Slashdot Mirror


Tin Whiskers — Fact Or Fiction?

bLanark writes "Some time ago, most electronics were soldered with old-fashioned lead solder, which has been tried and tested for decades. In 2006, the EU banned lead in solder, and so most manufacturers switched to a lead-free solder. Most made the switch in advance, I guess due to shelf-life of products and ironing out problems working with the new material. Lead is added to solder as it melts at low temperature, but also, it prevents the solder from growing 'whiskers' — crystalline limbs of metal. The effect of whiskers on soldered equipment would include random short-circuits and strange RF-effects. Whiskers can grow fairly quickly and become quite long. Robert Cringley wrote this up this some time ago, but it seems that the world has not been taking notice. I guess cars (probably around 30 processors in a modern car) and almost every appliance would be liable to fail sooner than expected due to tin whiskers. Note that accelerated life-expectancy tests can't simulate the passing of time for whiskers to grow. I've googled, and there is plenty of research into the effects of tin whiskers. I should point out that the Wikipedia page linked to above states that tin whisker problems 'are negligible in modern alloys,' but can we trust Wikipedia? So: was the tin whisker problem overhyped, was it an initial problem that has been solved in the few years since lead-free solder came into use, or is it affecting anyone already?"

459 comments

  1. Will my tin foil hats by LM741N · · Score: 5, Funny

    grow whiskers. That would be a major bummer. But then lead would be pretty heavy.

    1. Re:Will my tin foil hats by Skylinux · · Score: 2, Funny

      that's why I can't get mine off anymore, the damn whiskers grew inwards ..... I thought the pain and the itching was just bad hygiene.

      --
      Everyone who buys Wild Hunt will receive 16 specially prepared DLCs absolutely for free, regardless of platform.
    2. Re:Will my tin foil hats by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not only will they grow whiskers if they are pure, but if you wear them outside in cold weather they may catch tin disease.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:Will my tin foil hats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not likely as most modern tinfoil hat are actually made of aluminum foil available at grocery stores.

    4. Re:Will my tin foil hats by furbearntrout · · Score: 3, Funny

      Everyone knows that "tinfoil" hats must be made of aluminum to be effective, as tin is not sufficiently psychoactive. Modern (copper interconnect) computers are more (or less) sensitive to certain psionic attacks, for the same reason

      --
      Crap. What did the new CSS do with the "Post anonymously" option??
    5. Re:Will my tin foil hats by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Everyone knows that "tinfoil" hats must be made of aluminum to be effective, as tin is
      > not sufficiently psychoactive.

      Wrong: only tin is effective. Why do you think aluminum foil was invented? It only exists to mislead fools like you into believing you are protected.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:Will my tin foil hats by blackpaw · · Score: 1

      Wrong: only tin is effective. Why do you think aluminum foil was invented? It only exists to mislead fools like you into believing you are protected. Ok, *now* you've overstepped the bounds of paranoia! get yer tin foil hat on!
    7. Re:Will my tin foil hats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      A friend of mine says it's actually Saran Wrap that you're supposed to place around your head. I think "they" got to him, though, because I haven't seen him around for awhile.

    8. Re:Will my tin foil hats by greedyturtle · · Score: 1

      I wore a pure tin hat for years until the whiskers started getting into my brain. After a few minor surgeries in my bathroom, (what, you thought I'd let someone ELSE cut into my brain??) I was satisfied that I'd gotten all those pesky whiskers out of there. So, having learned my lesson, I switched to aluminum hatgear, and in the course of it's use, I've found that it is JUST AS EFFECTIVE!! So don't let anyone tell you that tinfoil isn't as effective as aluminum foil. I'm certainly satisfied and will continue to use aluminum unless there's another unforeseen problem, like aluminum ears or toes or fingers or something...

  2. obvious answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    > but can we trust Wikipedia?

    No. lol

    1. Re:obvious answer by yomegaman · · Score: 1

      OK, then maybe the question should be, who is less trustworthy, Wikipedia or Cringely?

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    2. Re:obvious answer by Ottair · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I used to buy into Wikipedia's stated ethos until I realized that any one person can (and all too frequently do) hijack articles to push and protect their point of view and once that happens you can forget about the "Five Pillars" and objectivity.

    3. Re:obvious answer by dna_(c)(tm)(r) · · Score: 3, Funny

      OK, then maybe the question should be, who is less trustworthy, Wikipedia or Cringely?

      Yeah, as long as you're certain the slashdot crowd is dependable, honest and therefore trustworthy...

    4. Re:obvious answer by NetSettler · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I used to buy into Wikipedia's stated ethos until I realized that any one person can ... hijack articles to push and protect their point of view and once that happens you can forget about the "Five Pillars" and objectivity.

      Well, trust is not a binary thing. You can trust someone for one thing and not another. And even if you do trust, you can have trust at a wide variety of different levels.

      I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia in some ways either, not so much because it lies, but because it doesn't want the truth. If I know something true, and I'm the only person in the world, it doesn't want it. But if I know something false, and I write it up, then it's referenceable, and it becomes closer to something Wikipedia does want. I can understand both of those at some level, but I think Wikipedia should care a lot more than it does about creating new mechanisms to let in real truth (perhaps creating a mechanism by which individual knowledge can be vetted) and keep out falsehoods (perhaps creating mechanisms for peer review of referenced documents). The fact that it doesn't is, of course, why other competitors have come up. I guess on that point, you have to score one for the marketplace for at least creating the idea and allowing competition to crank out alternatives.

      But as to what to trust in Wikipedia, their strength is that the things they say are supposed to be things that can be backed up by reference. Where you see a strong claim and no reference, find a way to flag that fact and maybe the person who put it in will add a reference. Where you see a reference, follow the chain back to the original source. That source may ultimately be believable or not, of course. In some sense, by its choice of paradigm, Wikipedia is just a complicated, statically-enumerated set of search engine results. It gets you started, but it isn't the whole of the thing you want.

      If I knew more about phenomenology, I'd probably say that's just the nature of the Universe, and that Wikipedia can no more escape it than anyone can escape the Three Laws of Thermodynamics. That is, no one ever really knows anything about the Universe other than what they're told, and what they can work out in terms of internal consistency checks on what they're told. But all I know of that is what I've seen mentioned in Dark Star. So I'll let you do your own research there. Whether to direct you to Wikipedia or the movie though, to study more of phenomenology... I dunno, that's a hard choice. Probably I'd say just see the movie. It's worth more than the 6.5 stars IMDB gives it. One could just imagine what Bomb #20 might have to say on the matter of Wikipedia...

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    5. Re:obvious answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes, but your truth might not be truth to others around you. Unfortunately I know quite a number of conspiracy theorists, and their truths are often hard to back up. Your Wikipedia would allow them to scribe their irrational beliefs as truths.

    6. Re:obvious answer by Smauler · · Score: 1

      Why on earth is parent marked flamebait? The stupid question was made by the summary, not the AC. The AC responded accurately. Anyone who uses wikipedia as authoratative information should be shown what proper research is, or shot.

      I am not saying that wikipedia is not useful, but claiming that it is authorative on the subject of tin whiskers is absurd.

    7. Re:obvious answer by SmokeyTheBalrog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > but can we trust Wikipedia?

      No. lol I must agree with parent and say, he isn't flame baiting.

      Wikipedia works well as one of the first sites to go to for information. But it is no Silver Bullet and should never be one's only source.

      I believe a newspaper writer based an article on information in a Wikipedia article only to discover (after it was published) that the Wiki had been vandalized. The most the most amusing modification stated that the person they were writing about had died. I'm sure the writer was surprised when he got an angry phone call from his supposedly deceased subject matter.

      A watched article is safer, but still not something that should be blindly trusted.
    8. Re:obvious answer by Gazzonyx · · Score: 1

      OK, then maybe the question should be, who is less trustworthy, Wikipedia or Cringely?

      Yeah, as long as you're certain the slashdot crowd is dependable, honest and therefore trustworthy...

      We are. Just ask us!
      --

      If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

  3. Fact or Fiction WTF? by Naughty+Bob · · Score: 0

    Where in the summary/linked articles is it suggested that tin whiskers are a fiction?

    I'm driven away from main-stream sites by the lack of rigor. The more Slashdot loses its nerdy focus on the technical details, the less reason I have to visit it.

    --
    "Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
    1. Re:Fact or Fiction WTF? by rhartness · · Score: 1

      Where in the summary/linked articles is it suggested that tin whiskers are a fiction?
      Uh... there isn't one because this was an 'Ask Slashdot' post. The intent is that someone wrote in and is asking the slashdot community if this is fact or fiction.
      You must be new here...
      I only responded to this comment because it's marked +5 Insightful. Come on!
    2. Re:Fact or Fiction WTF? by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Where in any of the referenced articles does it suggest that tin whiskers are fiction?

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  4. Paging Dr Moggles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    My cat gets through tins of Whiskas extremely rapidly. Perhaps scientists can interview him.

    1. Re:Paging Dr Moggles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dr. Moggles has officially declined public comment. In fact, when asked directly by our reporters, he simply turned around and started eating again. How rude!

      However action news has since learned that an unnamed source distinctly heard Dr. Moggles muttering "NOM NOM NOM" over and over while devouring the gelatinous food stuff.

      Film at 11.

  5. lead free solder by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Informative

    SnAgCu Rohs solder(with 3% silver and .05% copper) joints don't appear to whisker but they appear dimpled and shitty compared to the smooth, shiny joints of garden-variety tin/lead. At least in the electronics industry, your percenteges and mileage may vary.

    1. Re:lead free solder by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Informative

      This makes it a bitch to visually detect bad solder joints also. Not only are they dimpled/mottled, the solder does not wick up onto leads like tin/lead. The leads just sort of mush down into the solder paste. Maybe this is less of a problem with the newer leadless packages, but for older SOIC packages it makes visual detection of defects more difficult.

    2. Re:lead free solder by AllergicToMilk · · Score: 1

      Which is why JTAG gave us IEEE 1149.1

      --
      There are only 6,863,795,529 types of people in the world.
    3. Re:lead free solder by Ptraci · · Score: 1

      Are you seriously expecting all such defects to be found by "bed of nails" testing, or is that not what you are referring to? Please clarify, as I don't want to argue with you if I'm misunderstanding you.

    4. Re:lead free solder by kurthr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, because all connections, switches, and transistors are tested by a JTAG boundary scan...
      LOL! You've never heard of Analog?

      Visual inspection is key to debugging crucial and intermittent errors due to things like badly soldered bypass caps and ground bounce. Put that in your JTAG and smoke it.

    5. Re:lead free solder by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Analog? That is so 1980s

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    6. Re:lead free solder by AllergicToMilk · · Score: 1

      1's and 0's are my heroes! :-)

      --
      There are only 6,863,795,529 types of people in the world.
    7. Re:lead free solder by gweihir · · Score: 2, Informative

      Indeed. I have switched my soldering to this type of solder some time ago, and the results look a bit like you do not know what you are doing. It is not quite that bad though. Apart from that, my impression is that the joints are more durable.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    8. Re:lead free solder by mrmeval · · Score: 5, Informative


      I've been seeing heat related issues, some component manufacturers have removed the lead but their parts do not hold up to the heat required for no-lead reflow and wave soldering. We're having parts not only fall out during testing but getting field failures back. This is for non-electrolytic capacitors a ceramic surface mount type and a through hole mylar type.

      I've been seeing some units that were done with no-lead less than a year ago where parts are falling off the board. These were some of our early no-lead units so they'll just warranty them and replace the boards.

      As to the tin whisker problem NASA has a lot of information on it.
      http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/

      But I can't see where they're following their own advice if it means it's a 'show stopper'
      http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4537

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    9. Re:lead free solder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we saw with the XBOX 360 that your mileage may vary...

    10. Re:lead free solder by loki_tiwaz · · Score: 1

      i admit i haven't been observing pc part lifespan for that long but i still see old 486 machines clunking along fine when 5 year old machines and more recent parts are having noticably higher failure rates. i mean, computers built in the mid 80s still run great but anything much newer than around 97 doesn't last more than 5 years. if there is issues with quality control on the soldering that would explain it. back in the olden days most components weren't surface mount either, every ic on a board was socketed if it had much more than 20 pins which is an obvious way to resolve the heat issue for delicate semiconductors.

      perhaps socketing will be looked at again now, i don't know about anyone else but it seems to me that modern digital circuitry is not as reliable as it used to be, even accounting for the greater complexity involved. efforts being made to reduce the power draw of the circuits is also important as less electrons means less heat and less risk of stress to delicate solder joints through oxidation and whatnot.

    11. Re:lead free solder by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that one of the precepts of 'modern management' is that if a product lasts much longer than it's rated 'service life' it is a candidate for cost reduction. Said 'cost reduction' is guaranteed, if aggressively pursued, to result in the product failing much sooner. So, modern PC components, built by companies where the MBA-scum are in charge, are by design supposed to fail early.

    12. Re:lead free solder by celtic_hackr · · Score: 2, Informative

      A company that makes systems for trains use lead free solder, and I've not seen these problems. But they also coat the boards and solder joints with a sealant. This removes oxidation and any possible tin growth problem. You'd better hope these work, because the boards are used on freight trains.

    13. Re:lead free solder by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      I've had two Gigabyte motherboards die because of a botched industrial espionage incident. Manufacturers across several industries had use these parts.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor_plague

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    14. Re:lead free solder by Goffee71 · · Score: 2, Funny

      The BOFH intends to use your exact message the next time that a user calls us with a hardware problem. Sir, you win a prize.

      --
      If he's the Walrus then can I be a penguin please?
    15. Re:lead free solder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      No sealant or coating has been shows to have the slightest effect on tin whiskers. They grow from below and are atomically sharp; thus they poke right through surface oxidation, confirmal coatings, or whatever.

      What has been shown to have an effect is a bake/anneal after tin coating to form a stable Cu/Sn intermetallic layer; that basically preempts the low-temperature intermetallic recrystallization that is behind whisker growth.

    16. Re:lead free solder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always love how the deeper pages from NASA.gov look like their authors stopped learning web design practices in 1998.

    17. Re:lead free solder by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      I have yet to see boundary scan be used even in digital designs. For everything from low volume specialist apps, to very high volume apps, it's always bed of nails, then out the door.

    18. Re:lead free solder by harrkev · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sometimes you can get an intermittent contact that will test fine sometimes (like when thh board is horizontal) but will fail when the board is tipped or shaken. Ask me to tell you the story of a MIL-STD-1553 transformer one time. All of the usual testing techniques (JTAG, bed-of-nails) can miss these. I am not sure how X-ray would handle this though (not much experience with manufacturing beyond the prototype stage).

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
    19. Re:lead free solder by Cillian · · Score: 1

      A board I built not so long ago had this sort of short between two rails. It worked perfectly if bent over so slightly (As in, the lightest touch you can give with a finger), but not if just left horizontal. It turned out an artifact of my dodgy soldering :/

      --
      -- All your booze are belong to us.
    20. Re:lead free solder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      back in the olden days most components weren't surface mount either, every ic on a board was socketed if it had much more than 20 pins which is an obvious way to resolve the heat issue for delicate semiconductors. Sockets were used for serviceability, not to prevent exposing chips to soldering heat. It's really easy to replace a high pin count DIP chip if it's socketed, and a major pain if it's soldered.

      A large DIP package should have better tolerance of soldering heat than a small package (more heatsink mass to reduce the temperature rise from heat flowing in through the pins). Overheating wasn't generally a big problem in that era anyways, since the wave soldering process used on 100% through-hole boards did not require heat soaking the whole assembly in an oven (as SMT processes do).

      Sockets were bad for reliability. Cheap sockets with stamped sheetmetal pins were horrible. But even with really good expensive sockets with machined pins, chips can work their way free of the socket over time, particularly in a vibration environment.

      perhaps socketing will be looked at again now, It won't be. It's an extra expense which is no longer warranted, and it would actually decrease reliability, not improve it.

      i don't know about anyone else but it seems to me that modern digital circuitry is not as reliable as it used to be, even accounting for the greater complexity involved. efforts being made to reduce the power draw of the circuits is also important as less electrons means less heat and less risk of stress to delicate solder joints through oxidation and whatnot. Mechanical stress is a much greater problem for solder joints than oxidation.
    21. Re:lead free solder by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      I mixed some wording up. "Fall out" in the first paragraph means "Fail". The mylar capacitors will be swollen and cause the board to fail or we get them back from the field and they will be swollen. The ceramic ones crack from the heat. We no require our board house to hand solder those in and we've replaced the ceramic ones with leaded parts and hand solder those in a surface mount.

      The chips are falling off the board. It's some sort of bizarre corrosion. Have only seen two so far but it's odd having a part as big as an Intel 196 processor go missing. One hopes it didn't evolve.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  6. Exception by pipatron · · Score: 5, Informative

    One thing to remember is that safety control and monitoring products like fire alarms, but probably also car electronics, are excepted from the RoHS directive until at least 2012, possibly until 2018, but there's really no fixed date set yet. So yes, your DVD player might die, your car probably won't.

    --
    c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    1. Re:Exception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      In the electronics manufacturing lines I deal with, they have some Pb-Free and some non Pb-Free lines. So the article's concern about safety critical devices is incorrect.

      Yes, once you convert a line, there's no going back. But you don't have to convert all your equipment at once. You can keep a mix for as long as you see the demand for plain old lead solder.

    2. Re:Exception by f16c · · Score: 1

      Avionics and military equipment are also exempt for a while. Tin whiskers are the largest reason that they have been exempted for now.
      I'm actually on the second mainboard on the machine I'm typing this from that has the ROHS logo. The old one was a relatively old AMD Athlon XP board. This has been around a while now. I first hear about this at Litton in 1999 (not that we needed to use it). It's been used in electronics for at least that long

      --
      bob@Osprey:~>
    3. Re:Exception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      In the electronics manufacturing lines I deal with, they have some Pb-Free and some non Pb-Free lines. So the article's concern about safety critical devices is incorrect.

      Yes, once you convert a line, there's no going back. But you don't have to convert all your equipment at once. You can keep a mix for as long as you see the demand for plain old lead solder. The reason they are exempt is that they KNOW that RoHS is a pile of bollocks. Always has been. Lead usage in the electronics industry is horribly low, and to make matters worse, lead free solder fails at a greater rate, is harder to use and generally a pain in the ass to deal with.

      It was a feel good law that more and more idiots sucked up and didn't bother to fight.
    4. Re:Exception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Due to component availability many manufacturers have no choice; no warning before components started showing up with tin only -- and without a part number change either.

      Commitment to 'lean manufacturing' and the perception of non-compliance means that many manufacturers of "high reliability" assemblies also follow RoHS rules blindly. They avoid inefficient dual standards and are able to withstand the burden of proof of compliance to the new green standard by avoiding 63/37 and RoHS in the same facility.

      Remember, NASA was allowed an exemption to CFC ban for the Space Shuttle's external tank foam. They chose instead to switch to a poorer quality insulation to avoid the perception of non-PC behavior... and so we lost Columbia.

    5. Re:Exception by bgackle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Avionics was exempt as well, but the actual exemptions are useless. All the high volume consumer applications have gone lead free, so the economic incentive isn't there for component manufacturers to produce non lead-free parts. In practice, everyone gets to follow the ipods and use lead-free parts. Makes one wonder whether the environmental gain from eliminating (relatively stable) metalic lead from landfills will be far outweighed by the flood of prematurely failed electronics.

      --
      What we really need is a ten day waiting period and a background check before you can buy a congressman.
    6. Re:Exception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's nice that there are these exemptions, but the trick can be getting non-RoHS parts for exempt products. Most component manufacturers have gone to a RoHS plating for all their components, as it makes no economic sense for them to keep a small portion of the line with lead.

      On top of that, there is no visual way to distinguish between a lead-tin and a tin-only termination so you never know exactly what you are getting. I do some work with the space industry, and in a recent study they bought parts specified as "not pure tin" from a wide variety of sources and performed metallurgical tests on them. The number was well over 1/3 of those parts were in fact pure tin terminations. It's important enough that they have developed procedures to strip the terminations and replate with known tin-lead (not a cheap alternative).

      So the bottom line is this, regardless of exemptions, except for space and high-end military applications willing to pay the big bucks for lot testing and replating, any other electronics made today likely contains pure-tin-coated parts and stands a significant risk of failure due to tin wiskers.

    7. Re:Exception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The exception sounds good on paper, but nearly all component manufacturers are switching to RoHS completely (as in no more lead solder parts). That is making it difficult/expensive to find parts that aren't RoHS compliant...even for companies that are exempt. Everyone is basically being forced to switch by default.

    8. Re:Exception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Due to component availability many manufacturers have no choice; no warning before components started showing up with tin only -- and without a part number change either. Nonsense. I work in the industry on the design side and I have not once seen a component supplier substitute Pb-free parts without notification. And most suppliers have chosen to sell Pb and Pb-free parts side by side during the transition, meaning they have no option but to have a separate part number.

      You're allowing silly conspiracy thought patterns to override your common sense. Look at it from a slightly different perspective: what positive incentives do suppliers have to not lie? As it happens, there is a strong reason, which is that engineers designing lead-free products must know that every component they select is lead-free. Component suppliers who want to get design wins from engineers doing lead-free designs must therefore make it clear which components are lead-free.

      Remember, NASA was allowed an exemption to CFC ban for the Space Shuttle's external tank foam. They chose instead to switch to a poorer quality insulation to avoid the perception of non-PC behavior... and so we lost Columbia. Wrong. You are repeating a baseless bit of propaganda used to bash banning CFCs.

      As of ET-93 (the tank used on Columbia's final flight), many types of foam were still applied with CFC blowing agents. This includes the BX-250 foam (applied with CFC-11) which was used to build up an aerodynamic ramp in front of one of the tank attachment fittings. That ramp was the piece of foam which tore free and damaged the thermal protection system on Columbia's wing.

      Read this for the real story:

      http://caib.nasa.gov/news/report/pdf/vol1/chapters/chapter3.pdf
    9. Re:Exception by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      from what I can gather even if the parts have a lead free finish lead solder is still a better choice for reliability.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  7. Real article name by The+Anarchist+Avenge · · Score: 0

    bLnark's FUD - Fact or Fiction?

    --
    Today's lucky number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  8. Does it matter? by NerveGas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Cars, televisions, players, music, computers... are there really any electronics intended to last 30 years any more?

    --
    Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
    1. Re:Does it matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know of $100M electronic devices orbiting 23,500 miles out in space which would indeed live 30 years if the tin whiskers don't kill them first.

    2. Re:Does it matter? by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      My car is 16 years old and still in pretty good shape. I guess it will last a few more years. So 20 years are not unrealistic for a car.
      Now this model was built way before ROHS, so I'm not worried about whiskers. But for a car built in the last few years it could be an issue.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    3. Re:Does it matter? by kesuki · · Score: 1

      "$100M electronic devices"

      that's why they cost 100 million, they're designed to last 30 years and in space, where they get hit by hard radiation, and where heat is very hard to dissipate.

    4. Re:Does it matter? by mrbluze · · Score: 1

      So 20 years are not unrealistic for a car. The mechanics will die before the electronics, I would predict.
      --
      Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
    5. Re:Does it matter? by Grishnakh · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Don't be so sure. If it's an American car, it'll probably need the ECU replaced several times. My mother needed her car's and truck's ECU replaced; one was a '92 Olds, and the other was a '96 Ford F-150. I had never heard of ECUs just suddenly crapping out, but it happened to her twice, on two different vehicles, from two American manufacturers.

      My Acura, on the other hand, hasn't had any ECU problems in its 14 years of life, but the power lock controller had to replaced in the first year because it would act possessed and lock or unlock the doors on its own. There was a service bulletin for this problem, as it happened on many of the first 20,000 vehicles made that year. They replaced it for free under warranty and I never had a problem again with any electronics on that car. (Of course, this was unlike my mom's cars, where she had to pay towing and repair costs, nearly $1000 each time, for her problems.)

    6. Re:Does it matter? by sa1lnr · · Score: 1

      I don't know about intended but I have a Sony ICF-5500 transistor radio that I bought around about 1973. It's still working and it still gets used more or less every day.

      Opposed to the five Asus motherboards that have developed faults/died on me during the last two years.

    7. Re:Does it matter? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      You, sir, are what is wrong with the consumer electronics industry today.

      More so if you had said 3 years instead of 30.

      Can you please repost with 3 years to make my point stronger? Thanks.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    8. Re:Does it matter? by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 2, Informative

      My car is 16 years old and still in pretty good shape. I guess it will last a few more years. So 20 years are not unrealistic for a car.

      You can tell they don't use road salt where you live...

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    9. Re:Does it matter? by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 4, Funny

      last time i checked space wasn't an EU member. list here

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    10. Re:Does it matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not at all. You will be lucky if electronics last 5 years. I'm an EE major in electronic sales. Long story short what passes these days is just ridiculous. Nothing is built with any headroom. ROHS compliant, i'm still on the fence. I think most of the issues are due to the fact that if you can skip 1 step to save a penny, Lets do it. All corporations are worried about is their bottom line. Gone are the days of pride and over engineering. We will never see that again. So yes, you will always be buying the newest not because of want, but because your previous model just won't last.

    11. Re:Does it matter? by plasticsquirrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Cars, televisions, players, music, computers... are there really any electronics intended to last 30 years any more? Electric guitars and some guitar vacuum tube amps are the only electronics I know of that are still made to last decades and be serviced easily. A $2000 Marshall amp, for example, needs to be able to be serviced if a capacitor goes bad, or if the transformer blows out.

      Many vintage amps from the 1950's just need a few capacitors replaced, and they will work perfectly, 50-year old vacuum tubes and all.
      --
      Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
    12. Re:Does it matter? by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      "Many vintage amps from the 1950's just need a few capacitors replaced, and they will work perfectly, 50-year old vacuum tubes and all."

      Yup...back to a day when people AND companies took pride in their engineering and craftsmanship.

      I know now why some of those old McIntosh tube amps from the 60's still sell for $1200 and up. Things built back then were built like tanks.....and meant to last.

      Sad you no longer see that in today's disposable society. Strange that in this day or people trying so hard to be "green", that these same people don't demand that companies built products with such quality that they will last and not have to be replaced every other year.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    13. Re:Does it matter? by zilym · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OMG, a Sony device that still works properly after its short warranty has expired! They sure don't make 'em like they used to.

    14. Re:Does it matter? by blantonl · · Score: 1

      Cars, televisions, players, music, computers... are there really any electronics intended to last 30 years any more? You Bet there are... military and aviation electronics. MTBF's on those devices are expected to be significanly higher than "consumer devices"

      MTBF = Mean Time Between Failure.
      --
      Lindsay Blanton
      RadioReference.com
    15. Re:Does it matter? by Alastor187 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Cars, televisions, players, music, computers... are there really any electronics intended to last 30 years any more? Yes there are a lot. High grade electronics for critical applications are expected to last a very long time. It is not uncommon for military and aerospace equipment to have warranties of +15 years. As an electronic packaging engineering in the aerospace field I can tell you that Tin Whisker is taken very seriously.

      However, with that said there are a lot design techniques that are applied to aerospace electronics but are not applied to commercial electronics. I am not sure that it really matters, does anyone really want their Dell to last for 15 years?
    16. Re:Does it matter? by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There really aren't that many consumer electronics items from the 1950s and 1960s in general use, even when they're compatible with "current" standards. The exception are a few items, like those you mention, that were expensive then and are expensive now. There were hundreds - possible thousands - of millions of radios and TVs made during that time, for example. These are 100% electronic items, unlikely to have failed due to mechanical problems (wear and tear), nor incompatible (in practice) with current standards and systems. Where are they now?

      There are items made today that will still be in use in 40 years time, but the number is small, and as with the previous example, they'll be the obscure, highly priced, built-by-craftsmen objects. The "decline in quality" meme is a myth. If it's built in a factory, for the mass market, it isn't - and never has been - in the manufacturer's best interests to make it last for more than a decade. Exceptions exist - but they'll always exist. And, to be honest, there's a remarkable amount of stuff hitting landfills these days not because it fails to function as designed, but because it's obsolete. I suspect the number of 8088-based PCs that could still be working if their owners hadn't put them in the trash would probably number in the tens of millions. And that was hardly an industry where quality was considered a priority.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    17. Re:Does it matter? by nasch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, your anecdotal evidence is compelling. I am sure it's quite safe to extrapolate from your sample of two, and conclude that most American cars will need multiple ECU replacements.

      Please tell me I do not need sarcasm tags for this post.

    18. Re:Does it matter? by AJWM · · Score: 1

      I know of $100M electronic devices orbiting 23,500 miles out in space which would indeed live 30 years if the tin whiskers don't kill them first.

      Except that they'll die long before that because they've either run out of station-keeping fuel or their batteries die. (Even though they only need them for the few hours a year they're in the Earth's shadow, batteries have a limited shelf life.)

      --
      -- Alastair
    19. Re:Does it matter? by iamdrscience · · Score: 1

      In 1982 or thereabouts, my parents bought a Sony Trinitron television and liked it so much that the following year they bought a second, smaller Trinitron. The smaller one was serviced once early on (still under warranty) and saw regular use until it died about 6 months ago. I'm not saying all their products are rock-solid, I know they're not, but a television that lasts 25+ years and still looks better than plenty of newer standard-def screens, is no small accomplishment.

    20. Re:Does it matter? by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      There really aren't that many consumer electronics items from the 1950s and 1960s in general use. There were hundreds - possible thousands - of millions of radios and TVs made during that time, for example. (snip) Where are they now?

      Well, I have a Sony Trinitron color TV from the late 70's / early 80's, still in working condition though it's not as sharp as a modern TV (not to mention LCDs and HDTV).

      I only use it as a piece of furniture these days, I don't know what to do with it - I don't want to just throw it away, it used to belong to my great-grandmother so it has some sentimental value as well as historical one I guess (I wish I had had the foresight to stop my father from giving away his old 8086 computer).
      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    21. Re:Does it matter? by CompMD · · Score: 1

      I'd mod you up but I felt a reply to reinforce your statement would be better.

      I have a shortwave transmitter (Hallicrafters HT-37) and receiver (Hallicrafters SX-110) that were both built in 1959 if memory serves me right. To this day, they work flawlessly. I replaced a broken tube in the SX-110, but the giant 6146 driver tubes still in the HT-37 have kept on going. I have had the set for 10 trouble free years. I know that I can trust it to keep going too. In case of the apocalypse, global thermonuclear war, or a network infrastructure breakdown, the people who will still have a method of long range communication will be the hams with their 50 year old tube sets.

    22. Re:Does it matter? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      One word: undercoating.

      A good undercoating will almost entirely negate salt damage. And I mean the thick stuff, not the quickie spray. As a side bonus, it'll cut road noise dramatically.

      BTW my Ford pickup turned 30 last month. :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    23. Re:Does it matter? by Fumus · · Score: 1

      Where are they now?
      In Soviet Russia. Waiting for the right time to strike back!
    24. Re:Does it matter? by mbstone · · Score: 1

      My newly-built Marshall head is made with lead-free solder; you can always tell the new units 'cause they won't go up to 11.

    25. Re:Does it matter? by tirerim · · Score: 1

      Eh, my father lives in upstate New York and had a pickup that was 19 years old when he sold it. Mind you, you could look down next to the gearstick and see the road going by underneath, but it still ran, anyway.

    26. Re:Does it matter? by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      It's a matter of definition. When a capacitor "goes out", you don't grab aluminum foil and cellophane and start rolling a new cap, you buy new ones as little units premanufactured.

      Computers actually also follow the same model. Parts come in simple, prepackaged pieces that are interchangable, within certain design limitations.

      For example, my teen daughter is using a franken-system comprising a 10-year-old AMD K6-2 motherboard running Windows 98, with memory chips purchased at circuit city 6 months ago, assembled with a ATX power supply scrounged years ago in a tower case that originally housed an 80286/12 about 1985 or so. Seriously, who remembers a 12 Mhz processor first-hand? (I do!) It's got a USB 1.x port on the back for the flash drive she uses for her homework, and since all she really wants is some word processing and some youtube, it does the job quite nicely.

      We have other, far faster/nicer computers available, but this is the one she has in her room.

      My point? We have a longevity of design that is already over 20 years old in a perfectly working system. Parts are widely available: I could replace that Motherboard with a P4 mobo and not have to buy a single part to get equal or better performance, for just $59. All this in a case that dates its design to about 1985 or so.

      Built to last 30 years? We're at 22 and counting...

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    27. Re:Does it matter? by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      Satellites rarely need a 30-year life cycle. Earth-orbiting satellites are obsolete long before that (or they're constrained by other factors like the amount of fuel they carry), only the occasional scientific satellite needs a longer lifespan.

    28. Re:Does it matter? by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 1

      On a Fender Telecaster (design little changed since 1948) you undo two woodscrews and pull all the electronics out on a little oval control plate. It's never been quite so easy since, as most later guitars hide stuff under the pickguard or fasten them directly to the body. Mind you, a crude 3-way switch, two rotary potentiometers and a capacitor aren't exactly cutting-edge electronics. Back on topic, I recently built on of these and the modern solder I used was hopeless, even using extra flux. How many people are *really* affected by lead poisoning from the old stuff?

      --
      When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
    29. Re:Does it matter? by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1

      Seriously, who remembers a 12 Mhz processor first-hand?

      I do. I remember 4.77MHz processors and less than that. I'm not even that old.

      I could replace that Motherboard with a P4 mobo and not have to buy a single part to get equal or better performance, for just $59.

      Today, one finds P-IV's in the dumpster. Fully functional, in a nice case. You just need to reinstall the OS, because that's usually what is "defective". My best find was an AMD64 3000+, for free in a dumpster, sure, someone had raided the RAM in it, but I did have some DDR RAM at home. Alas, I'm banned from dumpster diving now at the recycling centre :-(

    30. Re:Does it matter? by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 0, Redundant

      "Strange that in this day or people trying so hard to be "green", that these same people don't demand that companies built products with such quality that they will last and not have to be replaced every other year." Probably because a huge percentage of what passes for "Green" these days has little to do with conserving finite resources, and plenty to do with slick marketing and making yuppies feel less guilty for their hyper-consumptive lifestyles. Therefore, you get products made with "greener" materials which end up in landfills in a few years, rather than older technologies that were more rugged and able to be repaired. That way, the companies get to sell more crappy consumer electronics, and the consumers get to feel good about their "environmental consciousness" as they toss 3 year-old TV sets to the curb to buy new ones which are "even greener".
      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    31. Re:Does it matter? by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      They do.
      But the undercoating combined with the zinc plated body has held up well so far. There is a little rust, but I guess four more years before the car has to be scrapped are realistic.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    32. Re:Does it matter? by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      Bikes too.

      It used to be you'd replace a few bearings in a bottom bracket, re-pack, and be good to go. Same for hubs. Now you replace the whole thing.

    33. Re:Does it matter? by mo^ · · Score: 1

      Got a mate runs a skip/dumpster hire company, he gets half a dozen of these a week. Monitors too. even got a 24" mac once with nothing worse than a blown PSU.

      I clean em up, he sells em on, pays for smokes...

      The waste is disgusting, but i'm sure many other such acts of recycling go on everywhere. whats more is people get a nice PC for £100 that would be out of their price range otherwise.

      TV's anmd such like are a different matter though. most cant survive the process of being dumped

      --
      bah!*@%!
    34. Re:Does it matter? by NerveGas · · Score: 1

      Actually, I am what is *right* with the electronics industry.

      I don't know how old you are, but think back to what electronics were like in 1978. Apart from a few stereos, was there anything produced back then that you would actually want to use?

      Technology advances so fast that products are obsolete long before they break down. I have seen a LOT of free or nearly-free 50"+ big-screen TVs in the classifieds lately, simply because people are dumping them for something better. Not cheap electronics, but things that cost a LOT of money.

      I've had two DVD players so far. The second cost a full order of magnitude less than the first. It does everything the first did (and more), and will surely last until I decide to go to something better.

      --
      Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
    35. Re:Does it matter? by NerveGas · · Score: 1

      Yes, but good amps are one of the extraordinarily few areas where technology has little chance of making them obsolete any time soon.

      --
      Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
    36. Re:Does it matter? by NerveGas · · Score: 1

      I should have said "consumer electronics". Long before the devices reach 30 years of age, folks have long since abandoned them because much better technology is out.

      Good, high-end amplifiers are an exception, but I can't think of any others. I don't know a single person who uses 30-year old electronics for any reason other than sentimentality.

      --
      Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
    37. Re:Does it matter? by DarkMage0707077 · · Score: 1

      I suspect the number of 8088-based PCs that could still be working if their owners hadn't put them in the trash would probably number in the tens of millions.

      My parents actually got a 286 back when I was just a toddler (used, BTW, don't know how old it was originally). This was back in the mid 80s. I had such fond memories of it that I refused to throw it out when it was replaced by more modern machinery. I finally had to get rid of it *2 years* ago because the power supply died, and there are no longer replacements anywhere.

      That's about 20+ years of use from that computer (no OS errors, either: DOS with a shell on it for me). So I guess you're right: if we don't throw it out, it could still work long after it's redered obsolete by other hardware.
    38. Re:Does it matter? by mmyrfield · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. My parents had a 29" Sony TV that saw 8+ hours of use daily for almost 20 years before it finally kicked the bucket a year ago, and had great standard def quality. I wish I could say the same about some other electronics I've used...

    39. Re:Does it matter? by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1

      I do believe that. It's most probably why dumpster diving is prohibited at my recycling centre: they make money on it.....

    40. Re:Does it matter? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      assembled with a ATX power supply scrounged years ago in a tower case that originally housed an 80286/12 about 1985 or so
      I call bullshit, any power supply of that age would not be an ATX unit. IIRC ATX was introduced at arround the same time as the pentium 2.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  9. No lead, but iron! by JackassJedi · · Score: 1

    Most made the switch in advance, I guess due to shelf-life of products and ironing out problems working with the new material.

    So that's what they put in there instead, good to be in the know! These little hints in the summaries are what makes me appreciate /. so much!

    --
    Power corrupts the few, while weakness corrupts the many.
  10. If you don't trust wikipedia... by ForestGrump · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    If you don't trust wikipedia, then change it! That's the whole idea behind wikipedia.

    This insightful comment brought to you by Forest Grump - /. ID #644805

    Tip: Do not change it using your home/work computer. It is best to change it from a public library in a city far far away.
    Tip #2: Don't buy a plane ticket to travel to this far far away city. It is best to hitchhike so you can save on travel $$$ and not leave a paper trail.

    --
    Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    1. Re:If you don't trust wikipedia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or just follow the links to the original sources that the Wikipedia article cites.

    2. Re:If you don't trust wikipedia... by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Or just follow the links to the original sources that the Wikipedia article cites.

      I don't see anything about tin whiskers [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed]here[/url].

      (The [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solder]article[/url]: "'Tin Whiskers' were a problem with early electronic solders which were coincidentally lead-free, and lead was initially added in part to eliminate them. These problems are negligible in modern alloys,[citation needed] however, except in hi-rel military, aerospace-satellite and life-critical medical applications." So where are these links to original sources?)

    3. Re:If you don't trust wikipedia... by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Crap, have been spending too much time on the XKCD forums, and didn't preview. I'll just copy what I said before and adjust the links:

      Or just follow the links to the original sources that the Wikipedia article cites.

      I don't see anything about tin whiskers here.

      (The article: "'Tin Whiskers' were a problem with early electronic solders which were coincidentally lead-free, and lead was initially added in part to eliminate them. These problems are negligible in modern alloys,[citation needed] however, except in hi-rel military, aerospace-satellite and life-critical medical applications." So where are these links to original sources?)

  11. Well,, I can only say... by Linker3000 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Imagine a ...er, no..

    I blame Mic..hang on..

    The RIA...Uh..

    In Soviet Ru...Damn..

    SCO probably...fu..

    Does solder run Lin...um...

    Bah!

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
    1. Re:Well,, I can only say... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Funny

      --
      You have wasted your time reading this signature I think I wasted my time reading the entire comment...
      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Well,, I can only say... by Daimanta · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      In South Kore, only old people solder tin whiskers!

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    3. Re:Well,, I can only say... by rishistar · · Score: 1

      There'll be some soldering in computers - so you can have a Beowulf Cluster of these tin whisker things!

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    4. Re:Well,, I can only say... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Blame the environmentalists for this. Maybe this slight reduction in lead is a benefit, but not if it means devices break much sooner than before. I don't look forward to getting my next computer, as it will have this lead-free crap in it.

    5. Re:Well,, I can only say... by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      environmentalists my ass, more like those wankers that dont like workers being poisoned. Fucking liberal idiots!!!

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    6. Re:Well,, I can only say... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      My dad worked in lead die casting for decades and never blew hot for lead until we moved out in the country and were drinking well water. It's far better to do some objective chemical testing and epidemiological studies fix what broken than use a one size fits all that's ineffective for everyone

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    7. Re:Well,, I can only say... by meatmanek · · Score: 1

      You forgot to put a number into "perspective". Change "(probably around 30 processors in a modern car)" to "(there are enough processors in a modern car that with roughly 12 cars, you could point to a different processor every day for a year.)" and presto, the general public knows how much 30 processors is!

    8. Re:Well,, I can only say... by Kjella · · Score: 1
      And the next three posts rolled into one:

      I think I wasted my time reading the entire comment... I think I wasted my time reading the entire article... I think I wasted my time reading the entire site... Isn't that the general idea?
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re:Well,, I can only say... by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      far better to ... fix what broken than use a one size fits all that's ineffective for everyone

      You must be new everywhere.
      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  12. NASA Are Worried by Ganty · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, NASA Goddard are worried about the situation and they have done extensive studies on the subject:

    http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/

    Ganty

    1. Re:NASA Are Worried by Reziac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was rather more impressed by these silver whiskers... looks like it grew a whole beard!!

      http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/photos/pom/2003sept.htm

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:NASA Are Worried by dhanson865 · · Score: 1

      I was rather more impressed by these silver whiskers... looks like it grew a whole beard!!

      Was I the only one that thought http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/photos/pom/2003sept.htm was nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/photos/porn/2003sept.htm and tried to imagine NASA porn that somehow involved a silver beard?
    3. Re:NASA Are Worried by Reziac · · Score: 1

      [laughing] Nope, I saw it that way at first too, and wondered WTF??!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  13. Tin Whiskers are fact by zejackal · · Score: 5, Informative

    Tin whiskers are, in fact a reality. They are a problem with pure tin specifically. The older tin-lead, and newer tin-vanadium alloys don't have the problem. However, many manufacturers still manufacture parts in a pure tin variety. The reason for all of this pure tin madness is that the EU passed strict anti-lead regulations and so the lead had to be removed from electronics. EU manufacturers immediately started using pure tin parts. In the US, many manufacturers followed suit, partly because pure tin parts were now more available than tin-lead (and at the time there was hardly any tin-vanadium), and partly because they wanted to maintain a good environmental image. Some manufacturers, having been burned by the whisker problem insisted on a better solution hence the tin-vanadium solders now available. The problem is there are a lot of electronics out there with pure tin parts in there. For example, I'm no fan of flying on Airbus aircraft manufactured in the late '90s and early 2000s (pure tin baby). The thing is, the hardware will work perfectly... until it doesn't, then an errant short will cause a malfunction and in the act, the tin whisker will vaporize. The only way you'll find the problem is with electron microscopy.

    1. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by AllergicToMilk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This, of course, is not always what happens. The whiskers, being very fine, don't have much current carrying capacity so they are quite likely to just vaporize. Nevertheless, there is risk.

      --
      There are only 6,863,795,529 types of people in the world.
    2. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by hughk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Avionics & military electronics were excluded from the no-lead rule in the EU. Automotive not, so it could still me that your ABS fails safe (but not very safe on a wet road).

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    3. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Sorry you might be perfectly right, but fail to understand how a whisker can cause a short. If at all the soldering point might "break" and cause a stop in current, but a short? With what exactly should it short cut? This really sounds like a myth.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by veranikon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It takes *very little* current to short a FET gate, i.e. microamps or less. Indeed, compare the geometry of these whiskers to the tracks etched on silicon. Not every bit of metal exposed on a PCB will carry current large enough to fuse these whiskers before they cause disruption. Furthermore, chip-scale assembly techniques likes BGA will give you plenty of areas with large blobs of solder within convenient whisker distance of each other.

      As referenced in another comment, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center does indeed seem pretty concerned:
      http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/

    5. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      With what exactly should it short cut?

      Two nearby solder points whose whiskers touch? One or more whiskers breaking off and landing between two solder points?

      Having metal floating around your sensitive electronics isn't generally a good idea.

      --
      AccountKiller
    6. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by morgad · · Score: 1

      This, of course, is not always what happens. The whiskers, being very fine, don't have much current carrying capacity so they are quite likely to just vaporize. Nevertheless, there is risk. see http://nepp.nasa.gov/npsl/Prohibited/tin_prohibition.htm (look at catagory 3)
      you can get currents of 100's of Amps
    7. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by plusser · · Score: 5, Informative

      As far as I am aware (and bearing in mind that I am a component engineer in the aerospace industry working equipment that is fitted to both Boeing and Airbus aircraft) there are currently NO LEAD FREE SOLDERS approved for use on critical applications on commercial jet aircraft. The Aerospace is currently out of scope of the RoHS directive as aircraft are not on open sale to the domestic consumer.

      Since 1994 the Aerospace and Military industry have been using commercial components to keep down costs as a result of the Perry Directive. This means that while the assemblies are manufactured using Tin Lead (Sn/Pb) solders, the components are now supplied with a Lead Free solder finish on the solderable terminations in order to comply with the RoHS requirements on commercial equipment. The problem is that different manufacturers have different finishes, and the suitability of that finish can very much depend on the design of the component (surface mount or through hole technology) and the design of the PCB to which it is attached (ground plane design), as well as the type of lead free solder that has been used.

      In addition, some lead free solders (such as Tin Bismuth) which have lower melting points that traditional Tin/Lead, leading to poor solder joints if mixed with a tin/lead process.

      To summarise, the problems that can be caused by using lead free solders are significant and there are more problems than just tin whiskering. The solution is knowledge of the problem and careful assessment of every component and processes used if the product is going to be used in a long life, high reliability product, irrespective of whether the product comes under the RoHS are not.

    8. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Once the whisker grows long enough to create a short between two adjacent contacts, even if the whisker immediately melts the transient disruption can affect logic circuits. If the voltage between the contacts is high enough the whisker can immediately vaporize and carry hundreds of amps of current.

    9. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      The 100s of amps situation seems to occur only in low pressure or vaccum situations. That isn't much comfort to people building satellites or evacuated relays; but at least we aren't likely to see widespread plasma arcing in more common applications

    10. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by home-electro.com · · Score: 1

      First of all, as pointed out Avionics is excluded, second, it is likely conformal coated anyway.

      As for military, they don't switch not because leaded solder is so much better, but because you just don't make ANY substitutions in manufacturing of critical equipment.

      It's simply an application of "don't fix it if it ain't broken" rule.

      Everyone in the industry of course is aware of whisker problem, but as of today manufacturers of solder had years to test their stuff, which they did.

      Don't worry about your car either, all electronics in it is conformal coated for sure, whisker will not grow.

    11. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by ardle · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. An Airbus might get into a low-pressure situation. I presume they know about this?

    12. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by ardle · · Score: 1

      Answer below ;-)

    13. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by budgenator · · Score: 2, Informative

      The ionized tin arc bridge is quite capable of conducting all of the available current. If your lucky it's a high impeadance low current signal line that shorts out instead of a 200 amp power feed. If the first happens your equipment glitches, if the second the Li-ion battery explodes in your pocket or worse.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    14. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by RonR · · Score: 1

      As designers of a small volume specialty hand held device that is safety related and that we want to last a long time with high reliability I can tell you this sort of stuff keeps us awake at night. Those of us working in medical and safety related fields (read small volume markets) have to deal with the fact that components are being driven by the mass consumer market. As has been pointed out, even if your product class is exempt, available components are ROHS. And we're using several BGA chips with tiny clearances, and SMT connectors with .3mm pitch. Does conformal coating solve the problem? I can say we have had bigger problems getting good assembly with lead-free processes.

    15. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to work at a company that made computers for telecommunications (cell phone towers, internet, phone, etc.). I was only peripherally involved in the lead-free changes mandated by RoHS, but it seemed like a generally minimal concern, with most types of solder and plating on the pins of chips. There are some types that will form whiskers, and we were careful to avoid them. Although the communications industry was exempt, many existing leaded products were discontinued, forcing us to convert many things to lead-free only. I'm only aware of one customer that was very averse to buying lead-free. It's a concern, yes, but one that has been mostly solved.

    16. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by rob13572468 · · Score: 1

      Thats not true. I can tell you from experience that aside from some equipment that resides under the hood, most automotive electronics are NOT conformal coated at all...

    17. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by Prune · · Score: 1

      Only somewhat related, but if I manufacture an non-RoHS consumer electronics item in North America, can I sell it to European buyers?

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    18. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by home-electro.com · · Score: 1

      Well, I have only limited experience.... In my car OEM radio circuits were CCed, and cabin fan regulator PCB was CCed.

      I figure more important circuits would not be left unprotected either....

    19. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I couldn't resist this classic from the great Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young:

      "Tin Whiskers and Nixon's coming...four dead in Ohio."

      I'm SURE that's how the song went...

    20. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      Only if you or your customers want to risk customs confiscating it.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    21. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In addition to aircraft, medical equipment, much military hardware, and a number of other microelectronics have been exempted from the EU's lead-free requirements. Consumer electronics are the target of that legislation. However, Pb-free still poses a problem for these areas, because if you want to repair that aircraft board down the line, you have to find a supplier who still produces the leaded solder board.
      Lead my be a poison, but it was great for solder becaused it poisoned whisker growth. Unfortunately, some common elements found in electronics have been shown to speed whisker growth, such as copper, by changing the stress state in finishes on contacts and the like.
      plusser is correct, Pb-free solders have lots of problems that need to be addressed (I think drop-shock failure is a particular problem for the SnAgCu family). However, lots of organizations are aware of this and in-depth studies are an ongoing thing. As an example, check the work of the iNEMI organization on the topic. (As a note, I am a materials science engineer who has done some work in this area)

    22. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      It takes *very little* current to short a FET gate
      Your sentace makes no sense.

      Yes a gate that is floating will take very little current to bring it to a different level. But gates should not just be left floating.

      Still it could cause a problem, especially with newer kit that doesn't have much current drive capability.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    23. Re:Tin Whiskers are fact by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      IANAL but afaict when you send something through the post or courior to europe the importer is considered to be the recipiant. So you the sender won't get in trouble for sending it but the recipiant might depending on the conditions of the import.

      ROHS covers manufacturing and importing on a commercial basis so individuals should be ok to buy from outside the EU. I think there are also exceptions for research use etc. but if a company ordered a load of your product they could get in trouble for doing so especially if they started reselling it.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  14. Well here are a few facts... by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Informative
    Contrary to what the summary implies, lead (327C)has a far higher melting point than tin(231C).

    Any whiskering is far more likely to be a result of board contaminants than just the tin migrating. Modern solders are less forgiving of bad handling practices.Poor flux choice and board cleaning practices are normally to blame for many faults. Changes in board cleaning practices to eliminate various chemicals means that the industry has had to learn how to do things again.

    So, while modern practices might be less forgiving, any faults are really just a result of poor processes.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Well here are a few facts... by computer_guy57 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Remember also the phenomenon of melting-point depression: when two substances are combined in an alloy (e.g., lead and tin) the melting point of the alloy can be lower than the melting point of either individually.

    2. Re:Well here are a few facts... by perbert · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Pb-Sn eutectic temperature is around 183 C. That's what the summary is referring to.

    3. Re:Well here are a few facts... by linzeal · · Score: 4, Funny

      People need to learn to solder as well. I can't tell you how many EE seniors I know that can't solder any better than I could when I was 10 and convinced if I hooked 10 D batteries in series I would be able to get a California radio station in Arizona with a boombox. Ah, precious magic smoke.

    4. Re:Well here are a few facts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      This image shows that your entire premise is bullshit.

    5. Re:Well here are a few facts... by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      Wrong, just wrong yet stil +5 wtf mods?

      its something to do wih mixing to substances and all that but tbh im wondering what slashdot has come to when THAT gets modeded informative.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    6. Re:Well here are a few facts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The only problem that you have now is that you are only 11 and have been at it for only a year!

    7. Re:Well here are a few facts... by gweihir · · Score: 2, Informative

      SnAgCu is at 215C or so. You feel the difference when using it. In addition, PbSn melts a bit like chocolate, i.e. it gets soft before it gets liquid. SnAgCu fells like it is going directly from hard to liquid and the other way round. Took me a bit to get used to (I do electronics as a hobby), but I think SnAgCu may actually better. Is mechanical strenght is certainly better. You do need to solder a bit hotter, and hence faster in order to not damage the componens, but once you have figured it out, the new stiff works well.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    8. Re:Well here are a few facts... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      what does any of that have to do with the fact that tin grows whiskers? A bad cold tin solder joint grows whiskers and a perfect tin solder joint grows whiskers. Maybe the next time we hear about a cellphone batteries spontaneously combusting in someone shirt pocket we'll wonder if it was because of the new "ecco friendly" solder grew invisible whiskers that finally shorted and arced out?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    9. Re:Well here are a few facts... by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It all about upbringing. My niece is an ME/AE Junior and is appalled at the soldiering abilities, and general electronic ineptitude, of her classmates, including EEs. She wonders what these kids were doing in high school when she was building amplifiers. Of course, her dad used to make her solder with a torch half the time. One time a neighbor knocked on the door to say, "Do you know your daughter is in the driveway taking a torch to a disassembled car door?" her dad was like, "Yeah, she got new speakers, what's your point?" That girl was brought up right. :-)

      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
    10. Re:Well here are a few facts... by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      If it's just your hobby why are you bothering with lead-free solder? SnPb isn't illegal for hobby use (in the EU anyway, perhaps it is somewhere).

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    11. Re:Well here are a few facts... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not just the solder that changed, it is also the "tinning" on all of the components, this is a huge change in the industry and we're basically throwing out decades of experience just to start learning all over again.

      Rumors floating out of NASA/JSC a few years back were that they were pretty seriously concerned about the sea-change in industry since they get so much of their current componentry off the shelf, and they have documented cases of whisker induced failures. It's one thing when your iPod craps out, quite another when a GPS satellite goes off-line.

      In the world of implantable medical devices (actually quite similar to space, since after a device is "launched" you really don't want to replace it for a stupid failure), there is also a lot of concern. Both of these fields can still use lead based solder, but they can no longer buy basic capacitors, and other components with the traditional lead alloy end-caps, and just the absence of lead in the caps can lead to whisker formation.

      What the parent posted is a very macho statement from an industry that wants you to believe that they have a handle on the problem. Stop for a minute and think about all the mom & pop immigrant employing electronic sweatshops in the US - now think how most of those assembly plants are run in Costa Rica, Taiwan, and mainland China... how many of them are going to be educated enough to even begin to approach the kind of expertise required to avoid tin whiskers in lead free assemblies?

      My take is that the electronics industry is laughing all the way to the bank, because they've taken another step on the road to manufacturing a disposable commodity. Nothing helps sales more than replacement business, and if everybody makes crap that dies within 5-10 years, you aren't going to be able to buy anything that lasts anymore.

      My stereo amplifier from 1985 still works almost like the day I bought it, but with lead free connections inside, it would likely have a half-life on the order of just a few years, you never know when it's going to die, but die someday it will.
    12. Re:Well here are a few facts... by nonsequitor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      While poor process may explain some of it, I know that American automotive companies are a major force in the microcontroller world, and probably the only reason leaded parts are still made in quantity for many chips. Turns out lead free boards are more vulnerable to vibration, so until the lead free stuff is more durable it is unlikely that cars will use the RoHS compliant parts.

    13. Re:Well here are a few facts... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps for the same reason manufactures are being forced to? Doing his bit for the environment? Less exposure to lead? Curiosity? Why not bother with lead-free solder?

    14. Re:Well here are a few facts... by hitmark · · Score: 2, Informative

      maybe he just worries about inhaling to much lead vapor. we know what lead pipes can do over time, why not lead vapor?

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    15. Re:Well here are a few facts... by elwinc · · Score: 2, Informative
      Yes, the graph of melting point vs mixture is called a eutectic diagram. Every new compound in the mix can lower the melting point significantly. This patent claims to solve the problem. It says:

      [0024] To prevent Sn whisker growth, one should remove at least one of the three following conditions of whisker growth: (1) Room temperature grain boundary diffusion of Sn in Sn, (2) Room temperature reaction between Sn and Cu to form Cu.sub.6Sn.sub.5, and (3) Formation of a stable and protective surface of Sn-oxide. If we remove any one or more of them, we should have in principle no whisker growth. In practice, substantially removing any one of them should lead to substantially hindered whisker growth. However, as we found from the synchrotron radiation study, it takes only a very small stress level to grow a Sn whisker. It is thus a difficult problem to prevent Sn whisker growth. The solution recommended by NEMI is to satisfy the condition (2) by preventing the Cu from reacting with Sn. To satisfy the condition (3) is unrealistic since one would have to have no oxide on the surface of the finish and to keep the device in ultra-high vacuum, or at least in an oxygen-free environment, to prevent oxidation. We disclose here to substantially satisfy the condition (1) by blocking the grain boundary diffusion of Sn. Also, we disclose that a combination of the two solutions together to satisfy both conditions (1) and (2) is even better. [0025] To prevent Sn whisker growth, one should uncouple stress generation and stress relaxation. One should remove both stress generation and stress relaxation. Stress generation can be removed by blocking the diffusion of Cu into Sn. The NEMI solution is to stop the diffusion of Cu into Sn by electroplating a layer of Ni between the Cu and Sn solder finish. The Ni serves as a diffusion barrier to prevent the diffusion of Cu into Sn. However, up to now, no solution to prevent stress relaxation has been available. In other words, there has been no teachings regarding preventing the creep process or the diffusion of Sn atoms to the whiskers. We thus disclose here to use another kind of diffusion barrier to stop the diffusion of Sn. Since we should block the diffusion of Sn atoms from substantially every grain of Sn in the finish, it is a non-trivial problem to solve.
      Material science isn't my specialty though...
      --
      --- Often in error; never in doubt!
    16. Re:Well here are a few facts... by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      On the environmental front, it doesn't take many overheated components, delaminated boards or dry joints resulting in components being thrown away to outweigh the impact of a bit of lead. Mostly though, it's just nicer to work with.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    17. Re:Well here are a few facts... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Yeah - the battery doesn't exactly have RoHS written all over it, either.

    18. Re:Well here are a few facts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they can pry my lead solder from my dead cold hands.

    19. Re:Well here are a few facts... by RiffRafff · · Score: 1

      It's already happening. A tech friend of mine works for a major U.S. wireless telecom, and their MTBF for the average cell phone is less than a year.

      --
      "I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
    20. Re:Well here are a few facts... by wooferhound · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, Whiskers only form at Very High Frequencies. Your Stereo Amplifier would probably be OK at the audio frequencies it works at.

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    21. Re:Well here are a few facts... by cthulhu11 · · Score: 0

      Building amplifiers. In high school. Not all parents are millionaires, and few kids have this sort of opportunity. Where exactly do you expect a kid to learn how to solder electronics?

    22. Re:Well here are a few facts... by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Building amplifiers. In high school. Not all parents are millionaires, and few kids have this sort of opportunity. Where exactly do you expect a kid to learn how to solder electronics? Do they not have Radio Shack where you live? Millionaires? Her father is a firefighter. It was a one watt mono amp. A school project. She also built a telephone. How rich does that make her. In a perfect world I would expect kids to learn to solder from their shop teacher. Here, well I guess their parents should teach them. Or they can look it up on the internet and practice.
      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
    23. Re:Well here are a few facts... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Whiskers are projections of tin, basically little wires, they are particularly nasty at high frequencies, but are conductive like any other metal trace.

      I have seen evidence of a periodic fault where a whisker grew, shorted, blasted itself apart (due to the high current density in the little conductor), and regrew to short again every couple of weeks for several months.

      The stereo amplifier would likely survive several such shorts without serious problem, but eventually something in a low voltage signal path would get crossed up and that would kill it. With any luck, you could bang it with your fist and break the short, but that would only work so many times....
    24. Re:Well here are a few facts... by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah - the battery doesn't exactly have RoHS written all over it, either.

      Interestingly enough, there are lead-(and other hazardous substance)-containing parts that are considered RoHS by exemption. Usually, this is because there is no existing viable alternative. Of course, a battery is also likely to be recycled, since it has a cash value even as junk.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    25. Re:Well here are a few facts... by PalmKiller · · Score: 1

      Outdoors, I find that a small torch is indeed better than a low wattage iron for soldering wiring, especially on a cold winter day. Also those little pencil type butane soldering irons from radio shack (re-badged portasol) work pretty well and tend to cause less collateral damage.

    26. Re:Well here are a few facts... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Economic and political reality strikes again.

      I found the zero tolerance aspects of RoHS particularly amusing in light of these kinds of glaring exceptions..... You there, with 0.2 micrograms of lead in your alloy, that's got to go! Oh, sir, yes, there's no other way but to put 50lbs of lead in this battery, we understand.

      All in all, RoHS is a noble sentiment, and will eventually do a lot of good - it's just going to be an interesting ride while some of the unknowns get worked out... tin whiskers is probably the biggest technical challenge that I've come across in the RoHS fallout, and again, I can see the economic interests at work creating a bigger market via replacement of defective electronics - at least the landfills and incinerators won't be dealing with as much hazardous substance while they process the stream of junk.

    27. Re:Well here are a few facts... by DarrenR114 · · Score: 1

      Building amplifiers. In high school. Not all parents are millionaires, and few kids have this sort of opportunity. Where exactly do you expect a kid to learn how to solder electronics? Do they not have Radio Shack where you live? Millionaires? Her father is a firefighter. It was a one watt mono amp. A school project. She also built a telephone. How rich does that make her. In a perfect world I would expect kids to learn to solder from their shop teacher. Here, well I guess their parents should teach them. Or they can look it up on the internet and practice.
      --
      Been there, Done that, Sold the t-shirt to the next idiot in line
    28. Re:Well here are a few facts... by DarrenR114 · · Score: 1

      Building amplifiers. In high school. Not all parents are millionaires, and few kids have this sort of opportunity. Where exactly do you expect a kid to learn how to solder electronics? Do they not have Radio Shack where you live? Millionaires? Her father is a firefighter. It was a one watt mono amp. A school project. She also built a telephone. How rich does that make her. In a perfect world I would expect kids to learn to solder from their shop teacher. Here, well I guess their parents should teach them. Or they can look it up on the internet and practice. firefighters make more than the median income in any locale, and certainly more than any school teacher - which is a shame because they're overpaid and contribute less to society than school teachers.

      As for "shop" classes - the high school where I learned to solder over 25 years ago shut down the "Industrial Arts" department over 15 years ago.

      Radio Shack is not a very good source for the serious electronics "jobber". Since the advent of "disposable" and cheap IC-based electronics, there hasn't really been a good brick-n-mortar source for the serious hobbyist, or jobber. And learning to solder from online sources would be like learning to be a symphony conductor from online sources.

      --
      Been there, Done that, Sold the t-shirt to the next idiot in line
    29. Re:Well here are a few facts... by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

      firefighters make more than the median income in any locale, and certainly more than any school teacher - which is a shame because they're overpaid and contribute less to society than school teachers. Actually that isn't true in NYC, where firefighters start at $32,000 and the median income is close to $39,000. Second of all it is totally irrelevant. All I said was that as a firefighter he was not a "millionaires." You know a lot of rich firefighters? I don't remember saying anything about the relative merits of various professions and their pay scales.

      As for "shop" classes - the high school where I learned to solder over 25 years ago shut down the "Industrial Arts" department over 15 years ago. I think I made that point.

      Radio Shack is not a very good source for the serious electronics "jobber". Since the advent of "disposable" and cheap IC-based electronics, there hasn't really been a good brick-n-mortar source for the serious hobbyist, or jobber. And learning to solder from online sources would be like learning to be a symphony conductor from online sources. Bullshit. I taught myself to play several instruments at a high level, I know many other people who have done the same. You can teach yourself to solder. Nonetheless my whole point was that she was brought up right, so her father taught her to solder.
      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
    30. Re:Well here are a few facts... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I don't want to poison myself? And, as I said, the resulting connection quality is better.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    31. Re:Well here are a few facts... by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      IIRC there are exemptions in rohs for at least some types of battery (maybe all batteries i'm not sure off hand)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    32. Re:Well here are a few facts... by PipsqueakOnAP133 · · Score: 1

      I graduated as a CS major several years ago and recall being the only one of my friends, who were primarily EE, who could solder. It's sad really.

      Most of them struggled to get two wires connected, while I could have done something like this:
      http://www.mod-chip.bz/PS2/images/duochip/duo_gh006.jpg

    33. Re:Well here are a few facts... by Rui+del-Negro · · Score: 1

      once you have figured it out, the new stiff works well. Isn't that a line from a Viagra ad?
  15. Built-in obsolescence by Stiletto · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Look at it from the manufacturer's point of view. There's a chance that any piece of consumer electronics is now going to wear out and die even faster, causing people to buy replacements more frequently. Sounds like a great deal for the manufacturer with no downside. They don't have to pay to dispose of these things properly. And no, chucking your old electronics in the trash is not the proper way of disposing of them, unless you like cadmium, mercury, hexavalent chromium, and brominated flame retardants seeping into your drinking water.

    Make manufacturers bear the ENTIRE cost of properly and safely disposing of their products, and overnight we'd have cleaner, greener, more long-lasting and durable products.

    1. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Chineseyes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Make manufacturers bear the ENTIRE cost of properly and safely disposing of their products, and overnight we'd have cleaner, greener, more long-lasting and durable products.

      Very idealistic of you but manufacturers will NEVER bear the cost, it will be passed on to the consumer who will then bitch and moan to their government representation that they are being gouged. The manufacturers will then play the victim, "It's the big bad government restricting our ability to provide you with cheap goods". Now Mr. John Q. Politician is stuck in a real crap hole because the next election is coming up soon and his constituents are angry at him because they are paying what they perceive is too much for certain goods. Also the manufacturers lobby who funded his last campaign are threatening to fund his competition who has promised to rescind any laws that keep the manufacturers from doing business as usual. To compound John Q. Politician's problems the manufacturers are saying they will have to move their factories to more friendly territory in Asia so they can continue to stay competitive providing cheap goods. This would cause thousands of jobs to be lost among Mr John Q. Politicians constituency and many thousands more job losses among the constituency of his colleagues who will refuse to endorse him if he goes against a bill that will hurt their own chances of re-election.

      Now he is facing pressure from his constituency, lobbyists, and even his own colleagues.

      What do you suppose Mr. Politician does? Stick to his guns and fight the good fight? Hell no he doesn't. He votes to rescind any law that forces the manufacturers to bear any costs that will be pushed onto consumers. Why? because if he doesn't he will be voted out of office and the guy who takes his office will do what he refused to.

      Is it right? No. Do I agree with it? No. But thats the way it is.

      --
      I think the invisible hand of the market has its middle finger extended

      --A wise old fart named SC0RN
    2. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      Very idealistic of you but manufacturers will NEVER bear the cost, it will be passed on to the consumer who will then bitch and moan to their government representation that they are being gouged.

      You are forgetting that under my (admittedly fantasy) scheme, clean products would end up less expensive, as fewer disposal costs would need to be passed on to the consumer. Instead of bitching to the government, consumers would simply buy the cheaper products, and let the manufacturer's of the dirty (now expensive) products die out.

    3. Re:Built-in obsolescence by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Look up the WEEE directive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WEEE

      In the EU, manufacturers are already responsible for end-of-life products.

    4. Re:Built-in obsolescence by The+Man · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dunno about him but I'm happy to bear the cost. Figure out the cheapest way to recycle or dispose of these things properly, then add that to the price and let me put it in the bin with the rest of my rubbish (or a separate one as with other recyclables). That system is simple and convenient and it provides the correct incentives. What we have now is a system in which it is often illegal to dispose of something but no alternative is available and, where one is, I have no pricing information to determine whether I'm getting jobbed. Meanwhile most people keep throwing the stuff into landfills and polluting everyone's water supplies. This is a no-brainer.

    5. Re:Built-in obsolescence by techno-vampire · · Score: 1
      You are forgetting that under my (admittedly fantasy) scheme...


      Exactly. It's a fantasy, as even you admit. That means that it's impossible in the Real World, and not worth discussing.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    6. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Very idealistic of you but manufacturers will NEVER bear the cost, it will be passed on to the consumer who will then bitch and moan to their government representation that they are being gouged.

      It worked for catalytic converters, (and as a result unleaded gas). It's worked for low-sulphur diesel. It's worked for air bags. All of those examples likely cause higher prices for consumers that are passed on from manufacturers. I recall auto makers making these exact same arguments against airbags, and nowadays people are afraid of any used car without them. I don't recall any politicians being thrown out of office for making these requirements.

      I'm sure there were some naysayers, there always are. The trick is you just have to sell it to the public. Not everyone is a dumbass that only cares about saving a few pennies on electronics.

      Right now it's a pain in the ass to get rid of electronics. A lot of garbage collectors won't take them. Cities sometimes do, but you have to bring them to a special collection place, often many miles away and open odd hours. Put something in the legislation that anyone that sells electronics has to also take them for recycling. In Minnesota (and likely other states) we already do this for motor oil.

      --
      AccountKiller
    7. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Orange+Crush · · Score: 1

      Very idealistic of you but manufacturers will NEVER bear the cost, it will be passed on to the consumer who will then bitch and moan to their government representation that they are being gouged.

      Not necessarily. So long as the market is competitive, manufacturers can't really raise prices arbitrarily. If a manufacturer raises its prices, it sells fewer units and its competitors sell more (all else being equal). Prices will rise and fall to what the market is willing to pay, regardless of production costs. If a new cost is imposed on a manufacturer, they have to cut costs elsewhere or accept less profit. Simply raising the price isn't an option.

    8. Re:Built-in obsolescence by ekhben · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ... but manufacturers will NEVER bear the cost, it will be passed on to the consumer ...

      Not holding the manufacturers responsible merely keeps the cost hidden, it doesn't get rid of it.

    9. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah genius, stick the evil global corporations with the cost! Those dumb bastards will never think to pass them on to us, the noble consumers. We're far too enlightened to be bothered with any personal responsibility.

    10. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Chineseyes · · Score: 1

      I agree it can be done but more often than not these sort of things just don't get done. In the example that you have given the cost required for these changes was a small percentage of the cost of before the change. In the case of electronics, they are so cheap that even the smallest increase in cost is a large increase in cost.

      --
      I think the invisible hand of the market has its middle finger extended

      --A wise old fart named SC0RN
    11. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, actually overnight we would have much more expensive products and the companies would blame the regulation. They would not change anything else.

    12. Re:Built-in obsolescence by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. So long as the market is competitive, manufacturers can't really raise prices arbitrarily.

      If the cost of production increases, manufacturers stop producing, because there is not sufficient profit, or they make adjustments to pass those costs down the line.

      It is a business risk that fewer units will be sold, but if the market is competitive, the prices were already nearly as low as they could muster, and the "competitors" will be making the same price increase, to the extent that the increased costs are the same for the competition.

      Granted, if the competition is more efficient: the increase in cost may be less.

    13. Re:Built-in obsolescence by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      I agree, certainly if the extra costs are for such things as conservation of the environment. It's not like consumers are going to be sympathetic to manufacturers for having to comply with laws that are there to help protect everyone.

    14. Re:Built-in obsolescence by sveinb · · Score: 1

      That's precisely the way it works in Norway. Used electronic equipment can be returned in any shop which sells similar equipment. The costs are covered by producers and importers of electronic equipment through a mandatory membership in a government-approved recycling company.

    15. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't the WEEE Directive say something to the same effect?

    16. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and I'll bet you'll be first in line to complain about the 2x-3x price tag of that "clean" product.

    17. Re:Built-in obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the EU there is the WEEE directive, making the manufacturer responsible for their products at the end of life.

    18. Re:Built-in obsolescence by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Automobiles come with airbags because the insurance lobbiests had more money than the automobile lobbiests. Not because some politician thought it was the right thing to do, but because an insurance exec saw the additional profit to be had if he/she could pay lower medical claims. Note: insurance premiums didn't exactly decline either.

      Its arguable as to if the person in the automobile is happier as a result. Now instead of being killed, you live in agony or mamed for the rest of your life in many cases. Given the option, I think I'll go with agony as a first choice since its easy enough to rectify the 'living' part on my own, so don't confuse my argument, just pointing it out.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  16. According to the web by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 4, Informative

    Tin Whiskers appear real:

        http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/background/index.htm
        http://www.calce.umd.edu/lead-free/tin-whiskers/

    From what I can tell from these links there issue is still present in lead-free solder, and very much an issue in certain conditions. I have not seen any pages which indicate long-term solutions, though it would be interesting if someone can turn one up.

    Another link:

        http://www.national.com/analog/packaging/leadfree

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  17. Re:Tin Whiskas - Fact by wart · · Score: 1

    My GSD eats a cat a day.

  18. Don't trust Wikipedia by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Check the reference yourself.

    What? No references? Add citation needed or better yet, do some research and find a citation that supports the statement.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  19. Fact by Telecommando · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Years ago I used to work on GE radio equipment. GE radios (Master II series) had tin-plated resonant cavities in their receivers. Tin whiskers were seldom a problem in the mobile radios as vehicle vibration tended to keep the whiskers knocked off. But in base stations the whiskers would grow along the lines of current until they shorted out the coils within the cavities.

    The symptoms were always the same. The radio would be working fine one minute and be stone-deaf the next. Sometimes just opening the cabinet door would be enough to dislodge the whiskers and remove the short. But it always returned a few days or weeks later. We got to the point where whenever we were sent out to fix a deaf base, our first repair technique was to take a large screwdriver and rap the cavities with the handle a couple of times, hard. We got some funny looks from the customers but they were happy to be back on the air.

    GE finally admitted that the plating was the problem and shipped us a bunch of cavities with a different alloy to use as replacements. They never would tell us what the difference was. Curious, we disassembled some of the old cavities and shook out tiny metal slivers that were finer than a human hair. Some were up to a centimeter in length.

    All of the radios we had problems with were less than five years old at the time.

    On a somewhat unrelated note, a friend of mine works for a company building avionics. They're still using Lead/Tin/Silver solder for US military contracts. He thinks they know something the rest of us don't.

    --
    Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    1. Re:Fact by sawak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So basically, when something stops working, hitting it may actually solve the problem? :-)

    2. Re:Fact by mrbluze · · Score: 1

      He thinks they know something the rest of us don't. We all think we know something the rest of us don't.
      --
      Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
    3. Re:Fact by kesuki · · Score: 1

      very cool, so people worried about cars failing have nothing to worry about, every time you hit a pot hole, the tin whiskers are all going to fall off!

      perhaps we need to put 'dual shock' systems in lead free soldier devices to knock free the tin whiskers.

    4. Re:Fact by QuoteMstr · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Percussive maintenance."

    5. Re:Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


        We got to the point where whenever we were sent out to fix a deaf base, our first repair technique was to take a large screwdriver and rap the cavities with the handle a couple of times, hard.

       

      Is this the reasoning and start of engineers pounding away at their hardware to magically fix it?

    6. Re:Fact by ardle · · Score: 1

      Wow. Brilliant!

    7. Re:Fact by dmitriy88 · · Score: 1

      Whiskers sappin' mah sentry!

    8. Re:Fact by Aenoxi · · Score: 1

      aka "Impact engineering"

      --
      "The sum of all knowledge does not imply the knowledge of all sums" Kurt Gödel (paraphrased)
  20. Not been taking notice? by Mike1024 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Robert Cringley wrote this up this some time ago, but it seems that the world has not been taking notice. Of Cringely? Well, of course not.
    --
    "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
  21. seems familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/gear/parts/2007-10-05-tinwhiskers_N.htm
    2007....

  22. Robert Cringley wrote it so its gonna be bollocks by moderators_are_w*nke · · Score: 1

    The man has never said anything sensible, well, ever.

    --
    "XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, use more." - Anonymous Coward
  23. Is lead truly that dangerous ? by billcopc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I understand the rationale for getting rid of lead in various products due to its toxicity, but is the amount of lead in solder really dangerous ? It seems like it would be such a small quantity, and perhaps more importantly it's sealed away in some plastic or steel enclosure... it's not like I go around licking motherboards all day long, and quite frankly if your kid wants to lick lead solder and you let him, brain damage might be an improvement!

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by hughk · · Score: 4, Informative

      The issue is more for some little Chinese kid who lives by scrapping our electronics. This means the lead is concentrated and gets into water and all sorts.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    2. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by pjt33 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's sealed away properly now, but unless people dispose of old equipment properly it ends up in a dump somewhere, and there's a risk that in a few decades it will end up contaminating groundwater. Obviously it's a hard risk to quantify, so I'll fence-sit as to whether this is a useful precaution or not.

    3. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by bjourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Computer breaks and goes to the garbage dump. Rats eat the circuits dies and decays in the soil. Grass sucks up the lead from the soil and cows eat it. Cows are slaughtered and transformed into ham which you eat. Lead is then accumulated in the body.

    4. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Really? I thought it was just through the water or dissolved in other liquids that we drink. I've never heard of anyone getting lead poisoning from a cow.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    5. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by gujo-odori · · Score: 2, Funny

      You live in a place where they make ham out of *cows*? I don't think I want to eat /anything/ there, lead or not.

    6. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by kesuki · · Score: 1

      where i live, the women's prison is where all the computers get scrapped for recycling.

      it's quite expensive to ship a useless computer across the ocean to be recycled, when they get shipped to china, they bury them in a landfill, where they then leech into the ground water.

    7. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Cows =! ham. s/cows/pigs, and you're all set

    8. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by drkmirror · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cows are slaughtered and transformed into ham which you eat. Lead is then accumulated in the body. Lead transforms cows into HAM my god I never realized lead was so dangerous
    9. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by rueger · · Score: 5, Informative

      ...but is the amount of lead in solder really dangerous?

      The risk is likely more to people repairing and building electronics than to the consumer. The last transmitter tech that I worked with was adamant about handwashing and always had a high wattage light positioned over solder work so that rising hot air would draw lead fumes up and away from his face.

      People who hand load ammunition face a similar long term but real risk of lead exposure.

    10. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      And where rats eat circuit boards?

    11. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um... s/ham/beef/ or s/[c,C]ows/pigs/i

    12. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by peektwice · · Score: 0, Troll

      Your brand of idiocy, where ham comes from cows, and lead poisoned retarded cows are loose in the streets, robbing trains, and killing women and children, uniquely qualifies you for political office. Left wing, of course.

      --
      Other than this text, there is no discernible information contained in this sig.
    13. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by gbutler69 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, I'll do you one better. I've never heard of HAM made from COWS!

      --
      Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
    14. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by mpaulsen · · Score: 1

      Homer: Are you saying you're never going to eat any animal again? What about bacon?
      Lisa: No.
      Homer: Ham?
      Lisa: No.
      Homer: Pork chops?
      Lisa: Dad, those all come from the same animal.
      Homer: Heh heh heh. Ooh, yeah, right, Lisa. A wonderful, magical animal.

    15. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by marxmarv · · Score: 3, Funny

      Kosher ham, I trust.

      --
      /. -- the Free Republic of technology.
    16. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that scenario is still more realistic than Iraqi WMDs.

    17. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget lead and tin whiskers and all that. I want to find about how you go about turning cows into ham!

    18. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is no such thing as "lead fumes" while soldering. Temperatures are NOT high enough to vaporize lead at all. Granted, some of the flux materials used in solder are not so good for you to breathe, but you will not inhale any lead while soldering. Wash your hands after soldering and your lead intake is practically zero.

    19. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Thats because after successfully getting a monkey into office, the republicans have already got all the lead poisoned retarded cows lined up as presidential candidates OFC.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    20. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Fweeky · · Score: 1

      So why go full tilt towards banning lead in electronics for something that *might* be a problem (and probably making the problem worse by increasing failure rates), but not do anything about lead roofing, which is probably a far more serious risk of leeching into groundwater and also has plenty of proven alternatives?

      I guess if banning lead roofing was going to increase failure rates there, the roofing industry would be all for it; more revenue for them.

    21. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cows are slaughtered and transformed into ham Neat trick.
    22. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Computer breaks and goes to the garbage dump. Rats eat the circuits dies and decays in the soil. Grass sucks up the lead from the soil and cows eat it. Cows are slaughtered and transformed into ham which you eat. Lead is then accumulated in the body. And the pig goes "Moo".
    23. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Maybe he means the ham they make hamburgers from.

    24. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Well... the last hamburger I ate almost certainly didn't have any ham in it (It may not have had any beef in it either but that's another story :)

      Google for 'steamed hams' too.

    25. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by dbIII · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ham no, but I live in a place where "seafood sticks" are made out of cows. Amazing what can can be done with tripe and boiled down prawn (shrimp) shells for flavour.

    26. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by billcopc · · Score: 2, Informative

      When soldering, I'm far more worried about that nasty flux than any imaginary lead vapors. Lead boils at 1600'C or so... definitely higher than my iron's tip.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    27. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seriously doubt that your cows are giving you ham...

    28. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      rats and squirrels are rodents and their teeth constantly grow so they'll both gnaw on and eat some very unlikely things just to keep the teeth ground down.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    29. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by budgenator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      back in the day I would sometimes hold the solder in my mouth when I needed an extra "hand"

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    30. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by gujo-odori · · Score: 1

      Oh man, I was eating dinner when I read that :p You'll excuse me while I go off and starve myself to death now...

    31. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      The Chinese have already located a lead ore smelter less than 10 kilometers from his school anyway, so some old lead solder is the least of his worries except that the local officials don't give a crap and his peasant parents don't know what is going on at the nearby smelter or why it is bad for their single child (under that great one child policy) until their kid finally makes it to a state hospital with lots of lead related developmental brain damage. In short, the Chinese are doing a bang up job of pissing in their own pool already, so a few more discarded electronics from Europe and the United States isn't going to make much of a difference.

    32. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by jack8609 · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that no one has ever documented lead leaching out of a tin-lead solder into ground water. However, silver - which is commonly used in lead-free solders will leach out and is somewhere around 100x (at least) more toxic than the lead anyway. The concept of lead-free solder having anything to do with safety or environmentalism is downright silly...

    33. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      They actually taste allright especially crumbed and fried. It's just a bit of a shock to find out what they are made from.

    34. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      Really? I thought it was just through the water or dissolved in other liquids that we drink. I've never heard of anyone getting lead poisoning from a cow. The process he's referring to is called biomagnification, and some quick searching suggests that lead is indeed not thought to be significantly biomagnified. And a little more rummaging suggests that you're right, the bigger sources of worry are groundwater and your plumbing, through lead pipes and lead plumbing solder.

      That's scary, but not entirely shocking: the very word "plumbing" comes from the Latin word for lead.
    35. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by cffrost · · Score: 1

      Surely bjourne meant hamburger-ham.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    36. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then you can even make radios from the HAM, but you may need to get a license first.

    37. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      So why go full tilt towards banning lead in electronics for something that *might* be a problem (and probably making the problem worse by increasing failure rates), but not do anything about lead roofing, which is probably a far more serious risk of leeching into groundwater and also has plenty of proven alternatives?

      I guess if banning lead roofing was going to increase failure rates there, the roofing industry would be all for it; more revenue for them. One of the reasons was that in many places, trash is incinerated due to lack of landfill space. Lead is the top toxin that's left over after incineration and it is hard to filter lead out of the exhaust with high effectiveness.
      And in the end most of what we bury in landfills comes back into the environment one way or another. Organic compounds decay; it's the inorganics that are the problem long term.

      Lead is only dissolved in the presence of acids. Pure lead forms an oxide layer and doesn't dissolve in noticeable amounts. I don't know if acid rain is strong enough to dissolve significant amounts of lead from roofing.
    38. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by darinfp · · Score: 1

      Please live a LONG way from me...

    39. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Many will point to the initial research and say that lead is not dangerous. I don't know. It seems to me that any level of heavy metal in a body, especially a developing body, is counter-indicated.


      That said, there is research that shows certain negative effects to lead poisoning, beyond the assumed effect on intelligence. Furthermore, when we are talking about heavy metals, we are talking about things that build up over time and may have effects that only show up intermitantly. I don't know about you, but if there is something that might have negative effects on me and I can avoid it, I do.


      So the question becomes can we avoid using lead. I think so. We have successfully gotten rid of lead in cars. We have successfully gotten rid of lead in paints. Were there compromises involved? Sure. But life is compromise and change, and those that don't change are relegated to the dung heap, especially in the USA. If we can force change, and we can innovate for change, then we get to define success, which in turn helps us be successful. If all we do is complain about change, then someone else will make use of that advantage.


      So what about lead free solder. It is going to require new formulation. It will require new technology to make it work. But that is what we are all about. If we were happy with the past generations technology, we would still be listening to vinyl recordings amplified by vacuum tubes and working on computers via dumb terminals. Adapt or die.

    40. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then what's a hamburger?

    41. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by dbcad7 · · Score: 1
      Me either, but it brings up something we always go through with employees every Christmas at work... Do you want a turkey or a ham ? .. We collect the information, buy the damn things, and it never seems to work out correctly.

      I've always thought it would just expedite the whole thing if we gave them all Turkey hams.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    42. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      The name comes from the town of Hamburg (in Germany), not the kind of meat used.

      While the presentation of the meat in a bun is of American origin (inspired by the British Earl of Sandwich, no doubt), the meat dish itself comes from Germany.

      Ham is a subset of pork, not beef.

    43. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by labnet · · Score: 3, Informative

      ROHS has been a billion dollar expense to the electronics industry, and it is argued the solutions are causing more enviromental damage than the original problem which was based ONE scientific paper out of the USA which was since retracted.
      Lead free is a huge pain.
      All soldering processes run 20deg hotter, consuming more electricity and stressing components, especially MLS devices (Mousture absorbed by components turns to steam fracturing parts if you are not careful). Wetting is poorer. Tin whiskers is a problem the industry is still trying to fully understand.
      All because some beurorats in the EU listened to one faulty research paper.
      http://www.edn.com/article/CA6355639.html

      --
      46137
    44. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's really serious. Apparently the process of soldering and desoldering creates lead fumes that can kill you in high dosages or cause birth defects in the children of women so exposed. The more you know...

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    45. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      This is very easy. In the parts of Europe, when I buy almost any bottle, I pay a deposit. If I don't return the bottle (any place that sells bottles, doesn't have to be same store that sold it to me) - I don't get my deposit back. Yes, it's only $0.25 per bottle - but most people buy their drinks in crates and it adds up to a good amount.

      Now, in America, Walmart charges you a $8 or so deposit when you buy a car battery. You get that back when you return the old battery. This way, batteries are not thrown in the trash. It works very well.

      This same deposit they should put on all electronics. It's not enough that people CAN return it to the store when used up, but they need a financial incentive as well. Hell, then they could put it on the curb for all they care and someone else will pick it up just for the deposit.

      Just mandate any store selling electronics must collect deposits and take things back to be disposed of properly. That way, you don't have to worry about this problem, manufacturers are free to use useful but not environmentally friendly materials in the products, and it all can be recycled with minimal interference on behalf of businesses/government.

      Of course, this program has to mandated nationwide to be effective, with proper deposit amounts, and at any retailer retailing it. Not the half-assed 5 cent deposits in some states collected only at some locations like they do with aluminum cans/bottles.

    46. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by hughk · · Score: 1

      It was made up to be a big thing a few years back (around the time the legislation was peddled). Yes, agreed that China is already an environmental disaster area, but the general feeling (also promoted now by the UN) was not to ship toxic waste to anyone who can't deal with it properly.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    47. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cows are slaughtered and transformed into ham which you eat.
      Muslims and Jews of the world rejoice! For on this day, you may indulge in the bounty of ham!
    48. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as "lead fumes" while soldering. Temperatures are NOT high enough to vaporize lead at all.

      Does it get hot enough to turn lead into liquid? If so, then evaporation will be taking place. At what rate I don't know, but the temperatures *are* hot enough to release lead vapors.

    49. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Overrated... http://www.kansasangler.com/makeit.html

      is that guy making sure to avoid areas where cars burn leaded fuel? What a paranoid guy.

    50. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAM made of Cow?
      VO1-MOO (ex VA3-MOO) ~ a.k.a. "CowMan"

    51. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by jodio · · Score: 1

      Silly. The cows are fed to pigs then you get the ham!

    52. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by bjourne · · Score: 1

      Thank you! That is what I meant. :) If it is not biomagnified, then maybe you wont eat lead.

    53. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nothing decays in a land fill once it is sealed. This is more eco-greenie nonsense.

  24. Yes, but you forgot the most important detail by davidwr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did he have tin whiskers?

    If you are going to troll, at least be on-topic.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Yes, but you forgot the most important detail by mo^ · · Score: 1

      tin, tin-cans, the can, .....

      tenuous, but related....

      --
      bah!*@%!
    2. Re:Yes, but you forgot the most important detail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps he had "ten whiskers" and got confused with this thread. His activities might have clouded his judgment a bit ;-)

  25. I wouldn't go that far by davidwr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Several times editors on both sides of an issue have been banned for edit-warring and aggressively reverting changes they don't agree with. Usually this happens over controversial political and religious articles. This process usually takes months and is preceded by other means, including attempts to resolve the dispute peaceably, administratively-protecting the article, and other mean.

    Also, when a philosophical-minority or fringe group tries to take over a highly-watched article, administrators eventually silence them if they insist on using unreliable sources or not keeping the article in "proper balance," where "proper balance" reflects the real-world opinions on the subject. Pseudoscience, alternative-history, and similar-subject proponents tend to get banned if they aren't careful.

    Low-traffic articles nobody cares about are very vulnerable to this kind of abuse though.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:I wouldn't go that far by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, that stops it. Unless, of course, one of the administrators takes over an article and enforces his point of view, which I have seen.

      I had an administrator remove factual, documented information from an article because it didn't jive with the rest of the obviously biased article.

      On Wikipedia, the truth is what the Admins says is the truth.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    2. Re:I wouldn't go that far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I had an administrator remove factual, documented information from an article because it didn't jive with the rest of the obviously biased article. Links (to article, edit history, and discussion page) or it didn't happen.
    3. Re:I wouldn't go that far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Low-traffic articles nobody cares about are very vulnerable to this kind of abuse though.
      And if you think about it, low-traffic articles wouldn't even appear in old-style dictionaries like Encyclopaedia Brittanica (basically by definition). So even if every low-traffic article was abused, it's still a net win (assuming that it's better to know something half-true than to know nothing at all).
    4. Re:I wouldn't go that far by D'Sphitz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yep, if I went to a "legitimate" encyclopedia rather than Wikipedia i'd guess 99% or more of the topics I look up every day wouldn't be there at all.

      I don't get all the hate for Wikipedia. So it's not perfect, well neither is the Encyclopedia Britannica, but for me Wikipedia is the single most useful resource on the internet second only to Google, and even that may be a tossup because Google often just links me to a Wikipedia page. I'm there dozens of times every day, whether it be looking up something I saw on TV, an actor's name, a musician's discography, or something I just read about.

      It's a shame such a valuable resource takes so much heat. Maybe it has its problems but it's alot more accurate and alot less opinionated than the average webpage you'll find on any given topic, and honestly it doesn't really matter to me that the article on Chevy Chase hasn't been published in a scientific journal for peer review.

    5. Re:I wouldn't go that far by csnydermvpsoft · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On Wikipedia, the truth is what the Admins says is the truth.

      And that's different than a commercial information source how?

    6. Re:I wouldn't go that far by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Commercial sources don't claim to use the so-called wisdom of crowds.

      Commercial sources don't say anyone can edit the entries.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    7. Re:I wouldn't go that far by kenwd0elq · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I have forgotten who it was who wrote that the real problem in life wasn't what we didn't know; it was the stuff we DO know that isn't true. Probably Sam Clemens.

      But it was long enough ago to have been included in the musical play "The King And I".

    8. Re:I wouldn't go that far by KGIII · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To play the devil's advocate, I'd argue that no information is better than dis-information or mis-information because then people are free to research on their own and draw their own conclusions as opposed to being fed incorrect (or biased and not entirely true) information.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    9. Re:I wouldn't go that far by Ottair · · Score: 1

      My experience leads me to believe that for the most part what you report is wishful thinking and that some of the biggest abusers of the process weren't "fringers" or "pseudo-scientists" but editors who felt they alone were entitled to determine what was and was not a fringe theory or pseudo-scientific. And that many of them were more than happy to obstruct the process where ever and when-ever possible even to the point of excluding any opposing point of view that would allow the reader of an article to decide.

    10. Re:I wouldn't go that far by Cylix · · Score: 1

      Been there seen that.

      Welcome to the converted brother.

      Wikipedia - Stomping Grounds For Your POV

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    11. Re:I wouldn't go that far by packeteer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're right. Commercial sources claim to be fact checked very carefully. Commercial sources claim to be strictly unbiased.

      Wikipedia strives for those goals but at least you are not deluded into thinking they are there.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    12. Re:I wouldn't go that far by Socguy · · Score: 3, Informative

      With Wikipedia I find it interesting to read the talk page when there is a contested article. If you're really interested in the subject matter, You can often learn significantly more with two knowledgeable people arguing about that topic.

    13. Re:I wouldn't go that far by hitmark · · Score: 1

      just like one could from a thread of comments around these parts at one time...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    14. Re:I wouldn't go that far by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, that stops it. Unless, of course, one of the administrators takes over an article and enforces his point of view, which I have seen.

      I had an administrator remove factual, documented information from an article because it didn't jive with the rest of the obviously biased article.

      On Wikipedia, the truth is what the Admins says is the truth. Citation needed.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    15. Re:I wouldn't go that far by glop · · Score: 1

      Well you still can. It's just that you have to wait a bit for people to chime in on a subject, then other people mod the posts and mod again etc.
      One thing I find a bit annoying is that the funny +5 articles are often drowning the insightful posts.
      But at the same time, funny is good and relatively easy to skip once I have had enough laughing and want more serious comments.

      Slashdot still summons pretty insightful comments on a variety of topics. And very often I'll see a post and think: "I don't care about the article linked too, it's probably average but I am curious if there will be some really knowledgeable comment on Slashdot".

    16. Re:I wouldn't go that far by norminator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess a lot of people here must spend more time looking at serious stuff that they're really interested in on wikipedia than I do. I think wikipedia is great for getting a high-level understanding of a new technical subject. If I want to find out more, I can follow any applicable reference links. Of course the text of the articles have to taken with a grain of salt, and I know that just because a reference is cited doesn't mean the reference is any good, bot at least there's some basic information to get started.

      But where I really think wikipedia is great is for pop culture references... Things that don't have a lot of hard-to-understand scientific details, and that are more common knowledge to more people. Things, as you mentioned, like music, movies, TV, etc.

      I think wikipedia has really been great for TV shows, especially those with a die-hard, internet-savvy fan base. A single TV series can hundreds of articles on episodes, characters, locations, themes, symbolism, etc., and you could spend all day learning more than you ever wanted to know about a single show.

    17. Re:I wouldn't go that far by Applekid · · Score: 1

      Links (to article, edit history, and discussion page) or it didn't happen. Wikitruth has much discussion over how admins can selectively delete sections or entire articles, histories, and discussion without leaving a trace. That site also claims to have mirrors of pre-cabal articles.
      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    18. Re:I wouldn't go that far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When so many people believe The Bible to be a work of absolute nonfiction, can we really be surprised that Wikipedia is written off as inaccurate/fantasy?

    19. Re:I wouldn't go that far by somersault · · Score: 1

      You could just change your user prefs to mod down funny posts and mod up the insightful ones? I am here to learn and keep up with news, but I must admit I tend to try to go for humour rather than insightfulness myself. Sometimes I even get modded funny!

      --
      which is totally what she said
    20. Re:I wouldn't go that far by somersault · · Score: 1

      It kind of depends on what you're going for. If you want to be happy then getting fed a lot of half-truths or lies is probably the way to go (as long as they're positive of course, I'm thinking people would be happier if they believed that certain famous people had just retired rather than died, or that there are no poor third world countries, etc).

      If you want to only believe in what is known to be factual then it would be better to know nothing than to know something that is flawed, unless you are going to do a study into finding and fixing the flaws. If you're reading a wikipedia article then there's a chance you are wanting to get acquainted with a topic in order to go into it in more depth, and then you will be able to fix the flaws in the articles.

      On the flip side there will also be the odd person who treats a wiki article as gospel and doesn't do any more research.

      For someone like an engineer, using wikipedia as a primary source of research is bad, but for someone just looking up an explanation of slashdot memes for example, it's probably not so important..

      --
      which is totally what she said
    21. Re:I wouldn't go that far by speculatrix · · Score: 1

      I added to a wikipedia article about the small village where I live. A wikipedant who lives in California decided to remove swathes of basic facts for some arbitrary reason. That was my most important lesson in wikipolitics - people are are asshats and do things for arbitrary reasons with the truth being one of the lesser.

    22. Re:I wouldn't go that far by menace3society · · Score: 1

      Commercial information sources can't cop out if they're wrong about something. Information wants to be free, so their business model must rest on keeping their reputation strong. Therefore they have a deep financial incentive to get it right, and if they make a mistake, clean it up quickly and apologize.

      The NYT, for example, prints apologetic correction notices in each day's paper. If a WikiMedia project contains a factual accuracy, it gets fixed silently, and you have to go digging (usually pretty deeply as many of any given page's edits are stylistic and grammatical changes, rather than alterations of content).

      In fact, sometimes, the record of the edit itself is erased, so a person who accessed the page when it was wrong is left wondering whether he actually saw that (for example) Almaty is the capital of Kazakhstan, or if he just misread the article.

      Add to this the ethos of removing statements which are true but not backed up with an inline citation, and you have a system where, given any two versions of a wikipedia article from different days, you can't tell which emendations are accurate and which aren't.

  26. Useless without pictures. by Gaffod · · Score: 1

    (body)

    1. Re:Useless without pictures. by Iceykitsune · · Score: 1, Informative

      rickroll

      --
      GENERATION 24: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
  27. An attempt to discredit WP with lies, I say. by game+kid · · Score: 3, Informative

    More importantly, where in "the Wikipedia page linked to above" did it state "that tin whisker problems 'are negligible in modern alloys'"?

    I saw nothing that said that in current version, and it hasn't been edited (minor or otherwise) since June 13th. I certainly cannot find that single-quoted statement.

    I am all for scrutinizing Wiki pages, and not using unverifiable statements from them, but I will not support discrediting them on material that was not written on them in the first place.

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    1. Re:An attempt to discredit WP with lies, I say. by kesuki · · Score: 2, Informative

      he might mean http://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/reference/tech_papers/2007-brusse-metal-whiskers.pdf page 5 where a '0.5% to 1%' lead coating prevents whiskers. the source is cited on wikipedia.

      ROSH laws require less than 0.1% though... i think they need to rethink that on lead, if 1% lead stops whiskering, it's well worth it.

      cadmium is also banned, and was the first metal to ever verify whiskering. chromate actually accelerates whiskering, so finding an additive that is better than lead might be hard.

    2. Re:An attempt to discredit WP with lies, I say. by kesuki · · Score: 4, Informative

      i found the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solder

      ""Tin Whiskers" were a problem with early electronic solders which were coincidentally lead-free, and lead was initially added in part to eliminate them. These problems are negligible in modern alloys,[citation needed]"

      the only metal I've heard of as being whisker free is lead, though, even gold silver and copper can whisker.

    3. Re:An attempt to discredit WP with lies, I say. by bLanark · · Score: 1

      Er, sorry, my bad. I must have malformed the HTML for that link.

      I now present a link to the page on solder that I obviously screwed up in the article submission.

      Sorry.

      --
      Note to ACs: I won't mod you up, even if you are being funny or insightful. So take a chance! It's not real life!
    4. Re:An attempt to discredit WP with lies, I say. by game+kid · · Score: 1

      Much appreciated. In any case, it is uncited (and now thusly-marked) and something I'd not be quick to quote anyway. :)

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    5. Re:An attempt to discredit WP with lies, I say. by andreyvul · · Score: 3, Informative

      >the only metal I've heard of as being whisker free is lead
      Oh really?
      http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/other_whisker/index.htm#pb

      --
      proud caffeine whore
    6. Re:An attempt to discredit WP with lies, I say. by AB3A · · Score: 2, Informative

      According to NASA, research has shown that you need at least 3% lead in the solder alloy to prevent whiskering.

      There are conformal coatings which can delay the effects of tin whiskering, but that's all they do. They do not prevent the tin whisker from forming.

      There are many tests out there which test for strength of the connection. But very few test for whiskering. We need to be careful when discussing this subject. Oh, and one other thing: the new solder alloys are not compatible with the older tin plated parts. This issue has turned the market in to one great big experiment.

      At the end of the day we don't really have much of a lead problem with electronics. Now, the RoHS folk have turned this relatively minor ecological problem in to a major headache for the general public. I hope you weren't expecting that pacemaker to last more than three years....

      --
      Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
  28. More stupid laws thanks to paranoia. by plasmacutter · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm sorry but I don't see the danger to life and limb these politicians do in the tiny dimples of lead alloy solder which are enclosed in numerous tough outer casings.

    Have there been any studies comparing this "health risk" to your average city's smog layer?

    Lead has its place in society. It's not as if lead based solder is being used to paint walls or as inlay in children's toys.

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    1. Re:More stupid laws thanks to paranoia. by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      Not in Europe anyway, I hear they have laws on this sort of thing.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    2. Re:More stupid laws thanks to paranoia. by rrohbeck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The whole WEEE/RoHS thing originated in Europe but then other states/countries got on the bandwagon too.
      Smog is more of a problem in many areas of the US. And every time some politicians try to do something about it everybody screams about the costs. In Europe the politicians have data about the effect of bad air on e.g. childrens' health. In the US, they have data about the effect on the economy.

    3. Re:More stupid laws thanks to paranoia. by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

      The whole WEEE/RoHS thing originated in Europe but then other states/countries got on the bandwagon too.
      Smog is more of a problem in many areas of the US. And every time some politicians try to do something about it everybody screams about the costs. In Europe the politicians have data about the effect of bad air on e.g. childrens' health. In the US, they have data about the effect on the economy. but without an economy your children can't get jobs, can't these stupid people think of the children ? : )
      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    4. Re:More stupid laws thanks to paranoia. by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      I think you're being sarcastic, but I'll bite:
      That implies that improving the environment kills the economy.
      Which is provably false.

    5. Re:More stupid laws thanks to paranoia. by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

      WHOOSH!~

      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
  29. This is only going to get recursive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I think you've wasted your time commenting on the comment.

  30. Cringley by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like his story about replacing all the car parts on his old Thunderbird. If it is true of course. Probably has been driving the latest BMW models for the last 10 years.

    He mentions silver and bismuth are just as bad for health. Checking the equally reputable Wikipedia page for silver yields "Silver plays no known natural biological role in humans, and possible health effects of silver are a subject of dispute. Silver itself is not toxic but most silver salts are, and some may be carcinogenic." So seems to me at least, one cannot compare silver and lead in terms of health effects. No one disputes that lead is bad for health, particularly the health of children. Checking on bismuth also yields no known health maladies other than perhaps discolored teeth from ingesting it. Again compared to lead it seems tame.

    Also a quote from Cringley's article, I love the type of logic it displays :

    "mean time between failures (MTBF) has gone down (accelerated MTBF tests, which are the only MTBF tests we do anymore, don't reliably pick this up, by the way), and reliability has suffered."

    So basically "I am right but you can't tell, because the ways of things are measured now hide the fact that I am right"

  31. Just had to replace an ABS unit. by plopez · · Score: 1

    The mechanic blamed the failure on lead-free solder. It sure did hurt my wallet.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Just had to replace an ABS unit. by EricJ2 · · Score: 1

      What kind of car was it? I have a car that has been having intermittent ABS controller failures, and you've got me wondering about this as a possible cause.

  32. This qualifies for a "Are you pulling my leg?" tag by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 0, Troll
    Tin Whiskers? You have got to be joking! If somebody wrote this into a sci-fi story, it would be one of the dumber Doctor Who episodes. Even the name is dorky.


    And, sorry, it may cause brain damage, when I grew up, the soldering iron was my sonic screwdriver, and 'flux' should be available as a room scent; I associate it with many happy memories. (Well, also with burnt fingers and exhausted frustration as expensive parts utterly failed to work at the 11th hour, but still. . .) Lead-based solder is on my top five list of all-time favorite non-food/medicinal substances.

    Ground-up ESTES rocket-engine powder is one of the others.

    How did Heston put it. . .


    -FL

  33. Built in obsolescence by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If your computer has a limited life expectancy, then you have to buy a new one at some point. So why would they 'fix' the problem ?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  34. Re:This qualifies for a "Are you pulling my leg?" by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Too bad he is serious, as the problem really does exist.

    Now, on what scale is debatable, but not the problem itself.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  35. CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by Stavr0 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've had several equipment fail, not because of tin whiskers, but because of crappy capacitors that leaked and/or burst.

    1. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by Vellmont · · Score: 1

      I've had two pieces of equipment fail for this exact reason. A motherboard, and a DVD player. I actually managed to fix the DVD player since other people have had the same thing happen and provided all the details of the right capacitor to buy. The motherboard I tossed.

      Tin whiskers I've never seen.. but then when the capacitor thing first came out I didn't have any equipment fail do to bad caps either.

      --
      AccountKiller
    2. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by Stavr0 · · Score: 1

      I actually managed to fix the DVD player since other people have had the same thing happen and provided all the details of the right capacitor to buy. Let me guess ... Philips DVP 642.
    3. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by Gazzonyx · · Score: 1

      I blew a cap on my (brand name, Hiper) power supply a couple of weeks ago. I may have been pushing the upper limits of its operational envelope, but I didn't put it under enough load to kill it. It was just a year old.

      I've seen more raised caps on modern motherboards than I'd like to admit. I'm starting to wonder if three years is just the lifetime of modern caps, or if I'm just exposed to more equipment that has failed due to popped caps.

      I have heard that something like 70% of electronic equipment failure can be traced directly to bad power, so it would explain the trend I've seen. Oddly enough, I don't think I've seen any Dell motherboards that are under the three year mark with these troubles. Perhaps it was just a bad batch of motherboards. I have seen this on a Tiger mobo, and a few bioStar, too. But not on Asus, IIRC. I don't deal with hardware much, (I see all the dead stuff 'cause I'm always the last ditch effort to fix it... yeah, bring it to the code monkey if no one else can fix it!) can anyone who deals with it on a regular basis confirm or deny my suspicions?

      --

      If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

    4. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Asus mobos that went into pre-Gateway eMachines sometimes had bad caps; dunno about their own-brand boards. I have a 4YO eMachine here (Intel mobo) with bad caps. I have a Dell that started failing before age 3, again bad caps. I just had a couple of random clone mobos die of bad caps at about age 6-7 years. I know someone who has had several ABITs fail that way too.

      (OTOH, my 10YO Tyan and SuperMicro boards are still perfectly fine. The Tyans have caps 3x the usual size, and lots of 'em.)

      The story as I heard it is that the failing capacitors come from a factory that got the formula via a bit of industrial espionage... problem is, they failed to steal the formula for the *stabilizer*. So their caps fail at an early age. And since these are cheaper, and OEMs like to go with the lowest bidder...

      I see a lot of dead stuff cuz I'm the hardware guru for the local user grope, so I deal with all the donated machines. The HPs are usually okay. Gateway/eMachine about 50-50. Dell and Micron are mostly DOA.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    5. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by effigiate · · Score: 1

      I bet you'll find that the problem is not the capacitor, but the circuit that is using the capacitor. Bad circuit designs lead to damaged components and capacitors are usually the ones that fail. The lower voltage you can make the cap, the cheaper it is. Unfortunatley, a lower voltage capacitor also puts it very close to its operating voltage. A voltage spike can then pop the capacitor. You can mitigate the damage by additional protection, but that also costs money. This isn't to say that the capacitor wasn't the failure point, but after years of working in the circuit design industry, a failed cap means that the circuit broke it.

    6. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Me too.
      Last week, a coworker's ViewSonic LCD monitor suddenly stopped working. I opened it up and all the electrolytics in the power supply (obviously a separately-sourced component) looked preggers: the top where the '+' is stamped (not polarity but for toughness) was pooched out. They say CapXon on the side. I replaced them all with nice Muratas and now the monitor works beautifully. That was Tuesday.
      Thursday my Dell Inspiron blew up -- flames, loud zapping arcing sound. Since it's still under warranty I didn't open the PS, but looking through the metal shielding, I could see a vaporized electrolytic.
      Today one of the main power amplifiers on our Eagle semiconductor test system, a $700k machine, failed. Guess what? vaporized electrolytic caps.
      AAAAAAND I'm in the process of rebuilding a pile of old Hewlett Packard/Agilent 3455 digital voltmeters because they're reading all scuzzy and intermittently from crappy electrolytics in the power supply section.
      That's just the last two weeks.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    7. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Could be more of the 'fake capacitor' problem creeping up again, since manufactures are still looking at the lowest bottom dollar for electronics and they're slapping in the cheapest they can get, it's usually those. Go nuts and google if you want, but it's been an ongoing issue for several years now, with them being filled with anything but electrolyte, but rather fish oil, oil, nothing and so on.

      There are a pile of fake CapXon capacitors floating around currently in a pile of high-end electronics.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by Stavr0 · · Score: 1

      ... after years of working in the circuit design industry, a failed cap means that the circuit broke it. I would say that the circuit design broke the capacitor.
    9. Re:CRAPacitors failed way before tin whiskers by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Tin whiskers I've never seen.
      You wouldn't without a microscope. You would most likely just see an unexplained failure or if you actually started debugging the electronics maybe an unexplained short that went away after a bit of cleaning.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  36. zinc whiskers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Zinc whiskers are also a problem - specifically if the raised floor in a datacenter is held up by older galvanized steel standards. i've actually got a client with this issue - you can see the whiskers on server motherboards with a flashlight held at an oblique angle.

    symptoms included random server failures, power supplies and pdu's exploding (had one go off when i was in the room - NOT FUN)

    they not only had the old standards, but the roof overhead was steel, soldered with a solder that also contained zinc.

  37. Google image search... by wolvesofthenight · · Score: 1

    I don't know about the majority of tin whiskers, but some of them sure are visible. Just do a Google image search for them. I do not know how common the problem will be in new electronics but some people have sure had trouble.

    --
    -WolvesOfTheNight
  38. Whoever controls tin whiskers controls the world by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 0

    Tin whiskers are nothing less than a gift from God. It is merely left up to us to discover the nature of His gift to us, and to take advantage of it.

    The question we should be asking ourselves is, what potential uses might these tin whiskers have? Are they good for anything? Can we sell them in some sort of product and make money? For example, can bald guys plate their heads with tin and start regrowing hair?

  39. How would we know? by supabeast! · · Score: 1, Insightful

    These days everything electronic is slapped together on assembly lines in third-world crapholes. How are we supposed to know the difference between tin whisker failures or the device being made with adulterated materials in a factory full of former cabbage farmers?

  40. Ice spikes by Fry-kun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What's interesting is, nobody seems to draw a parallel between spikes that appear when clear water is frozen and tin whiskers.
    Something very similar happens - as the temperature goes down, spikes/whiskers appear. It only happens in pure or near-pure water. And it's a well established fact (although not well understood until recently).

    This is too much of a coincidence to not investigate it.

    --
    Did you know that "FTW" ("for the win") is a direct translation of "Sieg Heil"?
    1. Re:Ice spikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the conditions they occur in sure seem similar, electric current flowing through metals as opposed to pure water freezing.

      Why maybe snowflakes explain everything.

      +4 Informative

    2. Re:Ice spikes by flnca · · Score: 1

      Did you know that "FTW" ("for the win") is a direct translation of "Sieg Heil"? No, "Sieg Heil" literally means "Victory, Luck, Health" as in wishing someone victory and good luck and health. The German word "Sieg" literally means "victory", and "Heil" (which is difficult to translate) means "healing, good luck, health" (LEO translates it with salvation, which is almost correct in some circumstances; "Seelenheil" (which is often translated with "salvation of the soul") literally means something like "good fortune for the soul"). During the Nazi times, someone coined the phrase "Heilt Hitler" (heal Hitler!) and got in trouble for it, because that one had connotations that Hitler was insane. ;-)
    3. Re:Ice spikes by shbazjinkens · · Score: 2, Informative

      What's interesting is, nobody seems to draw a parallel between spikes that appear when clear water is frozen and tin whiskers.
      Yeah, they do. NASA shows here a parallel between salt whiskers and tin whiskers. They're both crystalline structures, just like ice. I imagine lots of other crystals probably do the same thing, judging by macro-scale crystal growths in rock appearing as spikes.
    4. Re:Ice spikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It only happens in pure or near-pure water."

      One can easily find these in the freezers of the world, you'll see the results of "Whiskery" ice over long durations.

    5. Re:Ice spikes by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      The growing mechanism is completely different for ice spikes. They grow because water increases its volume right before it freezes. Water at the surface of the volume freezes first when it's in contact with cold air and then some water is squeezed out of the last remaining opening in the surface ice.

    6. Re:Ice spikes by Reziac · · Score: 1

      You must be referring to the little spikes that sometimes appear on the surface. But "hair" often grows on established ice, well after freezing. I don't know if it grows from the ice or as a result of condensation, but it looks kinda like something your wife pulls out of her hairbrush.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    7. Re:Ice spikes by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      I've never seen that. Do you have a reference? I see some snow-like stuff in the freezer all the time but I've never seen hairy ice.
      The ice spikes were mentioned in SciAm some time ago.

    8. Re:Ice spikes by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Dunno what conditions are required. I've seen it once in a while in my freezer, when I bother making ice cubes. Might require extremely low humidity??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    9. Re:Ice spikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit spying on my wife, you creep!

  41. Re:This qualifies for a "Are you pulling my leg?" by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    Too bad he is serious, as the problem really does exist.


    --Which just goes to show that life is stranger than fiction. Except when it's a Doctor Who episode.


    -FL

  42. Re:This qualifies for a "Are you pulling my leg?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    How did Heston put it. . .

    You can have my leaded solder when you take it from my warm tinned iron.

    I've worked with both leaded and unleaded solders. For hand work, nothing beats good old 60/40 Pb/Sn, but some lead-free solders are much worse than others. The ones with a little bit of copper or bismuth are somewhat better at wetting components. Unfortunately, most solder manufacturers just say "Lead-free" on the label, so it's hard to tell (at the retail level) whether you're getting "really annoying" lead-free solder or "not too bad" lead-free solder. My advice is to find a brand that works with your iron (and/or preferred temperature range) and stick with it. And to keep a spare set of soldering iron tips around, with a few pounds of leaded solder in the closet.

  43. Reprinted from my blog by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The problem of tin whiskers is real but the consequences ascribed to them by Cringley are not. A printed circuit board like the one in your computer or TV is made of fiberglass and copper layered in a sandwich. In the early days of electronics the copper was plated with tin to prevent corrosion, but scientists discovered that pure tin tends to form hairlike growths, causing the circuits to fail. Adding lead to the tin prevented the growths, and had other desirable properties, so the tin/lead alloy became a universal standard.

    More recently we got something called "the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment" or RoHS. RoHS prohibits the sale of materials containing more than 1% lead in the EU. (Old-style electronic assemblies use 37% lead solder.) RoHS came into force in 2006 but research into lead-free electronics began decades ago. Initially researchers tried pure tin plating, which lead to tin whiskers. Some products marketed in the late 90's even failed from this problem. But researchers did not throw up their hands in despair. RoHS has led to innovations in metallurgy to the extent that a circuit board designer can now choose from half a dozen different alloys. Today only 2% of printed circuit boards use tin plating.

      Some of these new alloys use gold or silver finishes over copper. These are completely immune to tin whiskers. The most popular new system eliminated the plating step, attaching components directly to the bare copper using chemicals called Organic Solderability Preservatives. OSP leads to stronger and more durable assemblies than even the old tin/lead process.

      The whining we see today on the subject of RoHS mirrors almost perfectly the doomsaying seen when California began regulating automobile emissions. There was at that time a tremendous amount of yelling about how the catalytic converter spelled the end of civilization as we know it, and only a moron would take the lead out of gasoline. But soon afterwards we saw the introduction of clean, efficient, powerful cars by Honda. Honda was even able to meet California emissions standards without using catalytic converters or even fuel injection. Their brand of engineering eventually trickled down to even the most benighted American car maker, and California emissions standards are now in force in every industrialized nation.

    I would expect to see the same thing with RoHS. We have only just entered the initial stage of complaining. The tin/lead dinosaurs with backwards-looking engineering departments face an existential crisis. In other design houses the challenge of lead-free assembly is being embraced as a competitive advantage. Those who can adapt to RoHS will thrive and those who cannot will clearly suffer.

    Cringley brags about a 1966 Thunderbird with a 428 cu. in. motor, a car so heavy, so polluting, and so slow by modern standards that it would be impounded by CARB and laughed off a drag strip by a base model minivan. As time goes on I think Cringley's views on the metallurgy of printed circuit boards will seem as antique at that T-Bird.

    1. Re:Reprinted from my blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plonker.

      OSP does exactly what it says on the tin. (Smirk)

      You still need solder. It just increases the life of the board PRIOR to soldering. Most decent (volume) assy houses will qualify bare boards boards' lifetimes in some set of conditions. OSP increases this.

    2. Re:Reprinted from my blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, no, the "entire industrial world" does not use California standards. Some industrial countries allow more soot than California (Japan, Europe), some allow more or less NOx, CO2, ect. Actually, Euro-spec emission standards are much more comprehensive than what California does, both from an engineering standpoint and a consumer standpoint.

      Second, the 1966 Thunderbird is not, nor are many cars from that era, exceedingly heavy compared to today's standards. The heaviest 66 Thunderbird (convertible, 4600lbs) was just as heavy then as modern luxury cars are now. Raw engine power is comparable to today's cars as well. What's happened in the last 40 years is that we've engineered better alloys, engine designs, rubbers, suspension parts. In fact, most cars today weight just as much as they did in the 60's and 70's. A base model minivan does not have the ability to "laugh off a drag strip) a 428 66 T'Bird. In fact, with the exception of sports cars, modern cars won't beat it in the strip, they will beat it only in a technical course because it was designed for poly-bias tires!

      Yes, engineers will learn to adjust to whatever rules are made and create products that meet our needs as consumers and the requirements of governments. But the lesson to be learned from this article, and all past legislative interference with technology, is that until someone creates the solution, crappy products will take to market in the interim (a la late 70's/early 80's cars; 99-02 electronics, the first generation airbags). Not all companies are equal, and not all of them will figure things out at the same time.

      As for you, learn something about automobiles before you make analogies. And learn some wisdom before you berate people for talking about the effects of laws on technology.

    3. Re:Reprinted from my blog by nfk · · Score: 1

      I think when you got the memo about blogs being an appropriate medium to post pictures of your cat, you became a little confused.

    4. Re:Reprinted from my blog by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

      The Thunderbird does 0-60 in about 9 or 10 seconds, depending, and a factory stock 2008 Toyota Sienna reaches 60 in 6.6 seconds according to Car and Driver. You're letting some rosy vision of musclecar glory cloud your judgment.

    5. Re:Reprinted from my blog by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

      The point is that with OSP you have bare copper pads. You don't need to put any kind of metal finish on the board at all, certainly not the traditional tin/lead finish. In fact the tin/lead HASL finish is practically useless with fine-pitch QFN parts that are no so popular, because HASL has bad planarity. OSP has the best planarity of any board finish.

    6. Re:Reprinted from my blog by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      In 1966 it was still standard operating procedure to rate engine horsepower without ancillaries (alternator, water pump, etc.) and with an open exhaust. Then 10% was added "for advertising". Modern practice is to test the engine as it is installed in the car, without exaggeration.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re:Reprinted from my blog by SydShamino · · Score: 2, Informative

      The most popular new system eliminated the plating step, attaching components directly to the bare copper using chemicals called Organic Solderability Preservatives. OSP leads to stronger and more durable assemblies than even the old tin/lead process. The problem we ran into with OSP was that it wears off in less than a year. Sure, the boards can be shipped back to the vendor, cleaned off, and coated with a new layer, but that's expensive. We found that OSP-coated boards had a lower shelf life, and tended to show intermittent failures during in-circuit test because of poor electrical contact on the test bed probes.

      Anyway, at my company we've settled on immersion silver as our PCB finish of choice. (We've been through white tin and OSP, and dabbled in immersion gold, but the silver finish has been working well for 3-4 years.)
      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    8. Re:Reprinted from my blog by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      There is no other institution that is as useless, corrupt and frankly dangerous as the government. Spoken like somebody who has lived all their life in a place with pretty good government. Having lived on four continents, I can tell you with some confidence that the ability to call for police, fire, or medical help is a pretty fucking miraculous luxury. Ditto for a reasonably reliable legal system.

      But heck, don't believe me; check out The Economist's recent mention of this, or search for more by the economist Hernando de Soto, who makes it clear that one of the biggest advantages the first world has is good government.

      Not that I don't have some big issues with my government, but American government is certainly not useless, is relatively uncorrupted, and generally suppresses a lot more danger than it creates.
    9. Re:Reprinted from my blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      generally suppresses a lot more danger than it creates

      MTBE

      And soon - you will need a HAZMAT team to clean up your CFL spills.

    10. Re:Reprinted from my blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice article except for one minor point -- the problem with whiskers is not constrained to the PCB. You can have the nice gold-plated board, use an appropriate solder, and have the whiskers grow on the tin-plated leads just above where the solder wetting stops (see the previously-referenced NASA site for pictures of this).

      So all those "forward-looking engineering departments" that abandoned the lead and ignored decades of evidence of the problem of doing so now have built-in reliability problems (which ultimately are almost impossible to debug and which get passed off as "voltage transients" or operator error). At some point a piece of medical equipment will fail, killing someone, and someone will do a detailed failure analysis and find that whiskers are to blame. Then those "forward-looking" engineers can figure out what their defense in the lawsuit is.

      At some point the technology will develop to a point where there is a reliable alternative to tin-lead. NASA and the defense industry have been looking at it for years. But to make the move before we reach that point is to play Russian Roulette with all of our electronics.

      On top of this, consider that the amount of lead we are talking about in an electronic system is fairly small. Solder costs money, so minimizing its amount saves money. While I don't have the exact numbers at hand, I believe the amount of lead in a standard car battery dwarfs the amount of lead in all the electronics a family would ever own. So if you really want to reduce lead pollution start with car batteries (and emergency light batteries, and UPS batteries, etc) and force them to "get the lead out." In the final analysis, RoHS is yet another example of clueless politicos coming up with window dressing to look good while ignoring the (harder to solve) real problem.

    11. Re:Reprinted from my blog by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      My crappy Subaru 4-cyl will beat just about every "muscle car" mass produced before the catalytic converter. And will get 2-3 times the mileage. And will beat the hell out of all of them around a road course. Even if you were to put bias tires on my Subaru and radials on all the muscle cars, my Subaru would still beat them. When you talk about the muscle car runs with just a few of the 400+ ci engines in order to generate the drool factor for the 302/305 whatever V8 base (and often "muscle cars" were available with some pretty guttless V6s as well) you get into a different territory. They would be comperable to the Viper - an engine with a car built around it. But the muscle cars would lose on a track for a number of reasons. The suspension on them was more geared to straight line performance. The brakes are incapable of keeping up with what the engine can put out. The steering was often difficult (no power, poor response). The seats weren't supportive (I've driven a 60s car that didn't come with seatbelts and actually fell out of the seat once while driving). They are as good around a road course as taking a Camry and placing a 4.6l V8 into it and claiming it to be a muscle car. It would go fast in a straight line, but taking that around a road course and it would be beat by all sorts of less-muscly cars.

