Advertisement

Cleaning Surface Mount Assemblies: The Challenge of Finding a Substitute for CFC-113

  • J. Kirk Bonner

Abstract

Up to now, the majority of cleaning solvents used in the electronics industry have been formulated using CFC-113 (1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane: CCl2FCClF2). This is because CFC-113 has many truly excellent properties. Chief among these are its outstanding stability and compatibility with almost all materials used in the electronics industry, low toxicity (i.e., high threshold limit value or TLV, for example, TLVCFC-113 = 1000), nonflammability, and ability to azeotrope (or boil as a compound at a single temperature) with other ingredients -- especially lower molecular weight alcohols and other select ingredients --s thus enhancing its solvency power for contaminant residues.

Keywords

Solubility Parameter Montreal Protocol Abietic Acid Flame Limit Threshold Limit Value 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    John K. Bonner, “A New Solvent For Post Solder Cleaning of Printed Wiring Assemblies”, Proc. Nepcon West ’86 (1986), 763-777.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    John K. Bonner, “A Comparison of four Solvents for Defluxing Printer Wiring Assemblies”, Circuit Expo ’86 Proc. (1986), 94-103.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Richard Monastersky, “Antarctic Ozone Reaches Lowest Levels”, Science News, 132 (10/10/87) 230.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Richard Monastersky, “Decline of the CFC Empire”, Science News, 133 (4/9/88) 234-236.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Richard Monastersky, “Arctic Ozone: Signs of Chemical Destruction”, Science News, 133 (11/11/88) 383.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Richard Monastersky, “Clouds Without a Silver Lining”, Science News, 134 (10/15/88) 249-251.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    “Montreal Protocol On Substances That Deplete The Ozone Layer (Final Act) ”, UNEP 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.H. Hildebrand, J.M. Prausnitz and R. L. Scott, Regular and Related Solutions, (VanNostrand Reinhold, New York, 1970).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.S. Basu, H. Pham and D.P. Wilson, “Prediction of solubility of long-chain hydrocarbons using UNIFAC”, Internat. J. Thermophysics, 7, 319–330, (1986).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    C.M. Hansen, “The three dimensional solubility parameter - key to paint component affinities”, J. Paint Technol., 39, 104–117, and 505-514, (1967).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A.F.M. Barton, CRC Handbook of Solubility Parameters and Other Cohesion Parameters, (CRC Press, Boca Raton FL, 1983).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J.K. “Kirk” Bonner, “Searching for a substitute: alternatives to CFC-113” Circuits Mfg., 29 (7), 42–45, (July 1989).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    David W. Bergman, “CFCs: the search for alternatives,” Printed Circuit Assembly, 3 (9), 40–44, (Sept 1989).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J.K. “Kirk” Bonner, “New solvent alternatives, ” Printed Circuit Assembly, 3 (9), 36–38, (Sept 1989).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R.S. Basu and J.K. Bonner, “Alternative to CFCs: new solvents for the electronics industry,”Surface Mount Technol., 3 (8), 34–37, (Dec 1989).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    “Cleaning and Cleanliness Testing Program: A Joint Industry/Military/EPA Program to evaluate Alternatives to Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) for Printed Board Assembly Cleaning,” March 30, 1989 (available from the IPC).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    “Cleaning and Cleanliness Test Program: Phase 1 Test Results,” IPC-TR-580, October 1989.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    “Allied-Signal Phase 2 Final Report” (available from J.K. Bonner, Allied-Signal Gensolv/Baron Blakeslee, 2001 N. Janice Avenue, Melrose Park, IL 60160.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Van Nostrand Reinhold 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Kirk Bonner

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations