On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Jesse Lackey w= rote: > Hi! I'm in the "little dab" camp... the "thin line" seems to often be > uneven/too thin/too thick and get bridges. For me... I've seen similar results, though I don't use this technique very often anymore. > And yes the next step is reflow those dabs with hot air / iron / oven. > Iron is the most control. No additional flux added. > > For oven, the chip won't move on you. For hot air, it may. Setting the > airflow to pretty low and holding directly above (an inch at least) will > probably be ok. Some experimentation required. Interesting. I would have expected that in doing this I would knock at least something out of alignment. I guess capillary action helps, but I'm surprised it works. > Be more fearless about bridges under the chip - you've got hot air to > remove it if needed (real easy), and a current-limited power supply to > avoid blowups when first powering up, right? :) That's where I'm heading I think, it's just taking me a while to get there! I suppose that I'm also worried about shorts across non power pins causing erratic behaviour. With a new chip, it can be hard to tell if it's a hardware problem or my mistake in programming! > Magnifier to examine pins after soldering real helpful. I find 3X to be > good. I have a jeweler's loupe that I like, though if I'm doing a lot of work a use my desk mounted magnifier (seems to be less eye strain). I would love a binocular microscope, but I don't really have room for it at the moment. Thanks! Josh --=20 A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .