search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
September, 2020


www.us-tech.com


Page 53


The Parallel Evolution of PCBs and Cleaning Methods


By Emily Peck, Senior Chemist, MicroCare, LLC M


icro components, such as CSPs, flip chips, micro BGAs, and QFNs, are routinely used


in today’s complex and miniature elec- tronics. Low-standoff components, like MOSFETs and zero-clearance compo- nents, are common. I/O counts are


of contaminants, including dust and finger prints. Today, 3D-printed components


are gaining popularity. They offer flexibility and versatility in design and are ideal for quick prototyping or for producing custom boards. 3D printing allows the creation


of curved or unusually shaped circuit boards. These boards use multiple materials as well, such as plastic for


the board itself and copper or silver conductive ink as the conductor.


Changing Cleaning Requirements


PCBs have gone through con-


tinuous change over the decades. Cleaning fluids and methods have evolved alongside them. Increasing packaging density, new materials and stricter environmental and safe-


ty requirements makes cleaning today’s PCBs a challenge. Many countries have federal,


state and local rules that limit the use of ozone-depleting and global warming substances. Also, low toxic- ity and worker safety are of utmost importance. During soldering, salts are pro- duced as the flux activators are heat-


Continued on page 56


BGA components have standoffs measured in microns.


increasing and circuit boards are becoming multifunctional. But, as PCBAs continue to


shrink in size and grow in complexi- ty, cleaning the contamination from them is more challenging. Dirty PCBAs are vulnerable to many long- term performance and reliability problems. These include parasitic leakage, electrochemical migration, delamination, shorting, and dendrite growth.


Electronics Evolution Until the 1970s, nearly all elec-


tronics were built from individual components. This was labor inten- sive and required thousands of sepa- rate diodes and transistors. Minia - turization, demanded by the space race, led to through-hole circuit board designs. ICs were embedded into black


plastic housings. Their legs were sol- dered after passing through the cir- cuit board, connecting them. These chips have high standoff from the board, allowing heat to escape. The height also allows for better cleanli- ness, since fluid can flow underneath the components. The first surface mount compo-


nents appeared in the late 80s. The trend of miniaturization continued. By reducing the size of the legs and using four sides of the chips, the number of connections was increased to 200 and beyond for the densest designs. This made them extremely powerful, more resistant to vibration and allowed more chips per square inch.


By the end of the 90s, BGA com-


ponents were commonplace. A further evolution away from space-wasting legs, all connections are made under- neath the chip, using micron-sized points of solder to form a complete cir- cuit. These designs also exponentially increased the number of connections, since the limiting factor became the area underneath the chip, and not its perimeter. The new millennium brought


with it fiber optic components. Almost every fiber network running to a home or business is connected at each end to transceivers mounted to PCBs. However, fiber optic compo- nents are vulnerable to many types


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92