Modern Printed Circuits: December 2014

DECEMBER ‘14

Interview with Dave Ryder CEO of Prototron

Advantages of Leadless

Packaging

Recycling PCBs

How PROTOTRON Endured the

Beating the Odds:

Offshoring Movement

CONTENTS

eeweb.com/register

Join Today

READY TO LAUNCH

For the launch of the Tiva C Series Connected LaunchPad, TI has partnered with Exosite, mentioned briefly above, to provide easy access to the LaunchPad from the Internet. The LaunchPad takes about 10 minutes to set up and you can immediately interact with it across the Internet and do things like turn an LED on and off remotely from the website and see the reported temperature as well. It can also display approximate geographic location based on the assigned IP address and display a map of all other connected LaunchPad owners if they are active and plugged-in to Exosite. “In addition, it supports a basic game by enabling someone to interface to the Connected LaunchPad through a serial port from a terminal while someone else is playing with them through their browser. It is basically showing how you can interact remotely with this product and a user even if you are across the globe,” Folkens explained.

START DEVELOPING

The Tiva C Series Connected LaunchPad is shipping now and the price is right; at $19.99 USD, it is less than half the price of other Ethernet-ready kits. The LaunchPad comes complete with quick start and user guides, and ample online support to ensure developers of all backgrounds are well equipped to begin creating cloud-based applications. “We have assembled an online support team to monitor the Engineering-to-Engineering (or E2E) Community,” Folkens said. “Along with this, you also got a free Code Composer Studio Integrated Development Environment, which allows developers to use the full capability. We also support other tool chains like Keil, IAR and Mentor Embedded.

Affordable, versatile, and easy to use, the Tiva Series Connected LaunchPad is well suited for a broad audience and promises to facilitate the expansion of ingenious IoT applications in the cloud. As Folkens concluded, “The target audiences actually are the hobbyists, students and professional engineers. A better way of looking at it is that we are targeting people with innovative ideas and trying to help them get those ideas launched into the cloud.”

http://bit.ly/jd6Wcw

CONTENTS

CONTENTS

Modern Printed Circuits

4

12

14

24

TECH REPORTSwitching to Leadless Logic Big Advantages Over Surface-mount Packages

TECH SERIESPCBs Rise from the Ashes: Part 2Salvaging Precious Metals

INDUSTRY INTERVIEWWhy “America’s Board Shop” is Here to StayInterview with Prototron’s Dave Ryder

TECH REPORTNew Liquid Crystal PolymerEnables High-speed Circuit Fabrication

Contributed by NXP Semiconductors

In the mobile, portable, and wearable

markets, board space is always at a

premium. Designers are constantly being

asked to add functionality while using

less PCB area and lowering overall cost.

Surface-mount packages, with their small

footprints and low profiles, can seem like

a good choice for tight spaces—but how

durable are they? Can something that

small really hold up?

The answer is a definite “yes.” We tested

various ultra-small logic packages to

evaluate their mechanical performance,

and found that that there are some

distinct advantages associated with using

leadless plastic packages.

The Advantages of Switching to

Logic PackagesLEADLESS

Rise from AshesSalvaging Precious Metals Part 2

In the previous article, “PCBs Rise from Ashes,”

methods and processes behind the recycling

of PCBs and components were explored. This

installment takes a look at the recovered

materials themselves—the rare earth elements,

along with precious metals.

By Colin Jeffrey, Contributing Writer

PCB design and production face tight performance

specifications that result in utilizing whatever components

are best suited to achieving that goal. Under these

conditions, little thought is generally given to eventual disposal

of these components at the end of their useful lifecycle. However,

with e-waste (electronic waste) growing at an exponential rate

worldwide, populated and bare PCBs alike are problematic

components of the ever-growing stockpile of discarded equipment.

Rise from AshesBy Colin Jeffrey, Contributing Writer

Salvaging Circuits

To read the previous article, click on the inage above.

Now, with two facilities and an ever-growing North American customer base, “America’s Board Shop” is here to stay.

By 1987, Dave Ryder had worked with a number of board shops in his native Seattle area. During

that time, he had risen from the plating department to general management—but he still wasn’t satisfied. He was not happy with the way things were run or with the way the customers were treated. He effectively saw how not to run a board shop, so he decided to do something about it: he started Prototron Circuits.

Prototron is one of those rare companies that pride itself on always doing what is right for the customer. The company’s two divisions—one in Redmond, Washington and the other in Tucson, Arizona—are made up of individuals with a customer-driven focus. Their credo is “service the customer and the business will grow.” Over the past twenty-eight years they have become one of the industry leaders when it comes to quick-turn prototype printed circuit boards. They pride themselves on having the best quality and delivery performance in the business. EEWeb recently spoke with Prototron’s co-founder and President, Dave Ryder, about what led him to start Prototron, where they are today, and what he thinks is the single most important factor to insure the successful future of the industry in North America.

For over twenty years,

Prototron has endured the offshoring movement.

Interview with Dave Ryder Co-founder and President of Prototron

Prototon photography by Carol Hook

Pg. 14

3

44



In the mobile, portable, and wearable markets, board space is always at a

premium. Designers are constantly being asked to add functionality while using less PCB area and lowering overall cost. Surface-mount packages, with their small footprints and low profiles, can seem like a good choice for tight spaces—but how durable are they? Can something that small really hold up?

The answer is a definite “yes.” We tested various ultra-small logic packages to evaluate their mechanical performance, and found that that there are some distinct advantages associated with using leadless plastic packages.



5

TECH REPORT

5


In the mobile, portable, and wearable markets, board space is always at a

premium. Designers are constantly being asked to add functionality while using less PCB area and lowering overall cost. Surface-mount packages, with their small footprints and low profiles, can seem like a good choice for tight spaces—but how durable are they? Can something that small really hold up?

The answer is a definite “yes.” We tested various ultra-small logic packages to evaluate their mechanical performance, and found that that there are some distinct advantages associated with using leadless plastic packages.



66


Stronger BondsTo begin with, leadless packages perform better in terms of mechanical adherence to the PCB. This is because leadless packages use metal pads, not leads, as the external connection for device pins. The pads on leadless packages present a larger contact area to the PCB. Solder paste does not adhere to the package itself, but only to the surface of the pad or lead, so having a larger surface area for the solder paste to bond with creates a stronger attachment to the board.

Harder to DislodgeCreating a stronger bond with the board results in better mechanical performance, too. That’s because, despite their tiny footprints, leadless packages are harder to dislodge from the PCB using an external force. A stronger solder bond, combined with a smaller footprint, also helps leadless packages perform better in four-point bend tests. The packages enable a greater degree of curvature in the board before the package connection fails. Having a stronger solder connection can also help improve electrical performance, since better “ground bounce” ratings result in lower noise.

“Having a larger surface area for the solder paste to bond with creates a stronger attachment to the board.”

NXP White Paper 6

Sample G5-pin leaded

(0.5 mm pitch)Pad area = 0.040 mm2

Total contact area = 0.20 mm2

Sample A6-pin leadless MicroPak



Sample E5-pin leadless WCSP



Figure 3. Solderable area of leaded, leadless MicroPak, and leadless WCSP packages

The DQFN package, which is a leadless alternative to the TSSOP, has a similar advantage in that

is uses pads, and not leads, to create a larger contact area. The DQFN goes a step further, by

adding a center bond pad that provides even more contact with the PCB.

III. Increased bonding resistance to dislocation forcesCreating a stronger bond with the board results in better mechanical performance. This means

that, despite their tiny footprints, leadless packages are harder to dislodge from the PCB

using an external force. Having a strong solder connection can also help improve electrical

performance.

Two test methodologies commonly used to evaluate the effectiveness of a mechanical bond are

referred to as “Pull” and “Shear” tests. The results included below indicate superior performance

of leadless packages in both these tests.

The leadless advantage in pull tests

The pull test measures how much force is required to dislodge the package from the board. The

packages were tested with a Zwick 1464 tensile machine. Figure 4 shows the direction of the

stress, away from the board. Table 5 lists the test results, while Figure 5 charts the data. Pull force

is given in Newtons.

PCB

Pull

Package

Figure 4. Pull test

NXP White Paper 9

package level. The package cracked or the bond pads separated from the package. From this

standpoint, the leadless WCSP package showed itself to be more susceptible to damage than

the leadless MicroPak or leaded packages.

IV. Better board-level reliabilityNXP’s quality program includes testing for the robustness of the bond between the package and

the PCB. NXP offers one of the largest leadless logic package portfolios in the industry, and the

very large number of options makes it impractical to test every specific package type. Tests are

typically performed on the largest and smallest types in each package category, and the results

are then applied to all packages in that category. For example, since DQFN is a subset of the

HVQFN category, the test results for HVQFN also apply to DQFN.

NXP’s internal tests comply with the requirements of JEDEC and show that NXP’s portfolio meets

or exceeds all the necessary qualifications. Leadless packages are required to pass the 192-hour

highly accelerated stress test (HAST), the 1000-cycle temperature cycle test (TMCL), and the

2000-hour high-temperature storage life test (HTSL) in order to comply with JEDEC standards.

Bend test

A strong solder bond, combined with a smaller footprint, lets leadless packages perform better

in four-point bend tests. This package characteristic enables a greater degree of curvature in the

board before the package connection fails. Results shown below for the bend test include two

package types: a 6-pin leadless MicroPak package with a footprint of 1.0 x 1.0 mm and a pad

pitch of 0.35 mm, and a 28-pin HVQFN with a footprint of 4.0 x 4.0 mm and a pad pitch of 0.5

mm.

Figure 8 shows the test setup. The boards, populated with nine packages each, were tested

facing down. The test involved four points of cyclic bend at 1 cycle per second, with a support

span of 110 mm and a load span of 75 mm. The JEDEC standard J-STD 22B113 requires a

minimum of 200k cycles with less than 60 percent failures.

Support span

IC packages

Load span

Moveableanvil

Fixed anvil Fixed anvil

Printed wiring board

Moveableanvil

Figure 8. Board-level bend test

A 2.0 mm deflection was applied to boards assembled with the leadless MicroPak. There were

no failures found after 1,000k cycles of testing. And analysis of the test samples and PCB traces

showed that the thinner solder lines of the 0.35 mm pitch held up, with no visible joint fatigue

NXP White Paper 4

The ratio of footprint to contact area determines what we call a package’s “solderability.” That

is, packages with a higher ratio of contact area to footprint form a stronger attachment to the

board and have a higher solderability rating.

The first step in calculating solderability is to determine the package footprint, which is the area

within the combined perimeter of the leads and the plastic body. Typically the width times the

length. Table 3 gives these numbers for each sample.

Table 3. Comparative footprints

Sample Package No. of contacts

Dimensions (W x L x H mm)

Pitch (mm)

Total area (mm2)

A Leadless MicroPak 6 1.45 x 1.0 x 0.5 0.5 1.45

B Leadless MicroPak 6 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.5 0.35 1.00

C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56

E Leadless WCSP 5 1.4 x 0.9 x 0.5 0.5 1.26

F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 2.56

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 1.00

Figure 1 charts these footprints. Samples C, D, F, and G, which are the 5- and 6-pin leaded

packages with a standard pitch of 0.5 mm, have the biggest footprints, measuring 2.56 mm2

each. Next in line are Sample A, the 6-pin leadless MicroPak package with a pitch of 0.5 mm,

with a footprint of 1.45 mm2, and Sample E, the 5-pin leadless WCSP package, with a footprint

of 1.26 mm2 also with a pad pitch of 0.5 mm. Samples B and H, the two packages with a pitch

of 0.35 mm, have a footprint of just 1.00 mm2. Using a narrow pitch of 0.35 mm shrinks the

footprint whether the packages uses leads or pads.

A

B

C D

E

F G

H

Sample A6-pin leadless

MicroPak(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample B6-pin leadless


Sample C5-pin

leaded(0.5 mm pitch)

Comparative footprint (total area in mm2)

Sample D6-pin leaded

(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample E5-pin leadless

WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample F5-pin leaded

(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0

Figure 1. Comparative footprint (total area in mm2)

The next step in calculating solderability is to compare the footprint to the total contact area.

The total contact area is the number of contacts multiplied by the area of each contact. For

example, a 6-pin package with contacts that measure 0.05 mm2 has a total contact area of

0.30 mm2 (6 x 0.05). The leadless WCSP package uses bumps, which are round, so the area per

contact is p r2. Table 4 gives the numbers, listing total area, total contact area, and total contact

NXP White Paper 5

area versus total area (solderability) for each sample, and Figure 2 graphs the solderability

ratings.

Table 4. Comparison of total area with total contact area, yielding solderability



Pitch (mm)

Total area (mm2)

Total contact area (mm2)

Total contact vs. total area

A Leadless MicroPak 6 1.45 x 1.0 x 0.5 0.5 1.45 0.39 26.9%

B Leadless MicroPak 6 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.5 0.35 1.00 0.30 29.8%

C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56 0.22 8.6%

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56 0.26 10.3%

E Leadless WCSP 5 1.4 x 0.9 x 0.5 0.5 1.26 0.20 15.8%

F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56 0.30 11.7%

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 2.56 0.20 7.8%

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 1.00 0.19 18.7%

AB

CD

E

F

G

H

Solderability = total contact area versus total area30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0





Sample C5-pin leaded

(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


Figure 2. Comparative solderability

Samples B and H, the two packages with a narrow pitch of 0.35 mm, have the same footprint,

but Sample B, the leadless MicroPak, has a much greater contact area, making the solderability

rating more than the leaded Sample H. Similarly, among the packages with a pitch of 0.5 mm,

Sample A, the 6-pin leadless MicroPak, offers the best solderability.

Figure 3 compares the solderable area of Sample A, the 6-pin leadless MicroPak (middle),

Sample G, the 5-pin leaded package (left), and Sample E, the 5-pin leadless WCSP package

(right). The pads of the leadless MicroPak package are relatively larger than the pins and bumps

on the other packages, so they create a larger contact area. The fact that the MicroPak package

has an extra pad makes the contact area even bigger. In total, the MicroPak pads create a

contact area that is 38 percent larger than other packages with the same-sized footprint.

7

TECH REPORT

7

Stronger BondsTo begin with, leadless packages perform better in terms of mechanical adherence to the PCB. This is because leadless packages use metal pads, not leads, as the external connection for device pins. The pads on leadless packages present a larger contact area to the PCB. Solder paste does not adhere to the package itself, but only to the surface of the pad or lead, so having a larger surface area for the solder paste to bond with creates a stronger attachment to the board.

Harder to DislodgeCreating a stronger bond with the board results in better mechanical performance, too. That’s because, despite their tiny footprints, leadless packages are harder to dislodge from the PCB using an external force. A stronger solder bond, combined with a smaller footprint, also helps leadless packages perform better in four-point bend tests. The packages enable a greater degree of curvature in the board before the package connection fails. Having a stronger solder connection can also help improve electrical performance, since better “ground bounce” ratings result in lower noise.

“Having a larger surface area for the solder paste to bond with creates a stronger attachment to the board.”

NXP White Paper 6

















performance.









PCB

Pull

Package

Figure 4. Pull test

NXP White Paper 9

package level. The package cracked or the bond pads separated from the package. From this

standpoint, the leadless WCSP package showed itself to be more susceptible to damage than

the leadless MicroPak or leaded packages.

IV. Better board-level reliabilityNXP’s quality program includes testing for the robustness of the bond between the package and

the PCB. NXP offers one of the largest leadless logic package portfolios in the industry, and the

very large number of options makes it impractical to test every specific package type. Tests are

typically performed on the largest and smallest types in each package category, and the results

are then applied to all packages in that category. For example, since DQFN is a subset of the

HVQFN category, the test results for HVQFN also apply to DQFN.

NXP’s internal tests comply with the requirements of JEDEC and show that NXP’s portfolio meets

or exceeds all the necessary qualifications. Leadless packages are required to pass the 192-hour

highly accelerated stress test (HAST), the 1000-cycle temperature cycle test (TMCL), and the

2000-hour high-temperature storage life test (HTSL) in order to comply with JEDEC standards.

Bend test

A strong solder bond, combined with a smaller footprint, lets leadless packages perform better

in four-point bend tests. This package characteristic enables a greater degree of curvature in the

board before the package connection fails. Results shown below for the bend test include two

package types: a 6-pin leadless MicroPak package with a footprint of 1.0 x 1.0 mm and a pad

pitch of 0.35 mm, and a 28-pin HVQFN with a footprint of 4.0 x 4.0 mm and a pad pitch of 0.5

mm.

Figure 8 shows the test setup. The boards, populated with nine packages each, were tested

facing down. The test involved four points of cyclic bend at 1 cycle per second, with a support

span of 110 mm and a load span of 75 mm. The JEDEC standard J-STD 22B113 requires a

minimum of 200k cycles with less than 60 percent failures.

Support span

IC packages

Load span

Moveableanvil

Fixed anvil Fixed anvil

Printed wiring board

Moveableanvil

Figure 8. Board-level bend test

A 2.0 mm deflection was applied to boards assembled with the leadless MicroPak. There were

no failures found after 1,000k cycles of testing. And analysis of the test samples and PCB traces

showed that the thinner solder lines of the 0.35 mm pitch held up, with no visible joint fatigue

NXP White Paper 4

The ratio of footprint to contact area determines what we call a package’s “solderability.” That

is, packages with a higher ratio of contact area to footprint form a stronger attachment to the

board and have a higher solderability rating.

The first step in calculating solderability is to determine the package footprint, which is the area

within the combined perimeter of the leads and the plastic body. Typically the width times the

length. Table 3 gives these numbers for each sample.

Table 3. Comparative footprints



Pitch (mm)

Total area (mm2)



C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56


F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 2.56

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 1.00

Figure 1 charts these footprints. Samples C, D, F, and G, which are the 5- and 6-pin leaded

packages with a standard pitch of 0.5 mm, have the biggest footprints, measuring 2.56 mm2

each. Next in line are Sample A, the 6-pin leadless MicroPak package with a pitch of 0.5 mm,

with a footprint of 1.45 mm2, and Sample E, the 5-pin leadless WCSP package, with a footprint

of 1.26 mm2 also with a pad pitch of 0.5 mm. Samples B and H, the two packages with a pitch

of 0.35 mm, have a footprint of just 1.00 mm2. Using a narrow pitch of 0.35 mm shrinks the

footprint whether the packages uses leads or pads.

A

B

C D

E

F G

H





Sample C5-pin


Comparative footprint (total area in mm2)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0

Figure 1. Comparative footprint (total area in mm2)

The next step in calculating solderability is to compare the footprint to the total contact area.

The total contact area is the number of contacts multiplied by the area of each contact. For

example, a 6-pin package with contacts that measure 0.05 mm2 has a total contact area of

0.30 mm2 (6 x 0.05). The leadless WCSP package uses bumps, which are round, so the area per

contact is p r2. Table 4 gives the numbers, listing total area, total contact area, and total contact

NXP White Paper 5

area versus total area (solderability) for each sample, and Figure 2 graphs the solderability

ratings.

Table 4. Comparison of total area with total contact area, yielding solderability



Pitch (mm)

Total area (mm2)

Total contact area (mm2)

Total contact vs. total area

A Leadless MicroPak 6 1.45 x 1.0 x 0.5 0.5 1.45 0.39 26.9%

B Leadless MicroPak 6 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.5 0.35 1.00 0.30 29.8%

C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56 0.22 8.6%

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56 0.26 10.3%

E Leadless WCSP 5 1.4 x 0.9 x 0.5 0.5 1.26 0.20 15.8%

F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 2.56 0.30 11.7%

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 2.56 0.20 7.8%

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 1.00 0.19 18.7%

AB

CD

E

F

G

H

Solderability = total contact area versus total area30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0






(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


Figure 2. Comparative solderability

Samples B and H, the two packages with a narrow pitch of 0.35 mm, have the same footprint,

but Sample B, the leadless MicroPak, has a much greater contact area, making the solderability

rating more than the leaded Sample H. Similarly, among the packages with a pitch of 0.5 mm,

Sample A, the 6-pin leadless MicroPak, offers the best solderability.

Figure 3 compares the solderable area of Sample A, the 6-pin leadless MicroPak (middle),

Sample G, the 5-pin leaded package (left), and Sample E, the 5-pin leadless WCSP package

(right). The pads of the leadless MicroPak package are relatively larger than the pins and bumps

on the other packages, so they create a larger contact area. The fact that the MicroPak package

has an extra pad makes the contact area even bigger. In total, the MicroPak pads create a

contact area that is 38 percent larger than other packages with the same-sized footprint.

88


The Widest SelectionNXP is the world’s number-one volume supplier of logic and offers the industry’s largest portfolio of logic functions in the smallest packages. That includes more than 50 leadless packages, all qualified for use in automotive-grade environments.

NXP’s leadless DQFN, MicroPak, and Diamond packages offer smallest-in-class footprints and can successfully replace bigger, leaded packages like TSSOP and PicoGate while delivering the added benefits of improved mechanical performance, simpler assembly, and lower overall cost. Leadless plastic packages offer the extra advantage of lowering risk, too, since pin-compatible versions can be used to second-source larger leaded packages.

Leaded package

Leadless equivalent

Space savings

Best for functions of

TSSOP DQFN Up to 76% smaller 10+ pins

PicoGate MicroPak Up to 62% smaller 6 to 10 pins

Diamond25% smaller

than smallest MicroPak (XSON6)

5 pins

Recommended Replacements for Leaded Packages

“Leadless plastic packages

offer the extra advantage of lowering risk,

too, since pin-compatible

versions can be used to

second-source larger leaded

packages.”

Get the DetailsOur white paper, titled “Save space and improve mechanical performance by moving your logic solutions from leaded to leadless packages,” summarizes the results of our comparison tests and introduces the three leadless formats we recommend for logic – DQFN, MicroPak, and Diamond. To download the white paper please visit: http://www.nxp.com/campaigns/logic-packaging/

NXP White Paper 7

Table 5. Results of pull test



Pitch (mm)

Pull force (N)



C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 14.0

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 15.0


F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 16.0

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 13.0

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 6.6

A

B C D

E

F

G

H

Pull force (Newtons)






(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


25

0

5

10

15

20

Figure 5. Results of pull test

Samples A and B, the two leadless MicroPak packages, withstood the greatest pull force. The

larger pads and contact area of the MicroPak package increases its resistance to being dislodged

from the PCB. This is due to the fact that there is more solder between the package leads and

the board, which creates a stronger bond that is more difficult to pull apart.

The leadless advantage in shear tests

The second test for evaluating the strength of the solder bond is referred to as a shear test,

which tests the ability of a package to withstand pressure applied to the side of the package.

The setup utilized a Dage 2400/PC machine to measure the shear force necessary to dislodge

the package from the PCB as shown in Figure 6. Table 6 and Figure 7 give the results, with shear

force listed in Newtons. NXP White Paper 8

PCB

Shear Package

Figure 6. Shear test

Table 6. Results of shear test



Pitch (mm)

Shear force (N)



C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 13.0

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 15.0


F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 17.0

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 12.0

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 6.6

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

Shear force (Newtons)






(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


0

5

10

15

20

Figure 7. Results of shear test

Samples A and B, the two leadless MicroPak packages, showed the best performance. The

superior solder bond, enabled by the larger pad size and larger contact area, gives the MicroPak

package greater ability to withstand shear forces, and results in higher board-level reliability for

MicroPak packages.

The pull and shear tests produced failures at the PCB level and at the package level. The leadless

MicroPak and leaded packages only had failures at the PCB level: the land traces were pulled off

the PCB or the solder joints fractured. The leadless WCSP package, however, had failures at the

PCB printing profile using a 125 µm stencil

Solder paste applied to both package landing pads on the dual-footprint layout.

Leaded package after re-flow with solder paste applied to both landing pads, leaded and leadless.

Leaded package without solder paste applied under the leaded package, no solder bleeding.

No solder under componentSolder under component

Solder paste applied to the leadless package landing pads on the dual-footprint layout.

Solder paste applied to the leaded package landing pads on the dual-footprint layout.

NXP White Paper 6

















performance.









PCB

Pull

Package

Figure 4. Pull test

NXP White Paper 8

PCB

Shear Package





Pitch (mm)

Shear force (N)



C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 13.0

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 15.0


F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 17.0

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 12.0

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 6.6

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H







(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


0

5

10

15

20





MicroPak packages.




9

TECH REPORT

9

The Widest SelectionNXP is the world’s number-one volume supplier of logic and offers the industry’s largest portfolio of logic functions in the smallest packages. That includes more than 50 leadless packages, all qualified for use in automotive-grade environments.

NXP’s leadless DQFN, MicroPak, and Diamond packages offer smallest-in-class footprints and can successfully replace bigger, leaded packages like TSSOP and PicoGate while delivering the added benefits of improved mechanical performance, simpler assembly, and lower overall cost. Leadless plastic packages offer the extra advantage of lowering risk, too, since pin-compatible versions can be used to second-source larger leaded packages.

Leaded package

Leadless equivalent

Space savings

Best for functions of

TSSOP DQFN Up to 76% smaller 10+ pins

PicoGate MicroPak Up to 62% smaller 6 to 10 pins

Diamond25% smaller

than smallest MicroPak (XSON6)

5 pins

Recommended Replacements for Leaded Packages

“Leadless plastic packages

offer the extra advantage of lowering risk,

too, since pin-compatible

versions can be used to

second-source larger leaded

packages.”

Get the DetailsOur white paper, titled “Save space and improve mechanical performance by moving your logic solutions from leaded to leadless packages,” summarizes the results of our comparison tests and introduces the three leadless formats we recommend for logic – DQFN, MicroPak, and Diamond. To download the white paper please visit: http://www.nxp.com/campaigns/logic-packaging/

NXP White Paper 7

Table 5. Results of pull test



Pitch (mm)

Pull force (N)



C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 14.0

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 15.0


F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 16.0

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 13.0

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 6.6

A

B C D

E

F

G

H

Pull force (Newtons)






(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


25

0

5

10

15

20

Figure 5. Results of pull test

Samples A and B, the two leadless MicroPak packages, withstood the greatest pull force. The

larger pads and contact area of the MicroPak package increases its resistance to being dislodged

from the PCB. This is due to the fact that there is more solder between the package leads and

the board, which creates a stronger bond that is more difficult to pull apart.

The leadless advantage in shear tests

The second test for evaluating the strength of the solder bond is referred to as a shear test,

which tests the ability of a package to withstand pressure applied to the side of the package.

The setup utilized a Dage 2400/PC machine to measure the shear force necessary to dislodge

the package from the PCB as shown in Figure 6. Table 6 and Figure 7 give the results, with shear

force listed in Newtons. NXP White Paper 8

PCB

Shear Package





Pitch (mm)

Shear force (N)



C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 13.0

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 15.0


F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 17.0

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 12.0

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 6.6

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H







(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


0

5

10

15

20





MicroPak packages.




PCB printing profile using a 125 µm stencil

Solder paste applied to both package landing pads on the dual-footprint layout.

Leaded package after re-flow with solder paste applied to both landing pads, leaded and leadless.

Leaded package without solder paste applied under the leaded package, no solder bleeding.

No solder under componentSolder under component

Solder paste applied to the leadless package landing pads on the dual-footprint layout.

Solder paste applied to the leaded package landing pads on the dual-footprint layout.

NXP White Paper 6

















performance.









PCB

Pull

Package

Figure 4. Pull test

NXP White Paper 8

PCB

Shear Package





Pitch (mm)

Shear force (N)



C Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 13.0

D Leaded 6 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 15.0


F Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.6 0.5 17.0

G Leaded 5 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.55 0.5 12.0

H Leaded 5 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.48 0.35 6.6

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H







(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


WCSP(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)


(0.5 mm pitch)

Sample H5-pin


0

5

10

15

20





MicroPak packages.




Your Circuit Starts Here.Sign up to design, share, and collaborate

on your next project—big or small.

Click Here to Sign Up

http://www.schematics.com

http://bit.ly/1nJivok

1212


By James Rathburn, HSIO Technologies

Limitations of Conventional Existing TechnologyIn many ways, the printed circuit industry has been driven by the mobile and handset market to achieve finer lines and spaces with higher density. The domestic circuit market has adopted laser direct imaging systems and laser drilled microvias over the last several years as advancements in fabrication techniques. In general, domestic suppliers can supply 75-micron lines and spaces with multi-layer construction, with the availability of 50-micron lines and spaces in some cases. The supplier pool is dramatically reduced below 50-micron lines and spaces, with blind and buried vias likely required. Material sets available to traditional fabrication combined with the line and space capabilities drive the overall stack up for impedance control.

For high speed applications, loss associated with glass weave and solder mask are an issue, and conventional via technology has become a major source of impedance mismatch and signal parasitic effects. In general, signal integrity, high aspect ratio vias and line and space requirements limit the relationship between semiconductor packaging and the printed circuit board the chips are mounted to. Whether the application is a multi-layer rigid PCB, a flex circuit, or rigid flex there is a need for a high-speed, high-density alternative. The domestic printed circuit industry is reluctant to invest significant capital to advance capabilities in many cases due to relatively low margins and off shore competition for commodity production.

HSIO Philosophy and Technology DevelopmentHSIO has taken the approach that there is no need for another supplier that replicates the existing capabilities and infrastructure. A list of key customers was interviewed and asked what capabilities are needed for future circuit requirements. The common theme was finer lines and spaces, higher routing densities and signal integrity improvements. HSIO did not have a legacy manufacturing facility with capital invested in infrastructure to produce existing technology, and the focus was to create a new way of creating circuits that leverages existing techniques to make it easy for suppliers to adopt production. Key parameters are:

• Lines and spaces below 50-micron multi-layer, high-density interconnect

• Signal integrity beyond 40GHz

• Material sets that can be processed with conventional means

• Via construction with improvements over conventional barrel plated or micro vias

• Application capability for rigid, flexible and rigid flex and semiconductor packaging

• System level approach to improving the signal channel considering more than just the PCB

• Production capability for small, medium, and large volume

• Format capability for small, medium, and large size circuit assemblies

The development focus was directed at starting with an improvement in material used to build the circuit stack. Liquid Crystal Polymer is used widely in the connector industry, which is another area of HSIO expertise, but mostly in an injection molded construction. LCP has been used in the flexible circuit industry as an alternative to Polyimid or Kapton with limited experience. HSIO focused on creating a circuit architecture that uses LCP material in ways that can be processed with the same equipment used to produce conventional circuits, as well as the laser system HSIO uses to produce connector and socket products. LCP has properties that make it ideal for high-speed circuit fabrication.

The following article provides an overview of the LCP circuit fabrication process with the philosophy of a technology building block or tool box approach. Visit EEWeb.com to read the full article—by clicking the image below:

HIGH-SPEED CIRCUITFabrication

Liquid Crystal Polymer Enables

New

13

TECH REPORT

13

By James Rathburn, HSIO Technologies

Limitations of Conventional Existing TechnologyIn many ways, the printed circuit industry has been driven by the mobile and handset market to achieve finer lines and spaces with higher density. The domestic circuit market has adopted laser direct imaging systems and laser drilled microvias over the last several years as advancements in fabrication techniques. In general, domestic suppliers can supply 75-micron lines and spaces with multi-layer construction, with the availability of 50-micron lines and spaces in some cases. The supplier pool is dramatically reduced below 50-micron lines and spaces, with blind and buried vias likely required. Material sets available to traditional fabrication combined with the line and space capabilities drive the overall stack up for impedance control.

For high speed applications, loss associated with glass weave and solder mask are an issue, and conventional via technology has become a major source of impedance mismatch and signal parasitic effects. In general, signal integrity, high aspect ratio vias and line and space requirements limit the relationship between semiconductor packaging and the printed circuit board the chips are mounted to. Whether the application is a multi-layer rigid PCB, a flex circuit, or rigid flex there is a need for a high-speed, high-density alternative. The domestic printed circuit industry is reluctant to invest significant capital to advance capabilities in many cases due to relatively low margins and off shore competition for commodity production.

HSIO Philosophy and Technology DevelopmentHSIO has taken the approach that there is no need for another supplier that replicates the existing capabilities and infrastructure. A list of key customers was interviewed and asked what capabilities are needed for future circuit requirements. The common theme was finer lines and spaces, higher routing densities and signal integrity improvements. HSIO did not have a legacy manufacturing facility with capital invested in infrastructure to produce existing technology, and the focus was to create a new way of creating circuits that leverages existing techniques to make it easy for suppliers to adopt production. Key parameters are:

• Lines and spaces below 50-micron multi-layer, high-density interconnect

• Signal integrity beyond 40GHz

• Material sets that can be processed with conventional means

• Via construction with improvements over conventional barrel plated or micro vias

• Application capability for rigid, flexible and rigid flex and semiconductor packaging

• System level approach to improving the signal channel considering more than just the PCB

• Production capability for small, medium, and large volume

• Format capability for small, medium, and large size circuit assemblies

The development focus was directed at starting with an improvement in material used to build the circuit stack. Liquid Crystal Polymer is used widely in the connector industry, which is another area of HSIO expertise, but mostly in an injection molded construction. LCP has been used in the flexible circuit industry as an alternative to Polyimid or Kapton with limited experience. HSIO focused on creating a circuit architecture that uses LCP material in ways that can be processed with the same equipment used to produce conventional circuits, as well as the laser system HSIO uses to produce connector and socket products. LCP has properties that make it ideal for high-speed circuit fabrication.

The following article provides an overview of the LCP circuit fabrication process with the philosophy of a technology building block or tool box approach. Visit EEWeb.com to read the full article—by clicking the image below:

HIGH-SPEED CIRCUITFabrication

Liquid Crystal Polymer Enables

New

14










INDUSTRY INTERVIEW

15









16


Prototron is a quick-turn prototype shop—was that always the case?

Yes, absolutely. I knew that this was the way to go from the start. During my ten years of experience, I’d seen time and time again that our customers wanted their boards in days—not weeks—and I also saw how they were willing to pay just about any premium price to get them more quickly. I figured that we have to build them anyway, so why not service the customer and give them exactly what they need?

When we started our business, there were around twenty-five shops in the Seattle area. Today, we are one of the only traditional PCB shops left in Washington State, and I attribute that to our decision to go with the prototypes and the small-quantity, quick-turn PCBs. When we first started, our competitors were production-type facilities with lead times averaging between four and six weeks—and sometimes even further out. We were able to turn orders in five working days. The other shop owners laughed at us for being a small-volume, quick-turn facility, but we stuck to our guns and were eventually the only ones to survive.

The hardest part of starting a business is getting customers and sales. What was your experience with Prototron at this beginning stage?

I had been in boards for around ten years before we started the company.

Of course, over ten years in management spots, I started to accumulate lists of customers and made relationships with people, so we knew some people to call. We also got pretty aggressive with a mailing campaign by using a typewriter and drafting up flyers and getting copies made. This was before the days of e-mail, of course. That was enough to get us started and at about the year mark, we went out to look for our first real salesperson, which really turned the corner for us. At that point we started growing and adding people, equipment, processes, and technology. Basically, it has carried on in that vein since then. We have now grown to the point where we have two facilities: Redmond at 35,000 square feet and Tucson, which has 19,000 square feet.

What makes Prototron the best in your customer’s eyes?

We take things like due dates quite seriously. The on-time rate in the industry today is at 80 percent, so we are at quite a distance ahead of most others out there. Giving the customer what they are asking for and making sure the quality and communication and the integrity are all there. We have always been a prototype shop, but we have always built with production quality as our goal—it’s never been a trial-and-error scenario.

When you think about why someone pays a premium for a 24-hour turnaround, they are doing so because it is so important that the board gets done in that amount of time. Prototron deals in a world where there is visibility all the way up to the

CEO—the customers need the board to make a milestone, deadline, or to go to a trade show. The customer typically deals in an elite world where if we don’t deliver that board on time, then we have let the customer down; but this doesn’t happen at Prototron.

Many other board shops promise as high an on-time rate as we do, but do they really do it? There is a reason why the industry average for on-time delivery is 83 percent. Prototron insists on a pure measurement of our on-time delivery performance. By that, I mean that we set the date and that’s it. If we are going to miss a date we miss the date and count it. Every other shop I know calls the customer, gets a new date and then if they make that date, they call it on time. We will deem it late even if the customer gives us a new date. We live and die with on-time delivery.

Do work with the customer to not only make sure they have good, functional prototype, but also a manufacturable prototype?

That is exactly what we do. In the beginning phases, we have a lot of communication back and forth with our pre-engineering or CAM department about what is buildable and what is not. Frankly, we will see stuff that we know that we can build, and if it is not buildable in production quantities. We will point those things out to the customer—we can give them what they are asking for, but they are not going to like this when they go offshore.

Prototron’s National Sales Manager, Russ Adams, can tell you what it takes:

≫ Attending over twenty trade shows

≫ A strong marketing budget with clear marketing message

≫ An extensive proprietary lead-generation plan

≫ Most importantly, a national sales force made up of ten experienced and seasoned sales professionals located all around the United States

≫ A sales manager who is on the road three out of every four weeks making sure that all those plates are spinning all the time.

“We have always been a prototype shop and we have always

built with production quality as our goal—

it has never been a trial-

and-error scenario.”

How do you handle sales and marketing for

a quick-turn prototype shop?

INDUSTRY INTERVIEW

17

Prototron is a quick-turn prototype shop—was that always the case?

Yes, absolutely. I knew that this was the way to go from the start. During my ten years of experience, I’d seen time and time again that our customers wanted their boards in days—not weeks—and I also saw how they were willing to pay just about any premium price to get them more quickly. I figured that we have to build them anyway, so why not service the customer and give them exactly what they need?

When we started our business, there were around twenty-five shops in the Seattle area. Today, we are one of the only traditional PCB shops left in Washington State, and I attribute that to our decision to go with the prototypes and the small-quantity, quick-turn PCBs. When we first started, our competitors were production-type facilities with lead times averaging between four and six weeks—and sometimes even further out. We were able to turn orders in five working days. The other shop owners laughed at us for being a small-volume, quick-turn facility, but we stuck to our guns and were eventually the only ones to survive.

The hardest part of starting a business is getting customers and sales. What was your experience with Prototron at this beginning stage?

I had been in boards for around ten years before we started the company.

Of course, over ten years in management spots, I started to accumulate lists of customers and made relationships with people, so we knew some people to call. We also got pretty aggressive with a mailing campaign by using a typewriter and drafting up flyers and getting copies made. This was before the days of e-mail, of course. That was enough to get us started and at about the year mark, we went out to look for our first real salesperson, which really turned the corner for us. At that point we started growing and adding people, equipment, processes, and technology. Basically, it has carried on in that vein since then. We have now grown to the point where we have two facilities: Redmond at 35,000 square feet and Tucson, which has 19,000 square feet.

What makes Prototron the best in your customer’s eyes?

We take things like due dates quite seriously. The on-time rate in the industry today is at 80 percent, so we are at quite a distance ahead of most others out there. Giving the customer what they are asking for and making sure the quality and communication and the integrity are all there. We have always been a prototype shop, but we have always built with production quality as our goal—it’s never been a trial-and-error scenario.

When you think about why someone pays a premium for a 24-hour turnaround, they are doing so because it is so important that the board gets done in that amount of time. Prototron deals in a world where there is visibility all the way up to the

CEO—the customers need the board to make a milestone, deadline, or to go to a trade show. The customer typically deals in an elite world where if we don’t deliver that board on time, then we have let the customer down; but this doesn’t happen at Prototron.

Many other board shops promise as high an on-time rate as we do, but do they really do it? There is a reason why the industry average for on-time delivery is 83 percent. Prototron insists on a pure measurement of our on-time delivery performance. By that, I mean that we set the date and that’s it. If we are going to miss a date we miss the date and count it. Every other shop I know calls the customer, gets a new date and then if they make that date, they call it on time. We will deem it late even if the customer gives us a new date. We live and die with on-time delivery.

Do work with the customer to not only make sure they have good, functional prototype, but also a manufacturable prototype?

That is exactly what we do. In the beginning phases, we have a lot of communication back and forth with our pre-engineering or CAM department about what is buildable and what is not. Frankly, we will see stuff that we know that we can build, and if it is not buildable in production quantities. We will point those things out to the customer—we can give them what they are asking for, but they are not going to like this when they go offshore.

Prototron’s National Sales Manager, Russ Adams, can tell you what it takes:

≫ Attending over twenty trade shows

≫ A strong marketing budget with clear marketing message

≫ An extensive proprietary lead-generation plan

≫ Most importantly, a national sales force made up of ten experienced and seasoned sales professionals located all around the United States

≫ A sales manager who is on the road three out of every four weeks making sure that all those plates are spinning all the time.

“We have always been a prototype shop and we have always

built with production quality as our goal—

it has never been a trial-

and-error scenario.”

How do you handle sales and marketing for

a quick-turn prototype shop?

18


For a lot of our customers, we function as an additional research and development department. They just place a call to us, speak with someone in our pre-engineering department and if we don’t have an answer for their questions, then we will hook you up with someone who can help you get there. The last thing we want is for the customer to be unhappy with the product that they have purchased from us. We like to say that the design is not complete until that first board is built.

Does each facility do different tasks?

Yes. We bought the Tucson facility in 1999 so that we could handle military work. We also work on RF products built from special materials in that facility. Redmond does more commercial and new product development work.

Your slogan is “Prototron: America’s Board Shop.” How important is it to you that you are US-based, and what kind of benefit does it add for your customers?

If the customer has a problem with a board from Prototron, we will work hard to make sure we fix it. We speak the same language as the majority of our customers, which are almost all located

in North America. This means we are easily accessible immediately by phone, e-mail, or in person. We have sales people in various locations that can get to the customer quickly to further help them with any issues that may come up. We believe that it is critically important that our customers know exactly where their boards come from. Many of our customers are in the defense and security business, so their boards should not be built offshore. Then again, many of our customers are involved in inventions and in new product development, and we don’t want those ideas going offshore where they can be copied.

Prototron has already come a long way since its inception. Where do you hope to be in the next couple of years?

We certainly want to continue steady growth. From a technology standpoint, things are growing at such an amazing pace right now that it is hard to say what things will look like in another 36 or 48 months. However, we expect more of the same and to build smaller holes and smaller traces—the technology will definitely progress to a smaller

“We take things like due dates quite seriously. We have an on-time rate of over 98% year after year.

The on-time rate in the industry today is at 80 percent, so we are at quite a distance ahead of most

others out there.”

INDUSTRY INTERVIEW

19

For a lot of our customers, we function as an additional research and development department. They just place a call to us, speak with someone in our pre-engineering department and if we don’t have an answer for their questions, then we will hook you up with someone who can help you get there. The last thing we want is for the customer to be unhappy with the product that they have purchased from us. We like to say that the design is not complete until that first board is built.

Does each facility do different tasks?

Yes. We bought the Tucson facility in 1999 so that we could handle military work. We also work on RF products built from special materials in that facility. Redmond does more commercial and new product development work.

Your slogan is “Prototron: America’s Board Shop.” How important is it to you that you are US-based, and what kind of benefit does it add for your customers?

If the customer has a problem with a board from Prototron, we will work hard to make sure we fix it. We speak the same language as the majority of our customers, which are almost all located

in North America. This means we are easily accessible immediately by phone, e-mail, or in person. We have sales people in various locations that can get to the customer quickly to further help them with any issues that may come up. We believe that it is critically important that our customers know exactly where their boards come from. Many of our customers are in the defense and security business, so their boards should not be built offshore. Then again, many of our customers are involved in inventions and in new product development, and we don’t want those ideas going offshore where they can be copied.

Prototron has already come a long way since its inception. Where do you hope to be in the next couple of years?

We certainly want to continue steady growth. From a technology standpoint, things are growing at such an amazing pace right now that it is hard to say what things will look like in another 36 or 48 months. However, we expect more of the same and to build smaller holes and smaller traces—the technology will definitely progress to a smaller

“We take things like due dates quite seriously. We have an on-time rate of over 98% year after year.

The on-time rate in the industry today is at 80 percent, so we are at quite a distance ahead of most

others out there.”

20


8:00 AM PO is received and order is released from sales.

8:15 AM Order has been Previewed and released to CAM.

11:45 AM Order through the CAM department and files sent to direct imaging and put in planning.

12:00 PM Planning releases order to production and material is pulled and put in dryfilm.

1:30 PM Inner layers coated, exposed on the maskless DI, developed and taken to etch.

2:15 PM Inner layers have been etched, stripped, punched and taken to AOI.

3:15 PM Inner layers have been AOI’d, inspected, oxided, and taken to layup.

7:30 PM Layers have been layed up, pressed and taken to drilling.

9:00 PM Panels have been drilled and taken to plating for cuposit.

11:30 PM Panels have been cuposited and taken back to dryfilm for final Image.

12:00 AM Panels coated, imaged on the maskless D. I., inspected, and taken to plating.

2:00 AM Panels have been plated and taken to strip/etch.

3:00 AM Panels have been etched and inspected and taken to screening.

6:00 AM Panels have been LPI’d, ID’d, and taken to surface finish.

6:30 AM Panels have been through HAL and taken to test (Add 1hr for ENIG).

7:00 AM Panels have been tested and taken to fab.

7:30 AM Order has been routed and taken to Q.C. for final inspection.

8:00 AM Order has been inspected.

(Add 1+ hours if F.A./ cross section is required)

This time study is based on a Standard 12x18 12 layer during average production volumes that has been

expedited through the facility.

and tighter fashion. We are in the speed business first and foremost and we follow what our customer’s needs are when it comes to technology. Our customers dictate our technology level both today and in the future.

What is the state of the board shop industry today?

If you were to look up IPC’s numbers, you would see a flat line in terms of domestic production. Everyone has been struggling right now due to offshoring. If you look

“Things are growing at such an amazing pace right now that it is hard to say what things will

look like in another 36 or 48 months.”

at pre-9/11 numbers, there were around 1,500 shops in the US, and today, we are somewhere in the 250 to 300 range. It’s definitely very competitive out there.

There is a lot of talk nowadays about “onshoring” and bringing business back to the US. How do you see that playing out?

We have seen a bit of this affecting business. Occasionally, we’ll see a few customers trying to place bigger quantity orders with us compared to what we have been seeing for a period of time. In talking with customers directly, you do hear that things are not as easy as people would like you to believe in terms of purchasing offshore—everything is all good until you have a problem and you can’t get anybody to help you. Sometimes the shipping is a problem, so we are seeing a shift in things being manufactured in the US, but price remains a pretty major factor in that.

Is cost parity with offshore shops the biggest issue facing American shops like Prototron?

Price is always an issue. We face that challenge on a pretty regular basis. There are a number of small shops out there that will give you whatever your files say; this is usually pretty cheap, which puts us at a disadvantage because the customer thinks we are over-charging

them. However, we believe that by going the extra mile with the customer and by manufacturing here in the US, that we offer a more dependable product. We offer UL, ITAR, and ISO—so we believe we are everything you could ask for in a board shop. We like to say that if you are truly serious about your boards then you should buy from Prototron Circuits.

How important is longevity of employees at Prototron?

Longevity of employees is a key factor for us. This is what makes us reliable and in our 28 years in business: we have more than a few employees that have been here for over 20 years, which really says something about the type of organization we are. Our goal has always been to make Prototron a great place to work and I like to think we have accomplished that. In fact, a few years ago when we hired a new Operations Manager who had worked with a number of shops during his career we heard that he went home and told his wife; “You wouldn’t believe how polite everyone is at Prototron.” I took that as a compliment.

How do you build a 12-layer board in one day?

For more information, go to: www.prototron.com.

INDUSTRY INTERVIEW

21

8:00 AM PO is received and order is released from sales.

8:15 AM Order has been Previewed and released to CAM.

11:45 AM Order through the CAM department and files sent to direct imaging and put in planning.

12:00 PM Planning releases order to production and material is pulled and put in dryfilm.

1:30 PM Inner layers coated, exposed on the maskless DI, developed and taken to etch.

2:15 PM Inner layers have been etched, stripped, punched and taken to AOI.

3:15 PM Inner layers have been AOI’d, inspected, oxided, and taken to layup.

7:30 PM Layers have been layed up, pressed and taken to drilling.

9:00 PM Panels have been drilled and taken to plating for cuposit.

11:30 PM Panels have been cuposited and taken back to dryfilm for final Image.

12:00 AM Panels coated, imaged on the maskless D. I., inspected, and taken to plating.

2:00 AM Panels have been plated and taken to strip/etch.

3:00 AM Panels have been etched and inspected and taken to screening.

6:00 AM Panels have been LPI’d, ID’d, and taken to surface finish.

6:30 AM Panels have been through HAL and taken to test (Add 1hr for ENIG).

7:00 AM Panels have been tested and taken to fab.

7:30 AM Order has been routed and taken to Q.C. for final inspection.

8:00 AM Order has been inspected.

(Add 1+ hours if F.A./ cross section is required)

This time study is based on a Standard 12x18 12 layer during average production volumes that has been

expedited through the facility.

and tighter fashion. We are in the speed business first and foremost and we follow what our customer’s needs are when it comes to technology. Our customers dictate our technology level both today and in the future.

What is the state of the board shop industry today?

If you were to look up IPC’s numbers, you would see a flat line in terms of domestic production. Everyone has been struggling right now due to offshoring. If you look

“Things are growing at such an amazing pace right now that it is hard to say what things will

look like in another 36 or 48 months.”

at pre-9/11 numbers, there were around 1,500 shops in the US, and today, we are somewhere in the 250 to 300 range. It’s definitely very competitive out there.

There is a lot of talk nowadays about “onshoring” and bringing business back to the US. How do you see that playing out?

We have seen a bit of this affecting business. Occasionally, we’ll see a few customers trying to place bigger quantity orders with us compared to what we have been seeing for a period of time. In talking with customers directly, you do hear that things are not as easy as people would like you to believe in terms of purchasing offshore—everything is all good until you have a problem and you can’t get anybody to help you. Sometimes the shipping is a problem, so we are seeing a shift in things being manufactured in the US, but price remains a pretty major factor in that.

Is cost parity with offshore shops the biggest issue facing American shops like Prototron?

Price is always an issue. We face that challenge on a pretty regular basis. There are a number of small shops out there that will give you whatever your files say; this is usually pretty cheap, which puts us at a disadvantage because the customer thinks we are over-charging

them. However, we believe that by going the extra mile with the customer and by manufacturing here in the US, that we offer a more dependable product. We offer UL, ITAR, and ISO—so we believe we are everything you could ask for in a board shop. We like to say that if you are truly serious about your boards then you should buy from Prototron Circuits.

How important is longevity of employees at Prototron?

Longevity of employees is a key factor for us. This is what makes us reliable and in our 28 years in business: we have more than a few employees that have been here for over 20 years, which really says something about the type of organization we are. Our goal has always been to make Prototron a great place to work and I like to think we have accomplished that. In fact, a few years ago when we hired a new Operations Manager who had worked with a number of shops during his career we heard that he went home and told his wife; “You wouldn’t believe how polite everyone is at Prototron.” I took that as a compliment.

How do you build a 12-layer board in one day?

For more information, go to: www.prototron.com.

http://www.prototron.com

http://www.pcbweb.com,

http://www.orderpcbs.com

2424



















Salvaging Circuits


http://issuu.com/eeweb/docs/08-2014-modern_printed_circuits_1_p_c50e7df9b7c5f2/29?e=7607911/9674178

25

TECH SERIES

25


















Salvaging Circuits


2626


Rare Earth ElementsAs advances in electronic components arise from the transformation of scientific research into usable technology, so too do the rare-earth* elements used in much of that research need to be sourced in commercial quantities to make the devices commercially practical. As part of that transformation, these elements must be mined and processed in greater and greater quantities to meet that demand.

However, despite the fact that many of these elements are, as their title suggests, “rare,” and should be prime candidates for recycling, they are still largely sourced from suppliers of mined product. In fact, almost exclusively: according to the latest figures, less than 1 percent of most rare earths critical to the electronics component industry are recycled at the end of their useful life.

Precious metals on the other hand, have recycle rates above 50 percent, indicating that elements with traditional fiscal worth still drive the majority of recovery operations simply based on perceived intrinsic value. Given, for example, that europium is more than USD$1000 per gram more expensive than gold, however, it is clear that electronics market forces do not yet have a clear understanding of the value of rare earth minerals.

Repurposing LEDsOn the flip side, extraction of rare earth and other materials from certain devices is not only uneconomic, it is also exceptionally difficult. White LEDs, for example, contain indium, gallium, cerium, europium, gadolinium, and yttrium in miniscule amounts—all of which are exceedingly difficult to extract from such components. Though, given that more than 25 billion white LEDs were produced in 2011 alone (according to the National Academy of Sciences assessment on advanced solid state lighting), these tiny amounts quickly add up to very large amounts of rare elements that are largely unrecovered, and unrecoverable. In other words, many tons of rare earth materials simply end up in landfill every year.

This is not to say that research isn’t being conducted by forward-thinking organizations. The U.S. Department of Energy via its AMES laboratory, for example, has been awarded $120 million over five years to help develop solutions to foreseen domestic shortages of rare earth materials, of which some will be dedicated to honing national materials recycling strategies. Such research is a double-edged sword for the likes of the energy department, though—LEDs are intrinsic to a plan for reduction in national energy consumption, but their recycling at the end of their useful life remains problematic.

Of the few private organizations actively involved in similar approaches, Molycorp, a rare earth mining company headquartered in the U.S., also sees the benefits in having a long-term strategy for recycling such material, particularly as the amount of raw product that they can mine struggles to keep up with world demand. According to Molycorp, the limited number of economically practical sources of rare earths and the decreasing amount of exports from China are actually creating opportunities to recycle and reuse rare earth materials as part of a whole of product lifecycle.

Similarly, the European-based, government-funded “Reclaim Sustainable Mining Project” specifically targets the recovery and reprocessing of gallium, indium, and other rare-earth elements from solid-state lighting and other e-waste. Though still in the assessment stage until September 2015, the core function of Reclaim is to also investigate sustainable methods for the efficient and economical retrieval of identified key metals from e-waste, specifically listing their intended recovery processes including the interestingly-titled method of “slug-flow emulsion hybrid membrane pertraction.”

* The rare earths include the elements yttrium, scandium, tantalum, gallium and indium and the lanthanides (lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium and lutetium).

“According to the latest f igures , less than 1 percent of most rare ear ths critical to the

electronics component industr y are recycled at the end of their useful l ife.”

27

TECH SERIES

27

Rare Earth ElementsAs advances in electronic components arise from the transformation of scientific research into usable technology, so too do the rare-earth* elements used in much of that research need to be sourced in commercial quantities to make the devices commercially practical. As part of that transformation, these elements must be mined and processed in greater and greater quantities to meet that demand.

However, despite the fact that many of these elements are, as their title suggests, “rare,” and should be prime candidates for recycling, they are still largely sourced from suppliers of mined product. In fact, almost exclusively: according to the latest figures, less than 1 percent of most rare earths critical to the electronics component industry are recycled at the end of their useful life.

Precious metals on the other hand, have recycle rates above 50 percent, indicating that elements with traditional fiscal worth still drive the majority of recovery operations simply based on perceived intrinsic value. Given, for example, that europium is more than USD$1000 per gram more expensive than gold, however, it is clear that electronics market forces do not yet have a clear understanding of the value of rare earth minerals.

Repurposing LEDsOn the flip side, extraction of rare earth and other materials from certain devices is not only uneconomic, it is also exceptionally difficult. White LEDs, for example, contain indium, gallium, cerium, europium, gadolinium, and yttrium in miniscule amounts—all of which are exceedingly difficult to extract from such components. Though, given that more than 25 billion white LEDs were produced in 2011 alone (according to the National Academy of Sciences assessment on advanced solid state lighting), these tiny amounts quickly add up to very large amounts of rare elements that are largely unrecovered, and unrecoverable. In other words, many tons of rare earth materials simply end up in landfill every year.

This is not to say that research isn’t being conducted by forward-thinking organizations. The U.S. Department of Energy via its AMES laboratory, for example, has been awarded $120 million over five years to help develop solutions to foreseen domestic shortages of rare earth materials, of which some will be dedicated to honing national materials recycling strategies. Such research is a double-edged sword for the likes of the energy department, though—LEDs are intrinsic to a plan for reduction in national energy consumption, but their recycling at the end of their useful life remains problematic.

Of the few private organizations actively involved in similar approaches, Molycorp, a rare earth mining company headquartered in the U.S., also sees the benefits in having a long-term strategy for recycling such material, particularly as the amount of raw product that they can mine struggles to keep up with world demand. According to Molycorp, the limited number of economically practical sources of rare earths and the decreasing amount of exports from China are actually creating opportunities to recycle and reuse rare earth materials as part of a whole of product lifecycle.

Similarly, the European-based, government-funded “Reclaim Sustainable Mining Project” specifically targets the recovery and reprocessing of gallium, indium, and other rare-earth elements from solid-state lighting and other e-waste. Though still in the assessment stage until September 2015, the core function of Reclaim is to also investigate sustainable methods for the efficient and economical retrieval of identified key metals from e-waste, specifically listing their intended recovery processes including the interestingly-titled method of “slug-flow emulsion hybrid membrane pertraction.”

* The rare earths include the elements yttrium, scandium, tantalum, gallium and indium and the lanthanides (lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium and lutetium).

“According to the latest f igures , less than 1 percent of most rare ear ths critical to the

electronics component industr y are recycled at the end of their useful l ife.”

2828


Extracting Precious MetalsPlatinum, palladium, gold, and silver still hold sway as the major elements recycled from PCBs and their associated components. Though, as previously stated, the actual economic viability of their extraction from discarded electronic equipment may be questionable. Many companies, particularly in the less developed parts of the world, are able to make sufficient profits to justify it.

In India, over 10,000 unskilled workers are involved in PCB recycling in Delhi alone. Of this work, some 280 grams of gold and 450 grams of silver are recovered from every 1000 kilograms of e-waste; a staggeringly small amount but, given the starvation wages of those in such informal employment, it is a significant bounty—for their employers, at least.

Similarly, in China, despite the importation of e-waste being officially banned by the Chinese government, the city of Guiya, a town of 150,000 people, employs more than 100,000 people in the illegal recycling business. Again, workers are very poorly paid, but the profits drawn from precious metal recovery is significant for those that run these businesses.

Yet, even with the amount of precious metal “mined” in this way, much of it is then simply sold on to gold merchants where it does not go directly back into manufacturing electronics. Instead, it is much more likely to go on to be further processed into ingots destined for the international gold market, where much of it will be removed and hoarded as a hedge against harsh economic times.

References• “Byproduct Metals and Rare-Earth

Elements Used in the Production of Light-Emitting Diodes—Overview of Principal Sources of Supply and Material Requirements for Selected Markets” http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5215/ -

• “Ames Laboratory to Lead New Research Effort to Address Shortages in Rare Earth and Other Critical Materials” http://energy.gov/articles/ames-laboratory-lead-new-research-effort-address-shortages-rare-earth-and-other-critical

• “Effective electronic waste management and recycling process involving formal and non-formal sectors.” http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=42315

• “Assessment of Advanced Solid State Lighting” National Academy of Sciences ISBN: 978-0-309-27011-3

• http://www.chemicool.com/elements/europium.html

• http://www.re-claim.eu/

• http://www.molycorp.com/technology/rare-earth-recycling/

“ Platinum , palladium , gold, and silver still

hold sway as the major elements recycled from

PCBs and their associated components .”

ConclusionTheoretically, any metal element, whether precious or rare earth, can be recovered by recycling. It is merely a matter of extracting the element from the impurities in which it is found in a way not too dissimilar to the process applied when it was first mined. From a practical standpoint, however, the major impediment is one of cost: if it costs more to extract material than to buy it from a supplier of raw material, then economic realities dictate that a manufacturer will purchase the cheaper product.

Unfortunately, the practical application of effort to this end does not meet the perceived need. Indeed, it is the more common elements—such as copper, tin, nickel, gold, and platinum—that are the most recovered in the recycling process. Partly because they are easier to extract with relatively unsophisticated melting and rendering techniques, but mostly because they exist in larger quantities than do the rare-earth elements whose recovery does not (as yet) offer a return on investment to do so.

As a result, countries such as China who are embedded in electronic component manufacturing are also intrinsic in the supply of rare-earth elements where, according to the USGS, they supply more than 97 percent of the world’s cerium, gadolinium, and yttrium. As such, the incentive at the original component level to incorporate recycled elements is low, just as it is at the end-of-lifecycle when the same country is the one who recycles e-waste; where raw product is far cheaper and easier to obtain.

29

TECH SERIES

29

Extracting Precious MetalsPlatinum, palladium, gold, and silver still hold sway as the major elements recycled from PCBs and their associated components. Though, as previously stated, the actual economic viability of their extraction from discarded electronic equipment may be questionable. Many companies, particularly in the less developed parts of the world, are able to make sufficient profits to justify it.

In India, over 10,000 unskilled workers are involved in PCB recycling in Delhi alone. Of this work, some 280 grams of gold and 450 grams of silver are recovered from every 1000 kilograms of e-waste; a staggeringly small amount but, given the starvation wages of those in such informal employment, it is a significant bounty—for their employers, at least.

Similarly, in China, despite the importation of e-waste being officially banned by the Chinese government, the city of Guiya, a town of 150,000 people, employs more than 100,000 people in the illegal recycling business. Again, workers are very poorly paid, but the profits drawn from precious metal recovery is significant for those that run these businesses.

Yet, even with the amount of precious metal “mined” in this way, much of it is then simply sold on to gold merchants where it does not go directly back into manufacturing electronics. Instead, it is much more likely to go on to be further processed into ingots destined for the international gold market, where much of it will be removed and hoarded as a hedge against harsh economic times.

References• “Byproduct Metals and Rare-Earth

Elements Used in the Production of Light-Emitting Diodes—Overview of Principal Sources of Supply and Material Requirements for Selected Markets” http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5215/ -

• “Ames Laboratory to Lead New Research Effort to Address Shortages in Rare Earth and Other Critical Materials” http://energy.gov/articles/ames-laboratory-lead-new-research-effort-address-shortages-rare-earth-and-other-critical

• “Effective electronic waste management and recycling process involving formal and non-formal sectors.” http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=42315

• “Assessment of Advanced Solid State Lighting” National Academy of Sciences ISBN: 978-0-309-27011-3

• http://www.chemicool.com/elements/europium.html

• http://www.re-claim.eu/

• http://www.molycorp.com/technology/rare-earth-recycling/

“ Platinum , palladium , gold, and silver still

hold sway as the major elements recycled from

PCBs and their associated components .”

ConclusionTheoretically, any metal element, whether precious or rare earth, can be recovered by recycling. It is merely a matter of extracting the element from the impurities in which it is found in a way not too dissimilar to the process applied when it was first mined. From a practical standpoint, however, the major impediment is one of cost: if it costs more to extract material than to buy it from a supplier of raw material, then economic realities dictate that a manufacturer will purchase the cheaper product.

Unfortunately, the practical application of effort to this end does not meet the perceived need. Indeed, it is the more common elements—such as copper, tin, nickel, gold, and platinum—that are the most recovered in the recycling process. Partly because they are easier to extract with relatively unsophisticated melting and rendering techniques, but mostly because they exist in larger quantities than do the rare-earth elements whose recovery does not (as yet) offer a return on investment to do so.

As a result, countries such as China who are embedded in electronic component manufacturing are also intrinsic in the supply of rare-earth elements where, according to the USGS, they supply more than 97 percent of the world’s cerium, gadolinium, and yttrium. As such, the incentive at the original component level to incorporate recycled elements is low, just as it is at the end-of-lifecycle when the same country is the one who recycles e-waste; where raw product is far cheaper and easier to obtain.

Sierra Circuits:A Complete PCB Resource

PLUS: The Ground ” Myth in PrintedCircuits

“

PCB Resin Reactor+

Ken BahlCEO of Sierra Circuits

Let There Be

How Cree reinvented the light bulb

LIGHT

David ElienVP of Marketing & Business

Development, Cree, Inc.

New LED Filament Tower

Cutting Edge Flatscreen Technologies

+

+

M o v i n g T o w a r d s

a Clean Energy

FUTURE— Hugo van Nispen, COO of DNV KEMA

MCU Wars 32-bit MCU Comparison

Cutting Edge

SPICEModeling

Freescale and TI Embedded

Modules

ARMCortex

Programming

From Concept to

Reality Wolfgang Heinz-Fischer

Head of Marketing & PR, TQ-Group

Low-Power Design Techniques

TQ-Group’s Comprehensive Design Process

+

+

PowerDeveloper

Octobe r 20 13

Designing forDurability

View more EEWeb magazines— Click Here

http://bit.ly/II3Clh

Modern Printed Circuits: December 2014

Documents

Transcript of Modern Printed Circuits: December 2014