components
in packaging are clean and whether the residues from any prior process will cause cleaning problems.
8.5.5 Temporary Solder Stops/Masks/Resists/Tapes Solder stopping materials, also called solder stops are used to keep
PTHs from filling with solder. It is useful for insertion of components that cannot be water washed and have to be assembled
by a secondary operation. There are several solder stops on the market today.
In some cases, the assembler will be faced with a situation where it is desirable to shield metallization from the soldering
process. These materials can be categorized as either washable or peelable.
The washable varieties can be water or solvent soluble. The water or aqueous soluble types are composed of different mix-
tures of gums, higher alcohols, thickeners, and polymers. Comparable solvent soluble materials are available based on
waxes. The use of water or solvent soluble masks will require increased monitoring and maintenance of cleaning equipment
due to the accumulation of mask residue. Water soluble masks and spacers may require changes in the cleaning cycle such
as longer pre-rinse times to avoid carrying the mask materials into the wash solution. The principal advantage is that the
post-solder cleaning process can be utilized to remove the resist. The resist supplier’s recommendations for the removal pro-
cess should be followed.
The peelable type of resist is usually applied as either a tape or a liquid (that subsequently cures) and is designed to be
removed manually after processing. Tape used can be either adhesive- or latex-based tape. For adhesive tape, adhesive resi-
dues may remain when the tape is removed after soldering. Silicone polymer latex based tape should not be used for elec-
tronic circuits since their residues are difficult to remove. Ammonia-based latex could be used but when peeled off, the
ammonia-based compounds leave ionic contamination that requires water wash for removal. Residues from peelable resist
materials leave increased levels of chloride and sulfate that can be a source of electrical leakage and corrosion problems.
These residues can be examined by using ion chromatography and by Environmental Stress Screening (ESS) tests which
expose the area to increased humidity under a nominal working bias voltage. A typical amount of the material is placed
across the comb patterns of the IPC-B-24 test board or equivalent. The material is then cured, wave soldered, and removed.
The residue remaining (invisible) and covering the comb patterns can be used in SIR investigation.
For either category of resist, the assembler should verify that the material is adequately removed for the application. Sub-
sequent solderability, conformal coating adhesion or performance of the assembly may be degraded if removal is inadequate.
8.5.6 Lubricants and Greases Product may be contaminated by contact with lubricants from assembly machines. These
can pose cleaning challenges since they may be difficult to remove. The best defense against this problem is good house-
keeping practices to avoid contamination by these materials.
Lubricating oils are normally mineral oils that are hydrophobic and tend to form tenacious films on surfaces which are dif-
ficult to be removed completely. They are soluble in non-polar solvents by emulsification or by saponification, but not in DI
water only. Sources include dirty compressed air, drips from machinery, handling, and pre-lubricated components. In the
early stages of board fabrication, oil contamination will inhibit plating, etching, and similar water-based processes. Residues
remaining after assembly cause poor adhesion of conformal coatings. Silicone-based products are particularly tenacious and
difficult to remove and therefore should be avoided.
84
Thermal grease has similar properties that create similar problems as those of lubricating oil.
Wax poses similar problems to lubricants and greases. They can be most difficult to remove in DI water only. Some solvents
can be relatively effective in wax removal.
8.5.7 Adhesives In assembly, marker tapes (Tape Arrows, Defect markers), labels, or other adhesive backed tapes are fre-
quently used. One must consider the removal of the markers and the fact that some residual adhesive from the marker may
remain. Component attachment adhesives bleed out or voids can trap flux and other contaminants.
Cleaning chemicals and processes should be chosen to be compatible with the adhesive materials on the assemblies. Tech-
nical data sheets for adhesives often do not list chemical susceptibilities, or compatibility with cleaning agents at the appli-
cation temperatures and pressures. Cleaning processes can attack and degrade adhesive materials. It is important for the user
to determine the impact of the cleaning materials and processes on the integrity of the adhesives used.
8.6 Cleaning Considerations Inspection and analysis of post soldering/cleaning residues is an important part of the
assembly cleaning process. In this section, issues pertaining to inspection of remaining residues, root cause of those resi-
dues, and preventative actions are discussed.
8.6.1 Visual Inspection Criteria The IPC offers current post assembly inspection guidance in IPC-A-610, ‘‘Acceptability
of Electronic Assemblies.’’ Additional details and requirements can be self-imposed or based upon customer needs. It is rec-
ommended that these requirements are documented and understood by all in the inspection loop. It is important that mini-
mum acceptable and reject criteria are clearly understood by all personnel. Inspection tools and magnification levels should
be established and communicated.
Visual inspection in the area of visible residues is often a primary source of controversy. The visible inspection criteria listed
in IPC-A-610 ranges from 1X (naked eye) to 10X as a referee method (see Table 8-1). It is strongly recommended that visual
assessments of cleanliness or residues not be performed at greater than 10X magnification. It is far too easy to look at an
assembly surface at high levels of magnification and find an optical effect that mimics a surface residue. Only certifiable
lunatics examine assemblies at greater than 100X.
Table 8-1 IPC-A-610 Table 1-3

Cleanliness (with or without cleaning processes) Magnification not required, see Note 1
Cleanliness (no-clean processes) Note 1
Conformal Coating/Encapsulation Notes 1, 2
Marking Note 2
Other (Component and wire damage, etc.) Note 1
Note 1: Visual inspection may require the use of magnification (e.g., when fine pitch or high density assemblies are present, magnification may be needed to
determine if contamination affects form, fit or function).
Note 2: If magnification is used, it is limited to 4X maximum.
The difficulty with Note 1 is that seldom will an inspector or operator be able to determine if a contamination affects form,
fit, or function. A manufacturer needs to determine what the residues are and how much residue can be present before the
residue affects form, fit or function. This is seldom an easy or trivial exercise.
IPC-A-610 lists the following:
• Contaminant is not only to be judged on cosmetic or functional attributes, but as a warning that something in the clean-
ing system is not working properly.
• Every production facility should have a standard based on how much of each type of contaminant can be tolerated. Test-
ing with ionic extract devices based on J-STD-001, insulation resistance tests under environmental conditions and other
electrical parameter tests as described in IPC-TM-650 are recommended for setting a facility standard.
The language in IPC-A-610 should lead the reader to understand that one cannot simply judge whether or not a residue is
acceptable or not by visual assessment alone. Many white residues are benign and have no impact on form, fit, or function.
Other residues are invisible and negatively impact reliability.
8.6.2 Component Geometries Complex part configurations, such as narrow stand-offs, fluid entrapping shapes and small
size parts will influence the cleaning process and through-put rates. There are multiple challenges designed onto newer
assemblies attempting to drive improved functionality. Designers are employing highly populated circuit boards to maximize
85
the component density in as minimal space possible. These designs are pushing component spacing limits, as well as striv-
ing for micro-miniaturization using large chip scale packages, flip chip components, land-grid-arrays, and passive devices
smaller than grains of sand all on the same assembly. These components are nearly flush to the printed wiring board sur-
face, creating narrow stand-offs and increased cleaning challenges.
Narrow stand-off heights will require mechanical energy such as pressurized sprays, centrifugal force, or ultrasonic agitation
to achieve penetration into crevices to effectively remove trapped residues. For aqueous systems, difficulties arise from
inability of water to penetrate very low clearances of larger devices due to the relatively high surface tension of the water
(72 dyne/cm) compared to water with aqueous based cleaning agents containing surfactants.
8.6.3 Standoff Height and its Influence on Cleaning Standoff height is usually not so critical above 5 mils. Standoff
heights greater than this provide sufficient clearance to allow good penetration of the cleaning chemistry, rinsing and dry-
ing. This is somewhat dependent on the component area/size and the cleaning fluid. Standoff heights less than 4 mils are
prone to a new set of cleaning challenges. To remove residues under component gaps, the cleaning flux must penetrate, cre-
ate a flow channel, wet the residue, and bring the residue into solution. These tighter spaces are subject to wetting problems,
surface tension effects, and cleaning inhibition due to complete filling of flux under the component. This problem can be
compounded with low standoff height and increased package size.
8.6.4 Trapped Fluids Non-hermetically sealed components may entrap cleaning fluids and moisture, and as such, present
the potential for reliability issues. In cases where the cleaning fluid can be entrapped in the body of the component, assem-
blers should look into alternative procedures for preventing fluid entrapment or place the component onto the assembly post
cleaning. Secondary baking may be necessary for some applications but may only be a temporary fix.
8.6.5 Component Issues and Residues A number of different types of residues can be found on incoming components.
Non-polar residues that may be found on components prior to the assembly operation may be in the form of particulates,
oils, or films. These residues may still be present on assemblies cleaned or not cleaned (no-clean) after soldering.
Particulate matter can be of a variety of types depending on the assembly and storage conditions. Examples of particulates
from assembly processes are dust left from blast de-flashing after part molding. Common materials used for de-flashing
include ground plastics and shells from various nuts (e.g., walnuts). Particulate matter from storage may come from the sur-
rounding environment or the packing that parts are stored in. Environmental contaminants may include ash, soot, or silica-
based grit. Packing contamination will usually be plastic or paper with occasional metal particles.
Oil contamination may come from assembly or storage of the part. Assembly oils may include metal processing oils. If han-
dling is counted as an assembly operation, skin oils, and hand creams may be present. Mold-release agents also may take
the form of oils on the part. Storage contamination from oily materials may come from the atmosphere (e.g., oil mists from
a compressor, poorly chosen packing materials, and on hopefully rare occasions, spills).
Films on the part are usually assembly related. Here film is defined as a material that is resistant to removal by a simple
cleaning method such as wiping or alcohol soaks. Films are most often the result of a bleed out of the molding material
onto the lead frame of the part. This molding material can be both difficult to detect and remove.
Undesirable films also can be deposited on component surfaces from packing materials, such as tape and reel, or component
tubes. These are most often made of plastic materials and may be chemically treated to eliminate the accumulation of static
charge. Chemical anti-stats are often amine-based and can transfer to the packaged components, resulting in conductive films
and can interfere with solderability.
Residues may be found on incoming parts as a result of either assembly or handling. Incomplete cleaning during assembly
may result in plating or flux residues on the parts. Handling residues will most likely be residues from skin contact.
Another source of contamination on incoming parts is the presence of sulfur either from atmospheric contamination or from
paper packing materials. The reaction of sulfur with the lead frames can result in solderability problems during assembly.
8.6.5.1 Contamination from Components Component leads and lead frames may be of various metals and alloys, some
of which are difficult to solder. It is common practice to apply a solder coating to the leads by hot solder dip or solder wave
using an aggressive flux. This ensures lead solderability prior to assembly. Flux residues should be properly removed as
defined by your process. This cannot, however, be guaranteed. Similarly, components with plated leads that have not been
solder coated may be contaminated with ionic residues from plating solutions. In addition, electromechanical devices such
as variable capacitors, switches, and potentiometers may have been lubricated. If these lubricants escape, they may cause
poor adhesion of conformal coatings in neighboring areas.
86
8.6.5.2 Component Degradation Cleaning operations after soldering should be chosen on the basis of degree of cleanli-
ness required, type of flux residue to be removed, and accessibility of this residue to cleaning solvents. Sensitivity to the
cleaning process should be considered such as metal surface finishes, low-temp plastics, wiper or other exposed electrical
contacts, and other materials, which can swell depending on cleaning chemistry. Certain components, such as open relays,
suffer ingress of contaminant-laden solvent, but do not allow its easy removal. It is not a design for manufacturability if
these components are identified as not cleanable and are only attached after the cleaning operation. Cleaning options of these
types of devices are limited.
8.6.5.3 Other Component Cleaning Considerations Traps are most likely to occur at the points where leads enter the
component’s body, especially with molded plastic components. For mounted components, it is essential that a sufficient gap
is provided for access of cleaning solvents between component and board. This is not always achievable, especially for sur-
face mounted components. It is doubtful whether assemblies with components having large surface areas mounted less than
4 mils above the substrate can be cleaned effectively. Improved cleaning is attainable when selecting cleanable solder pastes,
suitable cleaning agents, and mechanical cleaning equipment in the form of spray and air and ultrasonic energies.
8.6.6 Wetting of Surfaces A surface is said to be wetted if a film of water or other liquid remains on it without breaking
up. It is important to wet the parts in order to achieve good cleaning. Both the surface tension of the cleaning media and
the surface tension of the parts being cleaned affect the wetting process. Pure water has a high surface tension, approximately
72 dynes/cm. This compares with figures in the range of 16-36 dynes/cm for most organic solvents and aqueous solutions.
Typical part/water surface tensions can range from 30-70 dynes/cm for plastics, and as high as 1000 for ceramics or glass.
The cleaning medium used must have a surface tension below that of the part surface. For cleaning in tight spaces, the sur-
face tension of the cleaning media, the surface energy of the parts being cleaned, as well as the process agitation energy is
important. See IPC-CC 830.
8.6.7 Surface Tension and Capillary Force18 Surface tension can be thought of as a balloon of sorts surrounding the
cleaning fluid. If it is thin and weak, the cleaning fluid can easily move in and out of tight spaces. If surface tension is strong,
it will resist flow into tight spaces.
Capillary forces can work for or against the cleaning process. They can facilitate the initial wetting of tight spaces. They
also will inhibit the rinsing and drying steps by resisting displacement forces if insufficient. The larger the capillary force,
the more difficult the cleaning challenge.
8.6.8 Filled vs. Un-Filled Gaps15 Most electrical compo-

nents soldered to a substrate have an air gap which allows
penetration of cleaning fluids under the component. Some
however have tendency to be filled completely with flux resi-
due after reflowing blocking the cleaning solvent from pen-
etrating. These difficult cleaning challenges include parts such
as QFNs, leadless chip carriers (LCCs), flush mounted chip
caps and resistors, and many micro area array components.
Leadless chip carriers and chip caps are placed flush mounted
to the circuit board. The capillary action and surface tension
of flux residue at peak reflow fills the underside of the com- Figure 8-1 Flux Residue Trapped Under Component
ponent with flux residues (see Figure 8-1).
The average spacing under one of these devices ranges from 1-4 mils. The use of solder mask on bare copper under these
components further reduces the space under the flush mounted components. Flux residue fills the underside of the compo-
nent, thus forming a flux dam that retards cleaning action. To thoroughly and rapidly clean under these components, the
cleaning fluid must have sufficient dynamic forces to physically break through the solid flux.
Drivers for removing all flux residues under components include contact time with the wash chemistry, fluid flow, pressure,
directional forces, wash temperature, and rinsing conditions.
8.6.9 Flux Residue Variability Experience indicates that softer residues are easier to clean than hard residues. What makes
a residue hard is inherent in its make-up and history. The thermal history of a flux residue is important. The number of sol-
der reflow cycles, the peak temperature, time after reflow, and duration of the heating and cooling cycle will influence the
hardness, and thus, the cleanability of the residue.
87
One other important factor is the chemical make-up of the flux residue. Heating the flux drives out solvents and plasticiz-
ers that are needed to make the flux/solder paste printable or dispensable in the assembly process. The heating process
changes the flux from a liquid or gel to a solid plastic like residue. Organic molecules in the solid form can either arrange
in a crystalline structure or fold and wrap in an amorphous crystalline matrix.
Amorphous and crystalline polymers act differently when
softening (Figure 8-224). Crystalline structures are arranged in
nearly perfect lattices and therefore when heat is sufficient to
release one molecule from the lattice, they all fall apart.
This is referred to as melting, and the temperature at which
this happens is called the melting point (Tm). Amorphous
crystalline residues have a glass transition temperature (Tg)
not a melting point (Figure 8-324). Above the Tg the molecules
can slip pass one another giving a lower modulus. Most post
soldering residues are amorphous, although some are mixtures Figure 8-2 Examples for Amorphous Crystalline
Structures24
of both. Amorphous flux solids will therefore soften and con-
tinue to soften above its glass transition temperature.
Another factor that can influence the softening of the residue
for cleaning would be the plasticizers remaining in the residue
after reflow. Plasticizers are smaller organic molecules that act
as lubricants between the larger polymers in the matrix. They
effectively lower the Tg of the residue. This explains the
observation that some flux residues become harder to clean if
they set for more than a couple hours as the plasticizers
evaporate over time. Cleaning solvent molecules can act as
plasticizers if they can penetrate the solid residue. The func-
tion of the pre-wash in modern inline cleaners is to allow time
for the solvent molecules to diffuse into the flux matrix and
24
lower the Tg allowing the wash to act upon a softer residue. Figure 8-3 Phase Transitions and Tg
8.6.10 Wash Chemistry Effects The cleaning chemistry market is well established and offers many choices when it comes
to selecting a cleaning chemistry. Careful thought should be taken is selecting a cleaning chemistry. Often that decision is
influenced through contract requirements, plant set-up, or by requirements for costly re-qualification of the cleaning process.
The selection of a cleaning agent, unencumbered by these external forces, should be selected based upon, cleaning efficiency,
material compatibility, chemical cost per board produced, and environmental impact. These selection variables will need to
be weighted, as they are interactive. For example, a less aggressive chemistry may be selected to alleviate concerns of mate-
rial damage to the assembly or a more expensive solvent may be selected to meet health and safety standards. The selec-
tion of the wash chemistry definitely affects the equipment to be utilized.
8.6.10.1 Wash Chemistry Types Wash chemistries can be categorized into 8 basic types. They are first divided into sol-
vent and aqueous based. Solvent based systems are considered to be greater than 50% organic. Aqueous based systems are
greater than 50% water. Aqueous chemistries are further divided into reactive and non-reactive; separating and non-
separating. Solvents are classified based upon flammability or combustibility and azeotropes for vapor degreasing:
• Water only - Varies base on purity levels: De-ionized, Reverse Osmosis, Tap.
• Aqueous High Reactivity/Low Solvency - Saponified Aqueous Cleaning Agent.
• Aqueous Mild Reactivity/Mild Solvency - Drives with both solvency and saponification.
• Aqueous Low Reactivity/High Solvency - Drives with high solvency and low levels of saponification.
• Aqueous Neutral - Drives with solvency and low levels of reactivity to stabilize the bath.
• Semi-Aqueous Type I - Organic(s) stable in water <50% (does not separate upon standing).
– Neutral pH (operating pH=6.5 to 7.5)
– Alkaline pH (operating pH=8.5 to 12.0)
88
• Semi-Aqueous Type II - Organic(s) not stable in water >50% (separates upon standing).
– Neutral pH (operating pH=6.5 to 7.5)
– Alkaline pH (operating pH=8.5 to 12.0)
• Organic Solvents and Blends - >50% organic content.
– Flammable
– Combustible
– Azeotropic Blends
Table 8-2 provides some basic guidelines for selecting a type of cleaning chemistry.
Table 8-2 Cleaning Chemistry Guidelines

Cleaning
Chemistry Type Material Considerations Advantages Disadvantages Machine Factors
Water only - Compatible with most Suitable for water Depends primarily on Heat & high energy
Non-Reactive Varies materials. soluble fluxes. water purity required. recommended.
base on purity levels: Closed loop vs. open Foaming can be a
De-ionized, Reverse loop. problem with water
Osmosis, Tap soluble fluxes.
Not recommended for
other fluxes
Aqueous High Reactants oxide Saponification is an Saponified cleaning Heat and high energy
Reactivity/Low Solvency lead, white metals effective cleaning baths run at lower recommended. Foaming
(aluminum), yellow mechanism that works concentration levels but can be a problem when
metals (copper), ink well on rosin, low must be changed often loaded.
markings, and coatings residue and water due to Redox reaction
soluble flux types in cleaning strength
Aqueous Medium Drives with both Effective on most flux Runs at low Heat and high energy
Reactivity/Medium solvency and types. Saponified redox concentration levels recommended.
Solvency saponification. Lower reactions can lower but bath life con-
levels of reactants bath life over time. siderations come into
improve inhibition but play depending on
material compatibility through put levels
concerns must be
considered
Aqueous Low Drives with Solvency. Effective on most Material Compatibility Heat and high energy
Reactivity/High Low levels of reactivity flux types. Cleaning should be tested on recommended
Solvency are readily inhibited. efficiency is dependent product and machine
Cleaning agent on maintaining the hardware.
solubility parameter solvent/water ratio
is a critical factor. Runs at low con-
centration levels with
extended bath life.
Lower consumption
favors low cost
efficiencies
Aqueous Neutral Drives with solvency, Cleaning effectiveness Neutral cleaning agents Heat and high energy
surface active agents, is dependent on the are newer to the market recommended.
and low reactivity solubility for the flux and not yet fully estab-
soils. lished within the market
Semi-Aqueous Solvent based cleaning Effective on most flux Material compatibility Need for mixing
Non-Reactive Type Ia - agent that works well types. should be tested on circulation to keep
Organic(s) not stable in when matched to the Low consumption and product and equipment layers mixed in holding
water <50% (separates soils being cleaned disposal costs. hardware. tank. Possible need for
upon standing) organic separator in
rinse drain.
Neutral pH (operating
pH=6.5 to 7.5)
89
Cleaning
Chemistry Type Material Considerations Advantages Disadvantages Machine Factors
Semi-Aqueous Solvent based cleaning Effective on most flux Material compatibility Need for mixing
Reactive agent that works well types including high should be tested on circulation to keep
when matched to the temperature soldering product and equipment layers mixed in holding
Type Ib - Organic(s) not soils being cleaned processes. hardware. tank.
stable in water <50%
(separates upon Low consumption
standing)
(operating pH=7.5 to
12.0)
Semi-Aqueous Solvent based cleaning Effective on most flux Typically support a Controlling the wet
Non-Reactive agent that works well types. batch process. Material sections to isolate wash
when match to the Long bath life compatibility should be chemical from the rinse
Type IIa - Organic(s) soils being cleaned. tested on product and sections is critical.
stable in water <50% machine hardware.
(does not separate
upon standing)
Neutral pH (operating
pH=6.5 to 7.5)
Semi-Aqueous Solvent based cleaning Effective on most flux Material compatibility Controlling the wet
Reactive agent that works well types including high should be tested on sections to isolate wash
when matched to the temperature soldering product and equipment chemical from the rinse
Type IIb - Organic(s) soils being cleaned processes. hardware. sections is critical.
stable in water <50%
(does not separate
upon standing)
Alkaline pH (operating
pH=7.5 to 10)
Flammable Organic Check all plastics, Effective on rosin and Unfavorable - Disposal Machine and
Solvents and Blends - markings, and labels. some no-clean flux cost environment needs to
>50% organic content residues. Facilities prep for meet fire codes.
Low cost handling & solvent Consider VOC
storage containment.
Material compatibility
should be tested on
product and equipment
hardware.
Combustible Organic Check all plastics, Effective on rosin and Disposal cost Most require a rinse in
Solvents and Blends - markings, and labels. some no-clean flux Chemical transportation, water or a volatile
>50% organic content residues storage cost less than solvent
flammable solvents Consider VOC
Material compatibility containment.
should be tested on
product and equipment
hardware.
Azeotropic Organic Check all plastics, Effective on rosin and Disposal cost Requires a vapor
Blends - markings, and labels. some no-clean flux Material compatibility degreaser. Needs
residues should be tested on appropriate VOC
Solvent recovery and product and equipment containment. Consider
distillation lowers hardware. distillate spray.
consumption
8.6.10.2 Predicting and Controlling Reactive Cleaning Some aqueous cleaning agents have a reactive component, usu-
ally an organic amine, added with the solvent to react with carboxylic acids found in the activators and rosin based fluxes.
On carboxylic acid soils, saponification takes place. This type of cleaning chemistry has historically been referred to as
saponifiers. These saponification reactions increase with temperature, roughly doubling every 10°C (50°F]. These cleaning
solutions are usually heated from 51°C to 65°C (125°F to 150°F], and are typically machine and not chemistry related.
Higher wash temperatures can speed the cleaning process and reduce the concentration needed to remove the soils from
assemblies. A word of caution, some reactive type of chemistries without metal corrosion inhibitors can tarnish solder con-
nections when exposed to elevated temperatures and long wash cycles. Inhibited reactive cleaning chemistries can be used
safely when the level of reactivity is low enough to passivate the metal alloys during the cleaning process.
In predicting performance of reactive chemistries one should look at bath life. There are two important elements to consider.
One is depletion of the reactive agent; the second is the tendency for foaming. In closed loop washing systems, the amine
90
is depleted, and soap, which may build up to a point of foaming, is created. Foaming creates aeration with the wash bath
and will eventually cavitate the pump, increasing foaming to unsustainable levels, and potentially causing damage to the
equipment. De-foamers are added to reactive chemistries to prevent this, but may not always work, depending on the soil
types and amounts.
8.6.10.3 Solvent Action in Non-reactive Cleaning Flux compositions have evolved and changed with the desire to build
no-clean assemblies, miniaturization, higher interconnect densities and with alloy changes. Many cleaning agents are engi-
neered with solvent blends that match up to the soils being cleaned. Solvent, semi-aqueous, and many aqueous cleaning
agents use solvents that dissolve the constituents within flux residue. For flux residues that readily dissolve in solvent based
cleaning agents, saponification mechanisms may not be needed.
Inorganic alkaline and acid compounds clean the soil by overcoming the strength of an interionic bond(s) within the soil
matrix. On some organic structures, such as carboxylic acids, a portion of the molecular structure exhibits a positive charge
and other sites on molecule exhibit a negative charge. Some organic compounds, such as amine structures are attracted to
these dielectric residues through the forces of attraction to oppositely charge dipoles. These reactive cleaning mechanisms
have been shown to improve cleaning on some flux compositions.
Non-reactive cleaning agents clean with solvency in the absence of forces of attraction to oppositely charged dipoles. Sol-
vent cleaning agents, which exhibit like properties to the soil, clean the soil by dispersing or dissolving the soil. In essence,
the soil likes the solvent action within the cleaning agent, and as such, dissolves into the solvent based cleaning product. On
some flux residue compositions, solvent based cleaning agents work well but may require elevated wash temperatures and
wash time. As the flux residues load into these solvent based cleaning agents, they will become acidic over time. This may
change cleaning properties either favorably or unfavorably with time.
8.7 White Residue Post Soldering1 White residue is often

observed on the surfaces of assemblies soldered with water
soluble fluxes. White residue also is observed from inadequate
cleaning of other flux types. Several industry trends exacer-
bate this problem: 1. lead-free soldering, 2. halide-free solder
flux, and 3. low VOC water-based flux materials.
White residue commonly occurs during the electronic assem-
bly manufacturing process. Assemblers have a wide range of
flux options, each of which can contribute to white residue.
Improperly cured board finishes and inadequate cleaning pro-
cesses leave behind translucent surface contamination films.
The chemistry of white residue represents a complex form of
encapsulated salts derived from non-volatile flux constituents;
metallic oxidization-reduction reactions initiated by flux acti-
vators; alkaline saponifying agents, and heat; solder mask cur-
ing issues; and cleaning material flux interactions. The visual
appearance of flux residue has much to do with the flux com-
position and solder profile (see Figure 8-4). The ideal state,
specifically for low residue no-clean residue, is a clear benign Figure 8-4 SEM of White Residue Remaining on Solder
translucent solid. Joint Following Cleaning
8.7.1 White Residue Formation Mechanisms There are several mechanisms that can lead to white residue formation.
8.7.1.1 Thermal Oxidation Rosin may undergo thermal oxidation at temperatures greater than 200°C [392°F]. The oxida-
tion of rosin reduces the unsaturated abietic acid double bond. The reduction results in the formation of glycols, ketones,
and esters of varying molecular weights.2 These residues feather out on the surface and oxidize into a tenacious white resi-
due. The charred residue distributed around the perimeter of the flux also spreads on top of the solder bump. The flux film
at both locations is thinner and more prone to oxidation and charring.2
Oxidation is more prevalent on parts of the board that has absorbed the most heat.1 Multilayer boards with ground planes
absorb heat away from the circuit assembly, thus requiring a hotter reflow profile. Similar effects take place when solder-
ing area array components and chip caps. Residues under these small feature components tend to oxidize in irregular pat-
terns due to hot spots charring the flux residue.
91
8.7.1.2 Polymerization Elevated temperatures greater than 200°C [392°F] can cause rosin and resin structures to polym-
erize. Polymerization occurs as a result of heat, and metallic salts acting as catalysts, to promote a chemical reaction to form
three dimensional networks of polymer chains.6 This chain growth polymerization links double bonds joining resin com-
pounds to form a repeating chain.
8.7.1.3 Solder Mask Absorption using Water Soluble Flux Solder mask absorption during wave soldering with water
soluble flux and cleaning materials can cause flux and moisture to permeate into dry film porous solder mask.7 Porous board
finishes form microscopic air pockets, which expand when wave soldered. The wave flux wets and permeates into the sol-
der mask laminate. These fluxing agents react with tin and lead oxides. With a large quantity of metallic salts and little water
soluble flux vehicle surrounding it, the metallic salts adhere to the solder and board surfaces.8 When cleaned using an aque-
ous process, inadequate removal of these flux by-products leaves a white residue.
8.7.1.4 Solder Mask Absorption using Low Residue No-Clean Flux Moisture absorption is highly susceptible when using
a dry film solder mask and low residue flux. The wave flux and heat can break down and swell the dry film mask. This may
result from the tack cure and final cure at board fabrication. When the board is passed over the pre-heat and solder wave,
the pores in the dry film open and expand. The volatile solvents in low residue fluxes adsorb into the solder mask. The mask
forms a white residue over the surface post wave soldering. The white haze is removed using a hot air rework tool set at
400°C [752°F]. The temperature activates the low residue flux and removes the white film.
8.7.1.5 Low VOC Flux Low VOC flux materials commonly are less thermally stable. These materials are formulated with
greater fluxing capacity and fluxing strength. Halide activators, common in low VOC fluxes, improve the efficacy of the flux
in removing metal oxide films.16 Highly active fluxes produce metallic halide salts that can continually react if not removed.
Due to these properties, the flux residue is cleaned post soldering. With low levels of thermal stability, lead and tin salts
form that are highly difficult to clean. This can result in a residue that requires high levels of saponification to remove.
8.7.1.6 Vapor Condensation Cleaning solvents, which are high in volatility, such as IPA, bench-top, and vapor degreas-
ing solvents evaporate and flash off after exposure. These cleaning solvents can impart a partial clean scenario due to their
fast evaporation rate. The solvent vapor and/or solvent dissolve the soluble resin structure, but leaves behind insoluble salts
in the form of white residue. This is a common occurrence when processing in a vapor degreaser or at the bench level. In
a vapor degreaser, the vapor blanket extracts the soluble resin, but leaves the insoluble salt.9 This occurs when the parts are
placed in the cleaner and exposed to the vapor before being submerged into the liquid. At the bench level, solvents are
sprayed on the area to be cleaned. As the solvent flows over the part, the soluble resin is extracted while leaving behind the
white insoluble salt. White residue in both instances has the potential of being conductive and moisture absorbing.12 Once
the insoluble salt is exposed, the solvent cleaners do a poor job of removing the white residue.
8.7.1.7 White Residue Risk Factors When considering whether white residue creates a reliability risk, the key point to
consider is whether the residue is hydroscopic, ionic, and potentially corrosive in the presence of moisture and bias. White
residue tends to be moisture absorbing and conductive, which has the potential to create electrical leakage and stray volt-
age failures on sensitive circuits.10 Flux activators, if they are not deactivated and still present in the white residue, can dis-
associate if moisture is present and lead to electrochemical migration.11
8.7.1.8 Selective Wave Soldering (pallet) Selective wave soldering is the process of selectively soldering components to
the PCB. During the selective soldering process, applied flux can spread beyond the solder path to where there is no solder-
washing action to remove or activate the flux to render it benign.13 The problem is that flux spreads out over the surface of
the electronic terminations away from the pallet opening. When using a low residue flux, the activators must be activated
and encapsulated. In selective soldering applications, the flux that spreads away from the solder site is not activated due to
thermal protection from the pallet, and as a result, represents a reliability risk. In the presence of humidity and bias, the ionic
contaminants electrochemically migrate and form a white residue in the form of dendrites. To address this risk factor, selec-
tive soldered boards should be cleaned, even when soldering with a low residue flux.13
8.8 Cleaning Process Controls
8.8.1 Process Variables Cleaning agent selection, wash time, wash concentration, wash temperature, water quality, and
impingement energy are common process variables when designing the cleaning process.
92
8.8.2 Cleaning Agent The cleaning agent technologies commonly used to clean PWAs are solvent, semi-aqueous, and
aqueous product designs. Best practice matches the cleaning agent to the soil set and process equipment.
8.8.3 Setting Process Control Limits Process control technologies are needed to maintain a tight operating window.
Allowing the wash bath concentration to drift below the lower concentration design limit increases the potential for
unsatisfactory cleaning. Process control systems are designed to maintain cleaning material concentration within the speci-
fied range, which reduces variability. Similarly, other machine control parameters such as time, temperature, and pressures
need to be maintained within established operating limits. Statistical process control (SPC) limits with action levels are
recommended.
8.8.4 Avoiding Unwanted Material Effects Testing is key to optimizing a cleaning process which with not damage
assembly materials. One approach is to expose the assemblies to multiple passes through the cleaner. During this testing,
use the longest cycle, the highest cleaning chemistry concentration, and the highest pressure and temperature envisioned in
the process.
Visual, dimensional, gravimetric, or electrical measurements can be used to grade the result. The simplest is pass/fail. Did
it or did it not affect the part, lift the label, or swell the elastomers? If it did, can the process parameters be adjusted to
eliminate the effect? Is there an alternate part? Can the alternate part be added after cleaning? If none of these are real pos-
sibilities, the cleaning agent should be changed.
8.9 Cleaning Equipment Considerations
8.9.1 Driving Forces Time, Temperature, Concentration, and Energy An optimized cleaning process can be achieved by
controlling the cleaning agent, wash concentration, wash temperature, and energy delivered in the cleaning process. Time,
temperature, concentration and energy are all inter-related in the cleaning optimization process. Once the equipment and the
cleaning chemistry are chosen, optimization of the cleaning process should be performed. Decide what is important. Fast-
est speed usually leads to lowest cost. Other factors such as line balancing, chemical consumption, and fixturing need to be
considered.
8.9.2 Static and Dynamic Cleaning Energy The process cleaning rate theorem holds that the static rate (chemical forces)
plus the dynamic cleaning rate (mechanical forces) equals the process cleaning rate. The Static Cleaning rate, in simple
terms, is the cleaning agent’s ability to dissolve the reflowed flux residue. The dynamic cleaning rate involves the kinetic
forces to deliver the cleaning agent to the soil. This includes the Thermal energy and Impingement energy required to
remove the flux residue.
8.9.3 Efficiency Improvements with Dynamic Energy Adding dynamic energy to the cleaning process can result in faster
cleaning rates and improved cleaning results. There are several sources of dynamic energy that can be used to speed and
improve the cleaning process. Choosing the right one is dependent on the equipment and cleaning chemistry types selected.
Table 8-2 below provides the types of dynamic energy associated with post soldering cleaning processes.
Table 8-3 Dynamic Energy Associated with Solder Cleaning Process

Flux Cleaning Process Common Dynamic Energy Sources
Hand Cleaning Brushing, Wiping, Air blow-off
Vapor Degreasing Boil sump, spray under immersion, ultrasonic energy
Dip Tank Dipping, Bubbling, Spray Under Immersion, Ultrasonic
Aqueous/Semi-aqueous batch Air Spray Impingement, Centrifugal, Spray under Immersion
Aqueous/Semi-aqueous inline Air Spray Impingement, Spray Under Immersion
Utilizing brushing and wiping in hand cleaning operations greatly improves the cleaning of exposed residues. This does not
however, help much in cleaning flux trapped under the part. Vapor degreasers commonly utilize air spray wands to impart
the physical energy needed to flush under parts and generally speed up the cleaning process. ‘‘Dip’’ or ‘‘immersion tanks’’
commonly are fitted with ultrasonic generators or spray under immersion jets to add energy. High impingement ‘‘air spray’’
are common to most aqueous or semi-aqueous batch or inline defluxers. In addition to speeding the flux removal process,
adding dynamic energy to the cleaning process also helps remove particulates such as solder balls, dirt, dust, and lint from
the circuit card.
93
8.9.4 Excessive Energy The cleaning of most assembly process residues are a time-temperature-solubility relationship.
Increasing temperature and duration will generally improve cleaning, but that concept can be taken too far. When wash tem-
peratures start to climb above 150°F (65.5°C), chemical protective films can be attacked and some metals can become dis-
colored. Under very low clearance parts, longer wash times are often required but may have detrimental effects from a
materials compatibility stand-point. Increasing wash spray pressures (kinetic energies) in an effort to increase the dynamic
cleaning can often result in poorer cleaning as the wash media bounces off the surface before it can be effective. More is
not necessarily better.
8.10 Monitoring Wash Baths
8.10.1 Titration Acid/base titration of the alkaline agent is effective in determining the cleaning agent concentration in an
aqueous cleaner bath. An indicating agent that changes color is used to measure the amount of alkaline agent in the clean-
ing solution by neutralizing it with a known amount of standard acid. This method is primarily used for older saponifiers.
Titration also is useful in determining both free alkalinity and total alkalinity. Commonly referred to as mil equivalent quan-
tity (MEQ), free alkalinity is titrated to an end point pH of 8.3 and total alkalinity titrated of a pH of 4.0. This procedure
could be used to determine bath life and to compare the levels of alkalinity in different cleaning agents.
8.10.2 Refractive Index Prior to the introduction of modern aqueous cleaning technologies (1990s), users were limited
mostly to titration. With the introduction of refractive index techniques, users were provided another viable method. Refrac-
tive index in general allows for measurements of organic and alkaline ingredients (given the latter are liquid) through the
refraction of light. Manual and automated systems exist in the industry.
The refractive index of a medium is a measure of how much the speed of light (or other waves such as sound waves) is
reduced inside the medium. For example, a typical soda-lime glass has a refractive index of 1.5, which means that inside
the glass, light travels at 1/1.5 = 0.67 times as fast as the speed of light in a vacuum. Two common properties of glass and
other transparent materials are directly related to their refractive index. First, light rays change direction when they cross the
interface from air to the material, an effect that is used in lenses. Second, light partially reflects from surfaces that have a
refractive index different from that of their surroundings.
The refractive index (n) of a medium is defined as the ratio of the phase velocity (c) of a wave phenomenon such as light
or sound in a reference medium (Figure 8-5) to the phase velocity (vp) in the medium itself:
Figure 8-5 Refractive Index
94
Since the refractive index is a fundamental physical property of a substance, it is often used to identify a particular sub-
stance, to confirm its purity or to measure its concentration. Refractive index is used to measure solids (glasses and gem-
stones), liquids, and gases. In our industry, the refractive index is used to measure the concentration of a solute in an aque-
ous solution. A refractometer is the manual instrument used to measure the refractive index. When talking about a solution
of sugar, the refractive index can be used to determine the sugar content measured in Brix Units (Brix unit is a unit repre-
sentative of the sugar content of an aqueous solution. One degree Brix corresponds to 1 gram of sucrose in 100 grams of
solution and thus represents the strength of the solution as a percentage by weight (% w/w) (strictly speaking, by mass)).
The benefits lie in the ease of use and quick measurement. Also this technique is cost effective and reliable. One of the
shortcomings is the lack of adjustment for dissolved contamination. Cleaning agents tend to dissolve residues from the
assemblies, which can vary from organic to inorganic materials. Over time the refractive index reading can get affected. To
compensate for possible offsets, users can rely on supplemental analytical tests, such as GC (gas chromatography),typically
performed by the vendor, solid content (non-volatile residue) and bath analysis, and/or titration measurements.
8.10.3 Non-Volatile Residue Non-volatile residue (NVR) analysis is used to determine the total amount of residue with
a vapor pressure higher than water. This analysis can be used to estimate the amount of contaminate in the cleaning solu-
tion. Controls should be run to estimate the impact of the cleaning agent without soils.
8.10.4 Other Bath Monitoring Methods Additional meth-

ods include the bath analyzer technique. Here, a test liquid is
used to separate the cleaning agent sample into organic and
water phase, i.e., two distinct volumes (Figure 8-6). Those are
used to determine the concentration of the cleaning agent
through correlation to the reference. This method is able to
factor out inorganic contamination and provides very reliable
concentration results. The time to separate depends on the
temperature of the sample as well as on the solubility of the
organic raw materials in water. This can vary from product to
product. With a low soil loading, fluxes and other contamina-
tion do not influence the accuracy of the test. Soil loading is
generally a function of active concentration. Surfactant and/or
saponifier based products have a higher tendency to solubilize
contamination. That combined with higher active concentra-
tions, can lead to higher loading. Solid content measurements
can help analyze this behavior for each product. Depending on
the bath analyzer used, it can also help in determining the pH
value of the cleaning agent. Figure 8-6 Organic-Water Phase
Spectroscopy methods also can be used to further complement afore mentioned techniques. NMR (nuclear magnetic reso-
nance), Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, and UV (Ultraviolet-visible) spectroscopy help qualitatively iden-
tify the nature of the residues and cleaning agent constituents. Those methods are generally provided by specialized, exter-
nal laboratories. By comparing to standard, virgin solutions users can find key indicators to interpret the nature/state of the
cleaning agents in use.
8.10.5 Tank Foaming Foam is one of the potential problems that can be encountered in PCB cleaning systems. As it
relates to a wash process, the most general definition of foam is a substance that is formed by trapping many gas bubbles
in a liquid. Problematic foam can plague both batch and in-line cleaning systems. In an in-line washer, excessive foam can
develop in either the wash or rinse stages, or both, depending on the severity of the problem. Most wash stages will oper-
ate with a foam layer on the surface while the pump is on. This foam layer will normally be less than 2’’ thick and will not
cause a problem with the wash process. Foam becomes a problem when the height of the foam continues to rise to the point
where it overflows the top of the tank, or extends down to the pump suction inlet.
A similar foam problem can develop in batch washers. During an excessive foam condition, the wash reservoir will over-
flow. Excessive foam also can cause another problem in the rinse cycles unique to batch washers which continue running
sequential rinse cycles until a pre-set resistivity is met. This problem is discussed in section 8.10.5.3 below.
Whether in an in-line or batch washer, excessive foam will normally cause a wash system to shut down. In the best case
scenario, the system automatically shuts down due to a high level alarm, caused by the foam pushing up the high level float,
95
or a low level alarm, caused by the tank level dropping to the low level float as the foam overflows the top of the tank. In
the worst case scenario, the system floats do not react soon enough and the machine operator shuts the washer off after real-
izing that the floor is wet with wash solution.
8.10.5.1 Foam in the Wash Stage of an In-line Cleaning Machine In-line, conveyorized washers are commonly used
throughout the printed circuit industry for high throughput cleaning of circuit boards (Figure 8-7).
Figure 8-7 Typical Stages of an In-line PCB Cleaning Process
Because they generally employ relatively large pumps with high spray pressures and high volumetric flow, the wash stages
of in-line PCB cleaners are often prone to high foam production. Once a foam problem begins, the following symptoms as
listed in Section 8.10.5.1.1 can develop.
8.10.5.1.1 Typical Symptoms Resulting from Excessive Foam
• Low level alarm resulting from tank overflow.
• High level alarm resulting from the foam pushing up the high level float (see Figure 8-8).
• Low pressure/poor cleaning resulting from pump cavitation.
Once foam begins to develop, it can continue to propagate due to one or more of a number of root causes. Foam produc-
tion can be effected by the process parameters as listed in Section 8.10.5.1.2.
Figure 8-8 Foam Beginning to Overflow Two Different Wash Stages
8.10.5.1.2 Process Parameters Which Effect Foam Development

• Low temperature.
• Low cleaning chemistry concentration.
• Cleaning chemistry and flux selection.
• High flux loading which can emulsify defoaming agents (Typically water soluble and rosin based).
• Buildup of ‘‘high foaming’’ chemical components contained in the soil (Temporary solder masks, other soils or other sub-
stances).
• High spray pressure and high volumetric flow.
8.10.5.1.3 Corrective Actions to Eliminate Excessive Foam in the Wash Stage
• Increase temperature as allowable to determine the relationship between temperature and foam production. To minimize
foam, the process temperature should be a minimum of 2.7° to 5.6°C [5° to 10°F] above the cloud point of the cleaning
96
chemistry/flux mixture. The cloud point of a cleaning chemistry is normally stated in the product’s technical literature.
Foam will normally occur while the solution is beneath the cloud point, and will diminish rapidly at temperatures above
the cloud point.
• Take steps to assure the concentration of the cleaning chemistry is within the range recommended by the manufacturer.
Most cleaning chemistries contain defoaming agents to counter the foam produced by the added soils. Due to limited solu-
bility, defoamers are normally added to cleaner concentrates at low levels. Allowing the cleaning chemistry concentration
to get too low can render the defoaming components ineffective.
• Select low foaming cleaning and soldering chemistries. Cleaning agent manufacturers’ technical literature will often con-
tain data and charts that which show the foaming properties of the particular chemistry. A blender foam study can also be
conducted using a laboratory high shear blender. These lab tests need to be run at the intended process temperature.
• Assure that the soil load is not above the foam threshold. Soil build-up can cause an excessive foam condition. This prob-
lem is normally caused by the components contained in solder fluxes. Other high foaming materials such as certain sol-
der masks can cause this problem. Because an in-line PCB cleaner is a relatively continuous process, a steady state equi-
librium is reached and the soil load normally levels out at concentrations that do not produce excessive foam. However,
if the steady state soil concentration is above the foam threshold, then the soil level will need to be reduced periodically
via filtration or bath change out.
• When replacing a pump, always follow the recommendations of the washer manufacturer. Pump size is normally limited
by the volume of the wash tank. An oversized pump can produce excessive pressure and flow which, in turn, can result
in tank turnovers that are too frequent, and aspiration of air into the pump suction. The latter condition exacerbates foam
production.
• Add defoamer chemistry to the wash solution. This remedy to a foam problem is often a temporary fix, and does not
address the underlying causes of the high foam production. However, periodic additions of defoamer can be used to suc-
cessfully control foam in some cases.
8.10.5.2 Foam in the Rinse Stage of an In-line Washer Foam in the rinse stage of an in-line washer can be just as severe
as foam in the wash stage. The resulting symptoms are the same. The process parameters which effect foam development
are also somewhat similar, with one very important difference: In the vast majority of cases, the major underlying cause of
foam in the rinse stage is low level cross contamination of wash stage chemistry into the rinse stage.
Concentrations as low as ppm levels of the cleaning chemistry/soil mixture in the rinse stage can cause extreme foam pro-
duction. When this occurs, the concentration of defoaming components, which are in the rinse also as a result of cross con-
tamination, is not sufficient to counter the foam production. In a properly balanced in-line cleaner, cross contamination does
not occur to a level sufficient to cause rinse stage foam. Steps to take to assure the settings of an in-line cleaner are balanced
correctly are described in Section 8.10.5.2.1.
8.10.5.2.1 Corrective Actions to Minimize Cross Contamination

• Adjust the wash spray headers to assure that spray droplets are not bouncing over into the rinse. Normally the outer spray
headers are angled slightly toward the center of the wash stage, with the middle spray headers spraying in a vertical direc-
tion. This ensures that the spray header closest to the rinse is angled away from the rinse.
• Adjust both air knives in the chemical isolation section so
they are both either vertical or angled slightly toward the
wash stage. The chemical isolation spray header also should
be vertical or angled slightly toward the wash stage. Assure
that the spray headers and air knives are not angled toward
the rinse stage. (See Figure 8-9.)
• Adjust the exhaust dampers to assure that the net flow of air
and mist is toward the entrance of the washer. In-line clean-
ers come in a variety of exhaust configurations. Most sys-
tems are installed with external dampers. Some systems Figure 8-9 Adjust the Air Knives Away from Rinse
dampers are set in a manner that causes the wash stage mist
to move from the wash to the rinse. The rinse spray will pull the mist into the rinse tank and cause rinse tank contamina-
tion. This issue is often overlooked, but can be the major cause of problematic foam in a rinse stage. (See Figures 8-10,
8-11, 8-12, and 8-13.)
97
• Take steps to minimize the drag-out (carry over) of wash solution out of the wash stage and into the rinse stages. Drag-
out occurs as a result of wash solution clinging to the wetted surfaces passing through the washer, including the circuit
boards, baskets, and conveyor belt. Liquid can pool on the flat surfaces of PCBs and in components such as connectors.
Tight weave baskets, or screen material placed inside baskets to keep the circuit boards from moving around, can cause
excessive drag-out. In many cases, circuit boards, or baskets of circuit boards placed too close to each other can cause
pooling of liquid and can even lead to liquid channeling from the wash into the rinse stages.
Figure 8-10 Rinse stage foam before Exhaust Adjustment Figure 8-11 Rinse Stage Foam after Exhaust Adjustment
Figure 8-12 External Exhaust Damper Figure 8-13 Internal Exhaust damper
8.10.5.3 Foam in a Batch Washer Foam in the wash cycle of a batch washer occurs for the same reasons as foam in the
wash stage of an in-line cleaner, as described above. The potential symptoms and corrective actions are also the same.
The underlying causes of foam in the rinse cycle of a batch washer are also similar to those which produce foam in the rinse
stage of an in-line washer. However, poorly balanced exhausts are not normally a potential cause of foam, as most batch
washers have only one exhaust duct, or are not exhausted at all.
One unique problem that excessive foam can cause in a batch washer is the need for a high number of rinse cycles. Many
batch washers are designed to run sequential rinse cycles until a pre-set maximum resistivity of the rinse water is reached.
Typical pre-set values range from 300 to 700 kilohms. Excessive foam can cause a high level of carryover from one cycle
to the next, as the foam clings to the internal walls of the process chamber, and collects around the drain area. (See Figures
8-14 and 8-15.) The foam can inhibit good drainage between rinse cycles.
8.11 Cleanliness Testing Measuring and controlling circuit cleanliness improves yields, assembly performance, and long
term reliability. Ionic and non-ionic contamination can impact the operation and reliability of the device on which they are
present. In a humid environment, ionic contaminants can cause problems such as shorting between conductors by electro-
lytic dendrite growth, corrosion that erodes the conductors themselves, or loss of insulation resistance. Non-ionic residues
are not conductive, but the insulating properties of residue surrounding conductors can lead to unwanted impedance.
98
Figure 8-14 Foam in the wash Figure 8-15 Foam in the wash/rinse chamber impeding
drainage between sequential rinses
8.11.1 ROSE Testing In the 1960s, the Department of Defense (DOD) became increasingly concerned about the failure
of circuit assembly cards due to ionic contamination. The DOD collaborated with industry experts to develop a quality
assurance and process control method for quantifying the level of ionic contaminants remaining on circuit cards following
the manufacturing process. The method detected and measured ionizable surface contaminants by resistivity of solvent
extract, more commonly referred to as ROSE testing. The ROSE process control tool can be used to inspect printed wiring
boards or printed wiring assemblies and determine if they conform to the requirements of the user’s performance specifica-
tion. The methods developed here were incorporated into IPC J-STD-001 and the method is documented in IPC-TM-650.
ROSE testing was highly beneficial since the test provided a quick and easy method for manufacturing technicians to sta-
tistically control and monitor the production assembly and cleaning processes. The ROSE method limitations arise from the
methods inability to dissolve many of today’s flux residues and to remove and detect ionic contamination trapped under low
component clearances. These limitations question the validity of the ROSE test method as a quality assurance and process
control indicator on many of today’s leading edge circuit assemblies. To address these limitations, extract reagents, contami-
nation detection sensors, and dynamic cleanliness test instruments need to be improved to meet the quality assurance and
process control needs of electronic assembly manufacturing operations.
8.11.2 ROSE Testing Limitations Higher density, smaller components, and lower standoffs are changing the definition of
circuit board cleanliness. The current or traditional normal view of quality assurance correlated with visual residue and the
resistivity of solvent extract measurements. With the reduction in component size and low standoff clearances, the ability to
dissolve, extract, and measure ionic residues using the ROSE method is much more suspect. The ROSE test is a viable pro-
cess control tool, to measure the average ionic cleanliness on an assembly. The standard test cannot be used to evaluate a
single component.
The automated ROSE test remains the current standard for conducting daily production tests for electronic assemblies. The
current standard allows the use of many new flux types, but many of these new flux types are not soluble in the standard
75%/25% IPA/H2O reagent. Limitations of the current standard, new test equipment heated the IPA/H2O mixture to improve
solubility
Measurement using the ROSE test relies on dissolving the ionic residues that are bound in an organic flux matrix, to mea-
sure the effect on resistivity. Thus, if the ionic residues are not dissolved in the IPA/H2O mixture, then undissolved ionic
residues are not detected by the ROSE test, which results in an inaccurate determination of electronic circuit board cleanli-
ness. The limitations of current methods, including tighter geometries for electronic assemblies and new soldering materials/
methods, leave companies producing high reliability production hardware with significant exposure due lack of acceptable
cleaning and testing systems.
8.11.3 ROSE Test Equipment Cleanliness tester equipment uses a purified solvent reagent designed to remove ionic and
non-ionic flux residues. The reagent is circulated into and out of the test tank chamber containing the circuit assembly under
test. The solvent reagent exiting the tank is passed through a conductivity cell that measures the conductivity continuously.
These conductivity values are integrated over the time of the extraction. The mixture is then pumped through the resin col-
umns to purify the reagent solvent before the next test. As ionic materials are extracted from the samples and then pumped
out of the test chamber, the conductivity of the reagent will be reduced until all of the extractable ionic material has been
removed.
99
The cleanliness tester includes a chamber for cleaning and testing, a reagent solvent input into the test chamber, a resistiv-
ity sensor positioned for sensing resistivity of the reagent within the test chamber, and a reagent output for removing the
solvent from the test chamber. The cleanliness tester also may include a means for physically agitating and/or heating the
reagent to improve dissolution. The ion exchange resins must be compatible with both reagent and processing temperatures.
Resistivity of the reagent after contact with the electronic assemblies may be measured and compared with the starting
reagent resistivity. The level of ionic residues is calculated based on the drop in resistivity.
8.11.4 Ion Chromatography Ion chromatography can used to more accurately assess the ions remaining on a finished
assembly. This method extracts the ionic population of a circuit board in an aggressive solvent extraction similar to the
ROSE test. The extraction solvent that can be analyzed by a quantitative and qualitative Ion chromatograph revealing both
the types ionic species and concentration of that species. Anions and cations must be measured with separate columns. A
standard method of performing ion chromatography analysis on circuit assemble can be found in IPC-TM-650.
8.11.5 Localized Contamination
8.11.5.1 Site Specific Contamination Some residues remain concentrated in

entrapment prone areas. These areas are usually hidden from inspectors. These
SMT/REFLOW
localized residues can be easily missed in visual inspections. These residues can
reemerge from their hiding spots when the unit is thermal cycled in subsequent
manufacturing/rework cycles or later in product applications.
8.11.5.2 Site Specific Detection Detecting localized hidden residues can be PHT/WAVE
difficult to detect. Visual inspection is limited to parts with a clear 90° viewing
angle. Removing the device is the easiest way to evaluate the residue remaining
under a given device. It is not practical to remove components to inspect for
residues under components. Another approach is to extract the residue with a
solvent or steam and quantify it with electrical leakage characteristics of the TEST
solvent or submit the extraction for ion chromatography analysis.
8.11.5.3 Site Specific Extraction Steam and solvent extraction methods have
been developed to extract residues trapped under specific components. These
methods are based upon blocking of one components and forcing steam or sol- CLEAN
vent under the component of interest. The extraction solvent or steam conden-
sate is then collected and typically analyzed by ion chromatography.
8.11.6 Conformal Coating Adhesion and Wetting Conformal coatings are

protective materials applied onto printed circuits or other electronic substrates. MASK
The coating protects against environmental humidity and moisture, mechanical
stresses and vibration, dust and dirt, corrosion, contamination, and electromigra-
tion. Refer to IPC-HDBK-830 for a discussion on conformal coating.
CC/CURE
8.11.6.1 Conformal Coating Process Factors Electronic assembly process
inputs and outputs must factor in assembly build, upstream/downstream pro-
REWORK
cesses, and conformal coating processing steps (see Figure 8-16). The cleaning
process is more than just water and cleaning agent. Material selection within the
production and cleaning process is critical. A poor cleaning process is one of the INSPECTION
root causes for conformal coating defects. It is imperative for any PCB to be
IPC-65B-8-16
cleaned before conformal coated.
Figure 8-16 Electronic Assembly
Process
100
8.11.6.2 Upstream/Downstream Processes Conformal coating processes

follow three upstream/downstream processes: 1. Assembly Cleaning, 2. Assem-
bly Masking, and 3. Assembly Inspection/Rework. (See Figure 8-17.) SMT/REFLOW
8.11.6.3 Conformal Coating Cause and Effect Factors Four factors for
cleaning before conformal coating: 1. Components, 2. Assembly Materials, 3.
PHT/WAVE
Cleaning Process, and flux Chemistries. (See Figure 8-18.)
8.11.6.4 Conformal Coating Process Defects The cleaning process can be

closely related to process defects. TEST
8.11.6.5 Maskant Residue Materials used to mask components or board sur-

faces can lead to poor adhesion and conformal coating dewetting. The root
causes are not cleaned properly, residue de-wets conformal coating causing the CLEAN
coating to bubble and poor conformal coating adhesion.
8.11.6.6 Ionic Contamination Excessive ions present on the assembly may

cause mealing or vesication of the conformal coating. The root causes are not MASK
cleaned properly, finger contact, and assembly contaminants.
8.11.6.7 Organic Residues Poor Adhesion/De-wetting Organic residues on

CC/CURE
surfaces to be conformal coated can lead to dewetting and/or delamination of
conformal coatings. REWORK
8.11.6.8 Residue beneath Components These residues can spread and can INSPECTION
lead to poor adhesion/dewetting of conformal coatings to component, compo- IPC-65B-8-17
nent leads, and board surfaces. The root cause is poor cleaning, surface energy,
and SMT profile too hot. Figure 8-17 Conformal Coating Upstream/
Downstream Process Considerations
Components Assembly
Materials
Bonding
Lead Finish Labels
PWB
Markings
Package Finish Solder Mask
Conformal Coat
Cleaning agent SMT Solder Paste

Concentration SMT Solder Flux
Equipment Wave Solder Flux
Pressure Wave Solder Bar
Speed Rework Solder Wire
Temperature Rework Solder Flux
Cleaning
Process Chemistries
IPC-65B-8-18
Figure 8-18 Conformal Coating Cause and Effect Factors
8.11.6.9 Residue on Solder Joint Flux residues can lead to poor adhesion/de-wetting of conformal coatings to compo-
nent, component leads, and coverage area. The root cause is poor cleaning, wave profile too cool, and SMT profile too cool.
8.11.6.10 Residue on Assembly Surface Flux residue can lead to poor adhesion/dewetting to component, component
leads, and coverage area. These effects can lead to chipped or peeled particles. The root cause is poor cleaning, wave mask
material, and wave/rework flux.
8.11.6.11 Labels Some label adhesive agents can lead to poor adhesion/de-wetting of conformal coating around the label.
The root cause is poor cleaning, label selection, and marking inks.
101
References
1. Bixenman, M., Zhang, P. & Shi, C. (2009, May). White Residues on Printed Circuit Boards Post Cleaning. SMTA China
Technical Conference. Shenzhen, China.
2. Lee, N.C. (2002). Reflow soldering processes and troubleshooting SMT, BGA, CSP and Flip Chip Technologies. New-
ness: Woburn, MA
3. Dishart, K., (2008, Oct). Using Hansen solubility parameters to match the cleaning agent to the lead free flux residue.
IPC/SMTA High Performance Cleaning Symposium.
4. Lee, N.C. (2008, Oct). Lead-free flux technology and influence on cleaning. IPC-SMTA High Performance Cleaning
Symposium.
5. Chan, TM, Moo, KS, Teoh, KH (2008). White residue formation on printed circuit board assemblies. Sanmina-SCI Pen-
ang, Malaysia.
6. Polymerization. Retrieved February 25, 2008 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymerization
7. Steinke, T, Ling, Z., & Bogert. G.L. (2002) April. White residue on LPI Solder Mask. Retrieved from IPC TechNet
Forum.
8. Alpha-Fry Technologies (n.d.). White residue and water soluble fluxes. Cookson Electronics. Jersey City, NJ.
9. Sozansky, W. Ihms, D., & Bixenman, M. (2002, Feb). Enhanced vapor phase cleaning fluid for demanding flip chip
cleaning requirements. International Workshop on Wafer Level CSP and Flip Chip Packaging. Georgia Tech University.
10. Munson, T. (n.d.). White residue on finished assemblies: Is it good or bad? Retrieved February 15, 2009 from http://
www.residues.com/pdf/white_residue2.pdf
11. Munson, T. (2006, T). White residues: Are they or aren’t they? Circuit Assembly. Retrieved on February 15, 2009 from
http://www.residues.com/pdfs/Circuits%20Assembly%20Articles/2006/lowres/2006.01-White%20Residues-
%20Are%20They%20or%20Arent%20They%20-%20Circuits%20Assembly.pdf
12. Munson, T. (2004, July). Is white residue a reliability risk? Circuit Assembly. Retrieved on February 15, 2009
from http://www.residues.com/pdfs/Circuits%20Assembly%20Articles/2004/low%20res/2004.07-Is%20White%20
Residue%20a%20Reliability%20Risk%20-%20Circuits%20Assembly.pdf
13. Pham, H.H. (2007, July) Flux residues and selective soldering. SMT. Retrieved on February 13, 2009 from http://
smt.pennnet.com/display_article/297961/35/ARTCL/none/none/Flux-Residue-&-Selective-Soldering
14. Munson, T. (n.d.). White residue below BGA components: Is it good or bad? Retrieved February 15, 2009 from http://
www.residues.com/pdf/white_residue1.pdf
15. Bixenman, M., & Stach, S. (2007, Aug). Development and Validation of a new test platform for cleaning process devel-
opment: Phase I. SMTAI 2007, Orlando, FL.
16. National Physical Laboratory (NPL), White residues on soldered printed circuit assemblies. Retrieved from
www.npl.co.uk/ei
17. Keeping, J. (2008, Oct). Critical Considerations for Selecting a Conformal Coating Process. IPC/SMTA Cleaning Sym-
posium. Rosemont, IL.
18. Stach, S., & Bixenman, M. (2004). Optimizing Spray Energy in Batch and Inline Spray Systems. SMTAI, Rosemont, IL.
19. Bixenman, M., Lee, N.C., & Stach, S. (2009, Oct). Ionic Cleanliness Testing Research of Printed Wiring Boards for
Purposes of Process Control. SMTAI, San Diego, CA.
20. Stach, S. (2009). Using Hansen Solubility to Optimize Solvent Based Cleaning Processes for Manufacturing Electronic
Assemblies, Retrieved from http://www.aat-corp.com/technical_papers/UsingHansenSpaceToOptimizeSolvent
BasedCleaningProcesses.pdf
21. Stach, S., & Bixenman, M. (2005). Optimizing Spray Energy in Batch and Inline Spray Systems, Phase II. SMTAI,
Rosemont, IL.
22. Telcordia Technologies’ (formerly Bellcore’s) GR-78-CORE.
23. Tellefesen, K. GREEN RESIDUES AND ELECTRICAL RELIABILITY, Proceedings of the International Conference
on Electronic Assembly: Materials and Process Challenges, Atlanta, Georgia, June, 1998.
24. ″Thermal Residue Fingerprinting: A Revolutionary Approach to Develop a Selective Cleaning Solution’’ Steve Stach,
Austin American Technology Harald Wack, Ph.D., Umut Tosun, Naveen Ravindran, ZESTRON America, John M. Rad-
man, Daniel D. Phillips, Trace Laboratories East
102
9 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
9.1 Safety Although this section focuses primarily on US legislation and codes of practice, most other nations have simi-
lar regulations. These may be considerably more or less severe and may be applied differently. The general theme of this
section is universally applicable, but it should be read with an understanding that local regulations require primary compli-
ance, and that state and federal compliance is a parallel requirement to any regulated operation.
The selection of the cleaning agent must incorporate the inherent impact on air emissions, water discharges and waste gen-
eration from the facility. Each of these three environmental mediums may require a permit depending on the usage rate and
existence of other air emissions, water discharges, and waste generation at the facility.
Both solvents and semi-aqueous cleaning agents are chemicals. As such they are subject to the rules and regulations gov-
erning the use of chemicals in the work place. Since 1994 when the US OSHA Hazard Communication Standard became
effective, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) have expanded greatly. Suppliers are required to provide an abundance of
information to users on toxicity testing, health hazards, waste disposal, safe work practices, protective equipment, material
reactivity and flammability, etc. These documents should be read, understood, and used by those using each chemical. The
law requires that any personnel who may work with semi-aqueous cleaning agents and any other chemicals readily have
access to MSDSs on each work shift.
The work area should be well ventilated and exposure to chemicals should be minimized. Industrial hygiene monitoring is
often required to ascertain compliance with adopted exposure limits to specific chemicals. Proper personnel protective
equipment (PPE) must be available and used when dispensing chemicals or cleaning equipment if engineering controls can-
not achieve or maintain acceptable exposure levels. A PPE assessment is required for each job under OSHA’s PPE standards.
Recommended protective equipment is listed in the MSDS that suppliers are required to ship with the cleaning agents.
9.1.1 Environmental Considerations In the United States there is a full complement of regulations, including the Clean
Air Act, Clean Water Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In summary, these laws make the user
and the manufacturer responsible for air emissions, waste water discharges, and solid waste generation and scrap materials
used to manufacture printed circuit assemblies from cradle to grave. There are also regulations that require annual report-
ing of certain toxic chemicals released to air, waste water and shipped off-site. These regulations have required suppliers to
provide better documentation about the environmental and safety issues associated with their cleaning agents. Users are bet-
ter informed and are demanding safer chemicals, more disposal alternatives, and closed-loop technologies.
The cleaning process generates air emissions, solid waste and wastewater. A discharge permit is required in many instances,
for very small or infrequent industrial wastewater discharges from cleaners such as batch or dip tanks. The three regulatory
agencies that a user must review are federal (national), state (regional), and local. Each company must meet the minimum
federal standards. The state regulations may be the same or even more restrictive than the federal. Finally, the local com-
munity’s regulations will be at least as restrictive as state regulations.
9.1.2 Environmental Issues In the selection (and use) of a post solder cleaner, manufacturers must consider the effect of
the cleaning agent on air emissions, wastewater discharge, and solid waste generation. Special authorization or permits for
air, wastewater and special handling of solid waste are often the rule in those nations that have no precise legal definition
of permitted discharges. The following are most often a concern:
• Air Emissions.
– VOCs (volatile organic compounds)
– Ozone depleting substances
– Global warming substances
– Air toxics
• Wastewater.
– Heavy metal cations (notably lead, silver and copper)
– Anions (notably cyanides, phosphates, nitrites, fluorides and sulfates)
– Complexing/chelating agents (notably EDTA salts and ammonium/amine compounds)
– pH (acid or basic condition)
– COD/BOD (Chemical Oxygen Demand/Biological Oxygen Demand)
– Toxicity to aqueous life before and after biodegradation (typically 24 hr and 96 hr)
103
– Other (temperature, solid matter, suspended matter, surface tension modifiers, etc.)
• Solid Waste.
– Leachable heavy metals (notably lead, silver and copper)
– Listed toxic materials (off-spec or out-of-date chemicals)
– Used solvents1 (both halogenated and non-halogenated)1
Even though the spent solvent is not a solid, the US EPA classifies liquids, semi-solids and solids as a solid waste (see Code
of Federal Regulations, Protection of the Environment, Part 261.3).
9.2 Air Emissions The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to meet six National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
for specific pollutants. Five of these pollutants (sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates, carbon oxide, and lead) typically
are not triggered by EMS facilities. The sixth volatile organic compound (VOC) could be. State and local governments are
empowered under the clean air act to enforce local regulations that can be more stringent than national standards that seek
to attain the NAAQS. When any new chemicals, including cleaning agents, are introduced into manufacturing processes, the
user must seek guidance and rule interpretation from local authorities before receiving the required permits. The approval
process is lengthy, so users must address the permit application process early in the selection and implementation stages of
installing any new cleaning process.
Air emissions are a concern for some chemical cleaning agents that are used when cleaning rosin type fluxes. Generally,
there are two types of air emissions from such a cleaning process: (1) VOCs and (2) water vapor. VOCs are generated from
cleaning with both solvents and saponifier formulations containing glycol ethers, non-linear alcohol, and in some cases,
emulsions. Certain glycol ethers (ethylene family) also can be regulated as an air toxic emission. In certain nations and
regions, VOCs are highly regulated because of their vapors’ photochemical reactivity with nitrogen oxides producing ground
level ozone and smog. The water vapor from an evaporator that is used to concentrate the chemicals from a wash tank may
require an air emission discharge permit. In any case, it is important to consult with the regulatory agencies before a clean-
ing process is installed. In some states, evaporator use does not require a permit, but does require annual reporting and cer-
tification of non-hazardous waste activity.
Depending on the particular chemical(s) emitted, the amount of the chemical(s) emitted and the amount of other chemical
emissions from that facility, the emissions may or may not be regulated by the state (or other regional permitting authority
under the Clean Air Act ). An air emissions permit may be needed if the emissions thresholds for a given chemical or a
group of chemicals at that facility is exceeded. The worldwide trend is toward increasing the stringency of VOC regulations.
However, the definition of what constitutes a VOC varies much from one country or region to another. An emission control
device may be required to meet permitted VOC emissions levels. Such devices include condensers, carbon adsorption, and
thermal oxidizers.
Some drying processes may employ hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) or perfluorocarbons
(PFCs). All HCFCs are ozone depleting albeit less so than CFCs, and their use is permitted according to regulations adopted
under the Montreal Protocol. Many nations have already forbidden their use or are in the process of doing so. HFCs and
PFCs have high global warming potentials (some PFCs have a Global Warming Potential (GWP) index of over 10,000 com-
pared with carbon dioxide) and long atmospheric lifetimes. Although few nations have yet enacted legislation restricting
their use, it may be expected that this will come about within a decade. In the US, EPA regulates the use of non-ODS sub-
stitutes under its SNAP (Significant New Alternatives Policy). Hence, non-HCFC solvents like nPropyl Bromide must have
EPA approval (which nPB does) before use can begin legally. No matter whether there is regulation or not on the use of
some types of halogenated organic substances, it is not only recommended to limit their emissions to an absolute minimum
for both environmental and safety and health reasons, but it also makes sound economic sense.
9.2.1 Volatile Organic Compounds The Clean Air Act requires states to meet six National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for specific pollutants. NAAQS establish the maximum concentration allowed for each pollutant in the back-
ground air in all areas of the country. Those pollutants include Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Carbon Monoxide (CO), and Ozone.
The NAAQS provisions apply to areas of the country that do not currently attain an NAAQS for a particular pollutant (these
areas are called non-attainment areas). If you are located in a non-attainment area and your facility emits a non-attainment
pollutant, you will not only have a lower emissions threshold that requires permitting, but also may have to meet stricter
requirements for air pollution control for that pollutant than if you were located in an attainment area.
Electronic manufacturers are most likely to be affected by requirements in the non-attainment areas for ground-level ozone
(also called smog). Ozone is a pollutant that is not discharged to the environment, but is created by the reaction of ozone
104
precursors (VOCs and nitrogen oxides) and sunlight. VOC emissions are directly related to ozone production. Cleaning pro-
cesses are likely to emit VOCs, which combine with daylight to form smog in the summer months.
The amount of VOC that is emitted is directly related to the vapor pressure of the solvent, the ventilation flow rate from the
equipment, the temperature of the cleaning solvent, and the temperature and concentration of cleaning agent in the rinse
sections. VOC emissions are lowest when:
• Low vapor pressure solvents are used.
• The solvent temperature is minimized.
• The velocity and volume of ventilation are maintained as low as possible to provide safe and comfortable working condi-
tions around the cleaning machines.
• The temperature and concentration of material in the water in the rinse sections are as low as possible.
VOC concerns must be balanced with cleaning requirements. The vapor pressures for most semi-aqueous cleaning agents
are much less than one mm of mercury, significantly lower than vapor pressures of common alcohols and other lower boil-
ing materials. The amount of semi-aqueous cleaning agent that escapes as VOC material is relatively small and variable.
The exact amount depends on the type and size of equipment and the operating conditions. The best method to determine
the loss due to evaporation is to consider the mass balance of the cleaning process. The simplest way to calculate the daily
loss of VOC material is to first calculate the daily weight of cleaning agent lost, then multiply that times the percent of VOC
material in the cleaning agent formulation. VOC content can be obtained from the MSDS. The daily cleaning agent loss is
equal to the amount of semi-aqueous cleaning agent added to the cleaning machine minus the amount of cleaning agent that
leaves the machine through the decanter and in the rinse water.
Actual VOC Emitted, kg/day = %VOC in Cleaning Agent x Cleaning Agent Lost, kg/day
Where:
Cleaning Agent Lost as kg/day = A - B - C
Where:
A = Cleaning Agent Added as kg/day
B = Cleaning Agent Removed from Decanter, kg/day
C = Cleaning Agent Discharged in Rinse Water, kg/day
Where:
Cleaning Agent Discharged in Rinse
Water, kg/day (C) = D x E
Where:
D = Cleaning Agent Concentration in Rinse Water, kg/liter
E = Rinse Water Volume Discharged, liters/day
The concentration of the semi-aqueous cleaning agent in the rinse water can be easily measured by determining the chemi-
cal oxygen demand (COD) of the rinse water. The COD is proportional to the concentration. For most semi-aqueous clean-
ing agents, the concentration of semi-aqueous cleaning agent, in parts per million, is determined by dividing the measured
COD value by roughly 2.5.
VOC emissions vary widely depending on the cleaning machine and the operating parameters. A typical in-line machine may
emit about half a kilogram of VOC per hour. VOC emissions can be reduced with standard VOC control technology includ-
ing demisters, dead zones in the exhaust lines, scrubbers, and condensers. Users must carefully weigh the cost of VOC com-
pliance when considering cleaning process choices. Inorganic cleaning chemicals based on materials such as carbonates and
sulfates do not have a vapor pressure, so would not be a factor in the emission profile of a cleaner that uses them.
9.2.2 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) Section 112 of the Clean Air Act lists 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) for
which the EPA has set National Emission Standards. Some solvents, such as methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, trichlo-
roethylene, carbon tetrachloride, certain glycol ethers, and chloroform are included in the CAA Section 112 HAP list.
105
EPA has issued Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards to reduce emissions of hazardous air pollut-
ants. Each MACT standard controls emissions of one or more air toxics from a specific air pollutant source. The MACT is
the best control technology already in use for a given type of industry.
Under the CAA’s National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) program, major sources of air toxics
must use the MACT-specified technology. Facilities are considered major sources if their potential emissions are 10 tons/
year or more of a HAP or 25 tons/year of a combination of HAPs. Annual emissions are based on 24 hours/day x 365 day/
year operation. If a facility does not operate 8760 hrs/year, it can obtain a ‘‘synthetic minor’’ permit to limit its potential to
emit (PTE) to the actual hours operate, thereby avoiding the permit threshold and related permit emission requirements.
NESHAP standards require affected users to employ certain control technologies to reduce emissions. Typically, record
keeping, reporting, and emission control technologies may need to be upgraded to meet the requirements of these standards.
In 1994, the EPA finalized the Halogenated Solvent Cleaning NESHAP. This standard is published in 40 CFR Part 63, Sub-
part T, and affects new and existing halogenated solvent cleaning operations. For guidance, consult EPA publication EPA-
453/R-94-081, EPA Guidance Document for the Halogenated Solvent Cleaner NESHAP.
9.2.3 Ozone Depleting Substances The CAA amendments also contain provisions for controlling the use of chemicals
believed to destroy stratospheric ozone-a layer of atmosphere that protects the earth by filtering harmful sunrays. EPA has
established two lists of such substances: Class I substances and Class II substances. Class I substances refer to substances
containing chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and also both methyl chloroform (TCA) and carbon tetrachloride. Class II substances
include hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs).
In 1992, EPA issued its final rule implementing Section 604 of the Clean Air Act. That section implemented the United
States’ obligations under the Montreal Protocol by limiting the production and consumption of substances with a potential
to deplete stratospheric ozone. All Class I substances were identified as Ozone Destroying Substances (ODSs). This rule,
published as 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart A, required the phase out of production of these products for emissive uses by
December 31, 1995. This included dichlorofluoromethane commonly used in electronics.
Existing supplies of these solvents (produced prior to the phase out) and recycled product can continue to be sold into emis-
sive markets. Exceptions to the ban include product manufactured for transformation (chemical intermediate) processes, and
essential uses as approved by the EPA (such as asthma inhalers).
Additionally, 40 CFR Part 82.106 requires that products containing or manufactured with ODSs be specially labeled with a
warning label stating ‘‘Contains (or manufactured with) [insert name of substance here], a substance which harms public
health and the environment by destroying the upper atmosphere.’’
The Clean Air Act also required the EPA to establish a program to identify alternatives for ODSs, and to publish lists of
acceptable and unacceptable substitutes. This program, the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program is described
in 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart G, and prohibits replacing a regulated ODS with any substance determined as harmful to human
health or environment, if other substitutes with reduced overall risk are currently or potentially available. Acceptable
replacements for CFC-1 13 and 1,1,1- trichloroethane include aqueous cleaners, semi-aqueous cleaners, oxygenated solvents,
terpenes, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, and methylene chloride.
9.3 Waste Water The Clean Water Act is a comprehensive law that sets forth the requirements for reporting spills, lists
priority pollutants, dictates water quality criteria, and requires permits for discharges to Publically Owned Treatment Works
(POTWs) or water bodies. In addition, discharges to underground wells or septic leaching systems could endanger ground-
water quality are also regulated by either the state groundwater protection bureau, and/or a local aquifer protection ordi-
nance. On-site subsurface discharge of cleaning waste waters should be avoided because of the high likelihood that such
discharges could contaminate both soil and groundwater, and thereby cost the facility thousands or millions of dollars in site
investigation and remediation. Closed loop rinse water systems are recommended for this reason.
Because local regulations are often more stringent than federal regulations, it is imperative to consult with local regulatory
agencies before starting a waste water discharge, or introducing new chemicals or chemical processes to an existing permit-
ted waste water discharge. In the past, solvent cleaning in boiling solvent machines did not produce aqueous discharges, so
existing users may not be tuned into the importance of water quality requirements. Local POTWs regulate such parameters
as Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), pH, Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Total Toxic
Organics (TTOs) and metal concentrations. Permit limits for these parameters can require special pollution control
equipment.
106
The discharge of any wastewater stream, both by total flow and by chemical make-up must conform to national, regional
and local regulations in all nations. Such regulations vary from very strict limits with little derogation to relatively flexible
conditions. Many nations, particularly in Europe, have very strict legal requirements dictated on a national scale, covering
many aspects of waste water quality. Others have less comprehensive regulations, covering only the more important consid-
erations. Local authorities may offer derogations to national legislation, where their local treatment plant is able to handle
the otherwise out-of-tolerance waste. Derogations are frequently accorded to small users, particularly if the user can show
that the cost of treating a small quantity of slightly polluting waste would be disproportionate to the damage that could be
caused. Dischargers must note that installations approved in one place, may not be approved elsewhere. In all cases, it is
wise to discuss an installation with the local authorities before putting it into service, as a polluting fait accompli is never
looked at with a kindly eye.
In the USA, the discharge of the wastewater stream, both by total flow and by chemical make-up will likely require a per-
mit from the local POTWs under the Clean Water Act (CWA). In addition, local permit may also require co-current state or
regional EPA approval. It is important that any new or additional wastewater flow from a post solder cleaning process step
be reviewed with local POTW officials BEFORE commencing the discharge of wastewater. Such a review may result in the
POTW waiving the need for a permit, or in reducing the monitoring requirements of a required permit. New discharges
require that a baseline monitoring report (BMR) be submitted within 90 day of initiating such discharge. For POTWs dis-
charging less than 5 million gallons/day, the BMR must be copied to the regional EPA office.
9.3.1 Type of Flux and Contaminants to be Removed The solder flux type to be used and other common contaminants
that can be expected will influence the selection of an aqueous cleaning medium from Tables 4-3 and 8-2. The final selec-
tion of the wash medium will also take into account the foregoing discussion of environmental, safety and health aspects.
Table 9-1 Wash Media, Typical Cleaning Capability

Water with
Water without Non-Reactive Water with Water with Emulsified
Contaminant Removed Additives Additives Reactive Additives Organic Solvent
Water Soluble Flux X X X X
Rosin Flux No No X X
SAFlux No No No X
LR/NC flux * * * *
Common Finger Prints No X X X
Fats, Oils and Greases No X(1) X(1) X(1)
Mold Release Agents X(2) X(2) X(2) X(2)
Water Soluble Masks X X X X
X indicates removal
*depending on formulation
(1) except silicone, fluoro polymers and fluorosilicone types
(2) except silicone, fluoro polymers and fluorosilicone types and depending on formulation
Note: Low solubility contaminants or non-soluble contaminants may be removed by mechanical action, such as from hard spray or, more effectively, by
ultrasonic agitation
All contaminants removed from the assemblies, together with detergents and perhaps rinsing aids will ultimately require
disposal to some water system. The chemical cleaning wash tank is a common waste water flow that would require a per-
mit. The regulations controlling limits of what can and cannot be discharged from the plant are governed by local authori-
ties. Analysis of the waste stream for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), pH, lead and
perhaps other heavy metals, total suspended solids (TSS), or other parameters will be necessary to determine compliance
with local regulations. In some areas the effluent can be discharged to municipal systems without further treatment while in
other areas the same waste stream would require extensive treatment. Even though there is no universal US EPA rule for
electronics part cleaning, any state can have its own regulations for these processes. Throughout the USA, these vary greatly
from one regulatory agency to another, from minimal to very strict. A regulator’s interpretation and knowledge of this pro-
cess will determine the difficulty that one will have with discharging the wastewater. Some local communities may decide
to prohibit a discharge of industrial waste water. In such locales, evaporation can be an economical alternative means of
waste water disposal. Other communities will follow the state’s requirements and will rely on the state to monitor the waste-
water for them.
In the past, many nations and regions (states) allowed the combining of domestic sewage with industrial wastewater includ-
ing heavy metals as long as the final wastewater complied with the regulations. However, EPA requires such combined flows
107
to be analyzed based on the combined waste stream formula (ratio of volumetric flows) such that cleaning operations are
evaluated at the point source discharge. With increasing frequency, regulatory personnel are taking samples of wastewater
from the wash tank drain and the rinse water drain of the cleaning equipment.
In most European countries and many Asian ones, it is a legal requirement that the discharge be measured directly from the
machine or the individual wastewater treatment plant and that dilution of the wastewater stream either from within the
machine or without it, is expressively forbidden. In other words, if the discharge from the machine does not conform to the
regulations, the water must be purified in such a way that it does.
9.3.2 Metals Removal One of the more difficult aspects of wastewater treatment is that of heavy metal cations. Four of
the most important ones for electronics cleaning, have the following typical discharge limits:
Table 9-2 Heavy Metal in Effluent

Metal Legislative Range Approximate Average
Tin 0.5 to unlimited mg/liter 2.5 mg/liter
Lead 0.05 to 1 mg/liter US max daily = 0.6 mg/l 0.15 mg/liter (US = 0.43)
Copper 0.5 to 5 mg/liter 1-2 mg/liter
Silver 0.43 mg/l max daily 0.24 mg/l monthly avg
In the calculation of this average, those nations with unlimited permitted total in cation concentration were ignored. This
figure is therefore an average of those nations with a finite limit
In some nations, the permitted concentration is expressed in peak milligrams-per-liter, in others parts-per million. For the
sake of simplicity, the two units are considered equivalent. Very few regulations in the world permit integrating/averaging
to determine discharge concentrations.
Lead is typically removed from wastewater by filtration for suspended lead particles, or by either pH adjustment or ion
exchange for dissolved lead. Lead can sometimes be chelated, which makes removal by pH adjustment difficult or impos-
sible. The selection of an effective ion exchange (IX) resin must be piloted and then flow limits per cross sectional area of
the resin column must be followed for effective removal.
Removing heavy metals from waste water does not destroy these metals. Rather they are transformed into either a concen-
trate from membrane treatment or regenerate from ion exchanger removal or as a solid precipitate after hydroxide or ferrite
treatment. These transformed materials can be as toxic as the original cations in the wastewater. Wastewater dischargers must
ensure that removed metals are managed in as environmentally acceptable manner. Off-site recycling of removed metals to
smelters or chemical manufacturers is the most common method chosen.
9.3.3 pH Adjustment For most saponifiers, the pH is usually too high to meet regulatory discharge limits. A pH adjust-
ment system that employs an acid chemical feed system is required. Sometimes, a caustic chemical feed system for low pH
may be needed. Some insoluble lead salts may precipitate and leave a fine residue at the bottom of the neutralization tank.
A representative sample of the wastewater should be taken and analyzed to determine the acceptability of discharging to the
sewer without lead removal treatment.
9.3.4 BOD/COD Reduction Packaged biological wastewater treatment systems (basic design is similar to a municipal
sewerage treatment system used for cities) are commercially available. Activated carbon treatment may have to be used to
increase the safety margin of the equipment.
This method will reduce the COD/BOD/TOC (Total Organic Carbon) to acceptable levels for discharge to the POTW. With
proper mechanical filtration, lead will not accumulate in the system and the accumulated solids at the bottom of the system
will most likely be considered non-hazardous solid waste, and can be hauled by a septic system waste hauler. Testing of the
accumulated solids should be performed to verify hazardous waste applicability and determine proper management meth-
ods.
9.3.5 Water Use Reduction Water used for rinsing cleaned assemblies can be minimized and virtually eliminated by
employing the following technologies:
9.3.5.1 Reverse Osmosis (RO) RO units typically recycle about 75% of the water fed to them. However, the 25% reject
stream from the RO will have concentrations of lead, BOD, COD, etc., about three times higher than the feed stream, and
108
will require treatment to meet discharge limits. Due to limitations of the membranes in RO units, the feed water will require
pretreatment to ensure acceptable operational life with minimum maintenance. Pretreatment includes particulate filtration to
remove solder balls and micro particles, carbon adsorption to remove organics that could foul membranes and metering of
a descaling chemical.
9.3.5.2 Ion Exchange (IX) Mixed bed IX resins will remove both cations and anions from the cleaning and rinsing waste
waters. Pretreatment involving both particulate filtration and carbon adsorption are both required to achieve optimal IX resin
operation and bed life. It is usually more economical to dispose of IX resins that contain removed lead than regenerate them
because the cost of the regeneration acid required exceeds the value of replacement resin. Spent IX columns can be regu-
lated as hazardous waste if leachate tests show positive lead leaching, or in Europe.
Note: Filter elements from particulate filters for both RO and IX pretreatment generally hold enough lead from solder balls
and micro particles to test positive for lead leaching, thereby classifying them as hazardous waste. However, spent carbon
canisters from such pretreatment systems contain lower amounts of lead and are generally not a characteristic lead hazard-
ous waste.
9.3.5.3 Zero Discharge If public sewer discharge is not available to a facility, or meeting the required discharge limits are
problematic, and the facility does not want to discharge to an on-site subsurface disposal system, a zero discharge status can
be achieved by one of the following methods:
• Hauling Generated wastewater can be drummed or bulk shipped off-site to an approved waste disposal facility.
• Evaporation Generated wastewater can be evaporated in an on-site evaporator, which can be either the atmospheric type,
or the heated type (usually electrically heated). Some states regulate evaporators and may require a permit for their opera-
tion. Profiling each waste stream fed to an evaporator is imperative as most states prohibit the evaporation of a hazardous
waste stream unless extensive ‘‘Part B’’ permit requirements are met.
Air emissions from evaporators need to be analyzed against VOC emissions permit thresholds as saponifiers in cleaning
waste waters will generate VOC emissions. Flammability of some saponifiers will require further evaluation in heated
evaporators to ascertain fire hazard potential in the concentrated evaporator bath.
When an evaporator is used to concentrate wastewater streams, users may periodically empty the evaporator to waste drums
or they may operate the evaporator continuously. The advantage of periodically emptying the evaporator to waste drums is
more used cleaning agent is contained in the evaporator and less is discharged to the environment as a VOC. The disadvan-
tage is more waste drums for disposal. This option slows down the evaporation rate and uses a demister to help concentrate
the used cleaning agent in the evaporator. The disadvantage of slowing down the evaporation rate is the concentration of
used cleaning agent in the chemical isolation section is increased causing more used cleaning agent to reach the subsequent
rinse stage through drag-out. If carbon/ion exchange beds are used in subsequent water recycling processes, they will be
depleted slightly faster because of the additional used cleaning agent in the rinse stage that must be removed.
9.3.6 Total Toxic Organics The Metal Finishing Point Source Category assumes that proper management of solvent
wastes (i.e., ensuring that concentrated toxic organic wastes such as solvent defluxers, degreasers, and paint strippers are not
dumped into wastewater) will allow discharges to meet a total toxic organics (TTO) discharge level of 2.13 ppm for mul-
tiple chemicals. If a facility can certify that no dumping of solvents occurs, the facility will not have to do continuous moni-
toring of TTO but will only have to issue management plans to certify compliance with TTO limits.
9.4 Solid Waste RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976) legislation has established cradle to grave
control for all chemical wastes. The rules cover all sorts of solid wastes including liquids, solids, and gases whether they are
hazardous or non-hazardous. There are two ways to determine if waste is classified as hazardous. It is hazardous by defini-
tion if it is listed as a hazardous waste on the commercial-chemical, specific-source, or non-specific source lists in title 40,
Part 261 of the Code of Federal Regulations. A waste is also hazardous if it meets any of four characteristics: ignitability,
toxicity, corrosivity, and reactivity. Materials with flash points below 60°C [140°F] are by definition ignitable hazardous
wastes. Some of the semi-aqueous cleaning agents are hazardous by this definition, others are not. Semi-aqueous cleaning
agents by themselves are not corrosive (pH less than or equal to pH 2.0, or equal to or greater than pH 12.5), but can become
corrosive when they are loaded with corrosive flux residues. None of the semi-aqueous cleaning agents are classified as toxic
based on composition, and none of the semi-aqueous cleaning agents are reactive enough to be considered hazardous on
their own. Users are advised to consult the following (or replacement) sites for in-depth information on US EPA RCRA
regulations and compliance. Similar sites will provide solid waste information for other nations.
109
http://www.smallbiz-enviroweb.org/
http://www.epa.gov/osw/inforesources/pubs/hotline/training/gen05.pdf
http://www.epa.gov/osw/inforesources/pubs/hotline/training/excl.pdf
One special concern is heavy metals, particularly lead and silver. In practice, heavy metals will remain with water-insoluble
semi-aqueous cleaning agents because they can be complexed with flux dissolved in the semi-aqueous cleaning agent. Par-
ticulate lead will be filtered out of the cleaning agent during normal machine operation. The filters should be tested for metal
leachate to determine if they are hazardous waste (greater than or equal to 5 mg/l Pb or Ag). All waste streams from the
process should be monitored to assure that they are in compliance with applicable regulations. Such monitoring will be
needed to complete annual toxic release reporting for lead that must be reported to an accuracy of 0.1 lbs/year.
In some European countries, all industrial sludge is considered hazardous and must be treated accordingly with deposit in
a chemically approved landfill. If the sludge is of organic compounds, it may be incinerated in an approved kiln. Some kilns
also are capable of accepting sludge containing small percentages of heavy metals, especially cement kilns designed for
chemical incineration.
The disposal of spent or waste cleaning chemicals is regulated in most countries as hazardous waste. Spent cleaning chemi-
cals, filter cartridges, activated carbon, spent ion exchange columns or other waste streams must be analyzed and character-
ized by someone knowledgeable in hazardous waste generation, storage and shipment regulations. In the USA, the federal
TCLP (Toxic Characteristic Leachate Procedure) test is the minimum that must be performed to determine if a solid waste
is a characteristic hazardous waste. Applicability of the hazardous waste rules subject a facility to extensive regulations on
personnel training, storage and handling requirements and record keeping. Even if hazardous waste rules are not applicable,
local or state rules on solid waste may apply. Some states offer technical assistance to aid in this determination. Some states
require annual review of waste determinations to affirm their continued accuracy. Documentation of test results and records
must be kept to assure the regulatory agency of compliance with today’s cradle to grave requirement. Complete records of
the amount of regulated wastes generated, transported, and disposed are required.
In addition to analogous regulations, there are very severe rules in Europe simply for the transport of hazardous waste and,
for that matter, any toxic material. Furthermore, most regions operate licensed liquid and solid chemical disposal sites which
are specially constructed to protect the air, surface and ground waters (especially phreatic sites) and the surrounding soil.
Every load of waste must be clearly labeled as to the nature of the contents. Generally, waste disposal sites must approve
the profile of each waste before the generator can ship that waste to the end site. Combustible waste is usually incinerated
in special rotary kilns. In addition, special licenses are required to transport waste across a national frontier, according to the
Basel Convention.
9.4.1 Spent Solvent Wastes Spent halogenated solvents from vapor defluxers (F001) and spent solvents from other
cleaning operations (F002) are listed hazardous wastes. The amount of spent solvents generated by flux removal systems
can often be reduced, if desired, through distillation and reuse. In many cases, the remaining waste from such a system can
be sent to a licensed solvent reclaimer for credit, or to a permitted hazardous waste incinerator where the recovered still
bottoms can be used as a fuel source for certain equipment. Also, a facility can switch to aqueous-based cleaning and strip-
ping solutions although the volume of hazardous waste (as defined by RCRA) from aqueous stripping and defluxing may be
greater than the amount generated by solvent systems. These pollution prevention alternatives can reduce a facility’s haz-
ardous waste management costs.
9.4.2 Spent Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agent Depending on the type of cleaning machine and semi-aqueous cleaning agent
used, there are two sources of waste organic semi-aqueous cleaning agent. The first is the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank
itself. Ideally, the concentration of the flux residue in the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank will remain at an equilibrium
value due to the dragout of semi-aqueous cleaning agent from the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank and replenishment with
fresh cleaning agent. If air knife efficiency at the exit of the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank is too high, the concentra-
tion of soil in the semi-aqueous cleaning agent could become too high and force the entire semi-aqueous cleaning agent
chamber to be replaced occasionally. The second, and by far the most likely source of spent semi-aqueous cleaning agent,
is either the organic layer in the decanter or the concentrate from water recycling processes. The exact disposal route will
depend on the flash point of the waste, the amount of hazardous material dissolved in the semi-aqueous cleaning agents, and
the water content. (In the USA, these limits are dictated by RCRA rules; in other countries, they are generally governed by
the legislation on the disposal of hazardous wastes.) Flux residues can contain limited quantities of lead and other heavy
metals. This is particularly true if aggressive fluxes are used. Since Type I semi-aqueous cleaning agents are pH neutral,
110
they do not remove heavy metals by chemical reaction. Some semi-aqueous cleaning agent vendors have established pro-
grams to pick up spent semi-aqueous cleaning agents for correct disposal or recycling. Such services may be geographically
limited in remote areas or in countries other than the nation of origin.
For semi-aqueous cleaning agents that are soluble in water, the option for separating the bulk of the spent solvent from the
rinse water in a decanter or coalescer is not available. The material in the wash tank is handled in the same manner that
water-insoluble materials are handled.
All cleaning processes are capable of removing solder balls, solder splash, and other solder bits from the assemblies. The
cleaning equipment should be fitted with suitable filters to remove such solid metal particulate from the cleaning agent.
9.5 Spill Reporting Under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act, the EPA established a list of reportable quantities for spe-
cific chemicals (40 CFR 117.3). In July 1985, this list was incorporated into a master chemical list regulated under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (also known as CERCLA) found at 40 CFR
302.4. These reportable quantities (RQ) range from 1 pound to 5000 pounds and were derived from a variety of criteria.
Chemical spills in amounts equal to or exceeding their respective RQs during any 24 hour period must be reported imme-
diately to the US Coast Guard National Response Center12 or the nearest Coast Guard District office (33 CFR 153.203).
Violations of this provision can be costly. The Coast Guard can assess a fine in addition to assessing the cost of cleanup.
In addition, the EPA can take judicial action to recover tens of thousands of dollars, depending upon the severity of the event.
Willful discharges may be subjected to judicial fines of up to $250,000. Failure to report spills could result in a fine of up
to $10,000 or imprisonment of not more than one year, or both.
9.6 Superfund General Many people in industry mistakenly believe that Superfund, or the Comprehensive Environmen-
tal Response Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA), provides only for the taxation of certain chemicals to pay for cleanup
of specific hazardous waste sites. However, Superfund also includes provisions for old-site notification and for the report of
releases to the environment and for post-closure liability.
Under CERCLA, what must be reported to the EPA’s National Response Center as a release? The answer depends upon the
material that is released and the quantity of that material. Releases that are federally permitted or that are less than the
established reportable quantities for certain chemicals as listed in 40 CFR 302.4 are not subjected to the reporting provisions
under Superfund. Other requirements exist in Sections 311, 312, 313 of the Super-fund Amendment and Reauthorization Act
(SARA). State reporting requirements may have different release values and need to be verified by user.
No additional notification is required for any release that is continuous and stable in quantity and rate, and for which noti-
fication already has been given for a period sufficient to establish the continuity, quantity, and regularity, of such release. In
short, reports to the National Response Center need only be given for a period sufficient to establish the quantity and regu-
latory nature of the releases. Thereafter, only statistically significant increases in the release need to be reported but permits
may be required.
9.7 Toxic Release Inventory Reporting Requirements Facilities in the electronics industry that have 10 or more full-time
employees, which manufacture, process, or otherwise use more than 10,000 pounds per year of any toxic chemical listed in
40 CFR 372.65, must file a Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI) to the EPA and to their state agency. The inventory
reports releases and off-site transfers (including to recycling facilities) of those chemicals. Facilities also are required to
report their pollution prevention and recycling data for TRI chemicals. Reports are due by July 1st of each year. TRI chemi-
cals used by the industry include 1,1,1 -trichloroethane, carbon tetrachloride, ethylene glycol, and trichloroethylene.
In 2000, EPA amended the TRI regulations by adding much lower reporting thresholds for Persistent, Bio-accumulative and
Toxic (PBT) chemicals. Lead was one of the PBTs added, and its reporting threshold is 100 lbs/year. That equates to only
270 lbs. of 63/37 electronic solder. Lead releases to air, water and off-site media must be reported to 0.1 lb/year accuracy.
9.8 Health and SAFETY Issues
9.8.1 Hazards and Controls It is important to realize that even harmless appearing materials and equipment, designed
with safety in mind, can present hazards to the health and safety of operating personnel, if inadequately trained. Hence, per-
sonnel training on safe equipment operation, and chemical, physical and electrical hazards are a prime responsibility of the
employer.
In the USA, operating personnel need to be familiar with both the physical and health hazards of each cleaning material
used, as described in the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) for each material. Operators can summarize these hazards on
111
HazCom (Hazard Communication) labels for material containers, including equipment. The most common US labels used
are the HMIS (Hazard Material Identification System) or NFPA (National Fire Protection Association). Equivalent documen-
tation is generally available in nations other than the USA.
In the USA, equipment must be UL certified, operating manuals need to be studied, and personnel need to be trained by
equipment manufacturer or qualified personnel. Repairs and servicing should preferably be left to the equipment manufac-
turer. In the USA, operating personnel need to be also familiar with applicable MSDSs and HMIS or NFPA labels. Viola-
tions of OSHA HazCom Standard are typically the most cited standard. Some state agencies for occupational safety and
health issues have similar/identical requirements on ‘‘right to know’’ about chemical hazards.
9.8.2 Materials Safety Data Sheets In the USA, it is a legal requirement of OSHAs HazCom Standard (HCS) (29 CFR
1910.1200) to maintain MSDSs for each material to which a worker is exposed in a readily accessible location on each work
shift. Further, workers must be trained in how to read the MSDSs, what the health and physical hazards of the chemicals
are, and how to recognize spills and releases of each material. MSDSs must contain other information on the chemical
material including PPE (personnel protection equipment), first aid procedures, spill control and clean-up steps, and an emer-
gency telephone number.
9.8.3 Hazardous Materials Labeling Systems The HCS requires that information concerning both the physical and health
hazards of chemical materials, and proper PPE be shown on each container. The two label systems noted above facilitate
this understanding by using a 0 to 4 scale to rate Health, Flammability and Reactivity of the chemical material (see Table
10-3). 0 means a minimal chemical hazard and 4 means a severe hazard.
WARNING! Some other hazard scales use the reverse order where the lowest figure represents the greatest hazard. One must
never assume that hazard scales go in one direction or the other and operators should be trained accordingly. While the
flammability and reactivity of both labels are based on the NFPA ratings, the health hazard rating is different between the
two labeling systems. HMIS health hazard rating is based on employee exposure during normal operation and use, whereas
the NFPA rating is based on exposure to the chemical in a fire situation.
Table 9-3 Ratings for Reactivity

Rating/Hazard Health (HMIS) (Eye Rating) Flammability Reactivity
0 Will not burn in air up to 816°C
Essentially Non-Irritating Stable under fire
Minimal [1500°F] for 5 minutes exposure
1 Slightly irritating Must be preheated to burn May become unstable
Slight reversible in 7 days FP >149°C [300°F] Elevated temperature
2 Irritating; persisting more FP 38°C [100°F] Normally unstable and readily
Moderate than 7 days; sensitizer but < 93°C [°F] reacts but does not detonate
3 Corrosive, irreversible FP > 23°C [>73°F] Detonates with a
Serious corneal opacity but < 38°C [<100°F] strong ignition source
4 Capable of detonation
Not applicable FP < 23°C [<73°F]
Severe at room temp
9.8.4 Personnel Exposure It is a legal requirement to maintain worker exposure to chemical vapors at or below the Per-
missible Exposure Limit (PEL) for eight hour exposures, and at or below the Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) for shorter
time periods (typically 15 minutes) as published by OSHA in the air contaminant standard 29 CFR 1910.1000. These
hygienic standards must be listed on the MSDS. It is equally important to maintain worker exposures to chemicals on which
OSHA has not established a PEL or STEL, at or below the Threshold Limit Value (TLV) for eight hour exposures, as pub-
lished by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and/or the National Institute of Occu-
pational Safety and Health (NIOSH) through proper local ventilation or work practices, or both.
OSHA requires that engineering controls (i.e., local and/or general ventilation) be the primary method of controlling
employee exposure, and that requiring employees to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) in the form of respirators for
respiratory protection be used as a last resort if engineering controls cannot control exposures. Should wearing of respira-
tors be required to adequately protect workers from vapors of cleaning chemicals, the user is required to have a written
respiratory protection plan (reference 29 CFR 1910.134). Compliance requires medical evaluations of workers and medical
provide clearance to wear a respirator before requiring an employee to wear a respirator.
Health effects, besides potential inhalation hazards, include an evaluation of the need for required eye and/or face protec-
tion recommended in the MSDS to prevent the irritation to, or corrosive attack on both eye and skin tissues. Skin irritation
or corrosive action may be a potential hazard that can be prevented by wearing appropriate chemical resistant protective
gloves.
112
9.8.5 Flammable Liquid Issues Users of cleaners must also evaluate other safety factors, such as fire safety considerations
and both the acute and chronic health effects of the specific cleaning chemicals. Factory Mutual (FM) and the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) regard liquids with a flash point below 60°C [140°F] to be flammable, and liquids whose
flashpoint is above 60°C [140°F] but below 38°C [200°F] to be combustible. Flammable liquids pose explosion hazards
when their vapors are not properly removed by either local or general ventilation.
Users of flammable liquids also must recognize that installations where these liquids are to be used must conform to cer-
tain construction standards, such as explosion-proof wiring, switches, motors etc. (Reference NFPA 35 and OSHA 29 CFR
1910.106). Users of flammable liquids may require the approval of the local fire department, and in some districts, a per-
mit for using of these liquids. Notification may also be required under EPA’s Community Right to Know regulations 40 CFR
355.30 (b), 370.21 and 370.25 to report storage and usage of certain chemicals to both the local fire department and emer-
gency planning commission.
The foregoing sections describe US regulatory requirements. Similar regulations and legislation exist in most other nations.
Regardless of location, users of cleaning equipment and materials must determine the regulations applicable to their particu-
lar conditions of use.
9.9 Water Resources and Quality
9.9.1 Measurement of Water Purity Depending upon the application, there are several methods that can be used to mea-
sure the purity of water. For electronics part cleaning, there are two major categories of contaminants:
• Non-ionic.
• Ionic.
The following EPA document can be used as a guide: ‘‘Methods of Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastewater’’ (EPA-
600/4-79-020, revised 3/83 P.B.84-128677).
9.9.2 Definitions
9.9.2.1 Non-ionic contaminants most often do not affect the electrical properties of the water and can be measured by
the following methods:
9.9.2.2 TSS (total suspended solids) measures the amount of suspended particles having sizes greater than 0.45 microm-
eter generally.
9.9.2.3 COD (chemical oxygen demand) measures the amount of oxygen (oxidation by potassium permanganate) required
to oxidize reducing compounds such as sulfides, salts of metals, organic compounds.
9.9.2.4 BOD (biological oxygen demand) measures the amount of oxygen that bacteria need to oxidize biodegradable
organic matter over a given period of time; typical measurement used by municipal sewer districts known as POTWs (pub-
licly owned treatment works).
9.9.2.5 TOC (total organic carbon) is a measure of the total amount of oxidizable organic matter in water sample and is
most often used for high purity water applications.
Tap water should be filtered with a nominally rated filter having a rating from one to 20 micrometer (micron) to remove the
undesired suspended particles from the water. If a closed-loop recycling system is used, COD and BOD would give an indi-
cation of the need to replace the activated carbon and/or disinfection of the process equipment.
9.9.2.6 Ionic-purity of water is a measurement of the amount of dissolved minerals (ions) in the water. Usually, dissolved
contaminants are ionic and consist of minerals such as sodium chloride and calcium sulfate. Their total concentration can
be expressed by any of the following terms:
9.9.2.7 ppm (parts per million) an abbreviation used to express the concentration of a substance within another, usually
water. It is the unit weight of a material in a million units of weight of water. For example, one ppm means one milligram
(mg.) of material (for example, salt) in a million milligrams (1 kg) of water. For water calculations, ppm and mg/l are
equivalent expressions of the concentration of a contaminant in water.
9.9.2.8 TDS (total dissolved solids) TDS meters provide an estimate of the amount of minerals in a water sample. Typi-
cally, the measurement is used by water chemists to determine the approximate capacity of ion-exchange resins and reject
capability of reverse osmosis membranes.
113
9.9.2.9 Hardness is a measure of the amount of minerals (calcium and magnesium carbonates, expressed in mg/l or
grains/gal) in a water sample. The hardness can be removed by an ion-exchange process called water softening. It is not a
measure of ionic purity. (Note: Softened water forms a white powdery deposit, while hard water forms a hard, white, adher-
ent scale. As softening replaces calcium and magnesium ions with sodium ions, the deposit is essentially sodium carbonate
which is a highly ionic, aggressive, hygroscopic salt. For this reason, softened water should never be used without further
treatment for the final rinse in any aqueous process.
9.9.2.10 Conductivity is an electrical measurement (microsiemens/cm) that expresses the ability of an electrical current to
pass through water. The meter should be temperature compensated. The higher the dissolved minerals content of the water,
the higher the conductivity reading. Tap water is typically from 40 to 1000 microsiemens/cm. Conductivity is the measure-
ment of choice whenever tap water or high conductivity water samples are tested that are typically above about 5
microsiemens/cm. Note that microsiemens/cm = MHOS/CM.
9.9.2.11 Resistivity is the inverse of conductivity and is an electrical measurement (ohm-cm or megohm-cm) that
expresses the resistance to the passage of an electrical current through water. It is the preferred way to accurately measure
water with conductivity below one microsiemen/cm. The highest purity water has a resistivity of 18.2 megohm-cm at 25°C
[77°F].
9.9.3 Water Purity Standards The effectiveness of the water removal before drying the final rinse water from a part
determines its final cleanliness. The greater the amount of water that dries on parts cleaned, the greater the effect of water
purity on the final cleanliness. Low mineral content water will provide the user the widest process window for both the
washing and rinsing operations. Divalent cations from tap water, such as calcium and magnesium, can react with rosin,
forming insoluble compounds. They can also reduce the effectiveness and bath life of some washing chemicals. In addition,
the use of low mineral content water prevents scale buildup and will greatly reduce the frequency of maintenance, such as
descaling. As a rule, one should use the highest grade water required to give the appropriate cleanliness results.
For many applications, the use of deionized water, distilled water or reverse osmosis water will be required. Much will
depend upon the quality of the incoming water and the nature of the assemblies to be cleaned. The user should consult with
the flux and cleaning agent vendors for specific recommendations on water purity specifications. For high cleanliness level
applications, such as before conformal coating, a minimum water purity (one megohm/cm resistivity, one microsiemen/cm),
or a TDS of 0.4 mg/l is recommended.
9.9.4 Water Purification Methods There are numerous methods to remove both non-ionic and ionic contaminants. The
following methods are appropriate for electronics cleaning.
9.9.4.1 Mechanical Filtration is a barrier method that removes particles from water typically greater than one micrometer
(micron). Tap water filters can include:
9.9.4.2 Cartridge filters are made from a wide variety of materials such as plastic or natural fibers (polypropylene, cot-
ton and others) in a large variety of designs (such as molded, fiber wound, pleated papers, etc.) designed for lower capac-
ity contaminant holding applications.
9.9.4.3 Felt media filters (bag filters) are manufactured from different materials and have the capability of higher con-
taminant loading than cartridge filters, and therefore have a lower cost per unit weight of particulate matter designed for
higher flow, higher contaminant holding applications.
9.9.4.4 Granular media filters are composed of multi-media or single media (various grades of sand and other minerals).
These are used primarily to remove suspended contaminants.
9.9.4.5 Activated carbon is an adsorbent medium that is designed to remove certain organic molecules primarily from
flux residues, solder mask contaminants etc. Its unique properties are derived from its extremely large surface area. It is very
effective in de-chlorinating a water supply as pretreatment for Reverse Osmoses or ion-exchange resins.
9.9.4.6 Water Softening is a process in which the sodium cations of the cation ion-exchange resin (water softener) are
exchanged for the hardness mineral cations (e.g., calcium and magnesium) and other cations such as iron. Even though one
ion is being exchanged for another, there is no reduction in the total mineral content, or conductivity. The ionic purity of the
114
water essentially does not change. In other applications softened water, or perhaps tap water, may suffice depending on the
tap water quality used or the tap water quality that is softened. As a guideline, water with a hardness of greater than 30-60
ppm should be softened in order to reduce the scaling of nozzles and tank surfaces.
9.9.4.7 Membrane Filters are made from a variety of materials (plastic, ceramic and other) that are formed into sheets or
tubes. They are designed to remove particles, organic molecules and ions from a liquid stream. Most membranes produce
two streams: one with a high level of contaminants, and another with a low level of contaminants. There are four basic types
of membranes. They are differentiated from one another by their micrometer rating and materials of construction: (In order
of finest to coarsest)
9.9.4.8 Reverse Osmosis (RO) rated from about 200 molecular weight removal. It is capable of removing all molecules
and many ions from water. Wastewater can be typically purified to a resistivity from 25,000 to 500,000 ohm-cm. It is the
most commonly used for cleaning.
9.9.4.9 Nanofiltration (NF) rated from about 1,000 to 10,000 molecular weight removal. It is used to remove certain dis-
solved minerals, like calcium and magnesium (hardness) from a water supply.
9.9.4.10 Ultrafilter (UF) rated from about 50,000 to 500,000 molecular weight removal. They are primarily designed to
remove organic molecules that are much finer than those removed by the microfilter. Ions are not removed by ultra-filters.
9.9.4.11 Microfilter (MF) rated from about 0.05 to 0.8 micrometer for absolute removal. Ratings are based upon the size
of the pores. Ions are not removed by microfilters.
9.9.4.12 Ion-Exchange The following method is used to remove dissolved minerals (ions) from water. Other types of ion-
exchange resins can be used for a variety of specialty applications.
9.9.4.13 Ion-Exchange (Deionization) A process in which dissolved minerals (ions) are removed from water by cation and
anion resins in an exchange process. The cation resin removes all of the positively charged ions (calcium, sodium, etc.) and
replaces them with hydrogen ions (H+), and the anion resin removes all of the negatively charged ions and replaces them
with hydroxyls (OH-) anion. When the H+ and the OH- are combined, they form purified water. A two-bed deionization
method includes a cation resin tank followed by an anion tank and can produce water having a resistivity typically from
50,000 to 500,000 ohm-cm. A mixed-bed de-ionizer containing both cation and anion resins that are mixed and used in one
tank produces water having a resistivity from 500,000 ohm-cm to 18.2 megohm-cm.
9.9.4.14 Special Ion-exchange resins Special application resins, for example, chelate or heavy metal selective resin,
designed to remove heavy metals but no other ions (cations and anions) or organic removal resins.
9.9.4.15 Other Methods Other methods can be of value in very specific applications. Usually, these processes are used
to remove desirable fluids from a wastewater stream and reuse them. These methods are applicable to wastewater streams
that contain solvents. The most common method is distillation.
9.9.4.16 Distillation is a process that separates contaminants from tap water or wash water by evaporation and produces
high purity water or purified solvent. In some instances it can be used to recover water from wash baths. This process is
appropriate for purification, but the energy requirements make it expensive to run. In some locations, a special excise license
may be needed to run any equipment capable of distillation.
9.9.4.17 Ultraviolet radiation (UV) is a method of sanitizing water by deactivation or by killing microorganisms with a
specific wavelength (254 nanometers typically) of light.
9.9.4.18 Ozonation is a method of treating water and wastewater with ozone (gas), an extremely powerful oxidant that
degrades organic compounds into smaller molecules and ions.
9.9.4.19 Chlorination is a method that uses sodium hypochlorite, chloramines, chlorine gas or other chlorinated com-
pounds to disinfect water and surfaces by killing and inhibiting the growth of microorganisms.
115
10 SOLVENT CLEANING AGENTS

This section addresses solvent cleaning of electrical/electronic assemblies, parts and application tools after soldering.
10.1 Purpose The section provides a basic understanding of the subject and to serve as a guide to users or prospective
users of solvent cleaning technology, allowing selection or improvement of solvent cleaning processes.
10.2.1 Solvent Cleaning Solvent cleaning is a process that uses a solvent medium for washing and rinsing the electronic
parts and assemblies. In solvent cleaning, drying is application and equipment dependent. In vapor defluxing, drying is
accomplished by evaporating residual liquid solvent on the part being cleaned passing into the vapor zone generated by the
boiling solvent and resting in the freeboard zone where any residual liquid evaporates on contact with refrigerated air within
the vapor degreaser. In all other applications, drying occurs by evaporation of residual solvent into the room air. Make sure
appropriate ventilation is maintained to keep the vapor in air levels within recommended limits and in compliance with local
health and safety regulations for both working environment and exhaust airstreams.
10.2.2 Kauri-Butanol value (KB Value) KB value is an international, standardized measure of solvent power for a hydro-
carbon solvent, and is governed by an ASTM standardized test, ASTM D1133. The result of this test is a scales index, using
referred to as the ‘‘KB value.’’ A higher KB value means the solvent is more aggressive or active in the ability to dissolve
certain materials. Mild solvents have low scores in the tens or twenties; powerful solvents like chlorinated solvents have
ratings in the low hundreds. KB value is one indicator of solvency, and should be combined with other tests such as Larg-
est Soluble Hydrocarbon testing or specific solvency testing to determine the solvents’ ability to clean.
10.2.3 Azeotrope An azeotrope is a mixture of two or more liquids in such a ratio that its composition does not change
by simple distillation. This occurs because, when an azeotrope is boiled, the resulting vapor has the same ratio of constitu-
ents as the original mixture.
10.2.4 Wash or Washing Washing is the primary cleaning operation that removes undesirable impurities (contaminants)
from surfaces by chemical and physical effects, mainly dissolution of the contaminants.
10.2.5 Rinse or Rinsing Rinsing in a cleaning operation (usually following the wash step) where fresh solvent replaces-
via a dilution mode-any residual contamination, leaving surfaces wet with pure solvent. In vapor degreasing systems, sol-
vent condensing onto the parts in the vapor zone after the washing step is often sufficient to rinse the parts.
10.2.6 Drying Drying is the process of removing any residual liquid solvent on the surface of the washed and rinsed parts.
In a vapor defluxing process, drying is initiated in the vapor zone of the cleaning machine. Drying can be augmented by
passing superheated solvent vapor across the surface of the parts, to ensure complete removal of residual liquid solvent. This
technique is especially effective with complex geometries that can entrap liquid solvent. Drying actually occurs in the
equipment free-board cooling zone where the boiling solvent is re-condensed and allowed to drip from the assembly.
10.2.7 Defluxing (Flux Removal or Post Solder Cleaning) Defluxing is the cleaning process designed to remove solder
flux and by-products. Other objectives are removal of process residues and materials used as production aids, such as sol-
vent soluble maskants. Impurities left by the board or component fabrication processes or other operations may be removed
during the process, thus the defluxing process widens the process window for assemblers.
10.2.8 Chemical Material Acronym Definitions
• HCFC: Hydrochlorofluorocarbon
• HFC: Hydrofluorocarbon
• HFE: Hydrofluoroether
• nPB: normal Propyl Bromide
• CFC: Chlorofluorocarbon
116
• TCE: Trichloroethylene
• PCE: Perchloroethlyene
• IPA: isopropyl alcohol
• t-DCE: transdichloroethylene
10.3 Solvent Cleaning Background and Overview The acting principle behind solvent cleaning is the ability to dissolve
electronic assembly flux residues into the solvent as a non-volatile residue while rinsing the assembly with the volatile sol-
vent vapor. When flux residue is dissolved into the solvent cleaner, a solution is formed. The ability to dissolve flux resi-
due into the solvent cleaner is represented by the dynamic equilibrium that results from dissolution and phase separation of
solid flux residues to a point where the residue is in equilibrium with the solvent. The ability to dissolve flux residue into
the solvent cleaner is determine by the balance of intermolecular and intramolecular forces between the solvent and solute,
and the entropy change that accompanies the solvation. Factors such as temperature and pressure alter this balance, thus
changing solubility properties.
10.3.1 Overview of Solvent Cleaning Solvent cleaning is a process in which a cleaning agent is applied directly to the
surface by spraying, immersion, brushing, or wiping. The ability to dissolve a solute into a solvent is known as solubility.
Soils interact with the solvent cleaner by arranging the cleaning agents’ molecular structure with the soils molecular struc-
ture. Heat and entropy typically improve dissolution and render the solute more thermodynamically stable. The solvent
cleaners’ effectiveness is dependent on cohesive energy of the solvent and solute based on dispersion, dipole movement
(separation of partial positive and partial negative charges within the same molecule), and hydrogen bonding properties.
Solvent cleaning agents can be broadly classified into two categories: polar and non-polar. The dielectric constant of the sol-
vents present in the cleaner provides a measure of the cleaning agents’ polarity. Highly polar solvents have a high dielec-
tric constant while non-polar solvents have a low dielectric constant. Non-polarity, dipole moment, and hydrogen bonding
of a solvent determines what type of compounds dissolve into the cleaning agent and with what other solvents or liquid
compounds dissolve the solute. As a rule of thumb, polar solvents dissolve polar compounds best and non-polar solvents
dissolve non-polar compounds best (i.e., ‘‘like dissolves like’’).
Solvent cleaning agents can be classified as non-polar, protic, or aprotic. Common non-polar solvents such as mineral spir-
its, cyclopentane, and toluene typically dissolve non-polar solutes. Protic solvents, such as isopropyl alcohol, hydrogen bond
with negatively charged (anions) solutes. Common protic solvents include isopropyl alcohol, methanol and water. Common
aprotic solvents have larger dipole moments and commonly solvate positively charged cations through attraction to the sol-
vents negative dipole. Common aprotic solvents include 1-2, transdichloroethylene, acetone, and methyl acetate.
Hildebrand (1936) and Hansen (1966) theorems provide powerful insight into matching the solvent cleaner with the solute.
Solvent cleaning agents that exhibit close inter-molecular interactions with the solute typically dissolve the soil. Knowing
these interactions, cleaning agent companies can design solvent cleaning agents that match up to the soils solubility prop-
erties. This allows for the development of greener technologies by substituting ‘‘good’’ solvents with those solvents that
exhibit less desirable environmental and health properties.
10.3.2 Process Map Solvent cleaning agents are commonly used for topical cleaning, batch cleaning, and assemblies with
non-hermetically sealed components. One of the beneficial features that solvent provide is their low surface tension and
ability to wet under low clearances and blind holes. Solvents that are properly matched to the soils being cleaned have been
shown to be effective choices when cleaning printed circuit assemblies and components.
10.4 Solvent Cleaning Agent Technology
10.4.1 Single Solvent System A single solvent is a material that effectively dissolves the solute. For example, isopropyl
alcohol (IPA) dissolves a wide range of non-polar compounds. IPA is also relatively non-toxic and evaporates quickly. Thus,
it is used widely as a solvent and as a cleaning fluid, for bench-top cleaning electronic assemblies, stencils, and other elec-
tronic devices such as contact pins, magnetic tape, and disk heads, the lenses of lasers in optical disc drives. A common
application of IPA is to remove thermal paste from IC packages. Isopropyl alcohol is a common extraction solvent used to
remove and test for ionic contaminants.
10.4.2 Blended Solvent Systems Engineered solvent blends are suitable for a wide range of cleaning applications. Envi-
ronmentally friendly solvent molecules have replaced ozone depleting, toxic, and hazardous solvents. Solvent blends work
through high solvency, low surface tension, non-flammability, and molecular stability. These solvent properties provide the
platform for designing solvent blends targeted at specific soils and process needs.
117
Solvent blends are a common method for defluxing electronic assemblies and cleaning components. Solvent blends properly
matched to the solute and high vapor pressure possess good wetting characteristics to assure flow under low gap compo-
nents, which allows dissolution and removal of flux residues. Extremely low viscosity and surface tension enhance the wet-
ting and flow characteristics required to clean highly dense assemblies.
10.4.2.1 Azeotrope An azeotrope is a mixture of two or more liquids in such a ratio that its composition does not change
by simple distillation. This occurs because, when an azeotrope is boiled, the resulting vapor has the same ratio of constitu-
ents as the original mixture. The azeotropic blend has a characteristic boiling point. The azeotrope boiling point temperature
is either less than the boiling point temperatures of any of its constituents (a positive azeotrope) or greater than the boiling
point temperatures of any of its constituents ( a negative azeotrope).
The beneficial properties of azeotropic engineered solvent are highly desirable for cleaning electronic components and
assemblies. The engineered blend is unchanged by distillation, which allows for the cleaning solvent to be continuously
purified and reused. Another major advantage of an azeotrope is that effective flammable solvents can be combined with
non-flammable solvents resulting in a non-flammable azeotrope.
10.4.2.2 Azeotrope-Like Solvent blends form azeotropes in specific ratios. When designing engineered solvent blends, a
particular solvent in the blend may exhibit desirable Hansen properties and Kauri-Butanol values. As such, a higher ratio is
needed in the solvent blend to provide desirable cleaning properties. These off ratio blends tend to form azeotropic-like
character. The positive or negative azeotrope will form in the vapor space with the excess solvent either grossing up or tail-
ing down over time. If the blend ratio is not overly off azeotrope, the solvent blends composition tends to stabilize within
a safe operating range. Care must be taken when using azeotrope-like blends to ensure that composition shifts remain within
a non-flammable safe operating range. Monitoring of composition is recommended.
10.4.3 Co-Solvent Blends In this process, a non-flammable lower boiling solvent is combined with a higher boiling
organic solvent such as a hydrocarbon or ester to generate a homogeneous mixture in the first sump of a multi-sump vapor
defluxer. The boiling point of the mixture is determined by the ratio of the two solvents. The lower boiling solvent is used
in the remaining sumps to rinse the co-solvent mixture and dissolved soils from the PCBs. Drying is easily accomplished
in the vapor zone. This process, with the ability to raise the temperature in the first sump, can be effective in removing stub-
born soils.
10.4.3.1 Bi-Solvent Cleaning In this process, a variety of higher boiling organic solvents can be used to remove soils.
This is followed by a lower boiling non-flammable rinse solvent. The separation of the two cleaning solvents reduces the
cross-contamination of the higher boiling solvent in the vapor of the rinse solvent.
10.4.4 Hansen-Engineered Solvent Blends (Non-Azeotrope) Solvency of one material in another can be determined by
comparing solubility parameters of the two materials involved. The closer the solubility parameters are, the better the sol-
vency of the two compounds in each other. The solvency behavior of a pure solvent is proportional to the cohesive energy
of the solvent and this energy is proportional to heat of vaporization of the solvent. The cohesive energy density is the
amount of energy needed to completely dissolve one unit volume of molecules from their like molecules. Solvents or sol-
vent formulations which have a similar solubility parameter for soil, in this case flux residue, would be best suited for the
removal of flux residues.
Hildebrand (1936) proposed that the ability of a solvent to affect solids could be predicted by looking at the square root of
the cohesive energy of that solvent. For a material to dissolve, in this case flux residue, the cohesive energy of the mol-
ecules must be overcome by molecules that have similar solvency behavior. A good analogy is to think of all the thousands
of solvents as points in 3 dimensional spaces, like stars in the night sky. The stars in this universe are arranged such that
the stars closest to one another have similar solubility properties. Now imagine we can plot the residues to be removed and
the materials of construction the widgets are made from in the same space such that if the residue or a widget’s material
close to a solvent point, we could predict the dissolution or deterioration of the material. This would be quite useful in both
selecting a solvent to clean the residue of interest and avoid solvent selections that would deteriorate the materials of
construction.
Hansen (1966) proposed that the Hildebrand solubility parameter could be broken into three parts. The Hildebrand approach
is much like looking into the night sky and seeing two stars that appear to be close. They could be close, or one could
be light years behind the other. Dr. Hansen added three parameters to establish true location in this three dimensional
relationship.
118
The Hansen parameters estimate three important forces that influence solubility and that the sum of the squares of these
equaled the Hildebrand solubility parameter squared as given in the equation below.
δt2 = δd2 + δp2 + δh2
Where:
δt2 = total Hildebrand solubility parameter
δd2 = dispersion force component of solubility
δp2 = polar force component of solubility
δh2 = hydrogen bonding force component of solubility
The first component of Hansen space is the dispersive/cohesive force (δd). In non-polar solvents this force predominates. It
is a measure of the molecule to molecule interaction created by momentary differences in electron distribution. The energy
of vaporization can be used to estimate the dispersive force. The second parameter in Hansen space is an estimate of the
polar cohesive force (δp). It is the force created by the permanent differences electron densities created when electron rich
and electron poor atoms are found in the same molecule. The polar force can be estimated from the dipole moment of the
molecule. The third force of Hansen space is the hydrogen bonding parameter (δh). It is a measure of the ability to exchange
electrons though hydrogen bonding. It can be estimated from the heat of mixing, or can be calculated as the sum of every-
thing not included in the first two parameters.
Both the older Hildebrand and modern Hansen solubility parameters which relate the actual soil and the cleaning solvent
give a more accurate guide to cleaning efficacy and are therefore preferred for today’s complex soils. An older guide used
for predicting solvency was the Kauri-Butanol (KB) number per ASTM Method D-1 133, which was an indirect measure
related to the power of a solvent for dissolving Kauri gum.
It is critical to note here that neither of these solvency tests gives a measurement for effectiveness of ionic contamination
removal. This must be determined on an individual basis, taking into account the particular soldering materials, components
and soldering parameters in the assembly operation. In general, multi-component formulations containing a base solvent and
an alcohol are strongly recommended for ionic removal. Contact individual cleaning solvent suppliers for specific product
performance capabilities, as they often have comparative laboratory data available for reference.
10.4.5 Summary Each type of solvent has advantages and disadvantages and the selection of cleaning solvent will depend
primarily on the type of contaminant(s) to be removed and the material compositions of the electronic assemblies in ques-
tion.
Category 1 (plating and etching salts, sodium chloride, etc.), Category 2 (nonpolar/nonionic residues such as metal oxides
(tin or lead oxides)), and Category 3 (particulate residues, such as machining residues, resin and fiberglass debris, dust, lint,
etc.) contaminants are not satisfactorily dissolved by solvent cleaning. However, various combinations of cleaning cycles
(i.e., high and/or low pressure spray, flooding, flushing, ultrasonics) are capable of adequately removing insoluble residues
in many instances through their inherent physical actions. (In certain cases a rosin-based lacquer has been applied to lead-
based residues, cured and then removed by a fluorinated solvent/alcohol blend to wash away both the contaminant and the
lacquer. This process should also work with the newer solvent formulations.)
Table 10-1 contains a listing of typical/potential contaminants with which the assembly cleaning processes must contend and
the relative ability of various cleaning solvents to remove them. The list is not a complete compilation of all residues pos-
sible in an electronic assembly, but rather a guide to aid in proper solvent selection for a given category of contaminant/
residue.
119
Table 10-1 Relative Cleaning Effectiveness

Solvent Groups
AZEO/
Contaminant/ Blends Aromatics/ Check
Residues Chlorinated Brominated Fluorinated Azeotrope/1 Alcohols Ketones Aliphatics List2
Category 1
Fingerprint Salts I I I E E E I
Rosin Activators I I I E E I I
Activator Residues I I I E E I I
Category 1 (cont.)
Cutting Oils (water
I G I G G G I
soluble)
Temporary Solder
I I I G G I I
Masks/Solder Stops
Soldering Salts I I I I I I I
Residual Plating Salts I I I I I I I
Residual Etching
I I I I I I I
Salts
Category 2
Resin Fixative Waxes E E E E E E G
Waxes E E I G/E I G G
Soldering Oils E E E E E E E
Cutting Oils (solvent
E E E E E E E
soluble)
Fingerprint Oils E E E E E E E
Flux Rosin E E E E E E G
Markings E E I G I E E
Hand Cream E E E E G E G
Silicone oil and
G G G E G/E I I
grease
Silicone polymers I I I I I I I
Tape Residues E E I E E E E
Temporary Solder
E E I G I I I
Masks/Solder Stops
Organic Solvent
E E I G E E E
Films
Category 3
Resin & Fiberglass
M M M M M M M
Debris
Metal & Plastic
M M M M M M M
Machining Debris
Dust M M M M M M M
Handling Soils M M M M M M M
Lint M M M M M M M
Legend
E = Effective in dissolving contaminant
I = Ineffective in dissolving contaminant
G = Gray area (moderately effective)
M = Mechanical action required.
Note 1 Azeotrope compositions vary in solvent strength.
Note 2 Check List: Contaminants/residues present in my operation
120
10.5 Properties of Cleaning Solvents
10.5.1 Introduction A physical property is a measurable property value which describes a solvent or solvent blends state
at any given moment in time. Some common physical properties are boiling point, flash point, color, density, dielectric
strength, efficacy, electric charge, electrical conductivity, solubility, viscosity, surface tension, etc.
10.5.2 Physical Properties Examples for Common Solvents Several types of organic solvents are used in the cleaning of
printed wiring boards (PCBs) and printed wiring assemblies (PWAs). Solvents are also contained in conformal coatings,
which contact the laminate surface. The most common of the solvents are halogenated solvents, aliphatic hydrocarbons,
alcohols, ketones, and aromatic solvents (see Tables 3 and 4). Blends of the various solvents are also commonly used. This
section contains the following:
• Physical Properties.
• Solvency.
• Solvent monitoring/stability.
• Safety and Environmental properties.
• Cleaning processes.
10.5.3 Effectiveness To be effective, the solvent cleaning agent requires the following characteristics.
10.5.3.1 Wetting The cleaning agent should possess good wetting characteristics which ideally change minimally during
the cleaning operation to assure flow and wetting in all areas to dissolve and remove contaminants. Wetting is generally
dependent upon the viscosity and surface tension of the solvent. Solvent formulations possessing low viscosities and low
surface tensions will typically have the best wetting characteristics.
10.5.3.2 Solvency Power The cleaner should possess good solvency power (affinity for the contaminant). The cleaner
must be capable of dissolving the contaminants present, and if dissolution is poor, wetting is of little value other than to
mechanically wash away the contaminant. It is difficult to state the solvency power of a cleaner in absolute terms and there-
fore relative measures are often used. Examples of such relative measures, which are of limited utility, are solubility of con-
taminant in g/cm3 (changes with specific percent loading) Kauri-Butanol value, and aniline point number. A much better
method is solubility parameter data, which gives the best indication of the ability of a solvent or solvent formulation to
remove a soil. Also, it should be noted that solvency can be enhanced by proper choice of cleaning equipment, agitation
methods or cleaning cycle.
10.5.4 Multiple Components A cleaner may contain both polar and non-polar components. The non-polar portion is
needed to efficiently remove nonionic contaminants such as rosin, oils, fingerprint oils, etc., and the polar components for
dissolving (solvating) ionic contaminants such as flux activators, plating salt residues, or salts from handling. To achieve the
polar/non-polar characteristics, solvent blends and azeotropes are becoming more prominent. The non-polar component is
often a halogenated solvent, either chlorinated, brominated, chloro-fluorinated or hydro-fluorinated. The polar component
solvent is typically an alcohol such as methanol, ethanol, 2-propanol or 1 -propanol. Other components such as chloro-
carbons or hydrocarbons are often used to adjust the balance of solvent power and compatibility for specific uses. Stabiliz-
ers are often added as well to prevent degradation of the solvent formulation during use.
10.5.5 Degradation The cleaner should not, when properly used, degrade hardware or components comprising the elec-
tronic assembly(Some known examples where degradation can occur include annodization, some plastics, label inks, label
adhesive, connectors, metallic finishes, etc.). Marking/symbolization should not be removed by the cleaning solvent/solution.
Water accumulation can degrade the vapor degreasing solvent and can accelerate oxidation and reduction of chlorinated and
brominated solvents. To prevent solvent degradation, minor materials are added to increase acid acceptance. Suppliers define
acid acceptance levels and offer kits to monitor acid acceptance levels. If the acceptance level is low, suppliers offer mate-
rials to adjust the acid acceptance to safe levels.
10.5.6 Residues The cleaner should not leave detrimental solvent residues after final rinse. Adequate purity of solvents
is a very important factor in being able to achieve an acceptable degree of surface cleanliness. Solvent residues/impurities
encountered in the cleaning process can be generally attributed to suspended matter, contaminants in solvents as a conse-
quence of manufacture, and dissolved contaminants.
121
10.5.7 Suspended Matter Suspended matter consists of particulate matter insoluble in the solvent but suspended due to
particle size and/or specific gravity. The probability of this type of impurity being present increases if adequate controls are
not implemented on production cleaning equipment or if solvents are initially packaged or repackaged utilizing insufficient
controls or inadequate storage containers.
10.5.8 Dissolved Contaminants Once the cleaning process is underway, the soils removed from the parts are dissolved in
the solvent. In vapor defluxing, they will accumulate in the boiling solvent. Acceptable levels of contaminants in the boil-
ing solvent will depend on the purity requirements of the process. The contaminants can typically be removed through
simple distillation.
10.5.9 Reclaimed Solvents The use of reclaimed solvent has distinct economic advantages and is the principle behind all
vapor phase cleaning equipment. No problem is encountered as long as co-distilled contaminants, such as mineral and sili-
cone oils, are not present in the reclaimed solvent (i.e., a controlled/known source is providing the solvent material to be
reclaimed). However, reclaimed solvents available at low cost in bulk quantity from commercial reclaimers who coiled
solvent scrap from a variety of possibly uncontrolled sources can pose problems if not properly analyzed prior to use. The
risk assumed by the user when applying reclaimed solvent can be high if adequate controls (i.e., incoming inspection) are
not implemented. Subsequent operations after cleaning, such as conformal coating, can be adversely affected. Often such
reclaimed solvent is used upstream for cleaning parts prior to assembly or for maintenance cleaning, reserving the pure
material for final assembly cleaning.
Another potential source of contamination in incoming material is repackaging by distributors and/or users. Care must be
taken to ensure the plastic coating inside drums or pails (drum liner) are compatible with the solvent formulation. Individual
companies must determine their own incoming requirement to minimize product liability.
10.5.10 Stability The stability (long use life) of the cleaning agent is important from a reliability/cost standpoint. The
cleaner should exhibit resistance to both chemical and thermal decomposition.
10.5.11 Resistance to Chemical Decomposition Some halogenated solvents ( trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene,
n-propyl bromide are susceptible to chemical decomposition (previously called going acid, but more precisely degradation
to unwanted or harmful decomposition products) in the presence of heat, moisture, and contact with certain metals. Such
decomposition products are acidic and corrosive. Most commercially available cleaning solvents are formulated with stabi-
lizer systems included. Inhibitors and antioxidants are present to prevent solvent degradation and acid acceptors are present
to neutralize any acidity that might develop. During operation, the stabilizers may become depleted and, therefore periodic
testing of the solvent is required.
10.5.12 Resistance to Thermal Decomposition Most halogenated solvents (1,1,1 -trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, per-
chloroethylene, 1,2 transdichloroethylene, n-propyl bromide, HCFCs, HFCs and HFEs) are susceptible to thermal decompo-
sition (previously called going acid, but more precisely degradation to unwanted or harmful decomposition products) in the
presence of elevated sources of heat; such as hot spots on immersion heaters, contact with the heating elements of radiant
space heaters (either electrical or gas) or contact with the heat generated by a welding torch. Once the thermal limits of a
solvent molecule are exceeded, no stabilizer package can prevent decomposition. Thermal decomposition is not common.
The user must take care to properly maintain their equipment to ensure that such contact cannot take place.
10.5.13 Safety Users of solvent cleaners must also evaluate other safety factors such as fire safety considerations, and
both the acute and chronic health effects of the specific cleaning solvent chemicals. Users should always make themselves
completely knowledgeable on all aspects of all the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)as supplied by the chemical manu-
facturer and applicable to the materials in use.
Health effects, in addition to potential inhalation hazards, include irritation to, or corrosion of eye and skin tissues. An
evaluation of eye and/or face protection requirement should be done. Skin irritation or corrosion may be a potential hazard
and it can be prevented by wearing appropriate protective gloves.
For complete safety information, see IPC-CS-70. It should also be noted that, when using any chemical, a current Material
Safety Data Sheet must always be reviewed prior to putting the cleaning agent into service.
10.5.13.1 Fire Safety The halogenated solvents, along with their low percent alcohol blends, are generally nonflammable.
Users should be aware that multi-component azeotropes only possess that particular composition at the boiling point. Thus,
if the formulation contains a flammable component, the composition could become rich in that component at room tempera-
ture, and therefore ignitable. Other commonly used solvents such as 2-propanol, terpenes, and other hydrocarbons are flam-
mable or combustible and should be handled and stored according to local safety regulations. These materials can all be used
safely as long as the precautions recommended by the supplier are rigorously followed.
122
The flash point test of a liquid or combination of liquids is normally run to determine how the cleaning agent should be
packaged and shipped. It was not intended to predict behavior in a vapor defluxer. It is not uncommon for a cleaning agent
to have a flammable range (flame limits) usually expressed as the concentration in the air that can be ignited, but yet not
have a flash point. Many non-flammable cleaning agents that have flame limits and no flash point are safely used in vapor
defluxing operations.
Factory Mutual (FM) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) regard liquids with a flash point below 38°C
[100°F] to be flammable. Liquids with a flash point equal to 38°C [100°F] and below 60°C [140°F] are Class II combus-
tible liquids. Liquids with a flash point equal to 60°C [140°F] and below 93°C [200°F] are Class IIIA combustible liquids.
Flammable liquids pose explosion hazards if their vapors are not properly removed by either local or general ventilation.
Users of flammable solvent cleaners must also recognize that installations where these liquids are to be used must conform
to certain construction standards such as explosion proof wiring, switches, lights, motors, etc., (see NFPA 35 and OSHA 29
CFR 1910.106 for additional information.) Users of flammable liquids should also verify with their local fire department the
need for notification and permission of the use of these liquids. Notification may also be required under EPA’s Community
Right to Know regulations 40 CFR 355.30(b), 370.20, 370.21 and 370.25 to report storage and usage of certain chemicals
to both the local fire department and emergency planning commission.
10.5.14 Workplace Exposure It is important for worker safety that vapors of a chemical used in the manufacturing area
be maintained below the maximum threshold limit value (TLV). TLVs are established by the American Conference of Gov-
ernment & Industrial Hygienist’s (ACGIH). TLVs are generally used by OSHA for determination of compliance with work-
place safety standards. Modern closed or sealed equipment can permit the use of materials with low exposure limits (low
TLVs), as well as equipment that has been properly retrofitted to comply with modern requirements.
10.5.15 PEL/STEL It is a legal requirement to maintain worker exposure to solvent vapors at or below the Permissible
Exposure Limit (PEL) for eight-hour exposures, and at or below the Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) for shorter time
periods (typically 15 minutes) as published by OSHA in the air contaminants section of 29 CFR 1910.1000.
It is equally important to maintain worker exposures to solvent chemicals, on which OSHA has not established a PEL or
STEL, at or below the Threshold Limit Value for eight-hour exposures as published by the American Conference of Gov-
ernmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and/or the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) through
proper local ventilation or work practices, or both. OSHA requires that engineering controls (i.e., local ventilation) to be the
primary method of controlling employee exposure, and requirement to wear personnel protective equipment (PPE) in the
form of respirators to be used as a last resort if engineering controls fail to control exposures. Should wearing of respira-
tors be required to adequately protect workers from vapors of cleaning solvents, the user is required to have a written respi-
ratory protection plan (see 29 CFR 1910.134).
10.5.16 Workplace Exposure Monitoring Three common methods used for monitoring of solvent concentration in air are
the use of air sampling pumps, organic vapor monitor (OVM) badges, and the organic vapor analyzer (OVA). Both the air
sampling pump technique and the OVM badges provide a TWA (time weighted average) of a solvent concentration in the
air. The organic vapor analyzer (OVA) provides an instantaneous reading of a solvent concentration in air. The following is
more detail on each of the three sampling methods:
• Air Sampling Monitor The method utilizes a sampling pump and a charcoal tube to collect a given volume of air. It is
suggested that the air sampling be conducted over an eight hour period. The charcoal tube is sent to a laboratory and then
analyzed for the selected solvent concentration.
• Organic Vapor Monitor The organic vapor monitor (OVM) is similar to a sampling pump although without the mechani-
cal pump. One can wear the OVM as a badge by clipping it onto a shirt pocket for a specified time. The main disadvan-
tage of the method is limited selectivity of the solvent being monitored. The OVM will need to be shipped to an analytical
lab for analysis.
• Organic Vapor Analyzer The organic vapor analyzer is essentially a portable gas chromatograph using a flame ionization
detector or portable FTIR. The method provides measurement of trace quantities of hydrocarbons and organics. It is also
used to detect leaks from solvent cleaning equipment as well as measure the instantaneous solvent concentrations in air.
Laboratory calibration of the equipment is required to select the solvent to be monitored. Additionally, a technically trained
operator will be required to conduct the monitoring and interpret the data for determination of solvent concentrations in
air.
123
10.5.17 Environmental The selection of a solvent cleaning process, including materials and equipment, must incorporate
the inherent impact that a given solvent will have on air emissions, water discharges and waste generation from the facil-
ity. Each of these three environmental mediums may require a permit depending on the usage rate and existence of other air
emissions, water discharges and waste generation at that facility. Consult your local regulatory agency for permitting
requirements which may include:
• Air Emissions All cleaning solvents have a vapor pressure, Accordingly, the use of a solvent cleaning process will result
in air emissions of the solvent cleaning agent chemical(s) to the atmosphere. Such emissions may be regulated by the state
(or other local permitting authority), the Montreal Protocol, or the Clean Air Act (CAA), depending on the type and amount
of chemical(s) emitted, and the total chemical emissions at that facility. An air emissions permit may be needed if the
emissions threshold for a given chemical is met by the solvent cleaning process, or if the total air emissions of either a
given chemical at that facility from all process sources is exceeded, or if the total air emissions of a group of chemicals
at a facility is exceeded (such as volatile organic compounds, VOCs, at that facility).
• ODP The Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) of solvents containing chlorine or bromine ranges from near-zero to signifi-
cant. The ODP is determined by a Scientific Assessment Panel (SAP) which reports to the UN Technology and Economic
Assessment Panel (TEAP). Ozone depletion models used by SAP are currently being updated to permit accurate assess-
ment of halogenated solvents with short atmospheric lifetimes.
• GWP The Global Warming Potential (GWP) of a molecule is a function of its atmospheric lifetime. Many halogenated
solvents as well as non-halogenated cleaning materials such as carbon dioxide (used in the supercritical CO2 cleaning pro-
cess) have atmospheric lifetimes that could contribute to global warming. Various time horizons are used to express GWPs,
without universal agreement on one standard scale. The direct Global Warming Potential of a cleaner along with an over-
all process assessment of Total GWP (such as energy use) is often taken into account during cleaning agent qualification.
• HAP Many substances, including some solvents, are regulated as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) although they may
not be regulated on the basis of ODPs or GWPs. HAPs include such common chlorinated solvents as trichloroethylene
(TCE) and perchloroethylene (PCE). In some areas, HAP listing can preclude the use of a particular material, or more
importantly, provide guidance on the design of proper equipment and proper workplace practices to allow its use.
• VOC Many cleaning solvents may be restricted for use in certain areas based on their VOC Status. The US EPA has
generated a list of VOC ‘‘Exempt’’ solvents; however even these solvents may have restrictions in specific districts or
counties in the US. In addition, the definition of VOC varies from country to country. Parts of Europe for example, con-
sider any organic compound with a boiling point below 250°C a VOC, regardless of its stability. Knowledge of your local
regulations is needed when choosing a cleaning solvent.
• Handling All solvents should be handled with care, using the protective equipment and precautions outlined on the
MSDS supplied by the manufacturer. In particular with the solvents characterized by high cost per kg or having a low
allowable workplace vapor in air level, it is critical to transfer solvent into the cleaning machine below the vapor-air inter-
face using a proper drum transfer pump. In the case of flammable solvents, air driven instead of electrical pumps should
be used. Many of the larger cleaning machines are fitted with transfer pumps as an option, which ensures that solvent is
added to and removed from the cleaner properly. Such transfer pumps are often included if the cleaner is fitted with an
attached still for recycling the solvent.
• Recycling Nonflammable solvents are readily recycled by use of a relatively simple still. The still can either be piped
directly to the cleaner, to multiple cleaners (assuming the same soil is being removed in each cleaner) or a standalone unit.
Often the vapor defluxing equipment can be used to adequately recycle the solvents using a process known as a boil down.
If similar soil chemistry is used for manual cleaning operations, including rework and repair, spent solvent from these
cleaning operations can be combined with the solvent from the batch or conveyorized cleaning units, thus maximizing the
solvent that is recycled and reuse.
• Waste Generation The generation of spent or waste cleaning solvents may be heavily regulated as a hazardous waste.
It is imperative that all spent cleaning solvents be analyzed and characterized by someone knowledgeable in the hazard-
ous waste generation, storage and shipment regulations. These regulations may subject a facility to extensive rules on per-
sonnel training, recordkeeping, storage and handling requirements. Even if hazardous waste rules are not applicable, local
or state rules on solid waste, not regulated as hazardous, may apply (see Section 9.4 for further information). In general,
it is the soil removed which presents the waste hazards that need to be managed. Some solvent manufacturers offer a fluid
return program which covers the cost of disposal provided the waste was generated using their specific solvents. These
programs can ease the costs associated with waste handling.
124
• Water Discharges The following information is pertinent for users dealing with waste water streams from water sepa-
rators and water cooling coils. Generally, the discharge of any new wastewater stream, both by total flow and by chemi-
cal makeup, will require a permit from the local publicly owned treatment works (POTW) under the Clean Water Act
(CWA). In addition, such a permit may also require co-current state approval (and in rare cases, regional EPA approval).
Hence, it is imperative that any new or additional wastewater flow from a solvent cleaning process step be reviewed with
local POTW officials BEFORE commencing the discharge of wastewater. Such a review may result in the POTW waiv-
ing the need for a permit, or in reducing the monitoring requirements of a required permit. If wastewater discharge to an
on-site septic disposal system is contemplated, any such groundwater discharges must be reviewed with the facility’s state
groundwater protection bureau on the need for a groundwater discharge permit. Extreme caution must be exercised in dis-
charging wastewater containing cleaning solvents, as contaminated groundwater and possible soils may result, which can
be extremely costly to remediate. Solvent systems do not generate waste water discharges which can be a significant
advantage vs. aqueous cleaning systems.
• Community Right-to-Know In addition to the above considerations regarding air emissions, water discharges, and waste
generation, the annual usage or storage amount of certain chemicals will subject a facility to annual reporting requirements
to federal EPA, the state and local emergency planning commissions or fire departments. In addition, spills or leaks of cer-
tain chemicals above established thresholds will require self-reporting to federal, state and local agencies.
10.5.18 Cost The total cost of ownership must be considered. Solvents with low exposure limits, highly volatile, and
flammable materials may require sophisticated equipment and controls to prevent excessive material loss and higher than
permissible exposure levels. Previously mentioned factors of stability, effectiveness, disposal, work practices and safety,
coupled with initial cost of the solvent are all important in determining total process cost based on overall cost per part
cleaned.
10.5.19 Summary The cleaning agent should:

• Not be harmful to employees.
• Meet all local and federal environmental regulations.
• Possess excellent wetting ability to enable rapid exchange of the working volume of the cleaning agent under components
and within blind holes or other entrapment areas.
• Be able to remove both soluble and particulate contaminants.
• Be compatible with the product, equipment and work area.
• Be stable during repeated reuse.
• Be cost efficient (lowest cost per part cleaned).
10.6 Solvent Specific Material Compatibility Considerations Section 5 addresses material compatibility. There are three
notable material compatibility concerns associated with using solvent-based cleaning agents.
10.6.1 Polymer and Marking Compatibility At any temperature, the interactions between polymers (plastics, elastomers,
solder resin, and inks used in marking) and solvents depend on a number of factors. Examples are: the chemical properties
of the polymer in question, the polymer formulation parameters, the degree of cross-linking (curing or vulcanizing condi-
tions), annealing of molded plastics, the time of exposure to the solvent, and the level of contamination in the solvent.
Because of this, it is very difficult to predict compatibility/incompatibility with absolute accuracy. Therefore, a user should
evaluate all parts for compatibility with their defluxing solvent. Short term exposure testing is suitable for PCB materials.
Long term exposure testing should be performed for materials use in the construction of cleaning and ancillary equipment.
10.6.2 Compatibility with Conformal Coating Solvents Conformal coatings often contain solvents that are more aggres-
sive than typical cleaning agents. If the PCBs will be conformal coated, any of the polymers or marking inks previously
qualified for compatibility with cleaning solvents should also be checked for compatibility with the coating solvent.
10.6.3 Metals Compatibility and Solvent Stability It is important to note that chlorinated and brominated solvents can
react readily with white metals (tri and divalent metals such as aluminum, zinc, cadmium, magnesium; and alloys of such
metals) and, because of this, inhibitors and/or stabilizers are present in commercial grades to increase their stability. Fluo-
rinated solvents are compatible with these metals and do not require stabilizers. This should be taken into consideration when
selecting the materials of construction for solvent cleaning equipment as well as for baskets, fixtures or carriers.
125
Generally, commercial solvent cleaners with stabilizer packages must be managed when exposed to excess water. In the
presence of excess water, the stabilizer can be extracted, which could result in solvent decomposition (previously called
going acid, but more precisely degradation to unwanted or harmful decomposition products); especially if an acid acceptor
type stabilizer is used. Therefore, most users of chlorinated and brominated solvents test them for acid acceptance per ASTM
D2942 on a regular basis.
10.7 Solvent Classifications and Characteristics The majority of solvents generally used in electronic assembly clean-
ing fall into the following three categories (see Table 10-2). The classifications in conjunction with the types of soils in Table
10-3 can be a guide to choosing an appropriate cleaning agent (recall like dissolves like). For example, if one needs to clean
a single component soil such as a lubricant (non-polar), a non-polar solvent such as an aliphatic hydrocarbon may be used.
If the soil, such as activated flux, contains more than one component, a blend of polar and non-polar solvents should be
used.
10.7.1 Hydrocarbon Solvents This category of solvents includes: saturated hydrocarbons such as aliphatic and cyclo-
aliphatics, unsaturated hydrocarbons such as aromatics and terpenes, and oxygenated hydrocarbons such as alcohols, ethers,
esters and ketones. Although capable of removing solder fluxes and many polar contaminants these solvents are volatile and
flammable in use. In some cases they may be incompatible with certain materials of construction. This class is generally
used only in small quantities in well-ventilated areas (e.g., touchup). Large quantity use is restricted to properly designed
batch or in-line cleaning equipment. Equipment designs should include fire suppression and explosion-proof wiring, plus an
isolation zone around the perimeter of the machine per national and local regulations.
10.7.2 Halogenated Solvents Chlorinated and brominated solvents are nonflammable and are suitable for use in vapor
defluxing equipment that will maintain the vapor level and workplace air concentration below the workplace exposure lim-
its. These solvents are very effective in removing most non-polar soils such as cutting oils, soldering and handling oils, flux
rosin, and organic films. However, their strong solvency characteristics may require compatibility testing with some mate-
rials and components used in PCB cleaning.
Fluorinated solvents (HCFCs, HFCs, and HFEs) are nonflammable. They are capable of dissolving some oils and fluxes and
are suitable for use in vapor defluxing equipment that will maintain the vapor level and workplace air concentration below
the workplace exposure limits. Since their solvency characteristics are generally less than those of chlorinated or brominated
solvents, they are generally combined with other solvents to make blends or azeotropes that provide more effective clean-
ing performance while maintaining acceptable materials compatibility.
Table 10-2 Electronic Assembly Contaminants (Residues)

Category 1 Category 2 Category 3
(Polar or Ionic) (Nonpolar or Nonionic) (Particulate)
Flux Activators Flux Resin Resin and Fiberglass Debris from Drilling
and/or Punching Operations
Activator Residues Flux Rosin Metal and Plastic Chips from Machining
and/or Trimming Operations Dust
Soldering Salts Oils Fingerprints (particulate) Lint
Fingerprints (Sodium & Potassium Chlorides) Grease Insulation
Residual Plating Salts Waxes Hair/Skin
Residual Etching Salts Synthetic Polymers
Neutralizers Soldering Oils
Organic amines Metal Oxides
Surfactants (ionic) Fingerprints (Skin oils)
Polyglycol Degradation by:
–Products
–Hand Creams
–Lubricants
–Silicones
–Surfactants (nonionic)
126
Table 10-3 Solvent Classifications and Characteristics

Dielectric Dipole
Solvent Chemical Formula Boiling Point Constant Moment Classification
Water H-O-H 100°C [312°F] 80 1.85 Polar Protic
Methanol CH3-OH 68°C [154°F] 33 1.70 Polar Protic
Ethanol CH3-CH2-OH 78°C [172°F] 24.3 1.69 Polar Protic
Iso-Propyl Alcohol CH3-CH(-OH)CH3 82°C [180°F] 18 1.66 Polar Protic
Acetone H3C-(C=O)-CH3 56°C [133°F] 20.7 2.88 Polar Aprotic
Methylene Chloride CH2Cl2 40°C [104°F] 9.08 1.60 Polar Aprotic
Trichloroethylene CCl2-CHCl 87°C [189°F] 3.40 0.90 Polar Aprotic
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene CHCl=CHCl 48°C [118°F] 4.6 1.90 Polar Covalent
HCFC-225 ca CF3CF2CHCl2 54°C [129°F] 6.11 1.4 Polar Aprotic
HCFC-225 cb CF2Cl-CF2-CFHCl 54°C [129°F] 6.11 1.4 Polar Aprotic
n-Propyl-Bromide CH3-CH2-CH2Br 70°C [150°F] 7.2 Polar Aprotic
HFE-7100 CH3-O-C4F9 61°C [142°F] 7.4 Non-polar
HFE-7200 CH3-CH2-O-C4F9 76°C [169°F] 7.4 Non-polar
HFC-43-10 CF3-CHF-CHF-CF2-CF3 55°C [131°F] Non-polar
10.8 Solvent Cleaning Equipment/Processes
10.8.1 Introduction This selection deals with the most common type of solvent cleaning processes and systems. Each
system is covered in three sections: (1) definition, (2) equipment options, and (3) precautions. Specific equipment features
may be required to meet applicable national or local regulations.
10.8.2 Batch Vapor Cleaning
10.8.2.1 Definition and Description of Process Vapor defluxing is by far the most popular method of solvent defluxing.
It is a process whereby a solvent specifically formulated for the process is boiled and the vapors are condensed and returned
to the boiling tank. When the solvent is boiled, the vapor generated has a lower boiling point than the flux and soils being
removed. The process results in excess vapor remaining and provides a continuous source of clean solvent to work with.
When a part such as a printed wiring assembly is lowered into the vapor, the difference in temperature of the part and the
solvent vapor causes the vapor to condense on the cooler part flushing away the flux. In actual practice simple vapor con-
densation on a cooler part is seldom adequate for thorough defluxing, since the heat capacity of the plastic laminate is so
much lower than a metal part of the same dimensions. For this reason the vapors that are condensed are channeled into
additional tanks and spray reservoirs where the parts to be cleaned receive additional treatment. The tanks and/or spray res-
ervoirs are arranged so that clean solvent is cascaded from one tank to another and finally back to the boiling tank counter-
current to the movement of the parts through the cleaning machine. Also, due to the poor condensation capacity of PCBs,
immersion in the boiling solvent is much preferred for rapid dissolution of contaminants.
There are many variations in cleaning cycles and one should work with the solvent and/or equipment manufacturer to opti-
mize the individual system. Vapor degreasers used for defluxing are usually made of stainless steel, electrically heated, and
cooled by direct refrigeration system or by chilled water.
10.8.2.2 Equipment Features The following options may not be available on all equipment:
• Low liquid level safety switch.
• Hand spray (cold or heated; with heated being much preferred).
• Internal spray.
• Particulate filter systems.
• Desiccant water removal system, if required.
• Ultrasonics (added to a rinse tank).
• Automatic covers.
• Automated hoists.
127
• Special solvent control equipment.

• Freeboard chiller.
• Solvent recovery still.
• Dehumidification coils.
• Hot vapor recycle.
• Superheated vapor zone.
• Cool down coils.
• Boil up heaters.
• Vacuum machine.
10.8.2.3 Precautions Best practice for operating the vapor cleaning process reduces sources of variation. The following
practices should be considered:
• The user should be aware that if contaminants build up in the boiling sump. There is a potential for contaminating the
product during defluxing which could adversely affect subsequent assembly operations, i.e., conformal coating, component
bonding, etc. In such cases a separate still, an additional offset boiling sump, or another method to keep the boil sump
clean should be designed is necessary.
• Avoid locating equipment where drafts are present.
• All state and federal safety agencies require that ingress/egress speeds must not exceed 3.4 meters/minute [11 feet/minute].
• Water is the enemy of vapor defluxing solvents; therefore, water that enters the vapor defluxer by condensation on the
cooling coils must be controlled or removed. This is accomplished, in solvents not containing alcohols, by means of a
mechanical water separator usually built into the unit. A desiccant or water separator can be used to remove water from
solvents and their blends depending on the solvent/blend used (contact solvent/blend suppliers for specific recommenda-
tions). Desiccants are materials such as molecular sieve or silica gel which will absorb water. If alcohol containing solvent
formulation is being used, molecular sieves with three Angstrom pores may be suggested. This pore size will remove water
from the solvent condensate return line without removing the alcohol. However, refer to the solvent manufacturer for spe-
cific desiccant recommendations and sources.
• Keep vapor defluxers away from heat sources; especially sparks, space heaters, welding operations and open flames to pre-
vent thermal degradation of the solvent vapors.
• The user should be aware in worse cases, contaminants can build up in the boiling sump, there is a potential for contami-
nating the product during defluxing which could adversely affect subsequent assembly operations, i.e., conformal coating,
component bonding, etc. In such cases, a method to keep the boil sump clean should be designed.
10.8.3 Conveyorized Spray Cleaning
10.8.3.1 Definition and Description of Process A cleaning method whereby parts are transported by some mechanical
means such as belt or chain, and solvent is delivered by a mechanical pump. Conveyorized spray cleaning in the form of
an automated vapor spray defluxer is a popular method of defluxing PCBs where volume and tight process control justifies
the capital expense. The modern conveyorized machine employs multiple cleaning and rinsing stages. Parts are transported
from above a vapor line to an area well below the vapor/air interface where cleaning methods such as spray and/or immer-
sion take place. Parts are then transported back up and out of the vapor containing area to the next step in the manufactur-
ing process.
• Particulate filter systems.
• Desiccant water removal system.
• Solvent recovery still.
• Liquid level controls.
• Pressure gauges for spray and/or filters.
• Adjustable load/unload conveyor extensions.
• Temperature monitoring instrumentation.
128
• Automatic solvent transfer systems.

• Aqueous rinse and drying stages.
• Immersion tanks.
• Dehumidification coils.
• Liquid seals (to permit very high pressure spraying without an increase in emissive solvent losses).
• Superheated vapor zone.
• Emergency stop buttons at each end of unit in case of conveyor jam.
• Containment pan under the unit that can contain the contents of the cleaner in case of a leak or spill.
• Cool-down coils in the liquid full sumps to lower the vapor pressure of the solvent during idle periods.
• Sliding covers to seal off the entrance and exit to the cleaner during idling.
• Vacuum machine.
10.8.3.3 Precautions Conveyorized spray cleaning systems, by virtue of being highly automated, have most equipment
safety and operator safety items built into them. Nevertheless the same basic precautions would apply as to the batch vapor
defluxer.
10.8.4 Ultrasonics in Cleaning Machines
10.8.4.1 Definition and Description of Process When a liquid is mechanically agitated by application of energy through
contact with special transducers operating at frequencies ranging from 40 kHz to 150 kHz (or higher), a phenomenon occurs
known as cavitation. Cavitation is the rapid, sequential formation and collapse of microscopic bubbles in the solvent. The
collapse of these cavitation bubbles expends a tremendous force and the occurrence of these bubbles provides a rapid and
powerful scrubbing action on the surfaces to be cleaned. Ultrasonic cleaning is a popular choice when there are inaccessible
areas and where the contamination is particularly difficult to remove. However, the user must be aware of potential electri-
cal damage or the generation of latent defects in component. Therefore, ultrasonic cleaning processes should be properly
qualified by testing the components using industry developed test methods.
Ultrasonic cleaning equipment is available in many forms such as immersible transducer packages for use in existing tanks,
separate ultrasonic tank plus generator, integrated tank/generator, and as an add-on or built-in accessory for vapor defluxers.
Recent advances in this area include sweep frequency ultrasonics, where the frequency is continually varied over a small
range to prevent harmonics; and the use of mixtures of harmonic multiples of the base frequency. In these new techniques,
the goal is to provide enhanced solvent agitation while eliminating the possibility of damage that had been seen in certain
cases with the older lower fixed frequency units.
• Covers (sliding or rolling, not lifting type).
• Baskets (designed not to attenuate the effect of the ultrasonics; discuss optimum designs with the ultrasonic equipment
supplier).
• Heaters.
• Cooling coils.
• Filter systems.
• Timers.
• Temperature control system.
• Acoustical insulation system.
• Desiccant drier in condensate return line.
• Extended freeboard.
10.8.4.3 Precautions Where solvent is used, the same precautions apply as in batch vapor defluxers:
• Noise - Ultrasonic cleaners generate frequencies that can irritate and damage hearing of operators and workers nearby. To
reduce ultrasonic irritation it is advisable to consider one or more of the following:
129
– Cover when not in use

– Insulate tank
– Mount tank below bench surface (flush mount)
– Mandatory ear muff use for operators and nearby workers; combined with periodic hearing tests
• Component damage - the military has generally disallowed the use of ultrasonic cleaning, based on results from early fixed
frequency cleaning problems with all metal components such as TO-5 cans. Their conclusion that certain components such
as semiconductors may be damaged, has been investigated by UK military contractor and US Navy teams. Safe use con-
ditions, especially with modern non-fixed frequency units, are possible. When used in defluxing, component testing is
advised; IPC has generated tests for both loose components and attached components to qualify ultrasonic cleaning pro-
cesses (see IPC-TM-650, Test Methods 2.6.9.1 and 2.6.9.2).
10.8.5 Cold Cleaning Equipment
10.8.5.1 Definition and Description of Process Cold cleaning is the process of removing soils and fluxes from metal
parts, metal assemblies, and printed wiring assemblies through use of an organic solvent at room temperature or heated to
less than the boiling point. Typical equipment requirements include a cover, a facility for draining solvent from the cleaned
parts (preferably while enclosed in the cold cleaning tank), and a durable label summarizing the operating requirements.
Cleaning equipment can be spray, ultrasonics, brush, wave, or soak. Cold cleaning is used when heat might damage parts.
It is not, in general, as effective as vapor defluxing. Also, certain flammable cleaning solvents are not safe to heat and must
be used cold.
The distance from the top of the solvent vapor to the top of the tank, called the freeboard, must be at least 125% of the
width of the equipment opening.
A refrigerated air space above the liquid, or carbon adsorption system, or other equivalent emission control device is
required.
• Covers (sliding or rolling, not lifting type).
• Baskets (designed so to drain quickly).
• Cooling Coils.
• Filter systems (if the solvent is circulated by pumping).
10.8.5.3 Precautions When solvent is used, the same precautions apply as in vapor degreasing. The operating require-
ments demand that the cover be closed when not in use, the cleaned parts be drained for at least 15 seconds and that the
waste solvent be disposed of without permitting greater than 20% by weight evaporation to the atmosphere.
10.8.6 Soak Tanks
10.8.6.1 Definition and Description of Process Any vessel containing cleaning fluid and not otherwise agitated by pump,
air, ultrasonics, or boiling can be classified as a soak tank. Soak tanks are an earlier cleaning method and have largely been
replaced by newer, more efficient equipment. Soak tanks are currently used as a pre-cleaning station prior to more critical
final cleaning.
• Drain valves.
• Baskets.
• Filter systems.
• Covers.
10.8.6.3 Precautions When solvent is used, the same precautions apply as vapor defluxing.
10.8.7 Equipment Retrofitting (Upgrading) For more information on options available, retrofitting, and standard items,
please contact specific equipment manufacturers.
130
10.8.7.1 Increasing Freeboard Increasing the freeboard of a vapor defluxer or cold cleaning tank is simply a matter of
creating an extension on the existing tank and relocating the cover. This cost is minimal and has the advantage of requiring
no additional utility cost and minimum maintenance. Where practicable, this optional requirement is the least expensive and
the most likely to result in reduced overall operating costs. There is very little incremental savings with a freeboard/width
ratio in excess of one (1.25 or 125%). New equipment currently is supplied with a freeboard ratio of at least 125%. How-
ever, in some cases it may be advisable to add freeboard in excess of 125% to accommodate freeboard chillers or sub-zero
cooling coils.
10.8.7.2 Refrigerated Freeboard A refrigerated freeboard chiller is intermediate in capital expense. An additional utility
cost is experienced to operate the refrigeration compressor and, like all refrigeration systems, this equipment should be on
a regular maintenance schedule. This design feature has shown to reduce fugitive solvent emissions and is easily justified
through lower solvent costs. The refrigeration coils can be expected to condense atmospheric moisture. Care must be taken
to remove this moisture from a solvent operation to prevent unnecessary equipment corrosion, thus a separate trough for the
extra coils is usually added to remove condensed water from the cleaner.
10.8.7.3 Carbon Adsorption Carbon adsorption systems require a sizeable fan to draw air from the cleaning operation and
force it through the carbon bed system. The adsorbed solvent is removed from the carbon bed by injecting low pressure
steam and condensing both the solvent and water in a condenser. Compressed air is used to operate the automatic valves.
Two carbon beds are required for continuous operation to allow desorption of one while the second is processing the ven-
tilation air stream. This system is the one recovery system that can collect and recover solvent vapor mixed with air, even
in relatively low concentrations.
This equipment is the most expensive to purchase, install, maintain, and operate, and is not compatible with all solvent sys-
tems. The energy demand for this equipment is also much larger than that required for the refrigerated chiller. Relatively
large quantities of steam are necessary to strip the solvent from the carbon bed. This results in severe stabilizer loss into the
condensed water and may lead to concerns with regard to contamination of the waste water stream. Although it is the least
frequently chosen, carbon adsorption provides a unique solvent recovery capability. However, the general guideline is that
vapor in air levels must be at least 500 ppm to make this recovery method economical. Since only a very few solvents in
use today have allowed workplace air levels above this figure, the technique is not be widely used.
Note: In addition, CAA may require the installation of a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) to verify and
document correct operation of the dual bed system. CEMS instrumentation can be costly and require specialized mainte-
nance for reliable operation. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning use and control of these sol-
vents may cause some problems, but users will follow industry practices.
10.9 Process Integration
10.9.1 Cleaning After Manual Soldering The following are commonly used methods for cleaning PCBs after manual
soldering.
10.9.1.1 Aerosol Spraying The surface to be cleaned should be sprayed with solvent from a distance of 100-130 mm
[3.9-5.1 inches] in a well-ventilated area. Assemblies should be washed from top to bottom. Liquid and force of spray will
dissolve or flush away dirt and flux.
10.9.1.2 Aerosol spraying with Brush attachment The surface to be cleaned should be sprayed with the solvent and then
can be gently scrubbed with the brush attachment to provide mechanical action to assist cleaning. Then, the surface can be
sprayed with the solvent to rinse off flux residues. Users should be sure the brush is made of ESD-safe materials. Also, using
a dry wipe may assist with the removal of flux residues.
10.9.1.3 Manual Brushing An acid brush is dipped in a stainless steel dispenser containing solvent and the area of the
PWA containing the flux is brushed and repeated several times. The excess flux and solvent is wiped with absorbent lint-
free cloth. The brushing method dilutes the flux and spreads it over the PCBs. Often brushes must be changed frequently
to prevent redeposit of flux residues. Subsequent cleaning methods (i.e., vapor defluxing, etc.) will be required to completely
remove flux residues.
10.9.1.4 Combination Manual Brushing An acid brush is dipped in a stainless steel dispenser containing high boiling
solvent, such as an alcohol/hydrocarbon combination, and the area of the PCB containing the flux is brushed and repeated
131
several times. The excess flux and solvent is wiped with absorbent lint-free swab. Rinsing and drying are accomplished
by applying a fresh swab soaked in a volatile alcohol, such as 2-propanol. The brushing method dilutes the flux and spreads
it over the PCBs. Subsequent cleaning methods (i.e., vapor defluxing, etc.) will be required to completely remove flux
residues.
10.9.2 Vapor Defluxing (Vapor Only) Vapor defluxing involves suspending the board in a chamber filled with vapors from
a boiling solvent. Solvent will condense on the board until the board reaches the same temperature as the vapors. This step
will last from 30 seconds to 3 minutes, depending on the mass of the board. This method is generally not as effective as a
multiple step vapor defluxing process that includes immersion in the boiling sump, since the typical PCB does not have
enough heat capacity to condense the volume of solvent needed for effective cleaning.
10.9.2.1 Vapor Defluxing (Immersion and/or Spray) Vapor defluxing in a two or more sump unit is the preferred method
to carry out the cleaning process. Immersion in the boiling sump provides not only contact with the heated solvent but also
the agitation provided by boiling. The combination of these effects scrubs the PCB much more rapidly than immersion in
the vapor. Spraying of the PCBs should only be done under the vapor blanket using warm solvent. Constant circulation of
the condensate solvent through the spray wand is the most effective method to accomplish quality cleaning with minimal
losses.
10.9.2.2 Vapor Defluxing (Ultrasonics) Vapor defluxing in a two or more sump unit is the preferred method to carry out
the cleaning process. Immersion in the boiling sump provides not only contact with the heated solvent but also the agita-
tion provided by boiling. Immersion in the ultrasonically agitated rinse sump provides the agitation needed to get the sol-
vent in and out of crevices and blind holes, as well as under components much more rapidly than immersion in the vapor
alone.
10.9.3 Cleaning Protocol If manual rework or addition of sensitive parts is required, then some spot cleaning will be
needed. Some users prefer to do a final clean prior to conformal coating to ensure meeting the cleanliness requirement in
J-STD-001 Requirements for Soldered Electrical and Electronic Assemblies.
10.10 Process Control
10.10.1 Introduction Prior to discussing equipment options and recommendations for those options, it is necessary to
understand EPA and OSHA regulations for solvent cleaning systems, as these regulations basically are designed to control
solvent emissions from cleaning equipment. (See Section 9 for this information.
10.10.2 Equipment Options and Recommendations
10.10.2.1 Manually Operated or Open Top Cleaning Systems Many solvents of choice have high vapor pressures. One
of the concerns with manually operated open top cleaning systems is the risk of operational exposure to the cleaning agent.
A second concern is lack of repeatability when cleaning with manual systems.
10.10.2.2 Cover The cover should be of such a design that when it is opened and closed it either rolls or slides in a hori-
zontal motion across the top of the tank. It should never be designed in such a manner that it requires a hinged top or lift
which could result in pulling some solvent vapor from the cleaning system. Covers can be either manually operated by slid-
ing or rolling or can be powered by a motor or pneumatic mechanism.
10.10.2.3 Minimum Freeboard Minimum freeboard ratio of 125% to 150% for all solvents, with higher values used for
more expensive (per kg. basis) solvents or those with lower allowed workplace vapor in air levels.
10.10.2.4 Refrigerated Freeboard Devices can be employed for controlling diffusional losses from the vapor blanket,
removing moisture, and controlling evaporating solvent from carry-out problems while in the freeboard area of the unit.
10.10.2.5 Automatic Work Transport System Most equipment manufacturers offer automatic transport systems which
utilize programmable controls. These systems are easily changed to suit a specific cleaning application or cleaning cycle.
There are three main benefits utilizing this type of system for open top cleaning units:
• Controls cleaning cycle.
132
• Reduces solvent usage by eliminating operator violation of proper cleaning practices.

• Increases throughput.
10.10.2.6 Ventilation System with Solvent Vapor Recovery Unit (Carbon Adsorption Unit) Ventilation systems are not
normally recommended on most electronic cleaning applications since generally these cleaning units are small in size and
carry-out and emissions are minimized. However, with some applications and some large cleaning units, ventilation may be
required to comply with regulations. It then may be economically feasible to install a Solvent Vapor Recovery Unit with the
ventilation system.
Note: Some State Implementation Plans (SIPs) require a solvent recovery unit on any defluxer or degreaser which is being
ventilated. Therefore, it is incumbent for the user to check with their local Air Quality Office for compliance.
10.10.3 Conveyorized Cleaning System Conveyorized cleaning systems can be provided with the following equipment
(either provided with the system in its design or as optional items that can be purchased from manufacturers).
10.10.3.1 Deep Freeboard For entrance and exit areas of the unit, 50% freeboard is desirable for conveyorized cleaning
systems but not mandatory. This will vary with different state implementation plans. The rest of conveyorized area requires
at least 100% freeboard.
10.10.3.2 Refrigerated Freeboard These devices are used to control diffusional losses from the vapor air interface and
for partial control of evaporating solvent from entrapped areas of product as it exits the cleaning system.
10.10.3.3 Special Drying Methods If solvent entrapment is unpreventable due to product design, special drying methods
should be employed in one or more of the following:
• Vapor area.
• Freeboard area.
• Special drying tunnel.
• Hot vapor drying.
10.10.3.4 Ventilation System with Carbon Adsorption The primary purpose of the carbon adsorption system is to adsorb
solvent concentrations (in the ppm level or higher) entrained in the ventilation air. Most carbon adsorption systems offered
by manufacturers are capable of removing 85% to 95% of solvent entrained in an air stream. This method of solvent con-
sumption control is most effective when employed on a cleaning system that has solvent entrapment on the product that is
being cleaned and it can be introduced into a proper drying tunnel for evaporating. The general guideline for acceptable
economics of carbon adsorption systems is that the vapor in air levels must be at 500 ppm or greater. Since these levels
typically exceed the accepted workplace in air limits for today’s solvents, the payback resulting from this recovery tech-
nique may become marginal.
Note: The normal carbon adsorption system utilizes steam injection into the carbon bed to release adsorbed solvent. Some
solvents are not compatible with gross amounts of water which are the results of steam injection of the carbon beds. You
should consult with your chemical supplier prior to the installation of carbon adsorption system for a particular vapor clean-
ing unit.
10.10.4 Equipment Location and Operation.
10.10.4.1 Location The system should be located in an area where vapors cannot stagnate. Room size and ventilation
requirements should be reviewed from equipment manual.
10.10.4.2 Clearance Adequate worker space should be provided around cleaning unit for maintenance, as well as, for
automated transport systems.
10.10.4.3 Drafts A system should be installed so that it is not affected by drafts caused by windows, doors, fans, unit
heaters, ventilators, etc. Ambient air velocity should not exceed 15 meters [49.2 feet] per minute.
133
10.10.4.4 Ovens No cleaning unit should be installed adjacent to open flames or near high temperature surfaces above
400°C [750°F]. Welding operations and space heaters should not be located in proximity of solvent cleaning equipment.
10.10.4.5 Operation All cleaning units are provided with specific operating instructions from the equipment manufactur-
ers and should be reviewed by all owners.
• Cold cleaning units should be operated with cover closed.
• Systems should be covered when not in use. Well designed, manually operated, down time covers should be provided.
• Plumbing valves and pumps should be checked periodically for both liquid solvent and solvent vapor leakage.
10.10.5 Hot Vapor Systems

• Work should remain in the vapor area until all condensation has ceased.
• Work should not be introduced or withdrawn from the vapor area faster than 3.4 meters [11 feet] per minute.
• Introduction of moisture into the cleaning system should be avoided.
• Work load should not occupy more than 50% of the cross sectional area of the tank.
• The work load should be sized to minimize the fluctuation of the vapor level.
• All spraying should be done at least 150 mm [5.9 in] below the vapor condensation level.
10.10.6 Maintaining the Cleaning System Most cleaning system manufacturers supply well-written manuals for mainte-
nance. This should be regularly and strictly adhered to in order to properly minimize solvent losses and to maintain a con-
sistently clean product emerging from the machine. In addition, a training program for existing and new cleaning equipment
operators and maintenance personnel should be established.
10.10.7 Proper Still Practices
10.10.7.1 Solvent Recovery Still Separate distillation units are normally employed under the following conditions:
• In conjunction with cleaning unit.
– When large amount of soil must be removed from the product and therefore contaminates the cleaning system very
quickly.
– When it is required that the product being cleaned be subjected to a pure solvent rinse for final cleaning prior to exiting
the unit. The still acts as a source for pure solvent to allow this spraying cycle to occur.
– If the cleaning system is conveyorized and down time for maintenance must be held to an absolute minimum.
• Separate from the cleaning unit.
– When many small cleaners are used in a factory, none of which is large enough to justify a dedicated still.
– When all the small cleaners are removing the same or almost the same soil, so there is minimal danger of cross-
contamination. This case would include combining all the solvent from the small cleaners plus solvent used on the bench
top for manual cleaning operations.
– Preferably, if all the small cleaners can be connected to the common still by piping which minimizes losses and prevents
spills.
10.10.7.2 Advantages of a Separate Distillation System

• Concentrates the majority of the soils removed by the cleaning system in the distillation unit.
• Reduces down time on cleaning system for cleanout and cleanup of the unit.
• Provides additional distillate throughput to the cleaning system in order to remove soils from cleaning zones.
• Provides an automatic method of removing soils from the cleaning system.
• Allows easy method for sludge removal from cleaning unit.
• Is run as a batch operation.
10.10.7.3 Maintaining the Distillation System A distillation system performs two major functions:
• Concentrates soil residues within its body.
• Re-purifies solvent for cleaning systems.
134
The system must be properly maintained in order to provide these two basic functions for the cleaning system. When oper-
ating with a cleaning system the distillation unit is normally an automatic system. It is provided with a level monitoring
device which controls a solvent pump which withdraws contaminated solvent from the cleaning system and automatically
distills this solvent. It then feeds it back to the cleaning system. An operator is not normally required during production
hours.
At some point in time the distillation rate will be reduced due to the increase of the soil level within the still boil sump. The
in-plant maintenance department must set up a regular program for boil down, sludge dumping and cleanup of the distilla-
tion system. The following methods will help the maintenance department determine at what time and which intervals the
distillation unit should be isolated from the cleaning system and the still bottom residues removed:
The temperature of the still boil sump has increased over the normal boiling point of the solvent. In the case of some rosin
fluxes this temperature increase will be approximately 4° to 5°C [8° to 10°F] over the boiling point of the solvent.
If the product being cleaned in the cleaning system is not completely cleaned (when a still is attached to a cleaning system),
the distillation rate of the still must have been substantially reduced. This situation should be investigated and corrected.
In the case of some of the azeotropic alcohol blends, it is important that the flux content of the boiling sump not exceed 9%
by volume (8% by weight). Excessive flux in the boiling sump reduces the alcohol content of the vapor and rinse sumps
which in turn affects cleaning performance. (Flux content of a boiling sump liquid can be determined with a Goetz bulb.)
When residues become too viscous and heat transfer is reduced, the still temperature needs to be increased to complete the
distillation process.
All stills are furnished with high temperature liquid cut-out thermostats. Suggested high temperature thermostats settings for
different solvents should be obtained from the solvent manufacturer.
Basic function of this control is to shut the distillation unit down to prevent over heating of heater elements and therefore
possibly cause solvent decomposition. This thermostat is to be used only as a safety control and not for normal operating
cut-off.
Note: The operation of stills for flammable or combustible solvents is outside the scope of this handbook, due to the much
greater safety issues involved.
10.10.7.4 Cook-Down and Clean-Up Procedures Isolate the distillation unit from the main cleaning system (switch still
pump from automatic to off position), allow the still to continue to boil down and divert the distillate to a drum or storage
tank. Turn the heat switch to OFF when the solvent level reaches approximately 25 mm [0.984 in] above the heating ele-
ments. Allow the solvent residues to cool. Drain residues (if still hot or warm provide additional ventilation). Residues
should be placed in proper container tank for disposal. Refer to still manufacturers operating instructions.
10.10.7.5 General Procedures In the design of some distillation units it may be necessary to actually pump the still bot-
toms into the container receiving this residue. After complete draining of this distillation unit, the operator or maintenance
person should then observe the interior of the still. If caked rosin or soil residues can be seen on the heating element, it may
be necessary to open up the distillation unit, remove the heating element and clean the element. Heating elements for dis-
tillation units can normally be brushed or scraped to remove the baked on residues from the coil. Steam cleaning also does
an excellent job of removing soil-flux residues. If it is determined that the interior of the still body has sufficient residue on
the sides, the body then should be scraped or steam cleaned.
Caution: Prior to any interior cleaning the machine should be completely ventilated to remove any residual solvent or sol-
vent vapor that is still inside the system. This can be accomplished by forced ventilation systems such as a fan, compressed
air or blower exhausting outside the building. Any individual that enters this unit must wear a harness and lifeline in addi-
tion to an approved respiratory protection such as a hose mask operating from a remote source of compressed or self-
contained breathing apparatus. A second person must be in attendance at all times as an added safety precaution. Continue
ventilation of the unit while maintenance personnel clean the unit interior. Do not turn off the ventilation system until all
personnel have exited the unit and the unit has been completely closed.
10.10.7.6 Optional Cleaning Procedures In some cases chemical cleaning with hot alkaline baths or with formulated
organic solvent carbon removers is often practiced. These chemicals should be flushed out with water immediately after use.
Once the cleaning operation has been completed and the excess rinse water removed, it then will be necessary to completely
135
reassemble the various components that have been removed for cleaning. Close the drain valve and re-attach the door. Refill
the still and return to normal operation. Consult the solvent supplier for proper residue disposal procedures and regulatory
compliance.
Note: In many cases it may be only necessary to boil the distillation unit down, drain the still residues, and then refill the
distillation unit for normal operation. This is especially true in stills heated by hot water, steam, or heat pump systems. These
particular systems do not have a tendency to bake rosin flux and soils onto the heating elements therefore it may be neces-
sary to clean up the interior of the distillation unit only on an annual or semi-annual basis. This frequency of clean up can
only be determined by actual operation of distillation unit under the solid loads from the cleaning operation.
10.10.8 Still Solvent Drying Unit Some alcohol azeotropic blended solvents require desiccant type drying units; either
silica gel or molecular sieves are normally used in these drying compartments. It is necessary that the desiccant be changed
on a routine basis in order to assure its water adsorbing capabilities. Most desiccants can be regenerated by baking out the
adsorbed water. Please see the instruction furnished with the distillation unit for the proper procedures for the particular des-
iccant recommended.
For effective functioning of the water separator or desiccant dryer, the temperature of condensate should be kept below a
maximum value. Consult with solvent manufactures to determine that temperature.
Condensate should be retained in this compartment from 3.0 to 5.0 minutes. For instance, 1,1,1 -trichloroethane requires a
minimum of 5.0 minutes retention time at 65°C [149°F] to properly separate water. (Certain azeotropes may require even
lower temperatures since halogenated solvent-alcohol azeotropes are always minimum boiling point formulations.)
10.10.9 Solvent Monitoring There are two basic needs for solvent monitoring of the cleaning process: a) incoming
inspection and b) in-process monitoring. Numerous detailed analytical methods are needed for determining incoming (vir-
gin) solvent quality and less elaborate methods are needed for in-process monitoring or assembly solvent quality. Most sol-
vent suppliers can assist in specific tests for their products. Emphasis in this section will be placed on the in process aspects
of determining/monitoring solvent quality.
10.10.9.1 Need for Monitoring Whether using cold cleaning or vapor defluxing methods, contamination buildup of both
suspended matter and dissolved materials must be controlled to ensure adequate cleaning and prevent inadvertent contami-
nation of the product. In vapor defluxing, buildup of contaminants in the boiling sump could increase the boiling tempera-
ture of the solution to a point where there may be a point of solvent break down. Continued buildup of organic contami-
nants can result in sludge formation, coking of heating elements, potential heater failure, and solvent breakdown. If build up
occurs and cleaning efficiency is affected, the boil sump is drained, the sump inspected and cleaned as necessary, and fresh
solvent is added to the machine.
Decomposition of solvent due to heat, hydrolytic instability or exposure to white metals (such as aluminum, zinc, magne-
sium, beryllium or various alloys of such metals), can result in inhibitor depletion and the generation of corrosion byprod-
ucts which can damage products processed through the solvent. In addition, prolonged exposure without corrective action/
maintenance can detrimentally affect assembly/process equipment.
10.10.9.2 Methods of Monitoring
10.10.9.2.1 Hydrocarbon and Oxygenated Solvents Hydrocarbon solvents are not generally used for high volume assem-
bly cleaning operations due to their flammability and volatility. However, where applicable, contaminant levels may be
monitored by:
• qualitative observation of solvent discoloration.
• quantitative determination of suspended solids and/or dissolved solid materials as percentage (nonvolatile matter) - ASTM-
D-2 109.
• boiling point elevation.
• specific gravity changes - ASTM D-21 11.
10.10.9.2.2 Halogenated Solvents Halogenated solvents/blends or azeotropic compositions can be monitored using many
of the techniques applicable to hydrocarbon solvents. However, since most halogenated solvents/blends/azeotropes are used
in vapor defluxing or defluxing where elevated temperatures are employed, additional tests should be used to monitor pos-
sible solvent decomposition due to water contamination, exposure to white metals, inhibitor depletion, or a combination of
the above which could produce corrosion byproducts harmful to both product and equipment.
136
10.10.9.2.3 Chlorinated and Brominated Solvents Methods of monitoring solvent quality are:
• Specific Gravity - ASTM Method D-21 11.
• Distillation Range - ASTM Method D- 1078.
• Boiling Point Elevation - Refer to Paragraph 10.10.9.2.4.
• Non-Volatile Residues - ASTM Method D-2109.
• Acid/Alkalinity - ASTM Method D-2989.
• Water Content - ASTM Method D-3401.
• Purity - via Gas Chromatography.
The previous methods, although useful, are more suited for analyzing the quality of incoming (virgin) solvent. For day-to-
day monitoring, the more commonly used method is: Acid Acceptance Testing - ASTM Method D-2942.
This method determines not the amount of acid present but rather the amount of inhibitor (acid acceptor/stabilizer) present/
remaining to protect the solvent from the problem previously called going acid, but more precisely, degradation to unwanted
or harmful decomposition products. Guidelines for interpreting test results (listed as weight percent of sodium hydroxide)
and therefore quality of solvent are readily available. Kits can be obtained from chlorinated or brominated solvent suppli-
ers Some solvent suppliers will, at no charge, provide defluxer solution analysis for several solvent parameters: water con-
tent, nonvolatile residue (NVR) levels and acid acceptance.
Note: that most of the methods used for the traditional chlorinated solvents can be used for the new brominated solvents
with only minor modifications.
10.10.9.2.4 Fluorinated Solvents As with other halogenated solvents the fluorocarbon-based solvents may be analyzed
for purity/contaminants using various methods previously mentioned: boiling point elevation, total non-volatiles and mois-
ture content.
Pure fluorinated solvents in the absence of water do not normally react with white metals producing corrosive byproducts.
However, fluorocarbon-based solvents in the presence of water or blended with other solvents (especially alcohols), along
with elevated temperatures associated with vapor defluxing may decrease the solvent/solutions compatibility with reactive
metals thereby requiring in-process monitoring. The more commonly used analytical methods for periodic in-process evalu-
ation of solvent quality are:
The fluorocarbon producer will provide recommended monitoring procedures and allowable levels of contamination and acid
buildup in fluorocarbon solvent blends and azeotropes for defluxing and/or degreasing applications. Note that most of the
methods used for the traditional chlorofluorinated solvents can be used for the new HCFC, HFC or HFE solvents with only
minor modifications.
10.10.10 Summary In-process monitoring of cleaning solvents is essential in assuring the efficiency and longevity
of cleaning equipment, adequate cleaning of product without exposure to adverse/corrosive conditions and to minimize sol-
vent usage and costs. It should be an integral part of any electronics assembly process control program involving solvent
cleaning.
10.11 Environmental Considerations
10.11.1 Introduction Over the last thirty years, many environmental laws and regulations have been enacted that impact
the electronics industry. The complexity of these laws and regulations has resulted in a great deal of confusion among regu-
lated entities. This section will clarify five major compliance issues. They are:
• Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) air emission requirements including:
– Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) emissions under Title I
– Ozone depleting substance (ODS) usage under Title VI
– Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAPs) emissions under Title III
– Permitting of ‘‘Major Sources’’ under Title V
– Water discharges under the Clean Water Act (CWA)
– including the discharge of total toxic organics (TTOs)
– Hazardous waste generation under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and subsequent amendments
137
– Past improper waste disposal under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CER-
CLA) also known as Superfund
– Toxic chemical release reporting under the Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (SARA)
10.11.2 The Clean Air Act On November 15, 1990, amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1970 (previously amended in
1977) were signed into law. These amendments contain important provisions, which regulate the use of solvents. These pro-
visions are contained in two titles:
• Attainment and Maintenance of Air Quality Standards (Title I)
• Stratospheric Ozone Protection (Title IV).
10.11.2.1 Volatile Organic Compounds The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to meet six National Ambient Air Qual-
ity Standards (NAAQS) for specific pollutants. NAAQS establish the maximum concentration allowed for each pollutant in
the background air in all areas of the country. Those pollutants include Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). Carbon Monoxide (CO),
and Ozone.
The CAA’s NAAQS provisions apply to areas of the country that do not currently attain an NAAQS for a particular pollut-
ant (these areas are called ‘‘nonattainment areas’’). The 1977 Amendments required states to submit State Implementation
Plans (SIPs) to the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that details how states will achieve attainment with the
NAAQS by 1987 at the latest.
Despite this deadline, many areas continue to exceed the ozone NAAQS. The 1990 amendments subdivided non-attainment
areas into various categories according to the severity of their non-attainment problem. If you are located in a non-attainment
area and your facility emits a non-attainment pollutant, you may have to meet stricter requirements for air pollution control
for that pollutant than if you were located in an attainment area.
Electronic manufacturers are most likely to be affected by requirements in the non-attainment areas for ground-level ozone
(smog). Ozone is a pollutant that is not discharged to the environment but is created by the reaction of ozone precursors
(volatile organic compounds, VOCs) and sunlight. VOC emissions are directly related to ozone production. Cleaning pro-
cesses are likely to emit VOC, which combine with daylight to form smog.
Many common solvents are regulated as VOCs. The chlorinated solvent trichloroethylene is regulated as a VOC. EPA del-
isted perchloroethylene as a VOC in 1996, leaving individual states with the option of continuing to regulate it as a VOC
or to exempt it from VOC classification. While most states have exempted perchloroethylene as a VOC, several states and
regional air quality boards have not, and continue to regulate perchloroethylene as a VOC. State and local regulatory agen-
cies should be consulted for clarification.
10.11.2.2 Ozone Depleting Substances The CAA amendments also contain provisions for controlling the use of chemi-
cals believed to destroy stratospheric ozone-a layer of atmosphere that protects the earth by filtering harmful sunrays. EPA
has established two lists of such substances: a list of Class I substances and a list of Class II substances. Class I substances
refer to substances containing chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) or methyl chloroform. Class II substances include hydrochloro-
fluorocarbons (HCFCs).
In 1992, EPA issued its final rule implementing Section 604 of the Clean Air Act. That section implemented the United
States’ obligations under the Montreal Protocol by limiting the production and consumption of substances with a potential
to deplete stratospheric ozone. Carbon tetrachloride, trichlorotrifluoroethane (CFC-1 13) and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl
chloroform) were identified as Ozone Destroying Substances (ODSs). This rule, published as 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart A,
required the phase out of production of these products for emissive uses by December 31, 1995.
Existing supplies of these solvents (produced prior to the phase out), and recycled product can continue to be sold into
emissive markets. Exceptions to the ban include product manufactured for transformation (chemical intermediate) processes,
and ‘‘essential’’ uses as approved by the EPA (such as asthma inhalers).
Additionally, 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart E requires that products containing or manufactured with ODSs must be specially
labeled identifying the presence of an ODS.
The Clean Air Act also required the EPA to establish a program to identify alternatives for ODSs, and to publish lists of
acceptable and unacceptable substitutes. This program, the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program is described
in 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart G. Once EPAs acceptability list is established, it is illegal to replace a regulated ODS with any
substance determined as harmful to human health or environment, if other substitutes with reduced overall risk are currently
138
or potentially available. Acceptable solvent replacements for CFC-113 and 1,1,1- trichloroethane include HFEs, HFCs, oxy-
genated solvents, terpenes, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, and methylene chloride.
10.11.2.3 Hazardous Air Pollutants Section 112 of the Clean Air Act lists 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAP) for which
the EPA has set National Emission Standards. Some solvents, such as methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, trichloroeth-
ylene, 1,1,1 -trichloroethane, carbon tetrachloride and chloroform are included in the CAA Section 112 HAP list.
EPA issues Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards to reduce emissions of hazardous air pollutants.
Each MACT standard controls emissions of one or more air toxics from a specific air pollutant source. The MACT is the
best control technology already in use for a given type of industry.
Under the CAA’s National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) program, ‘‘major’’ sources of air tox-
ics must use the MACT-specified technology. Facilities are considered ‘‘major sources’’ if their potential emissions are 10
tons/year or more of a HAP or 25 tons/year of a combination of HAPs.
NESHAP standards require affected users to employ certain control technologies to reduce emissions. Typically, record
keeping, reporting, and emission control technologies may need to be upgraded to meet the requirements of these standards.
In 1994, the EPA finalized the Halogenated Solvent Cleaning NESHAP. This standard is published in 40 CFR Part 63, Sub-
part T, and affects new and existing halogenated solvent cleaning operations. For guidance, consult EPA publication EPA-
453/R-94-081, EPA Guidance Document for the Halogenated Solvent Cleaner NESHAP.
10.11.2.4 Operating Permit Title V of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requires ‘‘major sources’’ of CAA crite-
ria pollutants to obtain an operating permit that consolidates the facilities’ air pollution control obligations. Although the
threshold for triggering these requirements are 100 tons/year for most pollutants, the thresholds for VOCs and nitrogen
dioxides can be as low as 50 to 10 tons per year, depending upon where the facility is located. Check with your local air
quality agency to determine your Title V operating permit obligations. It is expected that the Title V permitting thresholds
will not be triggered for the majority of IPC member companies.
10.11.3 The Clean Water Act Discharges into navigable waters or tributaries have required a permit since the turn of the
century. The modern version of the Clean Water Act (CWA) was passed in 1972 and amended in 1977, 1978, and again in
1982. Although the CWA is almost 30 years old, the Act has not yet been fully implemented. The Clean Water Act has two
sections that can have a significant impact on industry operations: spill reporting requirements and the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
10.11.3.1 Spill Reporting Under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act, the EPA established a list of reportable quantities
for specific chemicals (40 CFR 117.3). In July 1985, this list was incorporated into a master chemical list regulated under
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (also known as CERCLA) found at 40 CFR
302.4. These reportable quantities (RQ) range from 1 pound to 5000 pounds and were derived from a variety of criteria.
Chemical spills in amounts equal to or exceeding their respective RQs during any 24 hour period must be reported imme-
diately to the US Coast Guard National Response Center12 or the nearest Coast Guard District office (33 CFR 153.203).
Violations of this provision can be costly. The Coast Guard can assess a fine in addition to assessing the cost of cleanup.
In addition, the EPA can take judicial action to recover tens of thousands of dollars, depending upon the severity of the event.
Willful discharges may be subjected to judicial fines of up to $250,000. Failure to report spills could result in a fine of up
to $10,000 or imprisonment of not more than one year, or both.
10.11.3.2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Sections 301, 304, 306, 307, and 402 of the Clean
Water Act authorize the establishment of regulations and the issuance of permits to control the discharges of pollutants to
waters of the United States. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program governs such
discharges. Facilities that discharge wastewater are considered as direct dischargers if they discharge directly into a water-
way. They are considered indirect dischargers if they discharge into a treatment facility that then treat the wastewater and
then discharge the treated wastewater into a waterway. Only direct dischargers need to obtain NPDES permits.
Direct dischargers in the electronics industry are subjected to either one of the following effluent limitation categories
depending upon when they begin to discharge wastewater:
• electroplating point source category.
• metal finishing point source category.
139
The Clean Water Act effluent limitation guidelines include limits on such parameters as Biological Oxygen Demand
(BOD), pH, metals, and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and companies must meet those limits through the use of specified
technology.
10.11.3.3 Total Toxic Organics The Metal Finishing Point Source Category assumes that proper management of solvent
wastes (i.e., ensuring that concentrated toxic organic wastes such as solvent defluxers, degreasers and paint strippers are not
dumped into wastewaters) will allow discharges to meet a total toxic organics (TTO) discharge level of 2.13 ppm for mul-
tiple chemicals. If a facility can certify that no dumping of solvents occurs, the facility will not have to do continuous moni-
toring of TTO but will only have to issue management plans to certify compliance with TTO limits.
10.11.3.4 Summary of Clean Water Act Impact on Solvent Systems The effect of the Clean Water Act on solvents used
in processing printed circuit boards should be limited since solvent systems are specifically designed to minimize discharge
in wastewater. If, however, chlorinated or fluorinated solvents reach the waste water effluent, they are subject to current
regulations for total toxic organics if the effluent goes to a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) or to surface waters.
10.11.4 RCRA - General Enacted by Congress in 1976, RCRA (the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) was
designed to ‘‘close the loop’’ in environmental legislation by regulating the management of both hazardous and nonhazard-
ous solid waste. EPA generally defines solid waste as any solid, liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting
from industrial, commercial, mining, or agricultural operations.
10.11.4.1 RCRA - Hazardous Waste In terms of hazardous waste, RCRA regulates its handling from the time it is first
generated to its ultimate disposal. Facilities must determine whether a material is a hazardous solid waste. EPA suggests
these steps for determining whether a material is a RCRA hazardous solid waste. First, determine if the substance is excluded
from RCRA based on 40 CFR 261.4. If the material is not excluded, determine if the material meet one of the following
two conditions:
• Determine if the waste is a listed hazardous solid waste under RCRA. For example, the waste may be listed as a hazard-
ous waste on the Commercial Chemical (P&U waste, see 40 CFR 261.33), Specific Source (K wastes, see 40 CFR 261.32),
or Nonspecific Source (F wastes, see Appendix VII to 40 CFR 261) Lists.
• If the waste is not listed, determine if the waste exhibits one of the four characteristics of hazardous waste-ignitability, cor-
rosivity, reactivity, or toxicity. If so, the waste is a characteristic hazardous solid waste.
If the waste meets one of these two conditions, it is generally a hazardous waste regulated by RCRA. RCRA requires that
any person generating, transporting, treating, storing, or disposing of such wastes must notify the appropriate EPA regional
office or designated state agency. Generators of hazardous waste must also: obtain an EPA identification number; comply
with pre-transport requirements relating to packaging, labeling, marking, etc.; satisfy recordkeeping and reporting require-
ments; comply with 90-day storage requirements; not offer waste to a transporter or a disposal facility without an EPA ID
number.
10.11.4.2 Exclusions of Hazardous Waste In the November 17, 1981, Federal Register, the EPA ruled that de minimis
losses of discarded commercial chemical products or chemical intermediates arising from manufacturing or laboratory
operations are not considered hazardous wastes when in mixture with wastewater that is subject to Section 402 or Section
307 (b) of the Clean Water Act.
The rule stated that: De minimis losses include those from normal material handling operations (e.g., spills from the unload-
ing or transfer of materials from bins or other containers, leaks from pipes, valves, or other devices used to transfer mate-
rials); minor leaks of process equipment, storage tanks, or containers; leaks from well-maintained pump packings and seals;
sample purgings; relief-device discharges; discharges from safety showers and rinsing and cleaning of personal safety equip-
ment; and rinsate from containers that are rendered empty during that rinsing.
The rule also applies to mixtures of wastewater and certain hazardous wastes from the Nonspecific Source List. Spills of
spent solvents from the cleaning application equipment and tanks sometimes can enter process wastewater streams. Mix-
tures of small amounts of these spent solvents with large volumes of wastewater are no longer considered hazardous wastes
as long as the generator is able to demonstrate that the maximum amount of solvents used during a week divided by the
average weekly flow of the influent into the headworks of the final wastewater treatment step would not exceed the stan-
dards established (in the regulations). In addition, the rule states that wastewater mixtures must go to wastewater treatment
system whose discharge is subject to regulation under section 402 or section 307 (b) of the Clean Water Act.
140
10.11.4.3 Penalties for RCRA Violations Violation of RCRA provisions may subject a company or individuals to signifi-
cant civil or criminal penalties. Civil fines of up to $25,000 per day are provided for in the statute. In addition, substantial
fines and imprisonment are provided for anyone who knowingly transports any identified or listed hazardous waste to a
facility that does not have a permit; treats, stores, or disposes of any identified listed hazardous waste without having a per-
mit, or in knowing violation of a material condition of a permit; makes any false material statement or representation in any
application, label, manifest, record, permit, or other document filed, maintained, or used for the purpose of compliance with
the regulations; or destroys, alters, or conceals records required by RCRA.
10.11.4.4 Summary RCRA Impact on Solvent Systems RCRA substantially impacts solvent processing systems for
printed wiring boards. Both methylene chloride (U-080) and the no longer produced 1,1,1 -trichloroethane (U-226) are listed
hazardous wastes under the Commercial Chemicals Category (40 CFR 261.33). Materials that are listed become hazardous
solid wastes only when they are discharged or intended for discard. In many cases, this means that the hazardous listing for
these commercial materials would only apply when they are spilled since the disposal of virgin solvents makes little eco-
nomic sense.
In addition to the Commercial Chemicals List, spent halogenated solvents from vapor defluxers (F001) and spent solvents
from other cleaning operations (F002) are listed hazardous wastes. The amount of spent solvents generated by flux removal
systems can often be reduced, if desired, through distillation and reuse. In many cases, the remaining waste from such a
system can be sent to a licensed solvent reclaimer for credit, or to a permitted hazardous waste incinerator where the recov-
ered still bottoms can be used as a fuel source for certain equipment.
10.11.5 Superfund - General Many people in industry mistakenly believe that Superfund, or the Comprehensive Envi-
ronmental Response Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA), provides only for the taxation of certain chemicals to pay for
specific hazardous waste sites. However, Superfund also includes provisions for old-site notification and for the report of
releases to the environment and for post-closure liability.
Under CERCLA, what must be reported to the EPA’s National Response Center as a release? The answer depends upon the
material that is released and the quantity of that material. Releases that are Federally permitted or that are less than the
established reportable quantities for certain chemicals as listed in 40 CFR 302.4 are not subjected to the reporting provisions
under Superfund. Other requirements exist in Sections 311, 312, 313 of the Super-fund Amendment and Reauthorization Act
(SARA). State reporting requirements may have different release values and need to be verified by user.
No additional notification is required for any release that is continuous and stable in quantity and rate, and for which noti-
fication already has been given for a period sufficient to establish the continuity, quantity, and regularity, of such release. In
short, reports to the National Response Center need only be given for a period sufficient to establish the quantity and regu-
latory nature of the releases. Thereafter, only statistically significant increases in the release need to be reported but permits
may be required.
10.11.6 Toxic Release Inventory Reporting Requirements Facilities in the electronics industry that have 10 or more
full-time employees which manufacture, process, or otherwise use more than 10,000 pounds per year of any toxic chemical
listed in 40 CFR 372.65 must file a Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI) to the EPA and to their state agency. The
inventory reports releases and off-site transfers (including to recycling facilities) of those chemicals. Facilities are also
required to report their pollution prevention and recycling data for TRI chemicals. Reports are due by July 1st of each year.
TRI chemicals used by the industry include 1,1,1-trichloroethane, carbon tetrachloride, ethylene glycol, and
trichloroethylene.
10.11.7 Influencing the Regulatory Process Many trade associations-for example, the IPC and the Halogenated Solvent
Industry Alliance (HSIA)-are working for scientifically sound regulations. Working to modify the Clean Water Act discharge
regulations for the Electroplating Point Category is an example of the effort. IPC’s active involvement in EPA’s Design for
the Environment (DFE) Printed Wiring Board project is another example of the industry working with government regula-
tors to promote pollution methods that save the industry money. For more on this project, check out the web site at http://
www.epa.gov/dfe.
10.11.8 Applicability These regulations apply to facilities that operate in the United States and its territories (Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands, Guam, etc.). Regulatory information contained in this handbook is believed to be accurate as of the date of
publication. The procedures and recommendations presented in this handbook should not be construed as a recommendation
to violate any federal, state, or local laws. Anyone using these products should review any applicable laws, rules, or regu-
lations prior to use.
141
11 SEMI-AQUEOUS CLEANING AGENTS, EQUIPMENT, AND PROCESS OPTIMIZATION

This section addresses semi-aqueous cleaning of electrical/electronic assemblies, parts and application tools after soldering.
Semi-aqueous cleaning is a process in which flux residues and other contaminants are removed from printed wiring assem-
blies (PWAs) by first washing the assemblies in an organic solvent and then rinsing the organic solvent from the assemblies
with water. Type I uses a water-insoluble organic solvent, while Type II uses a water-soluble organic solvent. Type I features
an emulsion phase formation step following the wash and first rinse, while Type II systems do not. (The semi-aqueous pro-
cess specifically does not include cleaning with aqueous solutions of organic or inorganic saponifiers or detergents; these are
included in the section on aqueous cleaning processes.) Other objectives are removal of process residues and materials used
as production aids, such as water soluble maskants.
The other parts and application tools are similarly cleaned using this same process or the emulsion variant of it.
11.1 Purpose The purpose is to provide a complete picture of the semi-aqueous cleaning process so that potential users
will better understand the technology, and so seasoned users can operate their semi-aqueous cleaning processes properly.
This document has been developed for those involved in printed wiring assembly operations. It is intended to describe all
aspects of semi-aqueous cleaning including cleaning mechanism, cleaning agents, rinsing, and process control.
Two different types of semi-aqueous cleaning agents are described in this handbook. The first employs a water-insoluble
organic solvent composition (Type I); the second uses a water-soluble organic solvent composition (Type II). After the wash
stage, the PWAs in either process are rinsed in pure water and then dried. The document includes information about com-
position, physical and chemical properties, waste treatment and compatibility.
11.1.1 Terms and Definitions

• Semi-Aqueous Cleaning A process in which flux residues and other contaminants are removed from printed wiring
assemblies by first washing the assemblies in an organic solvent and then rinsing the organic solvent from the assemblies
with water. Type I uses a water-insoluble organic solvent, while Type II uses a water-soluble organic solvent. Type I fea-
tures an emulsion phase formation step following the wash and first rinse, while Type II systems do not. (The semi-aqueous
process specifically does not include cleaning with aqueous solutions of organic or inorganic saponifiers or detergents;
these are included in the section on aqueous cleaning processes.) Other objectives are removal of process residues and
materials used as production aids, such as water soluble maskants.
• BOD Biological Oxygen Demand, the amount of oxygen required for the biochemical degradation of organic material
under controlled test conditions.
• Carbon Adsorption A technique to remove impurities from liquid or gas streams by adsorbing the contaminants in the
stream on activated carbon.
• COD Chemical Oxygen Demand, the amount of oxygen required to oxidize organic materials to carbon dioxide and
water, reported in mg of oxygen/liter of tested solution.
• Combustible This term is applied to liquid materials that have flash points greater than 38°C [100°F] but below 93.3°C
[200°F] by the closed cup method.
• Decanting The process of separating two immiscible liquids by drawing a top layer of liquid material off of another layer
of liquid without disturbing the lower liquid layer.
• Dragout A liquid cleaning agent which adheres to assemblies or transport devices and which is carried from one section
of a cleaning machine into another section of the machine and ultimately out into the workplace atmosphere.
• Emulsion A mixture of two or more immiscible liquids, such as oil and water, which is stable and uniform under con-
ditions of use in the cleaning process.
• Ozone Depleting Chemicals Chemicals capable of reacting with and destroying ozone in the stratosphere.
• Water Softening A water treatment process used to remove calcium and magnesium salts from water.
• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Regulated compounds containing carbons that have measurable vapor pressures.
11.2 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents
11.2.1 Semi-Aqueous Overview Semi-aqueous cleaning refers to a process in which flux residues and other contaminants
are removed from printed wiring assemblies by first washing the assemblies in an organic solvent and then rinsing the
organic solvent from the assemblies with water. Type I uses a water-insoluble organic solvent, while Type II uses a
142
water-soluble organic solvent. Type I features an emulsion phase formation step following the wash and first rinse, while
Type II systems do not. (The semi-aqueous process specifically does not include cleaning with aqueous solutions of organic
or inorganic saponifiers or detergents; these are included in the section on aqueous cleaning processes.) Other objectives are
removal of process residues and materials used as production aids, such as water soluble maskants.
When cleaning electronic assemblies with semi aqueous technology, the objective is to solvate the soils from the surface of
the assembly or component. Once the wash step is completed, the parts go through a series of rinse steps to remove the
solvent along with the dissolved soils (temporary soluble solder mask, non-ionic, and some particulate soils) and any water-
soluble (ionic) residues. The parts are then dried free of water and typically have contamination levels that are undetectable.
There is a broad array of semi-aqueous cleaning agent choices. Each uses organic solvent mixtures but with different chemi-
cal structures. Most are a combination of low vapor pressure solvents, surfactants and, if needed, inhibitors. The semi-
aqueous cleaning agents are designed to remove both polar (organic acids, ionic salts) and non-polar (resins, polymers,
rheological additives) soils. Bath life can be two months to one year due to their stable structures and tendency to hold high
levels of soil.
Semi-aqueous solvents can be heated to enhance their cleaning efficiency. The maximum use temperature is dependent upon
the flash point of the solvent. A good rule of thumb is to keep the use temperature 17°C [30°F] below the flash point. How-
ever, if solvent misting can occur, one must also be cognizant of the lower explosion limit (LEL) and upper explosion limit
(UEL) for the mixtures of the solvent and air.
Semi-aqueous cleaning agents are designed to have good compatibility with most components used in electronic assembly.
The process is robust and offers an excellent cleaning alternative. Semi-aqueous cleaning agents can be engineered to
achieve high solvency for soldering flux residues and can clean effectively even when they contain a high concentration of
flux residue. Some common issues are solvent entrapment, part marking degradation, seal, gasket and elastomer compatibil-
ity, and solvent consumption due to evaporative and drag-out losses. Careful attention to equipment design and cleaning
agent choice can minimize these problems.
The reader should be advised that most semi-aqueous cleaning agents are combustible and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). Cleaning equipment should be designed specifically for the semi-aqueous cleaning agent and corresponding clean-
ing process.
11.2.2 Science of Semi-Aqueous Electronic assembly semi-aqueous cleaning agents are engineered to solvate (dissolve)
both polar and non-polar solutes present in many flux residues. The engineered cleaning agents are mixtures of solvents and
functional additives designed to operate within targeted flash points, temperature ranges, boiling points, and solubility prop-
erties. Dissolution energy for the flux residue is typically improved at higher wash temperatures. Ideal cleaning agents
exhibit properties that dissolve a wide range of rosin and no-clean flux residues, compatible with component materials of
construction, and easily removed (rinsed) following the wash step.
Semi-aqueous cleaning agents are engineered with intermolecular and intramolecular forces that attract the soil to the clean-
ing agent. Flux residues that match up to the cleaning agent exhibit common dispersive, dipole moment, and hydrogen
bonding properties. As a rule, polar cleaning agents dissolve polar flux soils best and non-polar cleaning agents dissolve
non-polar fluxes best. For example, polar organic acids are ionic in nature and clean better with semi-aqueous cleaning
agents formulated with solvents that exhibit large dipole moments and dielectric constants. The partial positive and negative
charges within the semi-aqueous cleaning agent attract the positive and negative charges present in the ionic flux residue.
Conversely, highly thermally stable flux compositions built with strong chemical covalent bonds require semi-aqueous
cleaning agents with smaller dipole moments and dielectric constants that match up and dissolve covalent non-polar resin
and polymeric structures. The adage ‘‘like dissolves like’’ is the formulators guide to understanding the forces that enable
the semi-aqueous cleaning agent to dissolve the flux residue.
Some solvent-based materials used within the semi-aqueous cleaning agent are soluble in water and others are partially or
nearly insoluble in water. The characteristic of water that influences a solvent’s solubility in water is the extensive hydro-
gen bonding association of the solvent(s) used in the formulation. This hydrogen bonding network is stabilized by the sum
of all the hydrogen bonding energies. When solvents are partially soluble or insoluble in water, the hydrogen bonding sites
are low, and in some cases, their molecular structures are large. Depending on the characteristics of the flux residue, sol-
vents that are inversely soluble with water have advantageous properties. Since water is the rinsing agent, advantageous sol-
vents used in semi-aqueous cleaning agents are amphipathic by providing some attraction to water and some attraction to
the non-polar flux structure.
143
11.2.3 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents Both lead-free high tin alloys and miniaturization have resulted in increased
demands on the flux properties. As advances in aqueous cleaning agents were made, the need for solvent-based semi-aqueous
cleaning agents decreased. However, with new flux compositions designed to support high thermal stability, high resistance
against burn-off, high oxidation resistance, and high oxidation barrier capacity, the ability to formulate aqueous cleaning
agents that remove these residues has become increasingly difficult. As such, there appears to be an increased need for semi-
aqueous cleaning agents that match up better to these new flux compositions.
Semi-aqueous engineered cleaning agents are designed with low vapor pressure materials and high molecular weight com-
pounds. These solvent properties allow for materials that are not highly flammable, and in most cases operate at working
temperatures from 38° - 71°C [100-160°F]. Commercially available semi-aqueous cleaning agents can be described as
follows:
• Type I Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents - Limited water solubility.
• Type II Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents - Soluble in water.
11.2.3.1 Type I Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents Type I semi-aqueous cleaning agents are designed to be either insoluble
or partially soluble in water. Formulators select a diverse group of organic compounds that match up to the non-polar mate-
rials used in flux compositions but exhibit a general insolubility in water. The cleaning agent functions similar to a surfac-
tant with a strong attraction for the rosin and resin structures and a weak attraction for organic acids and ionic residues. The
engineered cleaning agent is designed to wet and spread evenly over the printed circuit board surface while forming a
monomolecular layer in which slightly polar oxygen groups bond at the water interface and the hydrocarbon chains bond to
rosin, resin, and polymeric soils.
A second design consideration is the ability to separate residual cleaning agent dragged into the chemical isolation rinse sec-
tion. The cleaning agent forms a series of insoluble droplets in the rinse holding tank. Over time, the cleaning agent drop-
lets approach one another closely enough to overcome their individual surface tensions. Mechanical coalescing equipment
extracts the cleaning agent from the rinse water. In some cases the cleaning agent is reused, and in other cases collected as
a non-hazardous waste. Removing organic compounds from the rinse water stream lowers chemical oxygen demand and
biological oxygen demand for those who send the chemical isolation rinse stream to drain. Others use ultrafiltration and
absorption to remove the organic contaminates from the rinse water making it suitable for reuse.
Common water insoluble chemical families used for electronic assembly cleaning are as follows:
11.2.3.1.1 Terpene Hydrocarbons As companies moved to develop alternative cleaning agents to replace CFCs, terpene
molecules demonstrated good solubility properties for rosin and some resin flux residues. Terpenes are natural solvents
widely found in nature. Terpene based electronic cleaning products were the first class of semi-aqueous cleaning solvents
introduced to the marketplace. From 1988-1992, terpene formulations emerged as the leading cleaning candidate to replace
chlorofluorocarbons.
The purity level of the terpene product is very important when used for electronic cleaning applications. Impurities can form
terpene oxides, which tend to be yellowish in color and exhibit a pungent orange smell. These oxides are higher boiling
point materials and can redeposit onto the surface of the part being cleaned. Terpene oxides exhibit poor solvency charac-
teristics. As a result, suppliers of products that contain terpenes use highly purified raw materials. This enhances performance
as well as reduces odor.
Terpenes are excellent solvents and work well at room temperature. Flash points range from 43°-54°C [110-130°F]. When
properly formulated into electronic cleaning formulations, terpenes provide good solubility properties for rosin and some
resin-based flux residues. Terpene formulations use a two- step rinse process. The first step uses a terpene emulsion with
water to assist in rinsing assemblies. The rinse water goes to a separate holding tank that uses mechanical means to sepa-
rate the terpene from the rinse water.
11.2.3.1.2 Aliphatic Esters Formulations based on aliphatic esters combine very low vapor pressure materials with block
polymer surfactants that exhibit high flash points and essentially no odor. Key advantages are cleaning with minimal emis-
sions, high flash points (138°C [280°F]), low odor, high flux loading capacity, and solvency for heavy paraffins such as wax
and grease. Key disadvantage is that aliphatic esters are poorly matched to many of the flux residue compositions.
Aliphatic ester formulations remove rosin and some no-clean flux residues. Aliphatic esters are not soluble in water but are
engineered with emulsifying agents to improve water rinsing.
Rinse water containing aliphatic esters and dissolved flux residues can be separated using coalescing equipment and mem-
brane filtration. Water can be further treated and disposed of or returned to the process. Separated cleaning solvent is
144
typically collected and either recycled or disposed of as a non-hazardous waste. Rinse tanks can be closed looped using acti-
vated carbon beds and ion exchange resins.
Aliphatic esters exhibit excellent compatibility on most components used within the electronic assembly process. Tradeoffs
with this technology are entrapment issues in sealed devices and connectors and poor defluxing performance on low solids
resin and polymer structures.
11.2.3.1.3 Paraffinic Hydrocarbons Paraffinic hydrocarbons are simple, straight chain hydrocarbons. These materials are
very stable and not usually subject to change. Paraffinic hydrocarbons exhibit good solvency for many non-polar soils. For
removing ionic residues and polar flux constituents, an oxygenated hydrocarbon is added to the formulation. Paraffinic
hydrocarbons are not soluble in water but surfactants are added to assist in rinsing.
Semi-aqueous cleaning products formulated with these mixtures combine polar and non-polar components to improve clean-
ing performance. This product family exhibits a high flash point and low toxicity. When used in combination with water
rinsing, these cleaning agents have been shown to be effective in removing ionic contamination and residual rosin from
printed wiring boards.
In operation, paraffin hydrocarbon blends can be used in industry standard semi-aqueous cleaning equipment. Wash tem-
peratures in the range of 49°-71°C [120-160°F] improve cleaning performance. Cleaned assemblies require rinsing with
DI-water (de-ionized water). Since this material is not water soluble, a two-phase rinsing step is employed. In the initial
rinse, it is desirable to rinse with an emulsion of roughly 90% DI water/10% cleaning agent. This enhances the ability to
rinse the cleaning agent off the substrate. The residues and cleaning agent can be transferred to a separate holding tank where
the water and cleaning agent are separated. This reduces organic content in water effluent, thereby reducing treatment
requirements. Subsequent rinse water typically contains low levels of contaminant and may be sent directly to drain or
treated in a close-loop recycle system.
Like aliphatic esters, paraffinic hydrocarbons are low in odor, low in toxicity, and have high flash points >93°C [> 200°F].
Tradeoffs with this technology are entrapment issues in sealed devices, limited cleaning effectiveness on some flux types,
and the need to use a two-step rinsing process.
11.2.3.1.4 Glycol Ether Compounds Glycol ethers are a group of solvents based on alkyl ethers with favorable solvent
compound properties using the lower molecular weight of ethers and alcohols. A wide range of glycol ethers solvents are
available and can be selected with the preferred evaporation rate, boiling point, solubility/insolubility in water, and clean-
ing properties.
Semi-aqueous products built from oxygenated glycol ether - alcohol compounds have been found to be effective on water
soluble, rosin, low-solids resin, and synthetic polymer flux residues. A key benefit of this product family is the ability to
engineer the desired properties into the cleaning agent formulation. The products work best at operating temperatures rang-
ing from 37°-71°C [100-160°F]. Similar to other semi-aqueous cleaning agents, engineered cleaning agents work in indus-
try designed semi-aqueous cleaning machines.
11.2.3.2 Type II Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents Water soluble semi-aqueous cleaning agents are typically very polar in
nature, which interact well with the polar carboxyl functional groups found in organic acid, rosin, and no-clean flux com-
positions. Oxygenated cleaning agents can hydrogen bond with water molecules and they also contain permanent dipoles
that allow them to interact well with polar molecules including water. These Columbic and Van der Waals forces of attrac-
tion lead to enhanced water solubility.
Water soluble semi-aqueous cleaning agents improve DI-water rinsing since the cleaning agent is soluble in water. The
tradeoff when running water soluble semi-aqueous cleaners is the inability to decant or separate the cleaning agent from the
rinse water stream. Typically, the chemical isolation rinse is sent to the local publically owned treatment facility after
obtaining the necessary permits. If closed loop rinse containment is needed, the chemical isolation rinse water can be recov-
ered using a membrane filtration system to isolate the organic components from the water. Rinse sections are typically closed
loop using activated carbon beds and ion exchange resins.
11.2.3.2.1 Non-Linear Oxygenated Alcohol Non-linear oxygenated alcohol is derived naturally from spent rice hulls,
sugar cane, and other biomass. This ring structure compound contains both an alcohol group and an ether linkage. The alco-
hol and ether groups enhance this compounds effectiveness in removing both polar and non-polar soils. Additionally, the
oxygen groups facilitate hydrogen bonding with both water and the carboxylic acid groups found in typical flux residues.
145
Non-linear oxygenated alcohol formulations have proven effective for removing all flux residue types including water
soluble, rosin, low-solids resin, and synthetic polymers. Formulations with this technology base are also effective at remov-
ing baked-on flux residues. Low surface tension and wetting characteristics facilitate penetration under low gap components.
The products work best at operating temperatures ranging from 37°-71°C [100-160°F]. Non-linear oxygenated alcohol for-
mulations operate in industry designed semi-aqueous cleaning machines.
11.2.4 Properties of Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents Table 11.1 lists a range of cleaning properties based on the semi-
aqueous product family.
Semi-aqueous products are not continually distilled as in vapor degreasers. Instead they are used in either batch or in-line
equipment in which parts are washed in the semi-aqueous organic cleaning solvents, rinsed in a series of aqueous rinses,
and then dried. Neat semi-aqueous cleaning agents are combustible, which greatly influences the processing techniques.
However, all these processes have been run safely for decades.
Table 11-1 Cleaning Properties Based on Semi-Aqueous Product Family

Paraffinic Non-Linear
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon- Oxygenated
Property Terpene-Based Ester-Based Based Alcohol-Based Oxygenated
Boiling Point°C [°F] >170 [>338] >200 [>392] >200 [>392] >170 [>338] >160 [>320]
Flash Point,°C [°F] 55 [131] >130 [>266] >90 [>194] >70 [>158] >70°C [>158]
Specific Gravity, 25°C
0.80-0.90 0.80-0.90 0.8-0.90 1.02-1.08 0.88-0.98
[77°F]
Surface Tension,
25-30 25-30 27-34 22-28 26-32
dyne/cm 25°C [77°F]
Odor Citrus Mild Hydrocarbon Very low Mild Alcohol Mild
Vapor Pressure <2.0 <0.2 <.002 <0.3 <0.3
Vapor Density (air = 1) <1 <7 <1 <4 <5
Solution in Water Insoluble Insoluble Insoluble Soluble Partially Soluble
11.2.5 Compatibility of Cleaning Agents The compatibility of semi-aqueous cleaning agents with plastics, elastomers,
and other materials used in the production of printed wiring assemblies must be considered. Most vendors of semi-aqueous
cleaning agents supply compatibility data sheets. These data sheets are meant as guidelines to the two main compatibility
issues: short term compatibility experienced by the part being cleaned and long term compatibility experienced by the
cleaning equipment. Important factors to consider when discussing compatibility of cleaning agents with materials are:
• Know under what conditions the material was exposed to the cleaning agent, e.g., elevated temperature, length of expo-
sure, etc. The data must come from a test method that closely simulates actual production usage to be meaningful.
• Test materials that are exactly the same as those used in the end product. Varying amounts of fillers or plasticizers can
greatly affect the compatibility properties of the materials.
• Compare data to the compatibility of the current cleaning method as a baseline reference.
• Know the effects of the cleaning agent on all applicable properties of the material (e.g., gloss, adhesion, corrosion, etc.).
Consider the compatibility of the materials that are being cleaned to the cleaning process and equipment. This would include
submersion under a liquid, high pressure sprays, ultrasonic energy, heat from drying steps, etc.
Due to the differences in test methods and the need for specific conditions relating to various production processes, each
user should conduct their own compatibility tests when evaluating semi-aqueous cleaning agents.
11.2.6 Properties of Water for Rinsing in a Semi-Aqueous Process Water is used as the rinsing agent in the semi-
aqueous process. There are typically two water rinse sections in a semi-aqueous cleaning process. The first rinse section
removes the bulk of the solvent as well as any ionic residues that the solvent was unable to remove. This is followed by a
second rinse that makes sure that only high purity water is present on the assembly when it is passed on to the drying sec-
tion. Unfortunately, water quality varies tremendously from one location to another around the world. The quality will affect
both the rinsing ability of the cleaning agents and the performance of the equipment.
There are many factors that should be examined to confirm clean water. The first and most common way to determine the
purity of water is by measuring the resistivity of the water (or its reciprocal, conductivity). Pure water theoretically has a
146
resistivity of 18.25 MÙ or a conductivity of 0.55 µmhos. The incoming resistivity of the water used to feed the rinsing
sections of a semi-aqueous cleaning process should be 1-5 MÙ depending on how critical the assembly is. The more criti-
cal the assembly, the higher the resistivity of the water should be. Meeting this requirement will eliminate ionic materials
that can leave residues on assemblies that have adverse effects on the reliability of the product.
For non-ionic contamination detection, the Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Chemical and Biological Oxygen Demand (COD,
BOD), and/or Total Organic Content (TOC) of the incoming water must be measured. These measurements are more
involved than measuring the resistivity and therefore this aspect of water purity is more difficult to control. An evaluation
must be carried out on any new treatment system that is used to eliminate non-ionic contamination followed by control
measures to ensure these conditions are maintained during production.
In order to meet purity levels, a treatment system should be added to the incoming rinse water stream of any semi-aqueous
cleaning process. This system should contain, at the least, a set of filters at the start and end of the purification process, acti-
vated carbon to remove unwanted organic materials, and deionizing resins to remove ionic material from the water stream.
11.2.6.1 Pre-Treatment of Water Supply The total amount of dissolved material in water is usually referred to as the TDS
(Total Dissolved Solids). If the amount of dissolved material in incoming water is less than 50 parts per million, it may be
possible to use it directly. If not, the water should be purified using one or several of the following water treatment tech-
niques: filtration, softening, distillation, deionization, or reverse osmosis.
11.2.6.2 Filtration All incoming water should be filtered to remove suspended rust, mineral scale and other particulate that
could clog pumps or sprays. Such levels are usually in the 0.005-0.010% [50-100 PPM] ranges. Such impurities can also
shorten the life of water softening, ion exchange or reverse osmosis systems, requiring more frequent maintenance and ser-
vicing of these units. Granulated activated carbon (GAC) followed by an ion exchange column is often used to adsorb and
remove such contaminants.
Note: Approximately 45 kg [100 lbs.] of GAC media are required to adsorb 2.3 kg [5 lbs.] of such suspended
contamination.
11.2.6.3 Softening An ion-exchange process that removes both calcium and magnesium minerals that cause hardness and
replaces them with sodium salts. Since these sodium salts are both hygroscopic and corrosive, it is advised that qualifica-
tion tests be performed when using softened water for final rinsing especially when softening a high hardness tap water sup-
ply. The relatively large amount of sodium salts produced may cause serious problems. Furthermore, water softened with
phosphates and metasilicates (household powder softeners) is particularly unsuitable for any use on electronics.
11.2.6.4 Distillation Distillation provides very pure water, but it is relatively expensive if large quantities of water are
needed.
11.2.6.5 Ion Exchange Deionization removes ions by an exchange process. The process can provide high quality water,
but it can be expensive if the quality of incoming water is poor or if a large quantity of water is needed. Depending upon
the tap water quality and deionization system design, the pH will normally be in the 6.0 to 10.0 range unless the system is
malfunctioning.
11.2.6.6 Reverse Osmosis In reverse osmosis, contaminated water is pumped under high pressure through special mem-
branes that concentrates the contaminants in a reject stream while generating a flow of purified water (permeate stream).
The process produces water with resistivity typically below 100,000 ohm-cm resistivity. It is particularly useful for large
volume applications and is often used as pre-treatment to ion exchange.
11.3 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Processes
11.3.1 Introduction The semi-aqueous cleaning process is distinctly different from boiling solvent, vapor degreasing
cleaning processes. Semi-aqueous cleaning agents based on terpenes, hydrocarbons, alcohols, or other organic solvents can-
not be continually distilled at atmospheric pressure for two reasons. They are combustible liquids raising safety concerns,
and their boiling points are far too high for practical on site distillation. Another difference is that semi-aqueous cleaning
agents are rinsed from the printed wiring assemblies with water. Figure 11-1 is a schematic of the basic semi-aqueous clean-
ing process steps.
147
Work Flow
Solvent Clean Water Rinse Driving System

IPC-65b-11-1
Figure 11-1 Generalized Overall Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Process
11.3.2 Process Parameters Since there are many semi-aqueous cleaning agents and several engineering approaches to
using them, it is difficult to completely describe the processing parameters. Table 11-2 and Table 11-3 summarize the range
of currently practiced processing parameters.
Table 11-2 Cleaning Processing Parameters for Water-Insoluble (Type I) Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents
Section Cleaning Emulsion Rinse Drying
Semi-aqueous cleaning Water plus semi- Water plus much less
Material agent - neat or mixed aqueous cleaning semi-aqueous cleaning Hot, high velocity air.
with water. agent (if necessary). agent than in emulsion.
Limited by circuit
Up to 17°C [63°F] Limited by circuit
Limited by circuit assembly. Follow
below flash point; so assembly, except
Temperature assembly and equipment and
long as solvent mist decanter should not
chemistry. solvent manufacturer’s
formation is minimized. exceed flash point.
recommendation.
Protect against fire
(e.g., spray under High pressure spray High pressure spray
Agitation High velocity air.
immersion, ultrasonics, or ultrasonics. or ultrasonics.
inert atmosphere).
Continuous to remove Continuous to remove Continuous to remove
Filtration –
particulates. particulates. particulates.
Transport of liquid one
Air knife and drip time. Air knife and drip time. Air knife and drip time. –
section to the next.
Table 11-3 Cleaning Processing Parameters for Water-Soluble (Type II & III) Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agents
Section: Cleaning First Water Rinse Subsequent Rinse(s) Drying
Semi-aqueous cleaning Water plus semi- Water plus much less
Material agent - neat or mixed aqueous cleaning semi-aqueous cleaning Hot, high velocity air.
with water. agent (if necessary). agent than in emulsion.
Wash temperature up
Limited by circuit
to 70°C [160°F] while Limited by circuit
Limited by circuit assembly. Follow
being 17°C [63°F] assembly, except
Temperature assembly and equipment and
below flash point; so decanter should not
chemistry. solvent manufacturers
long as solvent mist exceed flash point.
recommendation.
formation is minimized.
Protect against fire
(e.g., spray under High pressure spray High pressure spray
Agitation High velocity air.
immersion, ultrasonics, or ultrasonics. or ultrasonics.
inert atmosphere).
Continuous to remove Continuous to remove Continuous to Remove
Filtration –
particulates. particulates. particulates.
Transport of liquid one
Air knife and drip time. Air knife and drip time. Air knife and drip time. –
section to the next.
11.3.3 Wash Section In the wash (first or solvent) section, the printed wiring assemblies are cleaned by dissolving the
soil on them in the semi-aqueous cleaning solvent. The variables for cleaning are temperature, agitation, and cleaning time.
11.3.4 Temperature The maximum temperature is determined by the flash point of the semi-aqueous cleaning solvent and
the equipment design. In most cases, the cleaning agent should be kept at least 17°C [63°F] below the flash point. Such
compliance will satisfy the conditions of the National Fire Protection Association codes NFPA 30 (1990) (Flammable and
148
Combustible Liquids Code) and NFPA 34 (1989) (Dipping and Coating Processes Using Flammable or Combustible Liq-
uids). There also are applicable OSHA regulations: 29CFR1 910.106 (Flammable and Combustible Liquids) and 29CFR1
910.108 (Dip Tanks Containing Flammable or Combustible Liquids). In addition to controlling the maximum operating tem-
perature, the flash point determines the amount of material that can be stored in a cleaning machine and in an operating
area. These regulations should be considered for each installation in consultation with local fire protection, safety, and insur-
ance authorities. While the information in this section is drawn from practice in the USA, similar regulations for safe opera-
tional practices will be found in other nations.
Table 11-4 is a listing of the flash point classifications and storage limits for the various types of flammable liquids based
on NFPA Codes. Similar codes will be used by other nations.
Table 11-4 Flash Point Considerations (According to U.S. Regulations)

National Fire Protection
Association Classification II IIIA IIIB
Closed Cup Flash Point,°C [°F] 38-59 [100-139] 60-93 [140-199] >93 [>200]
Hazardous Waste Yes Requires Testing1 Requires Testing1
Volume allowed in use in open equipment
30 80 3300
in non-sprinklered buildings, gal.
Volume allowed to be stored in
120 330 13,200
non-sprinklered buildings, gal.
Volume allowed in use in open equipment
60 160 Not Limited
in sprinklered buildings, gal.
Volume allowed to be stored in sprinklered
240 660 Not Limited
buildings, gal.
1. May be characterized as hazardous once used due to entrained pollutants from the assemblies. See Section 9.2.2 for further information.
Another requirement is that the liquid should not be sprayed, aerated or misted if oxygen is present. Sprayed, aerated or
misted, combustible materials can be ignited more easily. Misting can occur by impingement of a solid jet (non-atomized)
onto a surface or by high-energy ultrasonic agitation. Since mists are ignitable and present the most serious hazard, equip-
ment manufacturers have chosen to minimize the misting or to totally inert the system if misting does occur.
Some equipment manufacturers have incorporated engineering controls to eliminate the threat of fire in semi-aqueous clean-
ing machines when necessary. Some machines are blanketed with nitrogen, some are equipped with spark detection devices
that shut the machines down if a flame is detected within a specific radius of the machine, some are equipped with carbon
dioxide extinguishing capability, and some are equipped with a combination of these fire suppression options.
11.3.5 Agitation In the solvent section, it is necessary to agitate the semi-aqueous cleaning agent to achieve effective
cleaning. Many equipment manufacturers have chosen to submerge the assemblies to be cleaned and to use subsurface
sprays, ultrasonics or other methods of agitation to enhance cleaning. A few common concepts for agitating the cleaning
solution or the parts are described below.
11.3.5.1 Spray Under Immersion Figure 11-2 is a schematic of a semi-aqueous cleaning machine in which the agitation
is provided by spray-under-immersion. The concept is most frequently used for large in-line cleaning machines but has also
found significant utility for smaller batch machines. The method provides agitation without misting.
11.3.5.2 Centrifugal Agitation Another approach is to rotate the parts rapidly in a liquid. The direction of rotation is
reversed periodically to maximize the effect of this centrifugal force approach to agitation. This concept is useful for rela-
tively small and uniformly shaped assemblies or parts. It is only applicable to batch machines. The manufacturer has incor-
porated cassettes for holding multiple parts. If low flash point cleaning agent is used, the air in the process chamber can be
easily replaced with nitrogen. Figure 11-3 shows an example of the centrifugal batch cleaner configuration.
11.3.5.3 Direct Spray Several manufacturers have chosen to directly spray parts. In one concept for a batch machine, the
assemblies are placed in a specially modified dishwasher type cabinet spray washer, the air in the chamber is replaced with
nitrogen, and the parts are sprayed with liquid from a rotating spray arm. The pressure is low and the liquid is not misted
excessively.
In a second concept, the circuit assemblies are transported on a belt through a chamber that is protected with spark detec-
tors and designed with wide-open entry and exit throats so pressure cannot build up in case of ignition. Liquid cleaning agent
is sprayed with low-pressure non-atomizing nozzles onto the printed wiring assemblies.
149
Re-circ. Drain
Wash
DI Water Make-up
EMULSION
WASH RINSE (S) DRY
RINSE
Work Flow
IPC-65b-11-2
Figure 11-2 Semi-Aqueouos Cleaning Machine Schematic
Air Inlet
Process Nitrogen Inlet

Chamber
Vent
Rinse In
Water In
Rinse Drain
Rinse
Wash Reservoir Reservoir
Wash
IPC-65b-11-3
Figure 11-3 Centrifugal Batch Cleaner Configuration
150
Still another manufacturer has designed in-line equipment that includes high pressure sprays in the solvent chamber which
has been filled with nitrogen.
11.3.5.4 Ultrasonic Agitation An additional method of agitation is ultrasonic agitation. Manufacturers use both sweep
frequency and constant frequency approaches. This type of agitation is particularly well suited for batch type machines.
Ultrasonics were originally banned from military applications, but they now can be used if adequate data are provided which
demonstrate that the ultrasonics do not harm either the loose or the attached components. Thus, the risk of long term fail-
ure of the assemblies should be nil. See IPC test methods for assessing loose and attached components for their ability to
withstand exposure to ultrasonics.
11.3.6 Rinse Section The purpose of the rinse process is to remove the organic cleaning agent and the soil that is dis-
solved in it. This is usually accomplished with a series of aqueous rinses. In the case of those semi-aqueous cleaning agents
that are insoluble in water, the rinsing process is an elegant displacement process. For water-soluble (Type II) semi-aqueous
cleaning agents, the rinse process involves continuous dilution.
There are two basic approaches to rinsing. The emulsion/decanter approach is only suitable for water-insoluble cleaning
agents whereas the continuous approach could be used for water-soluble cleaning agents and, after the first rinse, for sub-
sequent water-insoluble cleaning agent rinses.
The variables that affect rinsing are water flow rate, water temperature, water pressure, agitation, time for the rinsing pro-
cess, and the number and type of rinses. High-pressure spray rinses are much more effective than low pressure sprays.
Cleaning agent suppliers and equipment vendors can provide the optimum rinsing conditions for combinations of their
materials and equipment. At the rinse stage of the cleaning process, ignition of the mist is not of concern since the spray is
mainly water. However, the organic content should be maintained at or below 20% for safe operation.
11.3.6.1 Rinse Section for Water-Insoluble (Type I) Cleaning Agent When water-insoluble cleaning agents are used,
rinsing can be achieved by creating an emulsion in the chemical isolation rinse section and then decanting the cleaning agent
from the rinse water. An emulsion/decanter process is often used as the first rinse in a semi-aqueous cleaning process because
in some cases it can significantly lower the amount of solvent that exits the machine with the rinse water in subsequent rinse
steps. In a continuous process, all the solvent and soil exit the machine with the rinse water.
11.3.6.2 Emulsion/Decanter Rinse Process Figure 11-4 is a diagram of a two-stage rinse process in which the solvent
can be isolated from the bulk of the rinse water by a physical separation technique called decanting, carried out in a chemi-
cal isolation or ‘decanter’ section. In this approach, the water in the first rinse tank is reused and not discarded with the rest
of the rinse water. After the first rinse, the bulk of the cleaning agent is captured in its emulsified stated and piped into the
decanter tank. The emulsion is then allowed to stand at operating temperature in the decanter where it is allowed to sepa-
rate into a cleaning agent layer and a water layer. Note that some flux technologies contain emulsifying materials themselves
and in certain cases adversely affect the time or ability of the emulsion to separate.
After separation, both of these layers are recycled into the appropriate cleaning agent and rinse water tanks for use on sub-
sequent PWAs. It is often important to formulate the cleaning agent so the post-rinse emulsion separates rapidly and as
nearly completely as possible at the operating temperature of the cleaning process to minimize the organic cleaning agent
and dissolved soils that could be sent to waste treatment or to the drain. Differing formulations may be needed for optimum
performance and minimizing organics to drain for batch and for in-line processes.
The concentration of solvent in this section is high enough that the rinse water in rinse one is actually a dilute emulsion of
semi-aqueous cleaning agent in water. The rinse water in this section is often called the emulsion rinse, and the concentra-
tion of the emulsion is usually a few percent. The concentration depends on the emulsification properties of the semi-aqueous
cleaning agent. The emulsion must be capable of breaking into a solvent layer and a water layer when the rinse water is
diverted to a quiescent tank called the decanter or coalescer.
After the excess solvent has been decanted, the water is returned to the emulsion rinse tank and used to rinse more assem-
blies. The assemblies are transported to the second rinse station. At that point they are carrying very little semi-aqueous
cleaning agent with them and the amounts of semi-aqueous cleaning agent and soil that exit the machine with the rinse water
from tank two are quite low.
11.3.6.3 Emulsion Concentration It is possible to quantitatively estimate the concentrations of semi-aqueous cleaning
agent and soil in the rinse water using refractive index. Alternatively, a mathematical model with rinse water flow rates, dra-
gout on printed wiring assemblies, concentration of emulsion in the first rinse, and printed wiring assembly throughput as
151
140˚F 140˚F
Re-circ.
Wash Decanter
Section DI Water Make-up
EMULSION
WASH RINSE/ RINSE (S) DRY
DECANTER
Work Flow
IPC-65b-11-4
Figure 11-4 Two-Stage Rinse Process
the variables can be used. The dragout, or carry over between sections of the machine, is a function of the time printed wir-
ing assemblies are allowed to drip and the air knives that wipe material from the assembly surface.
Essentially, the use of the decanter/emulsion concept as the first rinse in a semi-aqueous cleaning process can lower the total
amount of organic that enters the subsequent rinse water streams to the percentage of the emulsion concentration. Hence, if
a 2% emulsion is maintained and if the semi-aqueous cleaning agent is insoluble in water, only 2% of the solvent carried
out of the solvent cleaning section on printed wiring assemblies will reach the rinse water streams.
Thus, the concentration of semi-aqueous cleaning agent in the rinse water can be estimated by simply dividing the total
semi-aqueous cleaning agent that will be carried out of the cleaning agent tank by the total amount of water that will be
running through the rinse sections of the machine in the same time interval.
11.3.6.4 Closed-Loop Decanter Systems for water-insoluble organics often employ a closed-loop decanter in the first
rinse. This isolated rinse concentrates the organic emulsion formed by dragout of cleaning chemistry from the first bath. It
assists in phase separation and recycling of both the cleaning agent and the rinse water. Final rinse water concentrations
should be multiplied by the percent emulsion concentration, rather than cleaning agent concentrations, as done in systems
where a decanter is not employed.
11.3.7 Rinse Section for Water-Soluble (Type II) Cleaning Agent For processes utilizing water-soluble cleaning agents,
the emulsion/decanter concept is unnecessary. Instead, a continuous rinse process is used as in aqueous processes. This type
of rinse can be used for semi-aqueous cleaning agents that are insoluble in water or for those that are soluble in water.
11.3.7.1 Continuous Rinse Process Figure 11-5 is a diagram of a continuous rinse process. Solvent is dragged out of the
solvent tank into the rinse tank. Water cascades counter to the solvent flow. The concentration of contaminants in each higher
numbered tank is progressively lower because of dilution.
11.3.8 Drying Section An important aspect of semi-aqueous defluxing is drying. Drying is the last step in the semi-
aqueous defluxing process, and is basically the same, regardless of the differences in the rinse steps. There are two ways to
dry-evaporation and physical displacement. Evaporation has two problems. First, it is extremely energy intensive since the
heat of vaporization for water is very high. Second, when water that contains contaminants is allowed to evaporate, any
contaminants in the water will be re-deposited. The most efficient drying process is to use high velocity warm air to blow
off or displace as much of the water off the assemblies as possible. The small amount of residual water can be evaporated
with infrared heaters or in convection ovens.
152
Evaporative Loss
DI Water 2-3 gpm
160˚F
To Drain or
Re-circ. Evaporator
Wash
WASH RINSE (S) DRY
Work Flow
IPC-65b-11-5
Figure 11-5 Continuous Rinse Process
11.4 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Equipment
11.4.1 In-Line Cleaning Machines In-line cleaning (defluxing) machines (schematic representation provided in Figure
11-5) are used to clean large volumes of printed wiring assemblies. Manufacturers have taken a variety of engineering
approaches for building in-line defluxing machines. Stainless steel is the preferred material of construction for in-line
machines due to the combustible nature of most semi aqueous materials. Key to the operation of these machines is the proper
selection of elastomers for pump seals and gaskets to match the cleaning technology chosen for the operation. Many types
of transport systems for the assemblies exist, and their effect on solvent usage should be considered. Some equipment
manufacturers have installed air knives between sections of their machines to reduce dragout.
Machines intended for Type I materials have built in emulsion decanter systems, whereas systems deigned to use Type II
materials do not.
Drying is usually done with high velocity heated air to displace as much rinse water as possible and to minimize the amount
of evaporative drying. The remainder of the moisture can be evaporated with the aid of IR heaters in the drying section of
the machine or in off-line ovens.
11.4.2 Combustibility Protection The different manufacturers have chosen to deal with the combustibility issue in unique
ways. Some have chosen to inert the semi-aqueous cleaning agent chamber with nitrogen to exclude the possibility of com-
bustion and to allow for more vigorous spray with small droplets. Several manufacturers have chosen to equip their
machines with flame detectors that shut down the sprays if an ignition source is detected. Most of the machines are equipped
with carbon dioxide fire suppression systems that flood the semi-aqueous cleaning agent chambers with extinguishing media.
Some water-soluble semi-aqueous cleaning agent manufacturers provide materials that can be used as emulsions in water.
In those cases, the water in the emulsions provides flame suppression function.
11.4.3 Batch Cleaning Machines Semi-aqueous cleaning agent consumption in batch cleaning systems is low because (a)
the semi-aqueous cleaning agents have relatively low vapor pressures and (b) they are still effective cleaning agents even
when they contain over 20% flux residue by weight.
The initial amount of semi-aqueous cleaning agent required to charge batch cleaning systems can be as little as 20 liters (5
gallons) and is easily changed.
VOC loss in batch cleaning systems is usually very low as the semi-aqueous cleaning agent wash module is usually a closed
chamber.
153
Batch cleaning systems offer a wide range of process adjustment. Not only is it easy to change the wash and rinse times,
but the ratio of these times is also adjustable.
Automated hoists permit tight process control while minimizing operating costs. Such hoists are extremely effective with
heavy loads of parts to be cleaned.
Due to their low off-line energy use, batch systems are very energy efficient.
There are many unique batch machine approaches. A few common ones are described below.
11.4.3.1 Double Spray Module This approach uses two spray modules, one for washing, and another for rinsing. Agita-
tion is achieved by cascading the semi-aqueous cleaning agent from rotating arms in a manner similar to that used in com-
mercial dishwashers. The assemblies are held vertically allowing them to drain and for semi-aqueous cleaning agent to pen-
etrate under components spaced closely to the boards. Since semi-aqueous cleaning agent is sprayed through the air, the
semi-aqueous cleaning agent wash module is inerted with nitrogen to eliminate possible ignitable mist problem. Rinsing is
done with hot water in a second module, thus reducing semi-aqueous cleaning agent loss. Rinse water contamination levels
can be measured and rinse time automatically extended if necessary. The rinse module may contain emulsion decanter and
water purification systems allowing reuse of the rinse water. Assemblies are dried in drying ovens suitable for use with
flammable solvents after the bulk of the rinse water has drained from the boards.
11.4.3.2 Single Cleaning and Rinsing Module This approach uses the same module for cleaning and rinsing. In one sys-
tem, the printed wiring assemblies are held horizontally and spun rapidly in alternating directions while immersed in a
chamber filled with semi-aqueous cleaning agent. The agitation is due to the centrifugal forces the parts experience while
spinning. After the cleaning cycle is complete, the semi-aqueous cleaning agent is drained from the chamber and replaced
with water for rinsing. Nitrogen inerting can be used for increased safety. The parts are spun dry and then dried in an oven
if required. In a second concept, the nozzles are fixed and a basket of parts passes back and forth under the spray section.
11.4.3.3 Filtered Tanks with Recirculation Pump This approach involves a series of three or four small tanks placed side
by side. The tanks may be equipped with heaters and or coolers with ultrasonics, as well as spray under immersion capa-
bility. The liquid in each tank is filtered and agitated by a recirculation pump. The U.S. Military no longer prohibits ultra-
sonics, provided the components and resulting assemblies meet the requirements of the appropriate IPC test methods, which
were used to qualify ultrasonic cleaning. A drying module can be easily put next to the final rinse. Assemblies may be trans-
ported from tank to tank manually, or with programmable automatic hoists.
11.4.3.4 Simulated In-line Process A fourth approach uses three machines in line, with the baskets of assemblies pushed
linearly along a series of tables either manually or by automation. The first machine contains a tank of the solvent with an
internal hoist. As soon as a basket is centered on the hoist, it is bodily immersed in the solvent, the lid shuts and the spray-
under immersion technique is used for the appropriate time. The basket is then hoisted very slowly out of the solvent to
minimize the quantity dragged out. After the appropriate drain period, the basket is transferred to the wash/rinse machine.
This operates with rectilinearly oscillating spray bars, initially with high-pressure water jets in a closed loop, followed by
open loop spray nozzles fed with pure water. The basket is then transferred to a third machine which is a dedicated rotary
hot high-velocity air-knife dryer. It is designed to allow a basket of assemblies to be in each of the three machines at any
one moment.
11.5 Process and Quality Control
11.5.1 Wash Section Various methods are used to control semi-aqueous cleaning agents. The goal of the process is to
create a mass balance condition where the cleaning agent will operate effectively at a fairly constant concentration of flux
loading and still achieve the desired cleaning results. There are four factors that control the concentration of flux residue in
any cleaning agent:
• The amount of flux coming into the cleaning agents on the printed wiring assemblies.
• The amount of flux that is dissolved in the cleaning agent.
• The amount of cleaning agent that is carried out on the surface of the printed wiring assembly.
• The amount of fresh semi-aqueous cleaning agent that is added to compensate for the semi-aqueous cleaning agent carried
out on assemblies.
154
When the amount of flux coming in on the assemblies is equal to the amount of flux that is dissolved in the semi-aqueous
cleaning agent and carried out on the assemblies, the concentration of flux residue in the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank
has reached a steady-state concentration. This can be controlled by adjusting the drip time or the effectiveness of the air
knife at the end of the semi-aqueous cleaning agent chamber. It is also important to adjust the air knife so that misting does
not occur. If the equilibrium is established properly, the semi-aqueous cleaning agent in the tank may not have to be changed.
For rosin fluxes, the equilibrium concentration of flux residue should be controlled at between 10 and 20% (maximum) or
according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. At these relatively high concentrations, semi-aqueous cleaning agent
consumption will be low and cleaning will be very effective. Since synthetic activated (SA) flux residues are very reactive
and corrosive, the concentration of SA flux residue should be controlled at ≤5%.
11.5.1.1 Monitoring or Bath Loading The concentration of flux residue can be monitored successfully by using the fol-
lowing methods:
11.5.1.1.1 Specific Gravity Monitoring The concentration of flux residue can be monitored successfully by specific grav-
ity since the specific gravity of the majority of the semi-aqueous cleaning agents is about 0.84 and the specific gravity of a
typical rosin flux residue is about 1.07. A similar plot can be constructed for synthetic activated (SA) fluxes although the
typical specific gravity of an SA flux residue is about one. Figure 11-6 is a plot of specific gravity as a function of rosin flux
loading in a typical Type I hydrocarbon semi-aqueous cleaning agent.
0.94
0.92
Specific Gravity at 25˚ C
0.9
0.88
0.86
0.84
0.82
0 10 20 30 40 50
Wt. % Rosin in Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agent IPC-65b-11-6
Figure 11-6 Specific Gravity vs Rosin Flux Loading
In all cases, semi-aqueous cleaning agents should be periodically monitored by laboratory analysis to verify the accuracy of
the above listed charts. In addition, materials such as dissolved solder masks, salts, and oils can cause deviations from the
concentration graphs.
Some semi-aqueous cleaning agents whose specific gravity is near 1.00 cannot be controlled by the use of density measure-
ment because of the similarity in density to that of flux.
11.5.1.1.2 Refractive Index Monitoring Some semi-aqueous cleaning systems are controlled by the use of differences in
refractive index in much the same manner as with density measurements. The measurement of refractive index is quite
simple and can be accomplished easily through the use of inexpensive hand held equipment.
11.5.1.1.3 Ionic Conductivity Monitoring Some vendors state ionic conductivity can be used to monitor water-soluble
(Type II) semi-aqueous cleaning agent concentrations, since specific gravity cannot be used (lack of sensitivity for these
measurements). However, not all vendors recommend this monitoring method, so operators should use the method suggested
by the supplier of their cleaning agent for this purpose to obtain reliable data.
155
11.5.2 Rinse Section As was shown earlier, the rinse process can be considered in sections.
11.5.2.1 Rinse Section for Water-Insoluble (Type I) Cleaning Agents If the emulsion/decanter concept is used, it is
important to control the concentration of the cleaning agent in the emulsion section. If the emulsion concentration is kept
as low as possible, only a small amount of semi-aqueous cleaning agent will be in the effluent rinse water.
Again, specific gravity can be used as an effective tool to monitor emulsion concentration. It is possible to construct a graph
as shown in Figure 11-6. Specific gravity measurements can be made quite accurately. The graph will vary with semi-
aqueous materials.
Some semi-aqueous cleaning agents form an emulsion that separates into hydrocarbon and water layers. If an emulsion/
decanter system is employed at the recommended operating temperature for specific semi-aqueous cleaning agents, the
emulsion concentration will stabilize at less than a few percent. No exterior control will be necessary.
Emulsion separation time can be shortened by using specially designed decanters that are packed with hydrophobic materi-
als to accelerate breaking the emulsion at the operating temperature of the process.
Once the semi-aqueous cleaning agents have separated from the water, they can be decanted in automatic decanters and dis-
carded as waste or reused if the level of flux residue in the semi-aqueous cleaning agent is less than the recommended maxi-
mum concentration.
11.5.2.2 Rinse Section for Water-Soluble (Type II) Cleaning Agents The concentration of semi-aqueous cleaning agent
in the discharged rinse water can be monitored by chemical oxygen demand (COD) measurements. COD measurements can
be converted to concentrations of organics in rinse water in parts per million by dividing the COD by a factor. For the aver-
age semi-aqueous cleaning agent, this factor will range from 2.0 to 3.0. For example, rinse water with a COD of 2,500 mg
O2/l actually contains 1,000 PPM organic if the conversion factor is 2.5.
11.5.2.3 Drying Section Controls for the dryer section are relatively simple. The most efficient dryer is a high velocity
hot air drying module. A critical aspect of drying is directing the air knives in the dryer at the right angle to push the water
out from under components and off the surfaces of the assemblies rather than to evaporate it. For efficiency, it is important
the dryer section of any machine be sized to keep up with the throughput of the other sections.
11.6 Environmental Controls and Considerations
11.6.1 Introduction The emissions from semi-aqueous cleaning machines are:

• Waste semi-aqueous cleaning agents that are contaminated with flux and other soils.
• Rinse water that contains small amounts of semi-aqueous cleaning agent.
• Semi-aqueous cleaning agent and water vapors.
• Contaminated ion exchange resins, filters, carbon canisters, and membranes used in the process.
• Air emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (and Hazardous Air Pollutants, if any).
Each waste stream must be handled according to applicable regulations.
Various governmental bodies have established rules and regulations for transporting wastes, discharging wastes into the air,
and discharging wastewater into sewer or septic systems and ultimately into rivers, lakes, and oceans. In the USA, the Clean
Air Act, the Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), etc. detail the responsibilities both user
and manufacturer have for products like semi-aqueous cleaning agents. Similar regulations may be applicable in other
nations. Users should carefully consider these protective regulations when they implement any new process like semi-
aqueous cleaning. Users should contact all appropriate air, wastewater, and solid waste authorities when implementing any
new process including semi-aqueous cleaning.
Semi-aqueous cleaning agents are usually classified as biodegradable and do not inhibit bacteria in water that is typically in
publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). The material safety data sheets (MSDS) or similar documents will contain infor-
mation specific to their products. Since local water regulations differ significantly, users should consult their local POTW
authorities.
Spills, as defined by local and national standards, should be reported to the appropriate authorities. MSDS contain informa-
tion about proper methods and equipment to contain and clean up spills.
156
11.6.2 Waste Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Agent Depending on the type of cleaning machine and semi-aqueous cleaning
agent used, there are two sources of waste organic semi-aqueous cleaning agent. The first is the semi-aqueous cleaning agent
tank itself. Ideally, the concentration of the flux residue in the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank will remain at an equilib-
rium value due to the dragout of semi-aqueous cleaning agent from the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank and replenishment
with fresh cleaning agent. If air knife efficiency at the exit of the semi-aqueous cleaning agent tank is too high, the concen-
tration of soil in the semi-aqueous cleaning agent could become too high and force the entire semi-aqueous cleaning agent
chamber to be replaced occasionally. The second, and by far the most likely source of spent semi-aqueous cleaning agent,
is either the organic layer in the decanter or the concentrate from water recycling processes. The exact disposal route will
depend on the flash point of the waste, the amount of hazardous material dissolved in the semi-aqueous cleaning agents, and
the water content. (In the USA, these limits are dictated by RCRA rules; in other countries, they are generally governed by
the legislation on the disposal of hazardous wastes.) Flux residues can contain limited quantities of lead and other heavy
metals. This is particularly true if aggressive fluxes are used. Since Type I semi-aqueous cleaning agents are pH neutral,
they do not remove heavy metals by chemical reaction. Some semi-aqueous cleaning agent vendors have established pro-
grams to pick up spent semi-aqueous cleaning agents for correct disposal or recycling. Such services may be geographically
limited in remote areas or in countries other than the nation of origin.
For semi-aqueous cleaning agents that are soluble in water, the option for separating the bulk of the spent solvent from the
rinse water in a decanter or coalescer is not available. The material in the wash tank is handled in the same manner that
water-insoluble materials are handled.
All cleaning processes are capable of removing solder balls, solder splash and other solder bits from the assemblies. The
cleaning equipment should be fitted with suitable filters to remove such solid metal particulate from the cleaning agent.
11.6.3 Rinse Water One of the true advantages of the semi-aqueous cleaning process is the way rinse water can be
handled. Again, there are two types of semi-aqueous cleaning agents: water-soluble and water-insoluble. The water-soluble
cleaning agents present a different challenge in that they do not separate from the rinse water by simple mechanical sepa-
ration. The water-soluble semi-aqueous cleaning agents (and any water-soluble components of non-water-soluble semi-
aqueous cleaning agents) are separated using more sophisticated mechanical or thermal techniques.
Theoretical calculations made on water-insoluble semi-aqueous cleaning agent processes show that the concentration of the
semi-aqueous cleaning agent is relatively small when the bulk of the material is decanted in a closed-loop emulsion decanter
system. The decanted semi-aqueous cleaning agent can be disposed of by the method described in the previous section. The
calculated concentrations are low enough that the dilute rinse waters from the process may be discharged to POTWs
depending on local regulations. All semi-aqueous cleaning agents are biodegradable when suspended or dissolved in water
and are non-inhibitory towards bacteria commonly found in the POTW facilities. Users should be aware that some nations
have a countrywide standard for wastewater to drain that has different limits on metals and other parameters for each
province.
11.6.3.1 Rinse Water from Water-Insoluble (Type I) Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Systems In the USA for example, water
from subsequent rinses in a rinse system with decanter can often be discharged directly to POTW facilities via a connected
facility sewer system. This should be verified with the local POTW authority or similar body in the nation of operation.
Water-insoluble semi-aqueous materials are considered by water regulators as oils and are usually regulated differently under
Fats, Oils, and Greases (FOG) rules than water-soluble semi-aqueous products. More information on this matter is covered
in the section on environmental controls (see Section 9).
11.6.3.2 Rinse Water from Water-Soluble (Type II) Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Systems Rinse water from water soluble
semi-aqueous cleaning systems will contain a higher level of organics. There are several ways to dispose of these rinse water
streams. If open loop disposal (discharging to drain or to POTW) is restricted or prohibited, evaporators could be used to
concentrate the waste streams. When the waste streams are concentrated, the water is removed and most or all of the water-
soluble cleaning agent and contaminant are usually left for alternative disposal. Also, open loop processes may generate
VOCs and HAPs, which are regulated emissions.
11.6.3.2.1 Rinse Water Discharge to Drain Direct discharge to drain is the easiest disposal process to set up. However,
environmental and regulatory considerations need to be taken in account. Facilities should first determine if their drains dis-
charge to a POTW or to some other destination. Facility drains not connected to POTWs generally go to septic systems or
perhaps Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells. In the United States, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regu-
lates the discharge of fluids or wastewater to subsurface UICs that may endanger underground sources of drinking water.
157
Facilities with UICs should contact their state UIC Program authorities to determine compliance requirements. Users in other
nations will have similar regulations to follow.
The waste streams from these systems will be mostly water with a little water-soluble cleaning agent and an even smaller
amount of contaminant from the parts cleaned. Water-soluble chemistry is biodegradable and has a neutral or slightly alka-
line pH. Usually a water permit will allow the small amount of water-soluble cleaning agent found in the waste stream to
go to drain. The amount of cleaning agent in the waste stream can be estimated by the amount of dragout and tested to verify
the levels. Some locations do not allow discharging to drain or limit the amount of liquid allowed to go to drain. For these
places, other options must be considered.
11.6.3.2.2 Rinse Water Discharge to POTW Rinse water from a water-soluble semi-aqueous cleaning system may or may
not be able to be discharged directly to a POTW. In many locations, the water-soluble materials will be regulated but will
be allowed to be discharged to a POTW with the payment of a small surcharge fee.
11.6.3.2.3 Evaporator to Waste Drums When an evaporator is used to concentrate wastewater streams, the users may
periodically empty the evaporator to waste drums or they may operate the evaporator continuously. The advantage of peri-
odically emptying the evaporator to waste drums is more used cleaning agent is contained in the evaporator and less is dis-
charged to the environment as a VOC. The disadvantage is more waste drums for disposal. This option slows down the
evaporation rate and uses a demister to help concentrate the used cleaning agent in the evaporator. The disadvantage of
slowing down the evaporation rate is the concentration of used cleaning agent in the chemical isolation section is increased
causing more used cleaning agent to reach the subsequent rinse stage through drag-out. If carbon/ion exchange beds are used
in subsequent water recycling processes, they will be depleted slightly faster because of the additional used cleaning agent
in the rinse stage that must be removed.
11.6.3.2.4 Steady State Evaporator When an evaporator is operated at a steady state, it can be run a long time without
emptying the evaporator to a waste drum. Waste streams from the chemical isolation or the first rinse section can be con-
centrated on a continuous basis.
The advantage of a steady state evaporator is it minimizes the amount of waste going to drums and it allows the evapora-
tor to run longer between shut down and cleanout. The disadvantage is the amount of VOC discharged to the environment
is higher. This option increases the evaporation rate of the evaporator and does not use a demister. The disadvantage of
increasing the evaporation rate and not using the demister is the amount of water used in the chemical isolation section is
increased. The advantage of this is the concentration of used cleaning agent in the chemical isolation section is lowered,
which lowers the amount of used cleaning agent in the subsequent rinse stage. This means if carbon/ion exchange beds are
used in the subsequent water recycling, they will last longer because they will not have to remove as much used cleaning
agent.
11.6.4 Water Recycling Several methods have been developed to remove the last traces of semi-aqueous cleaning agent
from the rinse water so it can be reused. The advantages of recycling water are reducing water consumption, eliminating
water disposal, and controlling incoming water quality. Users should examine such systems already in place for their pro-
posed application to ensure the system will work for them.
11.6.4.1 Carbon/Ion-Exchange Bed This option uses carbon/ion-exchange beds to remove the last traces of used clean-
ing agent. This option redirects the suction of the final rinse pump to the chemical isolation tank, pumps it through the car-
bon and ion-exchange beds, and discharges it to the final rinse stage via the spray nozzles. If this system is used to recycle
rinse water from a water-insoluble semi-aqueous system, a portion of the semi-aqueous agent that is dispersed in the rinse
water can be removed from the water by using an oil separator prior to the carbon beds
The carbon bed removes the organics in the liquid and the ion-exchange bed removes any ions. As carbon adsorption can
be almost molecule-size-specific, it may be necessary to have a series of carbon beds, each with a different quality of car-
bon. Incorrect adsorption may result in an accumulation of hygroscopic non-ionics that may have a deleterious effect on the
electrical qualities of the assemblies.
This process eliminates sending the waste stream to drum-up or to drain. The cost of the carbon/ion-exchange beds is high
and they will be exhausted frequently. This will probably be the most expensive option long term and therefore should be
considered as an intermediate or last step solution to the problem.
158
11.6.4.2 Reverse Osmosis A reverse osmosis (RO) system works similarly to the carbon/ion-exchange option except it
has a higher initial cost, but lower operating cost. It takes the waste stream and separates the cleaning agents and contami-
nants using membranes. Membranes are essentially extremely fine filters that are capable of separating materials on a
molecular level. is a diagram of how membranes work. Contaminated solutions are pumped under pressure through an ultra-
filter, then through membranes that are designed to allow small water molecules to pass and to restrict the flow of ions and
large molecules, such as those found in some semi-aqueous cleaning agents. Contaminants are concentrated in the reject
stream and reduced in the permeate stream.
Reverse osmosis theoretically should work for either Type I or Type II cleaning agents, since the water molecules are very
small in comparison with the organic solvent cleaning agent molecules. Type I cleaning agents have an advantage in that the
ROI concentrate (RO) concentrate (membrane reject stream) can be sent back to the emulsion decanter for separation and
reuse of the used cleaning agent. Users should be aware that such sophisticated designs are rare, with less than a dozen hav-
ing been built over the last decade.
11.6.4.2.1 Details of Reverse Osmosis Operation Well-chosen membranes can achieve better than 99% separation.
Membranes are selected based on compatibility and separation with a specific cleaning agent. A membrane that is suitable
with one semi-aqueous cleaning agent may not be compatible with other cleaning materials. Damaged membranes can be
expensive to replace. Semi-aqueous material suppliers can provide advice about the utility of this process for their semi-
aqueous cleaning agents.
With water-insoluble (Type I) materials, the reject stream is usually returned to the decanter on the cleaning machine. Once
in the decanter, the organic solvent will separate from the water. Working in tandem, the decanter and the hold tank for the
reverse osmosis system will naturally reach the same low equilibrium concentration. Typically, the optimum concentration
in both systems is two percent or lower. Some machine designs incorporated carbon adsorption/ion exchange columns in the
rinse loop to clean up the water from the first rinse tank and return it to the final rinse tank in an effort to minimize efflu-
ent to drain.
Reverse osmosis units are rarely used in Type II semi-aqueous processes due to compatibility problems with membranes. In
water-soluble (Type II) processes, these materials are disposed of in one of three ways. They may go to drain, an evapora-
tor, or a waste drum. See Section 9 for environmental regulations and considerations for these disposal practices.
11.6.5 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Since both water-soluble and water-insoluble types of semi-aqueous cleaning
agents are hydrocarbon based materials, they all are classified as volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Many countries are
extremely concerned about VOCs or their equivalents and have enacted legislation to limit VOC emissions.
The amount of VOC that is emitted is directly related to the vapor pressure of the solvent, the ventilation flow rate from the
equipment, the temperature of the cleaning solvent, and the temperature and concentration of cleaning agent in the rinse
sections. VOC emissions will be lowest when:
• Low vapor pressure solvents are used.
• The solvent temperature is minimized.
• The velocity and volume of ventilation are maintained as low as possible to provide safe and comfortable working condi-
tions around the cleaning machines.
• The temperature and concentration of material in the water in the rinse sections are as low as possible.
These VOC concerns must be balanced with cleaning requirements. The vapor pressures for most semi-aqueous cleaning
agents are much less than one mm of mercury, significantly lower than vapor pressures of common alcohols and other lower
boiling materials. The amount of semi-aqueous cleaning agent that escapes as VOC material is relatively small and variable.
The exact amount depends on the type and size of equipment and the operating conditions. The best method to determine
the loss due to evaporation is to consider the mass balance of the cleaning process. The simplest way to calculate the daily
loss of VOC material is to first calculate the daily weight of Cleaning Agent lost, then multiply that times the percent of
VOC classified material in the cleaning agent formulation, which can be obtained from the MSDS. The daily cleaning agent
loss is equal to the amount of semi-aqueous cleaning agent added to the cleaning machine minus the amount of cleaning
agent that leaves the machine through the decanter and in the rinse water.
Actual VOC Emitted, kg/day = %VOC in Cleaning Agent x Cleaning Agent Lost, kg/day
Where:
Cleaning Agent Lost as kg/day = A - B - C
159
Where:
A = Cleaning Agent Added as kg/day
B = Cleaning Agent Removed from Decanter, kg/day
C = Cleaning Agent Discharged in Rinse Water, kg/day
Where:
Cleaning Agent Discharged in Rinse Water, kg/day (C) = D x E
Where:
D = Cleaning Agent Concentration in Rinse Water, kg/liter
E = Rinse Water Volume Discharged, liters/day
The concentration of the semi-aqueous cleaning agent in the rinse water can be easily measured by determining the chemi-
cal oxygen demand (COD) of the rinse water. The COD is proportional to the concentration. For most semi-aqueous clean-
ing agents, the concentration of semi-aqueous cleaning agent, in parts per million, is determined by dividing the measured
COD value by roughly 2.5.
VOC emissions vary widely depending on the cleaning machine and the operating parameters. A typical in-line machine may
emit about half a kilogram of VOC per hour. VOC emissions can be reduced with standard VOC control technology includ-
ing demisters, dead zones in the exhaust lines, scrubbers and condensers. Users must carefully weigh the cost of VOC com-
pliance when considering cleaning process choices. Inorganic cleaning chemicals based on materials such as carbonates and
sulfates do not have a vapor pressure, so would not be a factor in the emission profile of a cleaner that uses them.
11.6.6 Greenhouse Effect Semi-aqueous cleaning agents do not emit significant quantities of greenhouse gases. Thus,
they are not regulated in the USA, but may be in other nations. Minimization of VOC emissions should also minimize any
potential concern. Users should be in compliance with any applicable regulations.
12 AQUEOUS CLEANING AGENTS, EQUIPMENT, AND PROCESS INTEGRATION

Aqueous cleaning of electrical/electronic parts and assemblies has been in use since the 1950s. Evolutionary refinements in
wash media, process conditions/techniques and application equipment yield a technology family that offers viable options to
many cleaning operations previously performed with ozone depleting chemicals (ODCs) or with other solvents or ‘‘non-
chemical’’ processes.
As with any other technology, aqueous cleaning has its limitations and peculiarities, which must be understood before pro-
cess selection is made. It must also be clear to the prospective user of this technology, that there is no universal cleaning
solution, but aqueous cleaning is capable of addressing a broad portion of electronic assembly and advance packaging
cleaning requirements demanded by current industry requirements.
Water is a better liquid for removing polar (ionizable) materials than organic based cleaning agents, but it is a poor medium
for most non-ionic materials, such as rosin, resins, and synthetic polymers found in many flux types. For removal of most
non-ionic soils, aqueous cleaning agents are engineered with a combination of solvents, activators, and functional additives.
In the assembly process major application areas consist of:
• removal of rosin, resin and no-clean solder flux residues after soldering.
• removal of water soluble organic acid solder flux after soldering.
• fine cleaning in preparation for coating, bonding and sealing.
• cleaning of screens, stencils, soldering machine palettes, and other application tools.
12.1 Scope This scope of the aqueous section addresses aqueous cleaning agents, aqueous cleaning machines, and pro-
cess integration when cleaning electrical/electronic assemblies, packages, components and application tools after soldering.
12.2 Purpose The content of this text is intended to provide a basic understanding of aqueous cleaning agents, cleaning
equipment, and process integration and to serve as a guide to users or prospective users of aqueous cleaning technology,
allowing selection or improvement of aqueous cleaning processes.
160
12.3.1 Aqueous Cleaning A cleaning process that uses an aqueous medium, consisting of more than one half of water for
washing, and water for subsequent rinsing.
12.3.2 Wash or Washing The primary cleaning operation that removes undesirable impurities (contaminants) from sur-
faces by chemical and physical effects.
12.3.3 Rinse or Rinsing A cleaning operation (usually following the wash step) where water replaces-via a dilution
mode-any residual contamination.
12.3.4 Drying The process of removing surface and/or absorbed water from the washed and rinsed parts.
12.3.5 Gross Drying The removal of surface water.
12.3.6 Defluxing (Flux Removal or Post Solder Cleaning) The cleaning process designed to remove solder flux and
by-products. Other objectives are removal of process residues and materials used as production aides, such as water soluble
masks. Impurities left by board or component fabrication processes or other operations may or may not be removed by this
process.
12.3.7 Fine Cleaning A final cleaning step that removes contaminants introduced after defluxing and/or improves the
degree of surface cleanliness achieved by defluxing or other previous cleaning operations. Fine cleaning may be needed to
achieve the required level of contamination to improve conformal coating adhesion and/or for other post solder assembly
processes.
12.3.8 Screen and Stencil Cleaning The process of removing unused solder paste/flux from application tools to maintain
them in an acceptable condition for re-use.
12.3.9 Semi-Aqueous Cleaning A cleaning process that uses undiluted organic solvents for washing and water for
rinsing.
12.3.10 Organic Solvent Cleaning A cleaning process that uses organic solvent for washing and rinsing. Organic solvents
are often referred to ‘‘solvents.’’
12.3.11 Functional Additives Compounds which do not react chemically with solder flux and other process residues.
These additives may serve to lower surface tension, assist in the removal of water insoluble residues, exercise foam control,
or inhibit wash medium attack on construction materials.
12.3.12 Reactive Additives or Reactants Water soluble chemical compounds which react chemically with the contami-
nants that are to be removed by the wash medium. Examples are chelating agents, saponifiers, sequestration or chemical
neutralizers, etc.
12.3.13 Organic Solvent Emulsions in Aqueous Media Uniform dispersions of organic solvents in water.
12.3.14 Manual Cleaning A cleaning step where parts are processed manually by an operator.
12.3.15 Batch Cleaning The cleaning of multiple parts or batches of parts as a group where process cycle times are
controlled.
12.3.16 In-Line Cleaning The cleaning method where parts are processed continuously on a conveyor and process cycle
time is controlled by the conveyor speed.
161
12.3.17 Saponification The hydrolysis of an ester under basic conditions to form an alcohol and the salt of a carboxylic
acid.
12.3.18 pH A measure of the acidity or basicity of a solution. Solutions with a pH less than 7 are said to be acidic and
solutions with a pH greater than 7 are said to be basic or alkaline.
12.4 Aqueous Cleaning Background Aqueous solutions have been used since the 1960s to remove rosin soils, which
were the common flux of that time period. Today, flux technologies are engineered to the application need. No-clean fluxes
and fluxes used with lead-free solders are more complex compositions, and commonly create a more difficult to clean flux
residue. The market offers prospective users a selection of many different cleaning agent formulations that are effective at
removing the large range of solder materials used in building integrated circuit technologies.
12.4.1 History After the Montreal Protocol was signed in September, 1988, Aqueous cleaning agents (organic and inor-
ganic based) rapidly advanced and even became the leading choice to replace CFC materials. The use of water, rather than
solvents, to clean assemblies brought advantages in the areas of cleaning, worker safety and the environment.
Since 1988, not only have the aqueous chemistries evolved, but also the fluxes and component geometries have advanced
tremendously. Today, these advanced packages create many challenges in the cleaning world. It is standard practice for
aqueous cleaning agents to effectively remove residues underneath devices with less than 10 mil standoffs, and, with very
well-controlled defluxing processes, often less than 2 mil. Assemblies are populated with hundreds of microelectronic
devices, tight spacing between components. The geometric challenges combined with the evolution in flux formulations,
including both lead and lead free, have demanded more attention to the cleaning process. While modern flux residues
improve the printing and soldering process, they tend to be more difficult to clean and can create reliability issues if left
behind.
With the exception of ozone depletion, environmental issues and worker safety were not nearly as fully understood or regu-
lated as they are today. Volatile organic components (VOCs) regulations, for example, are a focal point in states like Cali-
fornia and New Jersey. Cleaning agent manufacturers are addressing both the cleaning challenges as well as the environ-
mental concerns associated with control of air emissions and waste water management. While the electronic industry’s
cleaning needs continue to become significantly more challenging and complex over the last few decades, modern cleaning
technologies are successfully meeting process cleaning needs. Cleaning agent suppliers continue to research, experiment and
develop new cleaning agent designs. Many papers have been written and/or published regarding the cleaning needs for micro
devices with current residues, including lead free. We have also witnessed important improvements in the efficacy of clean-
ing equipment. Waste treatment and close-looping are fairly well understood technologies at this point in time.
Since 1988, available aqueous cleaning agents successfully remove a wide range of residues. Although, many of the clean-
ing agent manufacturer’s today were not active in the early stages of aqueous cleaning, they have provided significant
research and data to continue to meet the ongoing evolution of technology.
12.4.2 Overview of Aqueous Processing The purpose of cleaning is to remove foreign materials from part surfaces in
order to avoid detrimental effects on product performance and appearance. Screens and stencils are cleaned to maintain them
in an optimum condition for re-use.
The degree of cleanliness that is required may vary with product type and performance needs. Screens and stencils are usu-
ally cleaned to a ‘‘visually clean’’ condition. Part cleaning must be capable of removing invisible and visible contaminants,
such as ionic materials, and residues that could interfere with wetting and bonding. For electronic assemblies, a ‘‘visually
clean’’ appearance may be satisfactory for cosmetic criteria, but may not be satisfactory to assure product performance.
Hence semi-quantitative and quantitative tests are typically employed to verify that the cleaning process objectives are met.
While cleaning to a ‘‘set of performance requirements’’ is a primary objective, other objectives must also be set and
achieved. The cleaning process must not damage the parts cleaned and cleaning must be accomplished in a practical and
cost effective way. The process employed must also be safe to operators and be environmentally compatible.
Water alone can be a very safe material that will not damage most parts used in electronics assembly processes. Water does
not pose any problems as far as safety and health aspects are concerned. Using DI water with low ionics can in some cases
affect surfaces. Furthermore, water needs to be removed from the parts after cleaning, as presence of moisture may inter-
fere with the electrical performance. A drying step must be part of an aqueous cleaning process. As in all cleaning processes,
parts need to be checked for compatibility and susceptibility to rinsing. The design should be checked to ensure it will be
162
dry enough for proper conformal coating, if required. Allowance must be made for appropriate safety and health issues (see
Section 9).
When choosing a cleaning process, many variables must be considered. Process volume, labor, space requirement, wash/
rinse media, agitation method, application conditions and equipment features must all be taken into account.
In summary, the objectives for the cleaning process design are the removal of undesirable materials (process residues) from
part surfaces, without damaging the product, by a practical, cost effective, safe and environmentally friendly method.
12.4.3 Process Map of Aqueous Processes Numerous cleaning steps are completed during the manufacturing of an
electronic assembly, even if it is a ‘‘no-clean’’ process. A traditional cleaning process usually involves cleaning after wave
soldering and again after reflow soldering. However, in a traditional ‘‘no-clean’’ assembly process, cleaning post soldering
is not part of manufacturing steps. The traditional ‘no-clean’’ manufacturers frequently incorporate an aqueous cleaning pro-
cess for misprint, manual soldering (including rework), assembly tooling (Solder pallet, conveyor finger, screen and stencil)
and occasional cleaning prior to conformal coating. Below is a visual process map of the aqueous cleaning processes.
1. Electronic Assembly
Post Soldering
2. Thru-Hole Cleaning
8. Fine Cleaning
Before Conformal
Coating
3. SMT Cleaning
Post Solder Assembly
Cleaning Processes
7. Screen and
Stencil Cleaning
4. Misprint Cleaning
6. Solder Pallet/Conveyor
Finger Cleaning
5. Manual Soldering
IPC-65b-12-1
Figure 12-1 Post Solder Assembly Cleaning Processes
12.5 Aqueous Cleaning Agent Technology Electronic assembly aqueous cleaning materials are designed to remove a
broad array of flux technologies including organic acid, rosin, resin, and polymeric structures from mixed technology circuit
boards. The design challenge for aqueous engineered cleaning agents is to formulate a matrix of materials that work in syn-
ergy to remove both ionic and non-ionic contaminants. Flux formulations are very different based on their specific design
criteria. For this reason various cleaning agents will ‘‘match up’’ better with one flux or another and this range of perfor-
mance is most pronounced on new, leading edge flux materials. To address this challenge, water being the universal solvent,
combines with various materials to clean this broad spectrum of soils. The second challenge is to design aqueous cleaning
agents that are compatible with the product hardware. The final challenge is to design aqueous cleaning agents around vari-
ous cleaning equipment designs. To achieve best in class aqueous cleaning agents, those skilled in the art start with a set of
163
building blocks centered on solvency, activation, wetting, corrosion inhibition, and foam control. The end results are mate-
rial sets that clean the most challenging electronic assemblies and advanced packages.
12.5.1 Solvency Dissolution is the process by which the soil, typically a solid, forms a homogenous mixture with the
aqueous cleaning agent. Non-polar rosin, resin and synthetic polymers are non-soluble in water. To overcome this limitation,
solvating materials that dissolve the common residue types are added to the aqueous composition. Water also plays an
important role in dissolving polar ionic salts. The unique combination of water with additives proves to be highly effective
in dissolving both non-polar and polar soils.
Thermal effects in the form of wash temperature improve the solvency rate. With increased wash temperature, the flux resi-
due crystal formation starts to become fluid and soft. The properties of solvating materials added to the aqueous wash solu-
tion allow the softened flux to dissolve into the aqueous cleaning agent.
The user should be aware of inverse temperature solubility. As noted, soil solubility increases as the operating temperature
of the cleaning agent formulation is raised, however, at some point the solubility starts to drop off. This behavior is called
reaching the inverse solubility coefficient, which explains why many formulations operate best at ca. 60°C (140°F]. Today’s
cleaning agent formulators must keep this in mind when designing cleaning agents for the higher soldering temperatures and
resultant difficult residues from lead-free fluxes and pastes.
The user may also note that the efficiency of the cleaning bath may show some increased efficiency on initial process runs
with a fresh bath of chemistry. This seemingly paradoxical effect is due to the presence of soils in the wash bath or tank;
the dissolved soils can have a solvency effect, in essence enhancing the ‘‘like dissolves like’’ phenomenon. A the same time,
bath monitoring is required to avoid very high levels of soils.
12.5.2 Activators (Reactants) Traditional aqueous cleaning agents were commonly known as ‘‘saponifiers.’’ Saponifica-
tion is the hydrolysis of the flux residue with an alkaline source. Acid based reactions dictate the cleaning rate and flux dis-
solution and loading within the aqueous cleaning agent.
As previously discussed, water only is not a good cleaning agent for rosin, resin, and synthetic polymers. Activators help
to break the flux crystalline structure. The value comes from engineering the aqueous cleaning agent with multiple syner-
gistic properties that facilitate dissolution while not causing material compatibility concerns. The alkaline nature of activa-
tors can react with soft metals, laminates, coatings, inks, and some plastics. To overcome these negative tendencies, other
material sets can be added to the cleaning agent to passivate and protect against corrosion.
Activators are also used to help form a stable wash solution and increase bath life. Flux residues are acidic. Adding acid
flux to the wash solution can drive the wash bath to the acid range. This can cause the non-volatile flux soils to drop out
and redeposit back onto the surface of the part during rinsing. When engineering the wash chemistry, activators can be
reacted with weak acids to buffer the aqueous cleaning solution. This beneficial property prevents the pH of the wash chem-
istry from dramatically shifting when flux is loaded into the wash bath. This important property provides longer wash bath
life and prevents flux solids from re-depositing back onto the surface during the rinse and dry processing steps.
12.5.3 Functional Additives Modern cleaning agents perform multiple functions during the process of removing flux resi-
dues from the circuit assembly. This functionality is possible by adding various materials to the cleaning agent during the
development process. These additives are used to reduce surface tension, improve wetting, protect metallic alloys from oxi-
dation, prevent foaming, and emulsify materials used within the cleaning agent formulation. Additives can add highly ben-
eficial properties to the cleaning agent, and in many respects, form the basis for differentiating the products offered by vari-
ous suppliers.
12.5.4 Surface Tension Leading edge circuit assemblies are populated with low gap components, which increase surface
density. Component miniaturization reduces the surface area within and under low or zero standoff parts. In order for the
cleaning solution to penetrate these highly constricted areas, a fluid can be designed to improve wetting and penetration.
Surface active agents reduce surface tension of water by absorbing at the liquid-surface interface. Surface acting agents
maintain a favorable contact with both hydrophilic and hydrophobic surface particles. By doing so, the surface tension of
the water droplet is reduced, allowing improved penetration under low gaps.
12.5.5 Viscosity Viscosity is a measure of fluid resistance. To penetrate and flow under low clearance components, the
viscosity of the cleaning composition must be low. This reduces the internal fluid friction resistance for penetrating under
components.
164
The relationship between viscosity, surface tension and density can be illustrated by the wetting index:
Density x 1000/[surface tension x viscosity] = wetting index, expressed in simple one to three digit numbers. The follow-
ing table illustrates the relationship between pure water, saponifier, 2-propanol and the 2-propanol/water (75/25 v/v) mixture
used for ionic measurement. The values for water and 2-propanol were taken from standard handbooks, while the mixture
values were determined in an analytical laboratory. The detergent represents a 6% commercial mono-ethanolamine (MEA)
saponifier solution.
Table 12-1 illustrates that an engineered cleaning agent improves wetting and aids in cleaning with low stand-off compo-
nents.
Table 12-1 Cleaning Agents

Liquid Density Liquid Viscosity Surface Tension
Cleaning Agent @ 25°C (g/cc) (centipoises) (dynes/cm) Wetting Index
Engineered Aqueous Cleaning Agent 0.998 1.08 29.7 31
2-Propanol 0.785 2.4 21.7 15
Water 0.997 1.00 72.8 14
2-Propanol/Water (75/25 v/v) 0.856 26.8 3.44 9
Key: Higher Wetting Index = better wetting. (The table illustrates value of washing and rinsing with formulations of identical or near identical wetting properties
to achieve best removal of residues and washing formulation.
12.5.6 Corrosion Inhibition Leading edge circuit assemblies are built with a wide range of components with varying
alloys. Solder alloys used for electronic interconnections are designed with different alloys for differing applications. Com-
mon alloys include tin, lead, copper, bismuth, indium, silver and others. In addition to solder alloys, components are con-
structed with a wide range of plating metals and alloys. Additives can be added to the aqueous cleaning agent to inhibit or
control the rate of oxidation on metallic surfaces.
Alkaline materials may react with different metal types at different rates dependent on the alkalinity source, the level of
alkalinity in the cleaning bath, wash temperature, and exposure time. To decrease the corrosion rate of a metal or alloy, cor-
rosion inhibitors form a thin film on the metallic surfaces to stop access of the alkaline activator from reacting with alloy.
The suitability of corrosion inhibitors depends on many factors, from the material of the system they have to act in, to the
nature of the aqueous cleaning agent design and operating temperature.
Alkaline agents used in aqueous cleaning agents may react with some alloys and protective coatings present on the circuit
assembly. There are newer technologies with lower levels of alkalinity (such as pH neutral) which may improve this condi-
tion. The interaction of cleaning agents with these alloys results in an appearance change, most notably part discoloration.
Metallic alloys have specific discoloration issues:
• Tin-Lead Solder: Alkaline uninhibited agents can in some cases remove the soft lead skin layer of the solder joint that
progressively gets worse with the level of alkaline agents present in the wash bath, wash bath temperature and exposure
time. The effects range from dulling solder joint appearances, to bluish, grey and blackish appearances.
• Lead-Free Solder: Alkaline agents exhibit a less pronounced effect on the high lead alloys but may, in some cases, result
in a dull and grainy appearance.
• Aluminum (White Metals): Aluminum discoloration occurs when sensitive aluminum alloys including copper contain-
ing 2000 series and zinc containing 7000 series are adversely affected by the cleaning process. Alkaline agents may react
with aluminum alloys with the appearance dulling upon prolonged exposure. Longer exposure results in a white, spotty,
bright orange and dull grey appearance, wash bath temperature, and exposure time.
• Copper/Brass (Yellow Metals): Copper discoloration occurs when any of the yellow metals, including copper, brass,
bronze, or beryllium copper darkens or changes color during the cleaning process as a result of metal oxidation or tarnish.
The changes are more evident on highly polished surfaces than on rough surfaces. Some alkaline cleaning agents have a
greater tendency to promote tarnish of yellow metals.
The potential risk from exposing electronic components to the aqueous cleaning solution can be understood by referencing
Pourbaix diagrams. The potential/pH diagram maps out possible stable phases for a specific alloy. Predominant ion bound-
aries are represented by lines. Pourbaix diagrams identify regions of immunity, corrosion, and passivity for the selected alloy.
12.5.7 Defoaming Defoaming agents are needed in some process conditions to reduce or hinder the formation of foam.
High energy cleaning machines sheer and turn over the cleaning liquid at a rapid rate. One partial contributor to foam is that
165
during this turbulent process, the cleaning liquid has a tendency to entrap microscopic air pockets. On the other hand, some
chemical raw materials inherently have a tendency to foam more than others. Foam can cause significant processing issues
such as cavitating pumps, trigger high level conditions, reduced pressure, over flows, and poor cleaning. Excessive foam
may also result in inefficient rinsing, resulting in undesirable levels of flux residue and cleaning agent residue.
12.6 Aqueous Cleaning Product Designs In aqueous post solder cleaning, the wash media is solely water or water plus
a portion of organic and inorganic raw materials. By IPC definition when an additive is employed in aqueous cleaning, at
least 50% of the wash system is water; in most cases the level of water exceeds 80% of the wash bath composition. The use
of water as the primary ingredient in defluxing takes advantage of the ready solubility of ionic species in water. Ionic resi-
dues are a contributor to electrochemical failures.
Water without additives will not permit the removal of rosin and no-clean based flux residues. While water alone is often
satisfactory for removing organic acid (water soluble) fluxes, additives may be required when white residues, non-polar,
non-ionic soils or tight spacings are encountered. Excessive foam is a fairly common problem when using water soluble
fluxes, as these flux types contain small levels of surfactants. This situation can often be controlled with the addition of a
de-foaming agent.
Unlike the wash media, only DI (deionized)-water without chemical additives should normally be used for rinsing electronic
circuit boards. The role of the rinse water is to remove residues without leaving a residue of its own. Any additives or salts
in the rinse water work against this purpose. Similarly, depending on the hardness of the water (i.e., Ca2SO4 - which is a
‘‘salt’’) in the rinse water, ionic residues are likely to be left on the boards after drying. Thus, good quality deionized water
is the preferred rinse medium.
12.6.1 Matching the Cleaning Agent to the Soil Engineered cleaning agents are critically important in removing rosin,
no-clean and organic acid based flux residues. The wide span of flux types used to assemble circuit designs and packages
result in residues with different material properties. Flux residues contain a large number of molecules requiring cleaning
agents that match up with the properties of the soil, in other words like dissolves like. With the wide range of flux pack-
ages in use today, aqueous cleaning agents are designed with different properties that attract and dissolve the specific flux
residue(s) in question. As such, no one cleaning agent is best for each of the flux residues currently used by assemblers.
Most modern cleaning agents are capable of removing a wide variety of flux residues.
12.6.2 Pure De-Ionized Water (DI-Water) Water without any additives is used for the removal of residues resulting from
water soluble fluxes, particulate, and ionic contaminants. These fluxes have been designed for cleaning with water alone.
However, it is extremely important that all residues be completely removed. The very aggressive nature of water soluble
fluxes can result in corrosion in a short period of time unless the residues are completely removed. Every effort must be
made to ensure that residues are removed from areas with constricted spaces, such as under components. The relatively high
surface tension of water can make flux removal challenging for parts with tight spacing or low standoffs. For many opera-
tions, the use of water without additives yields parts with the required level of cleanliness. Success depends on the nature
of the part itself, the effectiveness of the equipment and minimization of the period between soldering and cleaning. Wash
temperatures used are generally in the 50° to 65°C (122° to 150°F] range.
12.6.3 Aqueous Neutral pH neutral chemistries for stencil cleaning processes have been in existence for many years and
have continued to evolve ever since. pH neutral chemistries (pH levels of 7.0 ± 0.50) for de-fluxing were recently intro-
duced in an effort to improve material compatibility and green material properties. With regards to their cleaning effective-
ness, the products work on soils that match up to the cleaning agent using similar process conditions and concentration lev-
els (i.e., 5-15%), when compared to their alkaline counterparts. Their cleaning mechanism differs from the traditional acid
base reaction which is common for alkaline cleaning agents. pH neutral cleaning chemistries rather rely on pathways such
as chelation and solvency. Cleaning performance for the pastes and fluxes of interest has to be confirmed as with every ini-
tial cleaning evaluation. The various neutral technologies available today employ a variety of techniques to minimize the
need for substantial alkalinity packages while accomplishing the required cleaning tasks.
Solutions with a pH less than 7 are said to be acidic and solutions with a pH greater than 7 are said to be basic or alkaline.
As users begin to consider the pH level of current or future cleaning agents they should keep in mind the following
differences:
• pH neutral formulations may offer a wider process window with sensitive materials and precious metals. The latter con-
cerns has been witnessed with alkaline products in the past, and may be overcome with the elimination or reduction of
alkaline raw materials.
166
• pH neutral formulations may improve the waste water management system, as it eliminates waste water neutralization. In
regards to pH neutral cleaning agents that rely on chelation mechanisms, the cleaning agent may complex heavy metals.
Please refer to Section 9 for limits of metals in waste water streams. Users are encouraged to check their regulations and
the buffer system of pH neutral and alkaline product technologies respectively, as contamination can affect the pH level of
the cleaning agent during the process.
Given the success of alkaline defluxing media, pH neutral cleaning agents represent a different approach toward assembly
cleaning. Much is yet to be learned regarding their effectiveness on tin-lead and lead-free no-clean and rosin based flux resi-
dues, bath life, and process reliability.
12.6.4 Saponified Cleaning Agents Alkaline cleaning agents have been used for decades. The original technology was
labeled ‘‘saponifier cleaners’’ While saponifier cleaners were renowned for effective removal RMA and OA soils, they
exhibited very short bath life, high pH and routine attack on solder finishes. The limitations of these saponifier cleaners lead
to the introduction of semi-aqueous cleaning agents as replacements for CFCs in the early 1990s. However, a high level of
process control is often associated with processes designed around semi-aqueous cleaning agents. Modern aqueous products
were developed in response to demands for a simpler, more rugged, more readily-controlled process.
The modern aqueous materials were themselves alkaline materials. However in general these new materials addressed the
two principal concerns of those old saponifier cleaners:
• Short bath life with better solvency packages.
• Solder attack through either mild activation or inhibition to prevent attack.
The early modern aqueous materials entered the market before the invention of no clean soldering, and were designed for
the removal of older RMA type soils. Their pH ranges were typically 9 or 10, with older technology platforms continuing
at the 11 or 12 ranges. These modern aqueous cleaners have seen vast innovation and improvement from many suppliers
throughout the world.
These innovations have tended to focus on several key issues:
• Longer bath life.
• Better compatibility with solder and all materials of construction.
• Good performance on the ever expanding universe of solder and flux technology: no clean, lead free, halogen free, halide
free.
• Lower cost of ownership.
These alkaline technology platforms have proven robust in many if not most manufacturing applications.
In general cleaning agents offer various reactivity levels, depending on application and processes used. Traditional saponi-
fication cleaning agents effectively clean flux residues using a combination of weak bases, solvency and functional addi-
tives. The reactivity rests in these cases solely on level of the alkaline cleaning agent present. The alkaline source may be
organic or inorganic in nature. Several approaches can be used to build saponified aqueous electronic assembly cleaning
agents. For the sake of clarity, three classifications will be discussed:
• Aqueous high reactivity: Product contains high levels of an alkaline base (Note: there are several alkaline structures
commonly used by formulators) that saponify the flux residue to improve rate of soil removal. The benefits of highly
saponified aqueous cleaning fluids are lower operating concentration and aggressive interaction with rosin, resin, and weak
organic acids. The tradeoffs of highly saponified aqueous cleaning fluids are potentially increased materials compatibility
problems, short bath life, and lower effectiveness on high molecular resins and polymers used in many of the new flux
designs.
• Aqueous mild reactivity: Product drives with both solvent and saponification. Mild reactivity formulation designs
improve rate using higher solvency combined with reactivity. The benefits of mild reactivity aqueous cleaning fluids are
improved material compatibility, longer bath life, and greater effectiveness on resin and polymer based flux residues. The
tradeoffs are lower bath life and lower effectiveness on higher molecular weight resins and polymers used in lead-free flux
compositions.
• Aqueous low reactivity: Product drives with solvency combined with low saponification levels. Low reactivity formu-
lation designs improve rate using high solvency with solubility parameters closely matched to rosin, resin, and polymers
compounds used in many flux residue compositions. The benefits of low reactivity aqueous cleaning fluids are long bath
life, good material compatibility, and high effectiveness on both eutectic and Pb-free flux residues. Aqueous low reactiv-
ity provides best in class technology due to high solvating power and excellent material compatibility.
167
12.6.5 Organic Solvent Emulsions in Water This cleaning technology uses a completely non-miscible organic solvent in
the form of an emulsion in water. Solvent emulsions are capable of removing rosin and other non-polar materials, while the
aqueous portion dissolves water soluble residues.
In this process, controlled amounts of the organic solvent used are mixed with water in the wash chamber and an ‘‘emul-
sion’’ of fine dispersed solvent droplets in the water is formed in the wash reservoir and sprayed onto the parts to be cleaned.
During the wash cycle, the sprayed solvent/water mixture that drains back into the wash reservoir is continuously
emulsified.
Overall, this process concept yields the benefits from organic solvent cleaning combined with the inherent benefits from
water cleaning. The relatively higher boiling points and lower vapor pressures of the organic solvents used minimize VOC
emissions. The small amounts of organic solvents in an aqueous medium also do not normally present a fire or explosion
hazard.
12.7 Aqueous Cleaning Agent Designs to Support Specific Processes The process cleaning rate theorem holds that the
static rate (solubility of the residue in the cleaning agent) plus the dynamic rate (thermal and mechanical energy) equals the
process cleaning rate. The static cleaning rate represents the cohesive energy properties of cleaning agent for the residue.
Soils with similar solubility parameters will be miscible and dissolve in cleaning agents whose solubility parameters are not
too different from their own. The basic principle follows Hildebrand and Scott (1950) theorem ‘‘like dissolves like.’’ Clean-
ing agents that do not match up to the soil do not usually clean the soil even when high mechanical forces are applied.
12.7.1 Bench-top Cleaning Low volume operations such as prototype processing or occasional touch-up soldering, sol-
der flux removal may be accomplished either in small tanks or by wet brushing. For such operations, purified or softened
water should be used for washing and deionized water for rinsing. Heating the water above room temperature up to 50°C
(122°F] will be helpful. Cleaning with water containing additives should be avoided, as manual rinsing may not be able to
completely remove the additives.
12.7.1.1 Brush Water combined with organic solvents may be used for brush cleaning rework applications. IPA/Water has
been commonly used at the bench. Blending a combination of organic solvents with cohesive energy parameters closely
matched to flux residue types and water makes for an adequate cleaning agent when using brushing action.
12.7.1.2 Wipes Saturated wipes are used for process and maintenance cleaning needs. Similar to brush cleaning, water
combined with organic solvents may be used for stencil cleaning, reflow oven cleaning, pallet cleaning, machine cleaning,
and other maintenance applications.
12.7.2 Stencil Cleaning Stencil cleaning has evolved to meet high value surface mount technology cleaning requirements.
The stencil cleaning process is a multi-dimension cleaning process used for cleaning stencils (solder paste and SMT adhe-
sives), misprinted SMT circuit cards, double-sided misprint of both uncured and reflowed solder paste. Table 12-2 lists the
stencil cleaning agent product designs.
Table 12-2 Stencil Cleaning Agent Designs

Cleaning Agent Design Technology Base pH Rinse Mechanical Design Soils
Uncured Solder Paste,
With fresh
Ultrasonic, and SMT Adhesive, and
Aqueous with no rinse Water + Solvent(s) Neutral cleaner or
Spray-in-Air some reflowed flux
water
residues
Water + Inorganic +
Ultrasonic, and
Aqueous with rinse Solvents + Functional Alkaline DI-Water Uncured Solder Paste
Spray-in-Air
Additives
Water + Activator + Uncured Solder Paste
Ultrasonic and
Aqueous with rinse Solvent + Functional Alkaline DI-Water and Reflowed Flux
Spray-in-Air
Additives Residue
12.7.2.1 Stencil Cleaning using an Aqueous-Base with no-rinse Water combined with organic solvent levels provides a
functional cleaning agent for removing uncured solder paste from stencils and misprinted PCBs.
12.7.2.2 Stencil Cleaning Using Aqueous-Base with Rinse Aqueous based cleaning agents engineered with mild alka-
line sources and functional additives are very effective at removing uncured solder paste, but may lack the performance
characteristics needed to remove uncured SMT adhesive and reflowed solder paste.
168
12.7.2.3 Stencil Cleaning Using Aqueous-Base for Removing Uncured Solder Paste and Chip Bonder Adhesive Water
combined with activators, organic solvents and functional additives provides a multi-functional cleaning agent for removing
principally uncured solder paste and SMT adhesives. The organic solvent base is partially soluble with water. The partially
soluble organic solvent wets non-polar adhesives and some flux residues that are not soluble in water with no additives.
Water is carrying solvent that helps flush away unwanted residue.
12.7.3 Aqueous-Base for Removing Uncured Solder Paste and Double-Sided Misprints For applications that require
multi-functional cleaning capabilities for removing uncured solder paste, uncured SMT adhesives, and reflowed flux resi-
dues, an engineered cleaning agent designed with those features is needed.
12.7.4 Batch Cleaning Batch process equipment typically use spray-in-air and immersion designs. Aqueous cleaning
agents are engineered with different functional additives based on the soil, equipment types, materials compatibility, and
environmental concerns. Material compatibility is a concern in batch processing since longer wash times are needed to clean
the assembly. In some cases, sump side inhibitors are used to address material compatibility concerns
12.7.5 Immersion Ultrasonic Various aqueous cleaning agent product designs are available for immersion ultrasonic
cleaning processes. The behavior of a given cleaning agent in an ultrasonic system is often very different than that of the
same cleaning agent at the same temperature, but using a different cleaning force, such as spray in air. Effective cleaning is
also a function of power density and frequency used in the equipment. While evaluating the cleaning agent in the cleaning
process is always important, it is particularly important to test the cleaning agent in using the anticipated ultrasonic param-
eters. The objective is to use a cleaning agent that achieves effective cleaning consistency during the process cycle but avoids
surface erosion. The user should focus on performance and rinsability characteristics.
The cleaning agent must be designed in such a manner that cleaning will be effective near the optimal temperature for effec-
tiveness of the ultrasonics. Below the optimal temperature, ultrasonic cavitation is impeded by physical properties includ-
ing the density of the cleaning agent. Above the optimal temperature, the level of vapor in the cavitation bubbles increases
to the point that effective implosion is impeded; this impedes cleaning effectiveness.
12.7.5.1 Spray-Under-Immersion Aqueous cleaning agents designed for spray-under-immersion are similar to ultrasonic
designs. The cleaning equipment heavily influences the cleaning agent design.
12.7.6 Immersion Centrifugal The centrifugal force accelerates the cleaning agent over the parts surface. For process
consistency, the cleaning agent must be consistently applied. The unique process introduces centrifugal forces to assist in
the cleaning steps. Apart from the drawback of throughput, this process achieves high cleanliness levels and can specifically
excel at under component cleaning.
12.7.7 Spray-in-Air (Single or Multiple Chambers) Aqueous cleaning agents designed for batch rackable and planar
cleaning machines are commonly engineered with functional additives based on the soil, materials compatibility, and envi-
ronmental concerns. Batch processes typically require longer wash cycle times due to shadowing and less direct fluid force.
Material compatibility is a critical aqueous cleaning agent design consideration. Functional additives may also be used to
prevent and eliminate foaming concerns.
12.7.7.1 Inline Spray-in-Air Aqueous cleaning agents designed for inline spray-in-air process vary widely. The design
objective is to engineer cleaning agents that work on a wide range of flux residue soil types. As the functional density of
devices and systems increases, the role of the aqueous cleaning agent becomes more important and difficult to obtain. To
achieve the process need, aqueous cleaning agents are designed with solvating materials to dissolve the soil, weak base, and
if needed, additives to wet, defoam, and inhibit corrosion and attack to the circuit assembly’s components. As circuit designs
increase in complexity, the functionality of the cleaning agent increases in importance.
12.7.7.2 Inline Spray-Under-Immersion The design of spray under immersion aqueous cleaning agents is similar to those
used for batch cleaning processes. The inline process creates a greater need to remove the soil in a short time period and
effectively remove the soil in the absence of strong mechanical forces.
12.7.8 Maintenance Cleaning Aqueous cleaning agents are needed to clean process materials used at various stages of
the assembly process. Process equipment, pallets and fixtures must be cleaned periodically.
12.7.9 Wave Solder Finger Cleaning Flux residues build up and dry on wave solder machine fingers. Aqueous based fin-
ger cleaning agents are commonly used to clean fingers when processing with water soluble fluxes. Aqueous based clean-
ing agents can also be a good match when rosin and no-clean fluxes.
169
12.7.9.1 Wave, Reflow, and Ventilation Filter Cleaning Filters collect flux soils and need to be cleaned on a periodic
basis. Aqueous cleaning agents engineered for this application remove heavy flux build-up. The aqueous cleaning agents
must be engineered to support cleaning equipment and soil types.
12.7.9.2 Pallet Cleaning Aqueous cleaning agents are highly effective at cleaning flux deposits on wave solder pallets.
Similar to other process designs, the aqueous cleaning agent must be able to support cleaning equipment and soil types.
12.7.10 Aqueous Cleaning Machines Electronic assembly cleaning needs are based on the application, customer, rework,
and overall steps in the process. Cleaning is required based on reliability and functionality concerns over the life of the end
product. Cleaning equipment designs are based on the application need. The application need can result from bench level
cleaning, batch cleaning, and high production continuous cleaning processes.
12.7.11 Batch Cleaning Machines Batch cleaning equipment represents the largest global installed electronic assembly
cleaning processes and encompasses several specific cleaning technologies and throughput capabilities. Batch cleaning
machines have historically been considered suitable in high product mix environments. Various spray-in-air, spray-under
immersion, ultrasonic, and centrifugal formats represent virtually all modern automated defluxing techniques and are all
available in batch formats. The selection of batch or other cleaning machine formats is based on a set of predictable con-
siderations such as throughput requirements, specific chemical selections, resource availability (water, power, space), and
contextual surroundings such as noise, required peripheral equipment, odor, etc.
12.7.12 Batch Immersion Batch immersion cleaning equipment incorporates a series of individual tanks into a bench or
series of cleaning modules. Parts are transported from tank to tank for cleaning, rinsing and drying, either manually or by
automation. Tanks are offered in a variety of sizes, depending on part dimensions and throughput requirements. The num-
ber of tanks is determined by the chemistry being used and the level of cleanliness required. Aqueous cleaning is commonly
performed using a single cleaning sump, two rinse sumps and a dryer. Some low volume applications or those applications
not requiring high cleanliness levels might use only a single rinse. For some critical applications, multiple wash tanks and
additional rinse tanks have been employed.
Agitation in these systems commonly uses ultrasonic energy or ‘‘spray under immersion’’ (SUI). Ultrasonic agitation can be
geometry sensitive, depending on transducer placement. Thus correct assembly placement relative to the transducer(s) is
needed to achieve optimum cleaning under very low stand-off height components. Because of this enhanced cleaning abil-
ity, it is often considered a superior method of agitation in this type of batch equipment. (Proper transducer to assembly ori-
entation is illustrated in IPC TM 650, methods 2.6.9.1 and 2.6.9.2).
It is important that the rinse water is continuously replenished in order to reach required cleanliness levels. Some systems,
especially spray-in-air, continually drain the used rinse water and introduce fresh onto the parts. When immersion rinsing is
being used, either a ‘‘dump and fill’’ method or a continual overflow should be used. In multiple tank systems, counter cas-
cade rinsing allows for conservation of water by flowing fresh deionized water into the final rinse bath, and then overflow-
ing into the previous rinse bath. This rinse should then overflow into waste water treatment. Overflow weirs can be effective
when the contaminants rise to the surface. If stagnant rinses are used, contaminant levels quickly raise and render the rinse
ineffective in short order and should be dumped and refilled often.
Bath monitoring is highly desirable.
Drying in multiple chamber batch systems is most often accomplished using forced hot air. Some systems employ hot air
knives to speed drying. Achieving complete drying in non-conveyorized aqueous cleaning systems can be challenging, espe-
cially with complex assemblies.
12.7.13 Ultrasonic In the past, the military community has been reluctant to approve ultrasonics for the cleaning of elec-
tronic parts. This reluctance was based in part on work using metal case components. As a result of damage to the compo-
nents housed in these metal cases, ultrasonics was not allowed for cleaning electronics. Since the era in which this thinking
began, there have been extensive changes both in component durability and in ultrasonic technology. Components are far
more robust than they were in the 1950s and 1960s, and can tolerate many exposures that were not possible at that time.
Most ultrasonic equipment manufacturers supply higher frequency ultrasonic transducers in the 40-270 kHz range, rather
than the 20-25 kHz systems which were previously prevalent. These higher frequencies are considered to be more appropri-
ate for precision cleaning applications, and are gentler on parts. Some manufacturers are also supplying sweeping frequency
and power control generators, both of which greatly reduce the probability of damage to electronic components.
170
The most prevalent means of damage by ultrasonics is resonant damage. This can still be an issue with certain hybrids and
components, such as quartz clock oscillators. Sweeping frequency ultrasonics can reduce this risk by not staying at a single
frequency long enough to set up the resonant pattern that leads to damage. It also eliminates the standing waves or areas of
high and low energy that are produced in single frequency units, and can cause delicate parts to be exposed to very high
power densities. It is highly recommended that ultrasonic units have power controls, even with sweeping frequency, to allow
the power to be reduced if necessary for delicate components.
Recently, through extensive research at the GEC Hirst Research Center and at EMPF, MIL-STD-2000 was revised (Rev A)
to allow the use of ultrasonics on military components. Currently, the burden of proof lies on the user to document that the
ultrasonic energy does not cause damage to the components. The Ultrasonic Energy Task Group of the IPC have published
test methods (IPC TM-650, No 2.6.9.1 and 2.6.9.2) to assist the user in qualifying electronic parts for Rev A. It is also rec-
ommended that this procedure be used to verify the use of ultrasonics on any delicate component or hybrid where ultrasonic
damage is considered possible. The US submission to the IEC technical commission, based on J-STD-001, also allows for
the use of ultrasonics in cleaning soldering applications.
12.7.14 Spray-under-Immersion Spray-under-immersion agitation creates a turbulent wash condition for penetrating and
dissolving soils under the liquid level. This technique was evolved to prevent mist formation from occurring with combus-
tible solvents. Its kinetic efficiency is less than that of spray-in-air. The liquid density rapidly diminishes pressure at the
board surface. The decreased level of impingement requires stronger cleaning agent solubility factors. As a result, the clean-
ing agent design must be adjusted to support lower levels of impingement energy.
12.7.15 Centrifugal This method of application utilizes centrifugal energy, produced by rotation of the product while
immersed in a bath for washing, then subjected to a spray for rinsing. Parts are placed in a fixture and rotated using forward
and backward centrifugal agitation. These coriolis accelerations transfer the mass of liquid cleaning agent with sufficient
force to propel the cleaning agent into spaces containing flux residues and other contaminants. This application provides
effective penetration by moving the cleaning agent parallel to the surface plane of the product and under closely spaced
components. The products direction of rotation is reversed every couple of seconds to disrupt developing laminar flow pat-
terns and vortex formations. This produces momentary random flow as liquid is propelled in the opposite direction of the
rotating product, maximizing the use of the centrifugal energy. Repetition of laminar-random liquid flow pattern produces
thorough washing and rinsing actions from all directions, which overcomes any shadowing effects. The mechanism of
cleaning is the penetration of wash and rinse fluids into tight spaces, tapped holes, blind vias, cavities and all other locations
where flux and contaminates are entrapped.
Centrifugal energy has been utilized in the removal of contaminates associated with semiconductor packages, populated
hybrid circuits and printed circuit boards since the late 80s. The effects of centrifugal forces upon electronic components
and parts have been studied extensively by the military. The most vulnerable items, those incorporating wire bonded con-
nections, MIL-STD-883 stipulates in Test Method 2001 that the constant acceleration force which large hybrid circuits must
with stand is 5,000 Gs, and small hybrid devices must withstand 30,000 Gs. In centrifugal cleaning, the force of constant
acceleration is a function of RPM and the radius of rotation. Commercially available centrifugal cleaning systems are
capable of subjecting the product to a maximum of 341Gs, which is well below acceptable limits.
Centrifugal cleaning is a semi-automated batch process and is utilized in applications that process high to medium volumes
of semiconductor parts or low volume hybrid or SMT assemblies. Conventional centrifugal cleaning equipment has many
similarities with other batch cleaning equipment and processes. These similarities include:
• Small footprint with minimal power consumption.
• Semi-automated process that requires operators to load and unload substrates.
• Zero to low volume effluent discharge.
• Programming versatility.
However, there are a few process characteristics of centrifugal batch cleaning that differ from conventional batch cleaning
processes, including:
• Typical centrifugal cleaning process cycle times less than 15 minutes.
• Products typically do not require additional equipment or process steps related to drying.
• Immersion wash eliminates shadowing that can be associated with spray in air processes.
• Flexible solvent compatibility; DI water, aqueous based chemistries, or solvent/terpene applications.
171
• Product dimensional limitations based on diameter of centrifugal process chamber.

• Requires engineered fixtures to hold substrates and may require multiple designs depending on product make up.
Conventional centrifugal cleaning equipment use a single axis robot head that is designed to hold custom or universal prod-
uct carriers or printed circuit board assemblies (PCBA). The single axis robots spin the product about its center, generating
coriolis, centrifugal accelerations as well as cohesion and adhesion forces to clean, rinse and dry the product. The time, tem-
perature and speed of rotation for each cycle are quite flexible and are defined by the application and/or required level of
cleanliness.
Typical process cycles consist of an immersion wash and spray rinse followed by a heated spin dry cycle. Cleaning agents
(such as terpenes and water based chemicals) may be introduced during the immersion wash cycle for the removal of non-
polar residues when required. The spray rinse cycle normally utilizes deionized or purified water to effectively remove any
remaining polar or ionic residues. The product is spun about its center while a fine mist of DI water is delivered into the
process chamber and onto the substrate, flushing and removing any remaining wash solvent or ionic residues. Some systems
may incorporate onboard closed loop recycling systems that reduce solvent consumption and rinse contamination related to
process ‘‘dragout.’’ When using solvents that separate from water, the system automatically removes the wash solvent from
the rinse water and returns the wash solvent to the wash reservoir for reuse. The used rinse water is then processed through
a filtration and purification system to restore the rinse water to its original purity level. The heated spin dry cycle is com-
pleted within the same process chamber as the wash and rinse steps. The substrate is spun about its center typically at a high
rate of velocity, as heated filtered gas is injected into the chamber to completely dry and remove any fluid remaining on the
surface or under components after the rinse cycle.
12.7.16 Batch Spray-in-Air Batch spray-in-air cleaning machines are available in single chamber, multiple autonomous
chambers, and progressive chamber configurations. A single chamber cleaning machine is capable of cleaning and drying
one batch of assemblies at one time while multiple autonomous chambered cleaning machines can clean and dry several
batches of assemblies simultaneously. Progressive chamber cleaning machines dedicate each chamber to a specific process
such as wash, rinse, and dry.
12.7.17 Single and Multiple Autonomous Chambers Single or multiple autonomous chambered batch cleaning systems
employ rotating spray arms to distribute cleaning solutions over boards that are racked on edge. The cleaning cycle may
include prewash, wash and multiple rinse stages. Cleaning agents may be introduced during any of the cycle stages. Final
rinse stages are normally of deionized or purified water. The number, type and duration of the wash and rinse stages are
usually quite flexible.
While most of these systems are similar in function to the home dishwasher, conventional home dishwashers are not well
suited for this process, as cycle times are fixed, and materials of construction are not compatible with many of the fluxes,
cleaning agents (including deionized water), and temperatures used. Additionally, dishwasher spray forces are commonly not
sufficient to ensure adequate under component impingement.
The chief advantages of batch cleaning systems are their small size, energy efficiency, low cost, low chemical usage, and
programming versatility. The typical single chamber batch system requires less than 3 square meters [10 square feet] of floor
space plus space for operator access. Tank sizes are small, easily allowing low or zero-discharge configurations, and energy
is used only when parts are being processed and is therefore quite small.
Due to the fact that each stage of the washing process is separately programmable, wash and rinse times, number of rinses,
and desired cleanliness levels can be programmed individually and over wide ranges.
The principal disadvantages of single chamber or multiple autonomous chambered batch formats are cycle time and load-
ing sensitivity. Cycle times, depending on dryness level required can vary from 15 minutes to 45 minutes. As it is difficult
to employ air knife type moisture removal, drying is usually the longest part of the cycle. How parts are racked relative to
one another and how many are placed in the wash chamber can also affect cleaning times and efficiencies. Manual loading
and unloading of batch systems may also be perceived as a disadvantage, although the use of extra board racks can mini-
mize this.
12.7.17.1 Typical Cycle The single chamber batch cleaning cycle can contain prewash, wash, rinse and drying stages.
The prewash stage is usually employed to remove any water soluble process soils or fluxes. Clean water is introduced into
the wash chamber and recirculated over the boards. In the case of water soluble flux, a considerable amount of flux removal
is accomplished during this stage. In the case of rosin fluxes, the prewash stage has an additional benefit in that it brings the
172
temperature of the parts up closer to that required for the flux removal process, although too high a water temperature in the
prewash can hydrolyze the flux and make the removal process more difficult. Some cleaning systems have the option to add
additional surfactants or chemistry into the prewash stage. At the end of a programmed recirculation time, the prewash solu-
tion is drained from the cleaning chamber.
The wash stage is employed to remove the flux and soils on the boards. Clean water and, if required, programmable amounts
of cleaning agent are introduced and recirculated over the boards. Most systems have holding tanks for the wash solution
and re-use them, thus reducing liquid waste.
A water only process may be sufficient to remove the contaminants on a particular board assembly. D.I. water can also be
used in either an open or closed loop process to boost the cleaning process. However, many times due to the type of flux
used on board assemblies, a chemical additive is necessary to effective remove any contaminants. While environmentally
and economically a water only process is preferred, there are considerations when using chemistry that can be environmen-
tally and economically friendly.
Frequently, the specific flux selection dictates the specific cleaning media to be used. For example, if an organic acid/water-
soluble flux or solder paste is selected, one may choose to remove the flux residues exclusively with water. One should
exercise caution when selecting the cleaning media as there are several external factors that may influence the cleaning
media choice as previously discussed in this document. While flux is frequently the primary target of a cleaning machine,
one must consider the possibility of the presence of other process contaminants including board and component fabrication
residues, as well as non-flux-related assembly residues. The possibility of additional non-polar residues may require the use
of a chemical additive. The particular chemical composition of the cleaning agent, the concentration of that cleaning agent
in the cleaning process, the amount of chemistry loss per cycle, and the treatment of that chemistry in the draining cycle are
all factors that contribute to the cost, effectiveness, and environmental friendliness of a chemical process.
Multiple rinse, recirculate and drain cycles, or closed loop rinsing may be employed. Closed loop systems continuously
recirculate a portion of the rinse water through DI resin and carbon beds. In both rinse to drain and closed loop systems, the
rinse water resistivity levels are monitored and can be used to determine when rinsing is complete. In the case of multiple
rinses, (non-closed loop), some systems allow introduction of a small amount of rinse aid during the first few rinses.
12.7.17.2 Drying Drying in single chamber or multiple autonomous chambered batch systems is typically the longest pro-
cess step. Drying consists of evaporation into the air in the chamber and subsequent removal. Drying time is primarily a
function of chamber temperature and air circulation. Heat during drying is a required element for batch cleaning machines.
Batch cleaning machines may be equipped with convection, radiant, or both heating technologies. A blower removes mois-
ture saturated air within the chamber and replaces it with dry, moisture receptive air.
12.7.18 Progressive Chambers The basic principle is to have separate chambers for cleaning/rinsing and for drying. The
baskets are slid along the machine horizontally, either manually or automatically, so that there is no lifting of parts. The
duration of each operation is individually controlled, so that the full flexibility of a batch system can be exploited. These
include low energy; low water requirements; low operating cost; and the ability to tailor cycle time at each step to maxi-
mize cleaning effectiveness for a variety of electronic assembly designs.
Maximum efficiency can be obtained only if boards are properly oriented and spaced in the baskets, impacting high peak
power needs. To explain, peak power is needed to impinge and deliver the cleaning agents under low gap components.
Shadowing effects can shield boards from needed impingement and can result in cleaning variability.
A typical cycle consists of a number of steps followed systematically. In general, four to five baskets are processed at any
one time: the first is in the loading station while the second is in the wash phase. An optional third basket can be in a hold
position while the fourth basket is being dried and the fifth basket is in the unloading station. The linear construction of
high-throughput machines makes automation of the basket movement easy.
A loading station needs to be ESD safe and may be constructed from various materials, upon which an empty basket is
placed, ready to receive the soldered assemblies. Once loaded, the basket is slid into the washing/rinsing machine. As the
lid of this machine is closed, the wash cycle starts manually or automatically. The sprays on the wash arms provide solid
jets of water at high velocity. At the end of the wash period, the wash water is allowed to drain back into the sump. The
rinse cycle consists of spraying the boards with deionized water using dedicated sprays.
When this cycle is finished, the lid of the machine is opened and the basket can be slid onto the holding table, which allows
a basket, if required, to drain while the drying machine is being liberated. From there, it is slid into the drying machine,
which automatically starts when its lid is closed. The drying machine consists of two air knives, which rotate slowly and
173
asynchronously. During the first part of the drying cycle, the air is blown through the machine and blasts off excess water.
After the air knifing, the assemblies are dried with hot air. The machine can then be opened and the basket slid onto the
unloading table. This is similar to the loading table and allows the operator to empty the baskets for reuse.
12.7.19 Inline Spray-in-Air The common way of providing mechanical agitation is by ‘‘spray in air’’ where the aqueous
cleaner is pumped through nozzles onto the parts being cleaned. The nozzle design must be made in conjunction with the
hydraulic characteristics of the pump. It has been shown that similar results can be obtained with high-volume, low-pressure
as with low-volume, high pressure on condition that the total kinetic energy imparted to the fluid is the same. The nozzle
design and the angle of attack can be optimized for the job required.
To improve cleaning efficacy, boards are initially sprayed in the pre-wash section using fan jets. The pre-wash zone brings
the circuit card up to process temperature, which starts the flux softening process. In the wash section, nozzle jets provide
uniform wash coverage. Board geometry, density, and component types are impinged upon using a combination of nozzle
technologies that provide various levels of fluid flow, pressure at the board surface, and directional forces. Printed circuit
boards with increased density and component shadowing require a longer wash time to allow wash fluid to penetrate blind
gaps.
Spray impingement research has advanced over the years to address the increased demands for removing all flux residues
under flush mounted and low feature components. To achieve this demanding cleaning challenge, spray impingement pres-
sures and vectored angles are used to penetrate low gaps and blind holes. Additionally, longer wash times/sections and lower
processing speeds are being used. Increase spray impingement and pressures increase the potential of shearing off label
stock, penetrating some coatings types, and chipping ceramic components. These effects need to be quantified and addressed
during the assembly design for cleaning at the board level.
In-line cleaning is a high volume cleaning process. Equipment may be of modular or non-modular design. The modular
design allows great flexibility with respect to expandability. All parts are subjected to the same process. The last board
loaded will receive the same cleaning as the first board loaded. In-line systems are not as loading sensitive as batch systems
can be.
The in-line process is comprised of four to five main steps, and varies with flux type being cleaned. The length and num-
ber of wash, rinse and dry modules is determined by the ultimate conveyor speed required. Once a conveyor speed is deter-
mined, appropriate test runs must be performed to establish optimum operational parameters (conveyor speed, temperature,
pressure, volume, drying). The following minimum base configuration would apply for each type of flux or paste.
Isolation: Some type of air or water isolation should be present between process stages on in-line systems, as the cleaning
and water treatment costs can be negatively affected. Also, if too much wash gets into the rinse, it will foam to the point
that adequate rinsing will not take place.
Prewash removes the gross contaminants and is generally a necessary step when processing water soluble fluxes or tempo-
rary solder masks.
Wash is where the high impingement spray dislodges and solubilizes the flux from beneath components. The closer the
component/board stand-off, the higher the energy required to remove contaminants under the Z-axis. The flow rate of this
section may depend on board complexity and flux/wash compatibility. One or more of these stages may be present, depend-
ing on line speed and cleanliness requirements. In rosin, resin, or synthetic polymer flux removal, chemistry is added that
solubilizes and removes the flux. Automatic injection of chemical will aid the repeatability of the process.
The closer the component/board stand-off, the higher the energy must be. One or more of these stages may be present,
depending on the line speed and cleanliness requirements. The flow rate of this section depends on board complexity.
• The chemical isolation section is needed to wipe the cleaning agent off the parts, return excess cleaning agent back to the
wash tank, and remove bulk cleaning agent from the parts before entering the rinse section.
• The rinse section is needed to remove cleaning agent, dissolved flux residues, and ionic contaminants from the surface and
under components.
• The final rinse section is where the board is subjected to a purified DI-water rinse. It is the last water the board will see.
This will rid the board of any residual ionic contaminants, and will ensure spot free product, if the drying step is not 100
percent effective.
• The drying section is where residual water is stripped from the board. It is desirable that drying be accomplished by hot
high pressure air, not by evaporation. One or more drying stages may be present, depending on line speed and dryness
requirements.
174
Orbital systems that emulate the in-line process also are available. They wash, rinse and dry with the same concept as out-
lined above, but with decreased part throughput. have similar process steps as linear in-lines, but process the parts vertically
and transport them in a circle. A load/unload person is required. The advantage of these systems is that less floor space is
required.
Depending on the automation, process integration requires consideration of the following process steps, most notably for
continuous inline cleaning systems:
• Pre-Wash.
– The pre-wash section is designed for different equipment and soil processes
– For water soluble processes, the pre-wash is used to remove surface active agents, temporary spot masks, and water
soluble spacers
– For rosin, resin and synthetic flux cleaning processes, the pre-wash is instrumental in increasing the board temperature
and wetting the circuit assembly with the wash agent to soak and start the dissolution process
– When running an aqueous cleaning agent, most pre-washes are supplied from the wash chemistry sump
• Wash.
– Deliver the cleaning agent to the circuit assembly and under flush mounted and low standoff components
– Scrubbing energy to increase rate of cleaning
– Impingement energy provides directional forces to penetrate low gaps and to remove the bulk of flux residues and ionic
salts
– Contains the wash agent
• Chemical Isolation.
– Air knifes are used to remove the bulk of the cleaning agent from the parts surface
– Return excess cleaning agent back to the wash holding tank
– Remove bulk of the wash agent using a slip stream of rinse water to prevent rinse contamination
– Isolate the contaminated rinse water by taking to drain or evaporating
• Rinse.
– Remove all wash chemistry from the surface and under components
– Remove ionic residues
• Final Rinse.
– Ionically clean rinse water to remove trace contaminants from the rinse water
– Render an ionically clean part
• Drying.
– Removal of surface water
– Removal of absorbed water
• Ventilation.
– Air flows in and out of the machine
– Remove cleaning agent odors
– Prevent saturated mist from entering equipment sections
• Water Purification.
– Purify incoming water to designed standards
– Recover rinse water stream to remove trace organics and ionic contaminates and return this stream for reuse
• Discharge unusable water.
– Optional Equipment
– Electric eye to turn each section on and off
– Wash sample port
– Wash sump filtration
– Process Control for maintaining the wash chemistry concentration
175
– Manual cleaning agent concentration monitoring

– Proportioning Metering Pumps
– Process Control Systems
– Wash Stage Mist Arrestors
– Resistivity monitors to control the number of rinse cycles required
– Closed Loop Recycling
12.8 Process Integration Many factors influence the cleaning process. Figure 12-2 illustrates causes and effects that
influence the effectiveness of the electronic assembly cleaning process. The section focuses on the optimizing the aqueous
cleaning process.
Electronic Soldering
Assemblies Materials
Through-Hole Solder Paste

Surface
Mount Clearance Wave Flux
Rework Flux
under components
Problem Solder Temperature # of Soldering Conditions
Components Materials Compatibility before Cleaning
Solder Mask
Clean Parts
Board Laminate Cleaning Agent

Coatings Cleaning Machine
Label Adhesives Wash Temperature
Cleaning Agent Concentration
Stock
Elastomers Processing Time
Impingement Energy
Assembly Cleaning
Materials Process
IPC-65B-12-2
Figure 12-2 Factors that Influence the Effectiveness of the Electronic Assembly Cleaning Process
12.8.1 Designing the Process to Meet the Cleaning Need
12.8.1.1 Cleaning Chemistry Selection Cleaning agent selection criteria typically includes, but it not limited to, the fol-
lowing criteria: cleaning equipment, process need, material compatibility, environmental, cost, bath life, odor, and technical
support. The cause and effect fish diagram (Figure 12-2) highlights a number of factors that need to be considered when
selecting a cleaning agent. Due to limited test samples and time, it is very difficult to study each of these factors when
evaluating and qualifying cleaning agents. To assist in selecting a cleaning agent, see Section 6, Development and Verifica-
tion. The following points are worthy of consideration:
• How effective is the aqueous cleaning for removing the soil?
• What is the cleaning concentration needed to remove the flux soils represented in your process?
• What is the wash temperature needed to remove the flux soils represented in your process?
• What is the concentration level of the cleaning agent?
• What is the flux loading potential?
• Does the cleaning agent foam?
• What are the materials effects of soil loading?
176
• What are the material compatibility properties for:

– Metallic alloys
– Board laminate
– Plastics
– Elastomers
– Coatings
– Components
– Part Markings, labels and inks
• What is the history of use?
• What do other users have to say about the product?
• What is the cleaning supplier’s support level and reputation?
• Is the supplier globally located and provide global support?
• Is the product RoHS/Reach compliant?
• Is the product hazardous? (OR: What level of controls will be needed to minimize hazards to workers)
• Is the VOC level acceptable to regulatory agencies?
• Does the VOC level meet company/customer policy?
• What is the odor in the workplace without properly installed HVAC?
• What are the evaporative and exhaust loses?
• How does the cleaning agent change over the life of the bath?
• What is the cleaning agent’s surface tension viscosity, density?
• How easily is the cleaning agent monitored and controlled?
• What could go wrong?
12.9 Cleaning Equipment Selection Fluid management is critical in maintaining an economical cleaning process. Analy-
sis of individual module containment (inline cleaning machines) and process fluid segregation (single chamber and multiple
autonomous chambered batch) specifically with the wash chemistry is essential. Fluid delivery is critical for penetrating and
rapidly breaking the flux dam under low standoff components. Air management is critical to reducing chemical odors in the
workspace while minimizing the amount of wash fumes exhausted from the machine. Fluid storage is critical for long wash
bath life. Fluid control is critical in maintaining the proper wash bath concentration within the cleaning process tolerance.
Cleaning equipment design decisions in fluid management can influence the effectiveness of the cleaning process over time.
Factors such as high wash consumption, steam out of the machine, foaming in the wash and or rinse, exhaust losses, and
poor cleaning all result from an imbalance caused by one or more of these factors. Process issues may not show up when
the machine is initially charged with cleaning chemistry and started up, but slowly creep in over time. Lack of process opti-
mization results in higher defect rates, which typically render white residue formation and unacceptable levels of ionic resi-
dues on the surface and under component gaps.
A number of factors need to be considered when selecting cleaning equipment. In addition to the cost assessment model, the
following factors are worthy of consideration:
• Will the cleaning machine and cleaning agent clean your most demanding assemblies?
• Does the ventilation design isolate the wash section from the rinse and dryer (applicable to inline and staged chamber)?
• Will the heating elements maintain desired temperature settings?
• What is the response time to bring the machine up to production ready?
• Is the machine capable of providing the needed cleaning and throughput rates?
• Does steam dissipate from the machine (other than the vent)?
• It the equipment assessable?
• How effective does the machine isolate the wash solution from the rinse water?
• Does the machine capture residual wash solution for subsequent reuse?
• Does the cleaning machine have a sampling port?
177
• How many times per minute does the wash tank turn over?
• How is the chemical additive injected and controlled?
• Is the machine PLC or computer controlled?
• Are the seals and gasket materials compatible with the cleaning agent?
• Will the machine dry your assemblies?
• What is the through-put rate needed to clean your most challenging assemblies?
• What is the noise level?
• What is the cost of the equipment?
• What is the water consumption?
• What is the volume of effluent discharge?
• What is the energy cost of the machine?
• What is the footprint of the machine?
• What is the cost/part to clean?
• How effective is the machine’s drying capability?
• Can the system be permitted in your area (air & water permits)
• Has your safety professional evaluated the system regarding worker safety in terms of engineering controls and employee
protection
12.9.1 Process Variables As important as the chemical aspects of cleaning, the purely physical mechanisms play an
important role. As a general rule, the higher the thermal and mechanical energy applied, the better the cleaning will become.
The obvious limits are when the energy becomes sufficiently great that damage to the part could occur.
12.9.1.1 Cleaning Agent Concentration Wash concentration is a function of the cleaning agent’s behavior, wash tempera-
ture and mechanical effects.
12.9.1.2 Cleaning Agent Temperature As the temperature of the cleaning agent increases, most flux-based contaminants
dissolve faster. Higher temperatures may soften fluxes and allow easier removal. Rinse times may be reduced at higher tem-
peratures. Optimal temperature is dependent on cleaning equipment, cleaning agent, contaminants and components.
12.9.1.3 Cleaning Agent Time The component standoff height has a strong correlation to wash time. Flip Chip, µBGAs,
LGAs, QFNs, chip caps, and other component types are reducing in size and clearance from the board surface. Standoff
heights lower than 3-5mils require increased time in wash to penetrate and remove all flux residues. On highly dense assem-
blies populated with low clearance parts, longer wash impingement time must be planned for. This is a factor that should
be considered when selecting cleaning equipment and cleaning agents
12.9.1.4 Impingement Energy To improve cleaning under low standoff components, research data indicates that fluid
flow, pressure at the board surface, directional forces, and time in the wash improve the process cleaning rate. The wash
section of the cleaning machine is highly important. Research data findings indicate that flux not adequately removed in the
wash will not be removed in the rinse sections. Maintaining pressure with flow also decreases the amount of time required
in the wash section.
Wash impingement effects can be generated using various nozzle and pump technologies. To remove all flux residues under
gaps less than 3-5mil, time in the wash and wash temperature are critical parameters. The wetting effects of flux during the
reflow soldering process cause the flux to penetrate under small component gaps and create a flux dam. To break the flux
dam, the cleaning fluid and impingement energy must first dissolve the residue to create an opening for the wash fluid to
flow under the component. Some flux residues take longer time to dissolve than others, which increases wash complexity.
12.9.1.4.1 Fluid Flow Fluid flow is generally expressed as gallons per minute (GPM). The amount of GPM a cleaner pro-
vides during the cleaning process is based on: the incoming water supply to the cleaner, the cleaner’s holding tank, the pump,
the plumbing used within the machine, the type of spray nozzles, the number of spray nozzles being supplied, and the return
rate of water back into the holding tank. It is important to have a sufficient supply of incoming water, particularly for clean-
ers with limited holding tanks. A holding tank maintains a large supply of water or chemistry mixed with water to keep a
178
cleaning process running at the desired flow rate. It also allows for the heating of the fluid prior to use in the process. An
efficient pump will provide the maximum volume of fluid being delivered throughout the cleaning system with least amount
of energy consumption. The type and number of spray nozzles will change the restrictions on the fluid flow. Nozzles should
be selected with a particular process requirement for flow and pressure in mind. Where the fluid goes after the process is
also a consideration. If the fluid is going through a closed loop system, less make up water is required. If the fluid is being
drained, the complete volume must be replaced.
12.9.1.4.2 Directional Forces Due to the complexity of board designs and the smaller and smaller clearances between and
under components, directional forces applied to the board are crucial in cleaning away all contaminants. Different directional
forces can be achieved using various spray nozzles and adjustable spray bars on both the top and bottom side of the board.
The distance from the spray nozzles to the board surface is a factor to the amount of force placed on the board and the
directional pattern of the fluid flow.
12.9.1.4.3 Pressure at the Board Surface Pressure at the board surface, or impingement force, is difficult to measure.
The variables that affect pressure at the board surface are:
• Volume of fluid moved through the pump, the plumbing, and out through the spray nozzles.
• Pressure of the fluid as it leaves the pump.
• Number and type of spray nozzles (can increase or decrease pressure depending on the restrictions imposed).
• Distance from the fluid spray to the board surface (the shorter the distance, the more pressure at the board surface).
By controlling these variables, you can increase or decrease the pressure at the board surface. It is important to find the right
balance of pressure at the board surface so the cleaning process is removing contaminants without damaging fragile com-
ponents. A cleaning system that allows for as much process flexibility as possible with these variables, such as selectable/
interchangeable nozzles, adjustable spray bars, and variable pump speed controls will help maximize cleaning results by
allowing a user to produce the optimal pressure at the board surface.
12.9.1.5 Controlling the Wash Process Cleaning processes are dynamic. In the aqueous process, the wash section loos-
ens the cleaning agent and water through evacuation of wash mist into ventilation exhaust ports, evaporative wash vapors
into the ventilation exhaust ports, and drag-out of wash solution into the chemical isolation section. These three types of
losses need to be minimized to maintain a cost effective process. This section provides information for monitoring the wash
concentration, automated process control, bath life, and bath life extension.
12.9.1.5.1 Wash Bath Monitoring The common methods used for monitoring the wash bath are titration, refractive index,
split correlation and bath analyzer.
12.9.1.5.2 Titration Titration is used to express the concentration of alkaline material in an alkaline wash bath by mea-
suring the free alkalinity present in the wash solution. The operator should clearly understand that there is a factor of 10
difference (logarithm) between pH numbers. A pH scale is a measure of the acidity/basicity of a solution. The pH scale
ranges from 0-14 and is the product of the molarity of hydronium and hydroxide in water. At a pH of zero, the hydronium
ion (H3O+) concentration is one molar, while at pH14 the hydroxide ion (OH-) is one molar. In other words, pH is not a
linear scale. For example, a pH of 10 has a molarity ten times more concentrated than a pH of 9.
Many aqueous cleaning agents are designed using weak bases with pH ranges from 9-11. The titration procedure is a mea-
sure of the mil equivalent levels of alkalinity available in the wash bath. The mil equivalent level of alkalinity is correlated
to concentration. This method works well for traditional saponified-based cleaning and other alkaline cleaning where all
materials are soluble in water and little to no organic raw materials are used. It is especially important for tracking alkaline
cleaning agent concentration where the cleaning agent is consumed by reaction with the residues.
12.9.1.5.3 Refractive Index The refractive index (or index of refraction) of a medium is a measure of how much the speed
of light (or other waves such as sound waves) is reduced inside the medium. For example, typical soda-lime glass has a
refractive index close to 1.5, which means that in glass, light travels at 1/1.5=2/3 the speed of light in a vacuum. Two com-
mon properties of glass and other transparent materials are directly related to their refractive index. First, light rays change
direction when they cross the interface from air to the material, an effect that is used in lenses. Second, light reflects par-
tially from surfaces that have a refractive index different from that of their surroundings. For a solution of sugar, the refrac-
tive index can be used to determine the sugar content (Brix Unit). The reading is then correlated to the wash bath concen-
tration. Refractive index measurements can deviate depending on the level of contamination dissolved in the cleaning agent.
For virgin cleaning agent the method is very reliable.
179
12.9.1.5.4 Bath Monitoring Techniques Aqueous cleaning agents designed with organic raw materials that are partially
soluble in water may form distinct layers. Typically, the solvent has a lower density than water and subsequently separates
to the surface when the wash solution is static. When the wash bath is sufficiently agitated, the solvent disperses into the
aqueous phase as finely dispersed droplets. When the wash bath agitation is stopped, the insoluble solvent phase separates
to the wash holding tank surface. The solvent layer represents the solvent at its level that is above the solubility ratio in
water and other soils or ingredients that are preferentially soluble in the solvent phase. The aqueous phase represents sol-
vents and other materials engineered into the cleaning agent that are soluble in water.
Wash baths that from distinct phases are more challenging to monitor using traditional techniques such as titration and
refractive index. Correlating the wash concentration by neutralizing the wash bath to an end point (titration) fails to account
for the organic raw materials. Refractive index is equally difficult since the insoluble solvent particle refracts differently than
does the aqueous phase. Monitoring techniques include but are not limited to techniques that allow for correlation of phase
separation to concentration.
12.9.1.5.5 Automated Wash Bath Control Aqueous cleaning agents operate at various concentration ranges. Various sup-
pliers offer automated control systems for their respective technologies.
12.9.1.6 Chemical Proportioning Devices Proportioning devices use several design approaches such as venturi, make-up
water slow rate, positive displacement pumps, timing, and piston measurement powered by the incoming make-up water and
pressure. The proportioning devices add cleaning agent when water is added to the wash tank. The proportioning devices
are designed to operate at specific cleaning agent concentration ranges. Within their operating range, the pump uses a dial
for proportioning the desired level of cleaning agent to the wash bath when adding make-up water. Venturi devices vary the
concentration of cleaning agent added by changing orifice sizes and typically need a pressure regulator up stream to keep
additions constant. To assure that the chemical proportioning devices are maintaining the wash bath at the design concen-
tration range, wash bath monitoring measurements are used. The readings from the wash bath monitoring measurements are
used as feedback to dial in the chemical proportioning device to the proper initial wash bath fill concentration and to the
proper maintenance concentration.
12.9.1.7 Process Control System Designed to automatically monitor and control the wash bath concentration. These
devices monitor the wash bath in real-time and reacts with precise additions of water and/or chemistry to maintain optimum
concentration and fluid level. Automated process control systems may use programmable logic controllers and chemical
measuring devices to control the wash bath in real time. Equipment based on refractive index can show similar limitations
in regards to consistency, as solubilized residues affect the accuracy of the reading. Supplementary manual wash bath moni-
toring techniques are used as a cross check to assure the process control system is maintaining the design range.
12.9.1.8 Manual Wash Bath Additions Many wash bath concentrations are successfully controlled by manual methods.
Success of this method typically depends on the effective cleaning range of the cleaning agent used. The wider the clean-
ing concentration range, the longer the interval between manual make-ups. As cleaning agent and water are lost due to
dynamic loses, the machine will add make-up water only. This will eventually reduce the concentration of the wash bath to
a level where the cleaning agent is no longer effective. Circuit card cleanliness testing and manual bath concentration moni-
toring can be used to determine the lowest usable concentration. Once the low point is established, the amount of cleaning
agent used during the time period can be determined. At this point more cleaning agent must be added into the wash bath
to increase the concentration back to the top of the range. Wash bath concentration that go too low can cause the wash tank
to foam and can cause failure of mechanical pump seals in horizontal centrifugal pumps.
12.9.1.8.1 Initial Manual Fill of Wash Bath Initial wash tank fill to proper chemical concentration is accomplished by
multiplying the total wash tank volume by the percent concentration required. For example a 100 gallon tank to operate at
15% concentration would require 15 gallons of chemistry and 85 gallons of water.
12.9.1.8.2 Maintaining Wash Bath Concentration Once the bath concentration is diluted a wash bath monitoring method
should be used to establish the current concentration. When the current wash bath concentration is determined it should be
subtracted from the target concentration. The resulting difference in concentrations should be added back into the wash tank
as cleaning agent concentrate required to raise the concentration back to the target concentration and verified by the moni-
toring method. The amount of cleaning agent concentrate to be added is determined by the equation X gallons =[ (target %
- actual %)(tank volume in gallons)]/(100% - target%).
180
12.9.1.9 Bath Life Many factors contribute to wash tank bath life, including:
• Flux residue type and Loading Rate: Flux types and levels of active soils vary widely based on the circuit assembly
design and process need. All aqueous wash baths vary in their critical soil loading level at which they fail to clean or rede-
posit soils back onto the part.
• Wash Tank Loss and Replenishment: The wash fluid is typically lost from exhaust evacuation or evaporation and carry
out (drag-out) from both the circuit boards being processed and wetted internal equipment features. The wash tank is
replenished with virgin cleaning agent and water. Losses plus replenishment additionally increases the timeline for reach-
ing the critical soil loading level. In some cases, the wash bath reaches a steady state soil loading level, which allows for
longer bath life.
• Cleaning Agent Design: Many factors and levels are needed to support the cleaning need. The ingredients in cleaning
may be used up over time (oxidize and reduce), or may change over time. Wash temperature, concentration, impingement
shear, foaming, and soil type are contributing factors as to the cleaning agent’s ability to remain stable and hold soil with-
out reducing cleaning effects.
• Cleaning Agent Concentration: Critical soil loading is a function of the level of active ingredients available in the clean-
ing agent to remove the soil at designed parameters. Higher cleaning agent concentration may increase the critical soil
loading level.
• Soil and Cleaner Interaction: The acidic nature of flux residues can react with aqueous cleaning agents, thus changing
their physical nature. Wash temperature and wash impingement are catalysts that can increase these interactions.
12.9.1.10 Critical Soil Loading Limit For each soil, there is a level at which the wash bath fails to clean at the desired
rate. Critical soil loading is dependent on many factors including the flux type, cleaning agent, controlling wash concentra-
tion, temperature, and dynamic energy.
12.9.1.10.1 Linear Soil Loading The dynamic wash bath typically loses fluid due to exhaust evacuation, evaporation, and
drag-out. In the absence of wash bath loses, flux residues may load at a linear rate. Aqueous wash baths that load at a lin-
ear rate are typically static wash baths with low evaporative and drag out losses. This is atypical for aqueous cleaning pro-
cesses.
12.9.1.11 Loses Due to Exhaust and Drag-out In the aqueous process the wash section loosens the cleaning agent and
water through evacuation of wash mist into ventilation exhaust ports, evaporative wash vapors into the ventilation exhaust
ports, and drag-out of wash solution into the chemical isolation section. These three types of losses need to be minimized
to maintain a cost effective process.
Evaporative/exhaust loses are influenced by exhaust air pull, temperature, fluid flow, fluid pressure, and vapor pressure
effects:
• High air suction increases the level of cleaning agent lost to exhaust. To address this issue, the air flows must be properly
balanced and controlled or supplemented by vapor recovery units.
• Water can be the most volatile solvent present in an aqueous process. Wash bath temperatures increase the tendency for
particles to escape from the liquid phase and into a water mist phase.
• Water will carry some of the organic raw materials out the exhaust stack. Functional additives in the aqueous cleaning
agent with high vapor pressures will be lost to exhaust at faster rates.
• Fluid flow and pressure effectives increase the level of water droplets and mist present in the wash spray chamber.
Increased water droplets and mist bound in the air space result in higher exhaust losses.
• Liquids have a tendency to evaporate into a gaseous form, and all gases have a tendency to condense back to their liquid
form. With increased wash temperatures, the vapor pressure of water and raw materials used becomes sufficient to over-
come atmospheric pressure and lift the liquid to form vapor mist and subsequently exhaust.
Evaporative losses are typically not 1:1 with water and aqueous cleaning agent. Low vapor pressure ingredients tend to con-
dense back into the wash tank.
Drag out losses carry the wash liquid from the wash chamber to the next processing step. For single chamber and multiple
autonomous chamber machines, wash liquid present in the chamber, plumbing, and on product hardware is typically lost to
water rinsing following the cleaning step. For continuous inline cleaning machines, wash fluid on the conveyor belt, prod-
uct hardware, and spray deflection travels into the next processing section, typically the chemical isolation chamber. Unlike
181
evaporative losses, drag out is typically a 1:1 loss of the cleaning agent and water. With active concentrations between 5 and
15%, the majority of the liquid drag out is however water itself.
Cleaning equipment companies have designed machine features which reduce both evaporative losses and drag-out. Evapo-
rative loss mitigation:
• For continuous inline machines:
– Demister technologies are designed to disturb the air flow and allow water droplets to collects and condense back into
the wash tank
– Condensing chambers cool wash mist and condense back into the wash tank
– Umbrella windows over spray manifolds contain the wash mist and drop it back into the wash holding tank
– Water knife provides a laminator flow of the wash fluid over the spray manifolds to collect wash mist and redirect the
fluid back to the wash tank
• For single chamber and multiple autonomous chambered batch machines:
– Storage of not-in-use wash solution in minimally vented tanks
– Minimum air flow requirement through chamber during wash cycle
Drag-out loss mitigation:

• For continuous inline machines
– The distance from the last spray manifold to the chemical isolation zone reduces deflection into the chemical isolation
section
– Air knifes in the chemical isolation section to wipe the board and redirect the wash fluid back to the wash holding tank
– Split chemical isolation section with a deflection wall that captures wash fluid and returns to the wash holding tank
– Spacing boards and pallets to prevent bridging the liquid into the chemical isolation zone
• For single chamber and multiple autonomous chambered batch machines:
– Designing drains that prevent fluid entrapment ensure the wash liquid drains back to the wash holding tank
– If common plumbing is used, air purges the lines
– Allow time from wash to rinse for wash fluid to drain
– Pump designs and orientations that minimize pump-caused drag-out
12.9.1.12 Monitoring and Replenishing Wash Chemistry High reliability circuit assembly operations require processes
that reduce variability. Real time statistical process control is needed to distinguish background variation from events of sig-
nificance based on statistical data and techniques. Dynamic cleaning processes must be monitored on a consistent basis to
control wash bath concentrations with upper and lower limits.
Once the bath concentration is diluted a wash bath monitoring method should be used to establish the current concentration.
When the current wash bath concentration is determined it should be subtracted from the target concentration. The result-
ing difference in concentrations should be added back into the wash tank as cleaning agent concentrate required to raise the
concentration back to the target concentration and verified by the monitoring method. The amount of cleaning agent con-
centrate to be added is determined by the equation X gallons = [(target % - actual %)(tank volume in gallons)]/(100% -
target%).
12.9.1.12.1 Steady-State Aqueous wash baths typically operate in high impingement equipment designs at elevated tem-
peratures. As a result, wash fluid is lost to exhaust evacuation, water due to evaporation, and wash fluid to drag-out. To
maintain the wash bath, new cleaning agent is added when replenishing the wash bath with water, drag-out loses also carry
out soils out of the wash bath. Cleaning agent additions slightly reduce the loading level. Wash bath additions that prevent
the soil from reaching the critical soil level, results in the bath reaching steady state. Some cleaning agent technologies are
able to filter out some of the wash contamination, to extend the bath life. Additionally, if the cleaning agent additions are
large enough to prevent the wash bath from reaching the critical soil level, the bath life is extended.
12.9.1.13 Wash Bath Life Extension Cleaning chemistry solution (wash sump bath) life extension may be achieved by
filtering the solution using a filter mounted externally from the cleaning system and pumping the cleaning solution through
the filter media. Cartridge filter(s) or a Diatomaceous Earth (DE) filter, compatible with the cleaning solution, may be used
182
to filter residues as small as 1 to 2 microns out of the cleaning solution. Plumbing from the was sump to a recirculation
pump, then to a filer housing and then back to the wash sump, may be run continuously or at intervals (such as 5 minutes
every hour) during the production day and during non-production time. The filtration system may effectively remove gross
and fine particulate material from the wash sump bath that is not caught by the wash stage pump intake filter(s) and filter(s)
on the high pressure side between the pump and the spray manifolds. The reduction of total dissolved solids in the wash
sump clearing solution allows the cleaning solution to clean more efficiently and effectively, may avoid cleaning solution
foaming caused by clearing solution soils loading and may reduce the rate of coating of the immersion heaters with residue.
Electronics industry printed wiring board assembly cleaning applications have demonstrated successful wash sump life
extension as much as 10X.
12.9.1.14 Waste Water Disposal The discharge of any wastewater stream, both by total flow and by chemical make-up
must conform to national, regional and local regulations in all nations. Such regulations vary from very strict limits with
little derogation to relatively flexible conditions. Many nations, particularly in Europe, have very strict legal requirements
dictated on a national scale, covering many aspects of waste water quality. Others have less comprehensive regulations, cov-
ering only the more important considerations. Local authorities may offer derogations to national legislation where their local
treatment plant is able to handle the otherwise out-of-tolerance waste. Derogations are frequently accorded to small users,
particularly if the user can show that the cost of treating a small quantity of slightly polluting waste would be dispropor-
tionate to the damage that could be caused. Dischargers must note that installations approved in one place, may not be
approved elsewhere. In all cases, it is wise to discuss an installation with the local authorities before putting it into service,
as a polluting fait accompli is never looked at with a kindly eye.
In the USA, the discharge of the waste water stream, both by total flow and by chemical make-up will very likely require
a permit from the local public owned treatment works (POTW) under the Clean Water Act (CWA). In addition, local per-
mit may also require co-current state or regional EPA approval. It is important that any new or additional wastewater flow
from a post solder cleaning process step be reviewed with local POTW officials BEFORE commencing the discharge of
wastewater. Such a review may result in the POTW waiving the need for a permit, or in reducing the monitoring require-
ments of a required permit. New discharges require that a baseline monitoring report (BMR) be submitted within 90 day of
initiating such discharge. For POTWs discharging less than 5 million gallons/day, the BMR must be copied to the regional
EPA office
12.9.1.15 Inline Rinse Section The rinse section of an in-line cleaning system usually consists of a recirculating section
with a dedicated tank and pump and a final rinse section, where the purest water enters the system. The function of the rinse
section is to remove residual process water from the wash section and flood the product with progressively cleaner water.
Operation of the rinse may be thought of in two ways, depending on the process. In a water-only process, water typically
flows, or cascades, from its entry point in the final rinse, back to the recirculating rinse, and finally to the wash tank. Thus,
the product being cleaned moves through the system into sections of progressively more pure water. In an aqueous process
involving wash chemistry, the goal is to isolate the wash section as much as possible from the rinse by minimizing dragout.
It is desirable both from a quality and a cost standpoint to keep cleaning chemistry in the wash tank. In this case, the recir-
culating rinse functions to flood the product and force residual wash chemistry out from tight spaces. It is important to note
that the flow dynamics in the rinse should be compatible with the cleaning challenge posed by the product. In other words,
the rinse section of a cleaner used for a difficult product with tight spaces should be capable of displacing residual wash
chemistry from those tight spaces.
In both processes, water incoming to the cleaner enters the final rinse and cascades to the recirculating rinse tank. In a high
performance cleaning system, the goal is that by the time the product enters the final rinse, all residual wash chemistry has
been removed, process residue, such as flux, has been removed, and the product is ready for its last rinse. This rinse serves
to reduce ionic contamination to the level dictated by quality and process standards.
12.9.1.15.1 Rinse Quality Needed When referring to rinse water ‘‘quality,’’ typically the standard is resistivity, expressed
in ohm-cm. There are, however, other characteristics, such as particulates and total dissolved solids (TDS) that should be
considered. For example, rinse water could meet desired resistivity levels, but could have non-ionic particulate contamina-
tion that would be detrimental to product quality. Therefore, rinse water is usually treated both for particulate removal (by
mechanical filtration) and deionization. The level of rinse water quality is determined by subsequent processing of the prod-
uct being cleaned and by product quality standards.
For example, a circuit board used in a non-critical consumer product with no subsequent processing after cleaning may have
a quality requirement to be visually clean only. In this case, filtered tap water may be adequate for the process. At the oppo-
site end of the spectrum might be a Mil-spec product that requires conformal coating after cleaning. In this case, rinse water
183
would surely require mechanical filtration and a significant level of deionization. For practical purposes, the maximum level
of deionization of water results in resistivity of approximately 18.2 megohm-cm. There is a relatively small difference in
parts per million (TDS) between 1 megohm and 18 megohm water. There is an exponential relationship that has a signifi-
cant cost impact as well. Operating a system at 18 megohm will be substantially more costly than operating one at 1
megohm, yet the benefits in cleanliness will be minimal. Typically, DI water above 1 megohm is a sufficient supply for the
final rinse of a cleaner.
The bottom line is that process engineering and quality engineering determine cleanliness standards. Rinse water quality
must support these standards. Cleanliness testing and some trial and error will likely be required to determine the ultimate
process standard.
12.9.1.15.2 Generating Rinse Water Rinse water can come from multiple sources. In the simplest case, rinse water can
come directly from the municipal water tap, assuming the quality thereof is sufficient for the process. When purity standards
exceed that of available tap water, a number of treatment options are available. For elimination of particulates, filtration,
microfiltration, and ultrafiltration are viable alternatives. Particulate filtration is usually used as a preliminary step for a sub-
sequent reverse osmosis or carbon/ion exchange process, but by itself it is efficient at removal of contaminants down to 1
micron in size. Microfiltration is targeted down to 0.1 micron, and ultrafiltration to 0.01 micron. For water purity and deion-
ization beyond that of simple mechanical filtration, reverse osmosis or carbon/ion exchange are options.
Choosing the correct approach to generating rinse-water begins with understanding the requirements. What is the projected
usage and minimum acceptable water quality? What are the system water requirements to make sure the process equipment
is correctly supported (flow rate, pressure, and temperature)? And finally, matching the filtration techniques is critical for
minimizing the capital expense, while optimizing the cost performance of the equipment.
12.9.1.15.3 Reverse Osmosis Reverse osmosis (RO) is a filtration process that utilizes a semipermeable membrane.
Unlike basic mechanical filtration that prevents particles of a certain size from passing through a filter, the RO process
involves forcing a solvent (water) from a region of high solute concentration through a membrane to a region of low sol-
ute concentration by applying pressure. This process can filter to the ionic level (.001 micron). The solute is retained on one
side of the membrane while purified solvent passes to the other. This process also produces an additional waste stream of
water used to purge the membranes.
Membranes used in the RO process are temperature sensitive, so they are not usually well-suited to recycling of cleaner
effluent. RO, however, is useful and often cost-effective in purifying incoming facilities water used to supply rinse water. If
this pretreatment step is used as part of a cleaner recycling system, it can significantly improve the life of media tanks used
in the deionization, since it removes contaminants that would increase media ‘‘loading.’’
12.9.1.15.4 Carbon/Ion Exchange Carbon/ion exchange is the most common process used to produce deionized water. It
may be used strictly to treat incoming rinse water, or it may be used as part of a recycling system in which it purifies efflu-
ent and returns it to the system as rinse water. In this process, granular activated carbon (GAC), cation and anion tanks (and
possibly combined cation/anion ‘‘mixed bed’’ tanks) are used to provide filtration down to the ionic level. The GAC is well
suited to removal of organic contamination, and the cation and anion tanks complete the deionization process by capturing
oppositely charged ions from the process water. The cation media is positively charged and, therefore, attracts negative ions
and vice versa for the anion media. When additional ‘‘polishing’’ is required, mixed bed(s) may follow the initial cation and
anion tanks to provide deionization approaching the theoretical maximum resistivity (18 megohm-cm). In addition, some
closed loop recycle systems also incorporate tanks to remove and capture heavy metals (such as lead) from the waste stream.
The primary concern with this process is media life. The GAC tank(s) must be replaced when they become fully loaded,
and the ion exchange tanks must be regenerated. If carbon/ion exchange is used just for incoming water purification (open
loop), media life is dependent strictly on water volume and amount of contamination in the incoming water stream. Media
life in a closed loop system is a function of several variables, such as: volume and quality of the media; volume and tem-
perature of process water (directly related to cleaner run time); amount of contamination on the product to be cleaned; quan-
tity of product cleaned; quality of incoming water; and use of process additives (cleaning chemistry, water soluble process
tape, defoamer, etc).
In the sections below, a number of recycling options are reviewed. It is important to note that the process operator must be
cognizant of local regulations that apply to directing effluent to drain and shipping/disposal of media tanks. Municipal water
districts can usually offer guidance, as can the vendor of closed loop recycling systems. Ultimately, however, it is the
responsibility of the effluent generator to take ownership of the process, from ‘‘cradle to grave.’’
184
12.9.1.15.5 Chemical Isolation (Inline Cleaning Machines) The chemical isolation module provides the ultimate fluid
management when using continuous inline cleaning machines by separating the wash and rinse sections. The conveyor belt,
circuit cards, and fixtures are wetted with the cleaning fluid. As these wetted components leave the wash section, they are
carried into chemical isolation section. One of the objectives of the chemical isolation section is to remove and return the
wash solution from the conveyor belt, circuit boards, and fixtures back to the wash tank. Recent equipment innovations strip
off the wash fluid from parts as well as capture defected wash spray that enters the chemical isolation section. This impor-
tant economic function reduces chemical usage and saves operation cost.
12.9.1.15.6 Chemical Segregation (Inline Cleaning Machines) One of the risk factors from high fluid flow, high
impingement pressure, and directional force nozzles is spray deflection into the chemical isolation section. Shorter wash
sections have less distance from the spray manifold to the chemical isolation section. Deflecting wash fluid into the chemi-
cal isolation section can cause high wash chemistry consumption. To address this issue, larger wash sections provide dis-
tance from the final spray manifold to the chemical isolation section entrance. Wash spray deflected into the chemical iso-
lation zone must be captured and returned to the wash tank. Chemical isolation strategies that provide spacing from the last
wash spray manifold, wipe the cleaning agent as it enters the chemical isolation section, and return the wash chemistry to
the wash tank dramatically reduce wash chemistry consumption. Good fluid management designs are the keys to reducing
chemical consumption and operating cost.
12.9.1.15.7 Dry Isolation (Inline Cleaning Machines) At the entrance of the chemical isolation section, an air knife above
and below the conveyor belt removes wash fluid mechanically from the conveyor belt, circuit boards, and fixtures. New
inline designs place a bulkhead positioned within the chemical isolation section after the air knife but in front of the chemi-
cal isolation spray rinse manifolds to catch and return wash fluid back into the wash tank.10 The bulkhead isolates deflected
spray carried into the chemical isolation section. The front isolated area is equipped to collect and drain wash chemistry
removed from both the air knives and deflection back into the wash tank.
12.9.1.15.8 Wet Isolation (Inline Cleaning Machines) The wet spray ensures the dilution of chemistry that remains in and
around tightly spaced components and underneath low standoff devices missed by the isolation air knives. This wet section
manifold is powered from the rinse module pump and provides high quality third use water for wet isolation. The slip stream
from the rinse improves rinse quality and prolongs carbon and ion exchange purification media. This cascade function allows
the rinse tank to be replenished and regenerated by the gravity cascading final rinse.
12.9.1.15.9 Dry and Wet Isolation (Inline Cleaning Machine) The last important section of the chemical isolation is
another set of air knives above and below the conveyor belt. These air knives mechanically strip the wet section spray from
the circuit board and conveyor belt before entering the rinse section. This prevents any diluted chemistry from reaching the
recirculation rinse and is especially important when running a closed loop rinse. Even if the rinse tank is not closed looped,
chemistry carryover can lead to rinse section foaming and excessive consumption. When close looping the rinse, the chemi-
cal isolation spray section is a must to ensure DI filter columns are not degraded due to chemistry contamination.
12.9.1.15.10 Rinse Water Recovery and Reuse For inline cleaning machines, there are several reasons to consider
options for recovering and reusing water from the cleaning process. First, an in-line cleaner typically uses anywhere from
2 to 5 gallons per minute of process water. Thus, a cleaner running two shifts per day, 5 days per week, can easily use over
1 million gallons of water per year, wasting what is becoming a very precious natural resource. Second, local environmen-
tal regulations often prohibit, or significantly inhibit, the ability to direct effluent to a municipal sewer system. Third, incom-
ing water represents a significant process cost. Finally, most cleaning processes require heated water. Heating incoming
water from the tap is significantly more expensive than maintaining water temperature in a closed loop recycled system or
a system that utilizes a heat recovery system.
12.9.1.15.11 Open Loop Open loop refers to a process in which water is not recovered or recycled in any way as part of
the cleaning process. Incoming water (which may or may not be purified or deionized) flows into the cleaner. The same
amount that flows into the process ultimately goes down the drain (less any evaporative losses). While there may be spe-
cific reasons for maintaining an open loop process, it is not energy or cost-efficient and it does not conserve water.
One possible variation of the open loop process, however, is to incorporate a heat recovery system. This type of system uti-
lizes a heat exchanger to capture the thermal energy contained in drain-bound water and uses it to supply heat to the incom-
ing water supply. While this does not conserve any water, it can significantly reduce energy costs to heat process water.
185
12.9.1.15.12 Close Loop Recycling Closed loop recycling refers to the process of capturing and recycling all, or some,
of the process water used in the cleaning operation. As with many aspects of cleaning, this is best reviewed by looking at
the ‘‘straight aqueous’’ and ‘‘aqueous with chemistry’’ processes separately.
In the straight aqueous process (typically used when water soluble flux is removed from a circuit board), incoming water
enters the cleaner, cascades from final rinse, to recirculating rinse, to wash, and exits to drain. Thus, there is one incoming
stream and one outgoing stream (the same scenario applies to a batch cleaner). This type of process is typically very well
suited to closed loop recycling whereby the drain-bound effluent is purified and directed back to the cleaner as incoming
rinse water. The carbon/ion exchange process (see section 12.8.6.4) is often used in this type of system. Pretreatment of
facilities water by filtration or reverse osmosis may or may not be used.
A number of benefits result from closed looping this type of process. First, water usage is limited to the initial fill of the
system and make-up water for evaporative losses. Second, much of the thermal energy contained in the effluent is retained,
and third, there are the environmental benefits of no ongoing process water being directed to drain.
In processes using wash chemistry, the closed loop recycling becomes more complex. Wash chemistry can have a signifi-
cant, negative impact of resin bed life in a carbon/ion exchange system. Therefore, it may be desirable to simply close loop
the rinse section. In this scenario, incoming water enters the final rinse, cascades to the recirculating rinse, and exits to drain.
At this point, a carbon/ion exchange system may be used to close loop the process similar to the straight aqueous process
discussed above. The main caveat, however, is that the cleaning system must be effective at isolating wash chemistry from
the rinse water (see section 12.8.6.6.3 below). The wash section of the cleaner using wash chemistry is ‘‘isolated,’’ in that
the drain valve remains closed during production and the cleaner is designed to limit dragout into the rinse section.
12.9.1.15.13 Close Loop Rinse with Chem-Iso to Drain Cleaning systems designed to run wash chemistry are usually
designed specifically to reduce the amount of wash fluid that gets dragged into the rinse section. Wash dragout can occur
simply by being carried over on the surface of the circuit board (or any product being cleaned), or by ‘‘overspray’’ from the
wash section itself. One method of limiting carryover of wash fluid is to incorporate an inter-stage section between the wash
and the rinse sometimes known as the ‘‘chemical isolation’’ section. In its simplest form, this section may just be dead space
with a ‘‘floor’’ under the conveyor that is angled back to the wash tank. Process water drips off the product and returns to
the wash tank. More sophisticated systems incorporate an air knife to ‘‘squeegee’’ process water off the product and direct
it back to the wash. Another variant of this includes spray manifold(s) that direct pre-rinse water on the product to flood
wash water out of retention areas such as connectors and tight spaces. Since this water would dilute wash chemistry con-
centration, it is not recommended to direct this chemical isolation spray back to the wash tank.
There are several options available to deal with this effluent stream. First, it may be permissible to direct it to drain (check
with local authorities). Since it is relatively low volume (typically less than 1 gallon per minute), sending the effluent stream
to drain would not represent a large cost. Second, this drain-bound water could be treated for heavy metals removal (and
possible pH), and then directed to municipal drain as a relatively benign waste stream. Third, it is possible in some pro-
cesses to recycle this water, but this must be verified by the recycle system vendor.
12.9.1.15.14 Rinse Verification Most users monitor the final rinse quality using resistivity measurements. The typical
range for electronic cleaning applications is greater than 0.5 megohm resistance.
12.10 Ventilation Air flow management prevents steam from exiting the entrance or exit ends of the machine.10 Clean-
ing machines that run wash chemistries require a separate exhaust plenum for managing the wash and chemical isolation
sections and a separate exhaust plenum for managing the dryer sections. The air must be balanced to provide a slight nega-
tive draw at both the entrance and exit ends of the machine. Excessive air draw in the wash section can cause wash fluid
fumes to be evacuated to the roof. Excessive air draw from the dryer vent can draw wash fluid fumes into the rinse section,
which can cause rinse foaming. Properly balanced, the system does not fill the room with wash odors and manages the air
flow so that minimal wash fluid is evacuated. Mist arrestors are commonly used to condense the wash fumes, which allow
much of the cleaning solution to be returned to the wash tank.
12.10.1 Balancing the Ventilation for Inline Systems Start by consulting the machine manufacturers recommendation.
The system needs to be designed to achieve the required flow rate at the specific static pressure for each exhaust port. The
cleaning system has fresh air introduced into the system, which must be extracted along with water mist. The objective is a
negative pressure that prevents cleaning agents and water vapors from escaping the inlet and process viewing windows.
Machines are provided with internal dampers. Consult manufacturers documentation for damper locations and recommended
setup. Adjustment of these internal dampers allows for proper balance and management of air outputs. The internal airflow
186
bias needs to be toward the load of the machine to prevent wash chemistry migration through the rinse and toward the dryer
end of the machine. Proper balance prevents wash chemistry from entering the rinse sections, preserves rinse quality, and
prevents rinse foaming. (Dirk Ellis)
12.10.2 Batch Systems The ventilation requirements of batch cleaning machines are determined by several design char-
acteristics and chemical selections. Closed cleaning machines (those with sealed doors and plumbing systems) may require
less ventilation than their open-top counterparts. If a cleaning chemical is utilized, factors such as odor and flammability
may dictate the specific ventilation requirements.
12.10.2.1 Open Top For open top designs, ventilation is accomplished by providing a lip vent exhaust plenum at the rear
of the tank at counter top height. The objective is to draw ambient air across the top of the tank toward the plenum to pre-
vent any fugitive emissions from permeating the work space. If necessary a feed plenum is installed at the front of the tank
at counter top height to supply a local source of air across the tank setting up a push/pull arrangement with the rear plenum.
12.10.2.2 Centrifugal The system is either sealed with an open vent to atmosphere or tied into an active exhaust system,
with a vented break in the air duct. The vented break prevents a vacuum from forming within the cleaning chamber. This
allows ambient air to enter the exhaust while preventing chamber vacuum and allowing the chamber to be opened.
12.10.2.3 Single Chamber and Multiple Autonomous Chambered Cleaning Machines Single chamber and multiple
autonomous chambered cleaning machines, machines generally require less ventilation than other cleaning machine formats.
In most of these cleaners, little or minimally assisted ventilation is required. Because the various wash, rinse, and dry cycles
are not operated simultaneously, air flow through the chamber is limited to just the dry cycle when wash solution and rinse
water are not airborne. A static connection to a vent pipe will not pull wash solution vapors from the chamber during a wash
cycle, reducing evaporative loss. Connection to a suction-based ventilation system will increase the negative pressure in the
chamber, causing increased loss of wash solution.
12.10.3 Drying Drying systems remove all moisture from dense substrates using high velocity, high temperature regen-
erative blower technology with air knives to mechanically strip the water from the assembly.
12.10.3.1 Air Displacement High temperature supercharged air displaces water from the circuit assembly and compo-
nents. Vector air knifes move air in both the length and direction of a hypothetical motion along a straight line from the
reference position. The air knife displaces water using high intensity velocity using a uniform sheet of supercharged lami-
nar air. The pressurized air plenum contains a series of holes or continuous slits through which pressurized air velocity is
directed.
12.10.3.2 Thermal Heat Temperature controlled convection zones are then used to evaporate water from the board. The
use of heated convection drying removes trace water from blind spaces at high throughput rates.
13 CLEANING FOR REWORK, REPAIR, AND RESTORATION OPERATIONS
13.1 Introduction Normal cleaning operations that circuit card assemblies go through during production operations have
been outlined in proceeding sections of this guideline. The cleaning operations that occur as part of rework, repair and res-
toration operations can be much different than those found in production. Assemblies are often built up to include compo-
nents that are sensitive to heat, chemicals and water. In addition, assemblies can be conformally coated, components can be
staked down with adhesives, and assemblies can have marking and labels that were not intended to be subjected to produc-
tion cleaning operations. Attention to details becomes increasingly more important during the cleaning operations associated
with rework, repair, and reconditioning of circuit card assemblies. Most electronic assemblies at this point in the process
have achieved their highest level of functionality as well as maximum value. Cleaning with poor methods and improper pro-
cess and materials can result in scrapping assemblies.
This document deals primarily with the cleaning and cleanliness aspects of rework, repair, and reconditioning. For a more
in-depth coverage of rework and repair, the reader is referred to IPC-7711/7721 Rework, Modification and Repair of Elec-
tronics Assemblies.
13.2 Terms and Definitions Rework, repair, and reconditioning are terms that have multiple usages and meanings in the
industry. IPC-T-50 uses the following definitions:
187
13.2.1 Rework The act of reprocessing non-compliant articles, through the use of original or alternate equivalent process-
ing, in a manner that assures compliance of the article with applicable drawings or specifications.
Example: If a manufactured assembly does not meet a set cleanliness criteria, it may be subjected to additional cleaning
processes until the criteria is met.
13.2.2 Repair The act of restoring the functional capability of a defective article. In common usage, repair may restore
the hardware to compliance with applicable drawings or specifications. In stringent [military] usage, rework is in compli-
ance whereas repair restores functionality without being in compliance.
Example: If an assembly is removed from a server and a circuit path was found to be damaged (open). The decision is made
to use a jumper wire to bypass the damaged section of circuit path. The jumper wire is not on the original drawing. The
assembly is functional, but the assembly is not in strict compliance with the manufacturers drawings or specifications.
IPC-T-50 does not have a standard definition for terms like restoration, reconditioning, or refurbishment. All of these terms
can be thought of as various approaches to ‘‘rework and repair.’’ All involve doing some reconditioning operation on elec-
tronic hardware to return the item to some level of functionality. Within this document:
13.2.2.1 Reconditioning The act of restoring the functional capability of a potentially defective article that has been sub-
jected to an abnormal event. Examples of abnormal events would be electronics equipment that was subjected to smoke
damage from a fire or water damage from a flood. These events are considered to be outside the normal operating environ-
ment that the article was intended to be used in. The level of functional performance may be considered to be outside the
normal original equipment manufacturers warranty. The impacts to reliability and service life should be considered prior to
reconditioning any article.
13.3 Rework in the Factory When rework is required during the original manufacture of the product, there may be subtle
differences between rework methods and approaches if the product is being built by the Original Equipment Manufacturer
(OEM) or an Electronic Manufacturing Services (EMS) provider.
For the OEM, there is generally easier or greater access to:
• Engineering drawings and process specifications.
• Specialized equipment for completing rework and repair including:
– Coating removal and re-application equipment
– Component removal and re-attachment equipment
– Up to date training programs and certification programs
– In-house experts on rework and repair
For the EMS/Contract Manufacturer:

• The engineering drawings may be accessible, but the manufacturing process may not be familiar if the process is imposed
on the EMS by the OEM.
• EMS standard rework methods may differ from the OEM methods.
• The EMS may not have in-house coating experts.
• Disparity exists regarding best practices for electronic assembly rework, repair and reconditioning. Rework and repair
methods should be agreed upon by contract.
13.4 Rework and Repair in the Field In a sharp contrast to rework in the factories, rework in the field is often conducted
without many of the tools and techniques that are available at original equipment manufacturers. Rework may be done by
the factory trained technicians, certified or accredited rework and repair operators, or by independent rework and repair con-
tractors.
• Detailed manuals on the product may be available, but seldom discuss methods for rework, relying on standard practices
manuals for such methods.
• The standard practice manuals may be obsolete.
• Standard practices of repair operation may differ significantly from that of the OEM.
• Material and method for rework and repair may not be available. For example the original coating materials may not be
environmentally compliant in certain geographic locations.
• In the above conditions, the OEM should be contacted to supply suitable alternatives.
188
13.5 Reconditioning and Restoration Beyond the scope of factory rework and field repairs are reconditioning and resto-
ration operations. These operations are used when electronics equipment is subjected to conditions which are outside of nor-
mal conditions. Examples of these conditions would be when electronics equipment is subjected to smoke damage from a
fire or water damage from a flood. Often there is a critical need to get products that have been subjected to these abnormal
conditions operational again. Cleaning of these assemblies takes on special needs. The soils or contamination that assem-
blies are subjected to are outside of normal service conditions. Determination of the contamination or soils and how to
remove them is part of the content within this document.
13.6 Repair, Rework and Restoration Impact on Reliability Product reliability represents a functionality of an assembly
under environmental conditions for a given time period. The rework, repair and reconditioning operations can influence the
life cycle characteristics of electronic assemblies1. Preparation of assemblies before rework, repair and reconditioning
operations may be required. Factors to consider in preparation:
• Conformal coating.
• Open bodied components (relays, potentiometers, connectors).
• Chemically sensitive components (LEDS, displays, labels, part markings).
• Thermally sensitive components (electrolytic capacitors).
• Reactive surfaces (plastics, metallized coatings).
• Electromechanical (motors, disc platters).
• Fiber optic devices.
13.6.1 Conformal Coating Many electronic assemblies are conformally coated to protect the circuitry from the often harsh
end-use environment. Removal of conformal coating and reapplication of conformal coating in the field can be extremely
difficult. Methods to identify conformal coating and methods for removal can be found in IPC-7711/21. The basic types of
coating and an overview of coatings will be described within this handbook. However, refer to IPC-7711/21 for more
detailed methods and procedures for identification and removal.
There are five basic types of conformal coatings: epoxy, urethane, acrylic, silicone, and polyparaxylene (Parylene™). Com-
mon first step in the rework or repair process is to remove the conformal coating, allowing access to the solderable surfaces
of the component(s). The four most common methods of removal are:
• Abrasive blasting (IPC 7711/21 Method 2.3.6)
• Chemical stripping (IPC 7711/21 Method 2.3.2)
• Thermal removal (IPC 7711/21 Method 2.3.4)
• Mechanical removal (IPC 7711/21 Method 2.3.5)
13.6.1.1 Abrasive Blasting for Conformal Coating Removal The principal of micro abrasive blasting is based on project-
ing a small particle onto the coating surface with enough force to mechanically abrade the surface and eventually remove
the coating. Balance must be achieved between the abrasion of the coating surface and abrasion of the printed wiring board
surface beneath the coating. This coating removal method uses a micro abrasive blasting system and a very fine soft abra-
sive powder. The powder is propelled through a small nozzle toward the area where the coating needs to be removed. To
determine the appropriate coating removal procedure, the coating must be identified first. Determining the coating type can
be done through a variety of methods. If the drawing or documentation does not call out the type of coating being used then
chemical or analytical techniques may be needed to help identify the type of coating.
Micro abrasive blasting will generate substantial static charges. Proper ESD measures need to be used in order to assure that
static charges are handled appropriately. It is recommended that the work area be flooded with ionized air and the printed
circuit board assembly should be grounded when using micro abrasive blasting.
13.6.1.2 Chemical Stripping for Conformal Coating Removal There are many instances where conformal coatings need
to be removed from electronic devices for rework, repair, or failure analysis. Chemical removing methods offer the highest
probability for complete coating removal without adversely affecting the electronic device. Chemical removal also offers a
low cost of ownership method when only a few boards need coating removal (see IPC 7711/7721).
The first step in selecting which chemical to use for removal of a coating is determining the type of chemistry the coating
is based on. The major types of conformal coating chemistries that can be removed with chemical stripping include epox-
ies, silicones, urethanes, and acrylics. The next question to ask is what components are on the device so that a chemical can
189
be selected which won’t damage these parts or the substrate. Other factors that need to be examined include the safety and
environmental aspects of the selected chemical. Caution is urged when using solvents on ER, SR, UR, and XY type coat-
ings. It is possible for some solvents to cause damage when in contact with these types of coatings.
13.6.1.3 Thermal Removal of Conformal Coating For some conformal coatings, an accepted method in many rework/
repair manuals is to ‘‘over cure’’ the coating with a soldering, iron hot gas rework machine, or other controlled heat source.
This is most commonly used on urethane coatings, because acrylic coatings often cannot take the heat (and turn to a black
tar-like substance), and the other coating families (silicones, epoxies, Parylene™) tend to be very heat resistant (see IPC
7711/7721).
13.6.1.4 Mechanical Removal of Conformal Coating This coating removal method uses various grinding and scraping
tools, depending on the composition of the coating material. A knife or dental style scraper is normally used when a scrap-
ing method is desired. A hand held drill is normally used when a grinding technique is desired. A wide variety of rotary
abrasive materials including ball mills may be required. Caution should be observed so damage to the substrate is avoided.
With all the discussed methods care should be exercised to ensure that residues or particulates from the removed coating do
not interfere with assemblies (see IPC 7711/7721).
13.6.2 Reapplication of Conformal Coating Techniques for re-applying conformal coating are given in IPC-7711/21. The
methods used to re-apply conformal coating will depend on how much coating was removed. For larger area applications,
typically spraying coating onto surface is preferred. For small area applications often a brush is used to re-apply conformal
coating.
13.7 Cleaning for Rework, Repair and Reconditioning Operations Cleaning assemblies that are being reworked, repaired,
or reconditioned is often different than production assembly cleaning. Most of the time, manual cleaning techniques are used
to clean assemblies during these operations. Tools such as dip tanks, brushes, cotton swabs, bench top cleaning agents, abra-
sion resistant wipes, or even automated equipment are used in conjunction with the process. Important factors in selection
of cleaning materials and processes are:
• Environmental regulations for operator/technician exposure.
• Type of soils needing to be removed.
• Control of dispensing the cleaning media and rinse media.
• Rinsing requirements.
• Drying requirements.
• Cross contamination.
A typical process may include selecting material which has a low vapor pressure cleaning solvent that can dissolve residues
and soils needing to be cleaned. Many bench top applications use aerosol based cleaning products which can be applied to
selective areas. Often preferred cleaning media is a one component product that does not require rinsing with a separate rinse
agent. Mechanical agitation to difficult areas is accomplished with static safe brushes. Removal of solubilized soils can be
accomplished through the use of abrasion resistant wipes.
13.8 Methodology for Reconditioning Electronics Assemblies Reconditioning assemblies to a functional level requires
a strategy. There are many questions that need to be asked prior to undertaking a reconditioning project. First and foremost,
is it better to replace the equipment than to attempt to recondition the equipment? The financial impact of recon-
ditioning versus replacement needs to be addressed up front. After the decision to recondition electronic assemblies has been
made, then the following methodology can help in determining the sequence of operations that is required for successful
reconditioning.
13.8.1 Data Gathering It is important to gain as much of the following information as possible:
• What was the equipment subjected to?
• How long was it subjected to it?
• Are there visible signs of contamination on surfaces of electronic assemblies?
• Are there any physical signs of damage to equipment?
• Are there any signs of electrical damage to equipment?
190
• Are soils that remain on the equipment conductive?

• Are the soils ionic or polar?
• Are the soils on the equipment organic or inorganic?
13.8.2 Analysis Analytical techniques can be helpful in the determination of the type of contaminants that exist on the
surfaces and the extent of exposure to the circuit assemblies. For a more comprehensive explanation of these analytical
techniques please refer to Dean’s Analytical Chemistry Handbook2.
• Optical microscopy.
• Infrared imaging.
• Scanning electron microscopy.
• Surface organic contamination (IPC-TM-650-2.3.39).
• Infrared Spectroscopy & Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR).
• UV Vis Spectroscopy.
• Raman Spectroscopy.
• Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy.
• Ion chromatography.
• Gas Chromatography.
Results for these analytical techniques can be helpful in determining the type of soils present on the circuit card assemblies
and direct one towards a reconditioning process that will restore functionality to electronics assembly.
13.8.3 Cleaning Process Selection Considerations for Reconditioning Circuit Card Assemblies The objective of recon-
ditioning cleaning operations is to select the least intrusive process that will recondition the assemblies to a functional state.
The selection of the process will depend on the results of the analysis. The residues or soils that need to be removed will
dictate the type of cleaning process that is required for reconditioning operations. Soils that are easily solubilized in clean-
ing media such as water or isopropyl alcohol will be much easier to remove than soils that contain organic constituents such
as oils which may require more intrusive cleaning operations.
It is well recognized that residues with ionic content can be harmful to circuit card assemblies. Therefore, chemical mea-
surement for the presence of ions is recommended after a contamination event. This can be accomplished by Rose or modi-
fied Rose testing, or by localized extraction from the exposed circuit assembly, followed by ion chromatography measure-
ment. Because it is seldom practical to immerse an assembly, and boil it in a field restoration endeavor, the localized
extraction technique is preferred. Laboratories specializing in these local extraction techniques are available in the market-
place.
References
1. Electronics Materials Handbook: Packaging, Merrill L. Minges, ASM International, ©1989
2. Dean’s Analytical Chemistry Handbook, Pradyot Patnaik, © 2004
191
192
ANSI/IPC-T-50 Terms and Definitions for

Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits
Definition Submission/Approval Sheet
The purpose of this form is to keep SUBMITTOR INFORMATION:
current with terms routinely used in Name:
the industry and their definitions.
Individuals or companies are Company:
invited to comment. Please
City:
complete this form and return to:
IPC State/Zip:
3000 Lakeside Drive, Suite 309S Telephone:
Bannockburn, IL 60015-1219
Fax: 847 615.7105 Date:
❑ This is a NEW term and definition being submitted.
❑ This is an ADDITION to an existing term and definition(s).
❑ This is a CHANGE to an existing definition.
Term Definition
If space not adequate, use reverse side or attach additional sheet(s).
Artwork: ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Required ❑ To be supplied

❑ Included: Electronic File Name:
Document(s) to which this term applies:
Committees affected by this term:
Office Use
IPC Office Committee 2-30
Date Received: Date of Initial Review:
Comments Collated: Comment Resolution:
Returned for Action: Committee Action: ❑ Accepted ❑ Rejected
Revision Inclusion: ❑ Accept Modify
IEC Classification
Classification Code • Serial Number
Terms and Definition Committee Final Approval Authorization:
Committee 2-30 has approved the above term for release in the next revision.
Name: Committee: IPC 2-30 Date:

Put IPC MEMBERSHIP to WORK for your Company

A trusted leader for more
than 50 years, IPC is the
Keep on top of industry developments …
premier source for industry and how they will affect your company
standards, training, market
research and public policy • Enjoy 24/7 privileges to FREE members-only online resources, including a
searchable archive of original articles and presentations on the latest technical
advocacy — supporting the
issues and industry/market trends.
needs of the estimated $1.7
• Receive FREE exclusive statistical reports available for the EMS, PCB, laminate,
trillion global electronics
process consumables, solder and assembly equipment industries.
industry.
• IPC events, including IPC APEX EXPOTM, technical conferences, workshops,
For less than $3.00 a training and certification programs and executive management summits provide
day, IPC members enjoy unparalleled educational and networking opportunities.
unlimited access to the •S
tay abreast of global environmental directives, legislation and regulations, and
tools, information and how these specifically impact each segment of our industry’s supply chain.
forums needed to thrive in
an ever-changing electronic Save enough money to easily pay for your
interconnect industry.
membership
“I have a responsibility to • Get discounts of up to 50 percent on IPC standards, publications and training
my customers and my materials.
shareholders. Between the • Save money on online subscription licenses of IPC standards through the world’s
savings on standards, training largest standards reseller — IHS.
materials, APEX and industry
data, IPC membership • Enjoy dramatic discounts on registration fees for meetings, technical
provides immediate 100% conferences, workshops and tutorials.
return on investment for us. It • Benefit from preferred pricing on exhibit space at IPC trade shows and events.
would be irresponsible not to
be a member.”
Joseph F. O’Neil
President
Hunter Technology Corp
“Graphic PLC has enjoyed the privilege of being

an IPC member for more than 30 years and the
technical benefits derived to focus us as a world
player in the manufacture of PCBs have superceded
the cost of membership many times.”
Rex Rozario, OBE
Chairman
Graphic Plc.,UK
“Being a part of the fast-changing global electronics

marketplace requires constant intelligence about
market trends, standards and solutions to the
challenges throughout the supply chain. IPC is an
invaluable partner in providing that intelligence
through conferences, white papers and technical
standards.”
Andy Hyatt
Executive Vice President
Business Development
Creation Technologies
Increase your knowledge and train your “IPC’s role in defining

industry technical standards,
people addressing industry concerns,
and promoting knowledging
• IPC workshops and international conferences provide an exchange of technical sharing through conferences
information that is unequalled. and training, significantly
benefits member companies
• IPC’s training and certification programs offer a cost-effective, industry- and the industry as a whole,
recognized way to demonstrate your commitment to quality. especially in today’s global
• Facilitate your staff’s continuous learning through IPC’s award-winning CD- outsourcing environment.”
and DVD-based training materials. Dongkai Shangguan, Ph.D.
Vice President
Flextronics International
Expand your network and build your
visibility
• Network with your peers through IPC committees, PCB/EMS management
councils and IPC events.
“Juki gets tremendous value
• Participate in problem-solving exchanges through IPC’s technical e-forums. from our ipc membership
• Get answers to your technical questions from IPC’s … we get quarterly market
technical staff. data which would cost us
thousands of dollars if we
commissioned it on our
Help shape the industry own. The industry standards
generated by IPC committees
• Participate in developing or updating the global industry standards that your allow us to design our
company, customers, competitors and suppliers use. equipment with certainty
that it will meet industry
• Take an active role in IPC-organized environmental and public policy activities
requirements. The returns
to advocate for regulations and legislation favorable to your company and the
for our company are so great,
global electronics community. they are beyond calculable.”
Bob Black
Market your business President and CEO
Juki Automation Systems Inc.
• Use the IPC member logo to highlight your company’s leadership in the
industry.
• Build your brand visibility through IPC’s Products and Services Index (PCB and
EMS companies only), and IPC’s annual trade shows and conferences, including
IPC APEX EXPO.
• Gain valuable exposure by sponsoring market research conferences and
executive management meetings.
Put the resources of the entire industry behind

your company by joining IPC today!
To learn more about IPC membership or to apply online, visit www.ipc.org.
IPC — Association Connecting Electronics Industries® Headquarters

3000 Lakeside Drive, Suite 309 S, Bannockburn, IL 60015
www.ipc.org
+1 847-615-7100 tel
+1 847-615-7105 fax
Visit www.IPC.org/offices for the locations of IPC offices worldwide.
®
Application for Site Membership
Thank you for your decision to join IPC. Membership is site specific, which means that IPC member benefits are
available to all individuals employed at the site designated on this application.
To best serve your specific needs, please indicate the most appropriate member category for your facility.
(Check one box only.)
o Printed Circuit Board Manufacturer

Facility manufactures and sells printed circuit boards (PCBs) or other electronic interconnection products to other companies.
What products do you make for sale? (check all that apply)
o One and two-sided rigid, multilayer printed boards o Flexible printed boards o Other interconnections
o Printed electronics
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
o Electronics Manufacturing Services (EMS) Company

Facility manufactures printed circuit assemblies, on a contract basis, and may offer other electronic interconnection products
for sale.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
o OEM — Original Equipment Manufacturer

Facility purchases, uses and/or manufactures printed circuit boards or other interconnection products for use in a final
product, which we manufacture and sell.
What is your company's primary product line?______________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
o Industry Supplier
Facility supplies raw materials, equipment or services used in the manufacture or assembly of electronic products.
Which industry segment(s) do you supply? o PCB o EMS o Both o Printed electronics
What products do you supply?__________________________________________________________________________
o Government, Academia, Nonprofit

Organization is a government agency, university, college or technical or nonprofit institution which is directly concerned with
design, research and utilization of electronic interconnection devices.
o Consulting Firm
What services does the firm provide?_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
®
Application for Site Membership
Site Information
Company Name
Street Address
City State Zip/Postal Code Country
Main Switchboard Phone No. Main Fax
Company E-mail address Website URL
Name of Primary Contact
Title Mail Stop
Phone Fax E-mail
Payment Information (Purchase orders not accepted as a form of payment)

Membership Dues
Membership will begin the day the application and dues payment are received, and will continue for one or two
years based on the choice indicated below. All fees are quoted in U.S. dollars.
Please check one:
Primary facility: Government agency, academic institution, nonprofit organization
o One year $1,050.00 o One year $275.00
o Two years $1,890.00 (SAVE 10%) o Two years $495.00 (SAVE 10%)
Additional facility: Membership for a facility of an organization that Consulting firm (employing less than 6 individuals)
already has a different location with a primary facility membership o One year $625.00
o One year $850.00 o Two years $1,125.00 (SAVE 10%)
o Two years $1,530.00 (SAVE 10%)
Company with an annual revenue of less than $5,000,000
o One year $625.00
o Two years $1,125.00 (SAVE 10%)
Enclosed is a check for $________________

Bill credit card: (check one) o MasterCard o American Express o Visa o Diners Club
Card No. Expiration Date Security Code
Authorized Signature
Mail application with check or money order to:

IPC
3491 Eagle Way
Chicago, IL 60678-1349
*Fax/Mail application with credit card payment to: Please attach b usiness card
3000 Lakeside Drive, Suite 309 S
of primary contact here
Bannockburn, IL 60015
Tel: +1 847-615-7100
Fax: +1 847-615-7105
www.ipc.org
*Overnight deliveries to this address only.

Contact membership@ipc.org for wire transfer details 10/10
Standard Improvement Form IPC-CH-65B

The purpose of this form is to provide the Individuals or companies are invited to If you can provide input, please complete
Technical Committee of IPC with input submit comments to IPC. All comments this form and return to:
from the industry regarding usage of will be collected and dispersed to the IPC
the subject standard. appropriate committee(s). 3000 Lakeside Drive, Suite 309S
Bannockburn, IL 60015-1249
Fax: 847 615.7105
E-mail: answers@ipc.org
www.ipc.org/standards-comment
1. I recommend changes to the following:

Requirement, paragraph number
Test Method number , paragraph number
The referenced paragraph number has proven to be:

Unclear Too Rigid In Error
Other
2. Recommendations for correction:
3. Other suggestions for document improvement:
Submitted by:
Name Telephone
Company E-mail
Address
City/State/Zip Date
3000 Lakeside Drive, Suite 309 S

Bannockburn, IL 60015
847-615-7100 tel
847-615-7105 fax
www.ipc.org
ISBN #978-1-61193-004-7

Ipc CH 65B (L)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ipc CH 65B (L)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SINGLE USER LICENSE - NOT FOR USE ON A NETWORK OR ONLINE

Association Connecting Electronics Industries

Thank you for your continued support.

Guidelines for Cleaning

Developed by the Cleaning and Alternatives Subcommittee (5-31) of the

Supersedes: Users of this publication are encouraged to participate in the

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

Cleaning and Coating Cleaning and Alternatives Technical Liaisons of the

Cleaning and Alternatives Subcommittee

Greg Marszalek, 3M Meaghan Munson, Foresite Dean May, NSWC Crane

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

2.9.4 Dragout ............................................................ 10 3.6.6 Reliability Risks .............................................. 21

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

7.2.33 Polar Matter ..................................................... 62 8.3.20 Resin ................................................................ 76

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

10.5.6 Residues ......................................................... 121 10.10.9 Solvent Monitoring ....................................... 136

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

Guidelines for Cleaning of

1.5 Document Chapters

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

2.1 Industry Standards

2.1.1 IPC Standards1

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

2.1.2 Joint Industry Standards3

J-STD-001 Requirements for Soldered Electrical and Electronic Assemblies

2.1.3 Telcordia Technologies4

GR-78-CORE Physical Design and Manufacture of Telecommunications Products

2.2 U.S. Federal Regulations5

2.2.1 Federal Laws

CAA Clean Air Act

2.2.2 Federal Standards

O-A-51 Acetone, Technical

2.2.3 Department of Defense6

MIL-C-81302 Cleaning Compound, Solvent, Trichlorotrifluoroethane

IPC-CH-65B July 2011

2.2.4 Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)7

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1000 Air Contaminants

2.2.5 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)8

2.2.6 Department of Transportation9

DOT 33 CFR 153.203 Procedure for the Notice of Discharge

2.2.7 American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH)10

2.2.8 National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)11

2.3.1 American Standards for Testing Materials12

July 2011 IPC-CH-65B

2.3.2 Standard Specification of Materials

ASTM D 329 Acetone

2.3.3 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)13

NFPA 30 Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code

ANSI/ASQC Z-1.15 Generic Guidelines for Quality Systems

2.4 Other Considerations