    12. Re:Reprinted from my blog by deanoaz · · Score: 1

      But will a Sienna cruise at 100 mph +, even up hills? My '65 T-bird would and it only had the earlier 390 Cu. In. motor. By the way, the 64-66 T-bird was not intended for quick acceleration, or drag racing. It was a big 'sporty' luxury car for more than two people to cruise in speed, comfort, and style. The dashboard looked like it belonged in a space ship and the rear seat looked like it belonged in a cocktail lounge.

      --
      If 'the people' in Amendment 2 are 'the state' then Amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 benefit the state, not you.
    13. Re:Reprinted from my blog by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      There are indeed board finishes that don't contain tin. but there are other tin surfaces. Most if not all solders contain tin (iirc some solder alloys are better from a whisker perspective than others but none of the new ones are proven to be as whisker resistant as tin-lead). Component finishes are also often tin or tin based.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  44. Cat Name by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

    Fact or fiction... I don't know. All I know is that "Tin Whiskers" is an amazing cat name.

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    1. Re:Cat Name by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      "Scrambles" is better.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  45. Let's try by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 1

    I for one welcome our new tin-whiskered overlords.

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu
  46. Patch Cords! by toddhisattva · · Score: 1

    Next time my cords fail "invisibly" I will look closer.

    I was beginning to wonder why simply unscrewing and rescrewing the plug-case from the plug proper would fix the short. There is no visible short - but "visible" is very different when you're trying to get notes to happen and not caring about the specifics of the failure mode.

    I guess it's again time to make my own patch cords with gobs of politically incorrect lead-tin solder.

    1. Re:Patch Cords! by zrobotics · · Score: 1

      Most likely, this problem isn't due to whiskers, but intermittent shorts. Patch cords, in general, get twisted around, plugged and unplugged often. Even if you're anal about storing them properly, all the flexing and movement in the connector from use is more likely to cause an failure. Unplugging it and plugging it back in will often move the connector termination and wires back into contact, "fixing" the problem. Sadly, this isn't something that's easy to detect, as the only practical solution is to replace/resolder cords that seem to fail often. In a studio environment, your patch cords are most likely moved around/jiggled enough that long whiskers don't have the opportunity to form, and a whisker isn't as likely to short a connector as it is a BGA. The joints are much farther apart, and assemblies with BGAs and such are typically much more stationary.

  47. Re:Cars by couchslug · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Probably we don't have any major car manufacturer sued because nobody ever cares to examine cars electronics after accidents. It's so easy to blame the drunk/distract/incompetent driver."

    Especially when they ARE drunk/distracted/incompetent.

    Automobile systems are very well designed to fail gracefully or just not matter much when they crap out. (That's also why drive-by-wire is a stupid idea.)

    The average car is driven by a mechanical illiterate who barely maintains it (washing does not count) and is designed accordingly. I am an experienced mechanic and know whereof I speak. :)

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  48. Re:This qualifies for a "Are you pulling my leg?" by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    DOESN'T QUALIFY: I've been to the JPL open houses and discussed the tin whisker problems and looked at the photomicrographs and JPL has been designing spacecraft circuitry with an eye to avoiding this problem for a long time.

    Anyone who doesn't know about this is not in the military electronics or satellite business.

  49. Maybee hype depending on the application by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In cars solder joints are rather far apart as most vehicle electronics are not as complicated as your average Enterprise grade server. As the distance between the solder joints narrows and when you have 10 high speed fans blowing air through this rather dense device the probability of a whisker causing a dead short is much higher. What is more scary than tin whiskers is zinc and other alloy whiskers from rack hardware and screws being sucked into the fans.

    Many datacenters ban sawing drilling and any kind of metal or material cutting on the data center floor for this very reason. Any particulate matter is going to be sucked right through the servers and has a high probability of hitting the wrong places and causing shorts or even worse being trapped inside the server and causing cooling issues.

  50. A question for those who have experience with this by OzTech · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does a conformal coating stop the whiskers from growing?

  51. Re:A question for those who have experience with t by mako1138 · · Score: 1

    According to the last RoHS-is-stupid thread I read on Usenet, yes. Conformal coatings make rework messy, though.

  52. Re:Whoever controls tin whiskers controls the worl by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

    Tin whiskers cause failures, and failures are good for business if you are in the troubleshooting/repair field.

  53. Re:A question for those who have experience with t by eclectro · · Score: 1

    Why wouldn't it? The conformal coating will provide a physical barrier to the tin whiskers. They would be too fine and not have enough energy to penetrate it.

    I think the military was onto something by demanding much of their electronics have it.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  54. You forgot... by msauve · · Score: 2, Informative

    the exemption for military electronics.

    RoHS may b e good for plebes, but the ruling class can't risk losing control.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:You forgot... by TinheadNed · · Score: 1

      The exemption isn't too useful though, as the requirement to be able to support your equipment for 10+ year minimum is tricky when all leaded components are EOLed.

      Don't know if that's the case for the solder itself.

    2. Re:You forgot... by Candid88 · · Score: 2, Informative

      "RoHS may b e good for plebes, but the ruling class can't risk losing control."

      That's a bit misleading. Basically all military systems are of electronic categories (e.g. control & monitoring systems) which would make them exempt if they were civilian also.

      Vehicles and aircraft electronics for example are exempt until around 2018 regardless of them being military or civilian.

    3. Re:You forgot... by msauve · · Score: 1

      Basically all military systems are of electronic categories (e.g. control & monitoring systems) which would make them exempt if they were civilian also. So TVs and radios aren't subject to RoHS, being monitoring systems?
      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    4. Re:You forgot... by Candid88 · · Score: 1

      Your typical home TV and Radios aren't classified as monitoring systems, they're entertainment systems.

      Monitoring systems refer to devices like sensors.

    5. Re:You forgot... by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The solder itself is still easilly availible and I would imagine it would remain so. The rohs exempt high reliability market is almost certainly more than enough to support it.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  55. RoHS caused one of our boards to catch FIRE by Moof123 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The board was in the field in a T&M application for about 1 year. Root cause pointed to 2 factors. First the board had very poor (actually out of spec) via to pad alignment. The result was significantly increased voltage density between the offending 12V via and the ground plane. The second factor WAS RoHS compliant board prep and solder. Basically drilled and plated via holes are not 100% sealed (rough bits of fiberglass can still protude through the plating). The solder was one of these high Tin (97%) varieties, and we got dendrite growth (not the more common whisker growth) INSIDE the board along the fiberglass fibers between the via hole and the ground plane, creating a short from a ~30A power bus to ground. The board caught fire. Indications are that it creates a crappy short that repeatedly fries open, and regrows causing intermittents, then eventually enough heat for fire if the power supply can handle it. Higher power electronics with dendrite growth or tin whiskers may fail only briefly (or not at all) when a wimpy short occurs. Low power signal lines won't always have enough juice to overcome the short and may fully die on the very first short. Our safety/reliability group said dendrite growth is a known, but poorly talked about issue that is greatly exacerbated by the lack of lead, and greatly increased board densities today. To a previous post about melting points. Yes, Tin/Lead solder melts well below the melting point of either element in the alloy, at about 175-180C depending on the particulars. NASA literature indicates that conformal coating is ineffective against whisker growth. At a previous defense sub-component job we had to resort to getting many parts re-plated with a tin/lead finish over their matte tin finish to comply with contract requirements. Most commercial off the shelf parts (COTS) are no longer available with anything but matte Tin, or other RoHS finishes. Many vendors changed finishes without any notice, creating havoc in our stick room.

    1. Re:RoHS caused one of our boards to catch FIRE by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tale, there's not much real information out there on this. What do you think of the idea that an arc can form to a whisker with enough instantaneous heat to form a plasma, which induces the fire? Any evidence of that in your work (small high-temp point-source burn, I'd guess)?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  56. I don't think that means what you think it means by Minwee · · Score: 0

    The affect of whiskers on soldered equipment

    The effect. Say it back.

    Eeeeeefect.

    Now please look up the definitions of those two words and write them on the blackboard a hundred times before the start of Monday's class.

  57. Lead Free Solder has issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lead free solder makes it more difficult to manufacture boards reliably. They require much more post assembly inspection and lots of touch up work done by hand. The industry is adapting, as expected, but not without it's fair share of bitching and moaning. Lead free solder does have known reliability issues and that is why military and aerospace is exempt from RoHS. As someone who designs PCB, I deal with this issue a lot. It is a pain, but it is just one more problem that needs to be solved, and it will be.

  58. I know that's flamebait, but I will respond by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    I recently bought an electronic kit from USA with some parts made in China, some in USA and some unbranded (likely Asian). All the Asian made stuff was in spec, but the plastic casing ("Proudly Made In USA") was poorly molded with various defects. The actual circuit was designed by someone in Eastern Europe.

    How the mighty has fallen. Reduced to making bits of plastic; and that not very well!

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:I know that's flamebait, but I will respond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what you get for taking "Made in..." stickers at face value. There are two rules about the origin of modern plastic goods.

      1: it was made in China
      2: if the sticker claims otherwise, see rule #1

  59. My car could be a legal alcoholic by Robynthegeek · · Score: 1

    She reached legal drinking age this year (21 where I live), but so far she's been very responsible with her drinking. (Probably has something to do with the price of gasoline).

  60. Re:Robert Cringley wrote it so its gonna be bolloc by fpp · · Score: 1

    Except when he predicted that pretty much nothing was going to happen with the Y2K switchover, despite the fact that most "experts" thought we were going to have massive computer chaos on a global scale.

  61. cows transformed into ham by neonsignal · · Score: 1

    And just when I thought bovines were halal, too...

  62. Pb was in the GLASS! by Gim+Tom · · Score: 3, Informative

    The EU Lead regulations came about when the CRT was king and the glass screen in front of the CRT was made of heavily leaded GLASS -- yep similar to the heavily leaded glass "crystal" that some EU countries are so proud of for wine glasses! The amount of lead in the electronics was minimal compared to the lead in this glass, which was usually broken up and sent to the land fill. Of course the problem is going away pretty fast since the CRT is going away! LCD displays don't have or need the leaded glass -- they are not first cousins to an X-Ray tube! Oh, the single BIGGEST source of Lead getting into the environment is automobile batteries -- and no they don't have lead free versions of those (well they do, but the cadmium is worse!).

    1. Re:Pb was in the GLASS! by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      But recycling car batteries is pretty common, so you can't really compare it.

    2. Re:Pb was in the GLASS! by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Oh, the single BIGGEST source of Lead getting into the environment is automobile batteries -- and no they don't have lead free versions of those (well they do, but the cadmium is worse!). Ummmm... I believe he just did include recycling in that when he says "getting into the environment", that would be after the recycling has been accounted for, since recycled car batteries don't get into the environment (until later anyway).

      Cheers!
      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    3. Re:Pb was in the GLASS! by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they need to up the penalties where he lives or something.

  63. Tin WhiskersFACT - It's happend in my lab recently by wcl3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, "newer alloys" are better. Tin whiskers can appear before your eyes. I've recently seen a whisker grow between two tin plated component leads while I watched (under a high power microscope). While I use new CuAgSn solders, many of the "RoHsS complant" parts I buy use pure tin finishes on the leads and there are no other finishes available yet. Classic Tin/Lead solders producted joints that were easy to visually inspect - the shape and surface texture of a good joint were fairly unique. Modern non-leaded solders produce a variety of lumpy grey results even when carefully applied. Aiding an abetting the RoHS issues are the use of fluxes that are easily cleaned without CFCs. Old school rosin based fluxes worked well and left beautiful joints - but were nearly impossible to clearn off without CFC based solvents.

  64. Re:A question for those who have experience with t by Cassini2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My understanding was the conformal coating doesn't stop whiskers from forming. Small whiskers can simply grow straight through the coating. Besides, most conformal coating processes are designed to keep hands or screwdrivers or loose wires from shorting the circuit board by touching it. It isn't obvious to me that the conformal coating gets between pins and underneath pins in such a manner that would stop all possible whiskers from shorting to all possible nasty locations. Can conformal coating even get underneath the leads of an LQFP package (with 100% coverage)? A BGA package?

    Conformal coatings may mitigate risk, but I don't think they are a "solution". Also, the performance of conformal coatings probably varies widely with type and quality of the coating and quality of application. Conformal coatings are in the category of "any manufacturer that cares enough to get the conformal coating correct, probably also knows enough to get the tin-replacement solder chemistry correct and avoid the problem in the first place."

    I think we have to worry about the cheap subcomponents from relatively unknown factories being assembled into larger subsystems that are in turn assembled into larger machines/products/cars/etc. To have a quality problem, we only need one whisker on one circuit board, and there are lots of circuit boards in most machines (and most other devices too.) The "not checking the suppliers" problem is what caused the leaky electrolytic capacitor problem. It only took a few inexpensive capacitors to cause lots of computer problems.

  65. Wait... by Perseid · · Score: 1

    ...this isn't about a movie with a giant robot cat?

    Phooey.

  66. Lead Free and Consumer Electronics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The military specifically prohibits the use of lead free electronics for their applications. It is becoming increasingly problematic, as most commercial providers are going lead free to meet European requirements. Lead free substitutes are great for the consumer electronics industry, as experience suggests that a reduced life expectancy of 2 to 4 years is great for generating a replacement sale.

    1. Re:Lead Free and Consumer Electronics by Skinkie · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Apple indeed. Maybe some people recall the iBookG4 wifi/graphics troubles, because of the bad soldering. Now that was only after 1 year of usage.

      The point is: is it bad if something like a laptop breaks after 4 years? (So you can trow it away... without the lead stuff) The possibility that the battery breaks within a year seems to be clear, but it is kind of useless a complete laptop breaks within 5 years. I have used older laptops that were over 10 years old (HP Omnibook series), they still function.

      But do electronic boards usually end up in garbage waste? In The Netherlands there is a big recycle market to get the gold, etc. from these boards. In this case it seems to be totally clueless to have lead replacements if the garbage doesn't pollute.

      --
      Support Eachother, Copy Dutch Property!
  67. Re:This qualifies for a "Are you pulling my leg?" by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    Anyone who doesn't know about this is not in the military electronics or satellite business.


    Hey! That's me! My ignorance is justified for once. Cool!


    -FL

  68. Is lead... by wpiman · · Score: 1
    We used to put lead in gasoline and it went into the air. American's lead levels fell 80% once leaded gasoline was banned. Lead is not good.

    Banned leaded gasoline: that was a good idea. But this may be a bit over the top. Sure, we should minimize the amount of heavy metals in our environment: but last time I checked PCs were recycled (at least in my hippie town) and kids don't lick microprocessors and circuit cards.

    1. Re:Is lead... by Zarf · · Score: 1

      kids don't lick microprocessors and circuit cards Zoidberg: Speak for yourself. Mmm. Yummy. I wonder how the shroud of Turin tastes...

      --
      [signature]
  69. duh... by tacocat · · Score: 1

    Tin whiskers is very real. I've seen electronics fail from them and it only requires a Tin-Lead solder, not pure to do it.

    However, the voltages today tend to blow the whiskers like a fuse, thus negating the issue.

  70. Says.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the man who types with bionic fingers.

  71. Whiskers & Corrosion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Protective coatings on circuit boards prevent corrosion and whiskers. As a hobbyist, I use lead-free solder and liberally spray every board I etch with a conformal coating. It also keeps them nice and shiney. The only thing left exposed are connectors.

    Most consumer electronics have protective coatings. But they don't have a conformal coating on flexible leads, because it chips & cracks there. It also isn't used on heatsinks (to my knowledge), because it can insulate them or burn off.

    1. Re:Whiskers & Corrosion by zrobotics · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most consumer electronics have protective coatings. I don't know what you've been buying, but my consumer electronics aren't conformal coated. I wish they were, but I rarely see conformal coat on consumer products. Not on my LG cellphone, dvd player, computer motherboard, etc. In fact, the last time I saw conformal coat in a consumer application, it was a radioshack RC car I had bought intending to gut. It was pretty unnecessary, since it used cheap components and was poorly soldered, but I was a little impressed. In general, I rarely see conformal coated products, since it's just another, many times unnecessary, expense. The biggest exception seems to be automotive electronics, but those are designed for a much longer life.
  72. Tin Whiskers Are Real. Very Real. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The tin whisker phenomenon is absolutely real. Whether it is a problem for a particular application depends on a number of factors, including the cost of failure, the likelihood of failure based on the specifics of the design, etc.

    It is an extreme problem in military electronics because both the likelihood and cost of failure rise for several reasons. Military electronics are, indeed, expected to operate for decades, the types of maintenance that can be done do not fix the problem, and the types of repair required on failure are fairly expensive. (Assuming failure does not result in crash and burn.)

    The particulars of military make whisker-shorts fairly likely, and the cost effective solution, so far, has been to use the solder that works instead of the solder that doesn't. (As other posters have noted, there are some lead-free solders that avoid the whisker problem, but cause others. One is the identification of a good solder joint. Another is eutecticity. Yet another are the melting and reflow points; understand that complex assemblies undergo multiple solder and temp cycles and using a high temp solder after a low temp solder is a sure recipe for disaster.)

    The real devil of a problem is subcontracted designs from commercial-oriented contractors. In practice, there's nothing wrong with leveraging commercial talent, but in practice, they don't always realize or take seriously the no-lead-free dictates under which the military industry operates. This translates directly into migraine headaches for design engineers and the logistics departments of the big four military contractors.

    And the gut-grinding aspect of this is that electronics do not use that much lead to begin with. A typical turn-of-the-century PC board used around a gram of solder, of which less than half, typically, is lead by weight. That's a tiny amount-- about a thousandth of a pound. Annually, lead consumption due to solder is much less than one percent. (Compare to storage batteries, though, which is up around 75%.)

    These are not problematical amounts of lead.

    The only thing that's been overhyped, here, is the dangers of lead-based solder.

  73. But they buy components from somewhere... by mengel · · Score: 2, Insightful
    As TFA points out, the military folks must buy their components from somewhere, and the parts suppliers are shipping tin-coated components...

    So even if they get to use leaded solder, they can get whiskers on their components...

    --
    - "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
    1. Re:But they buy components from somewhere... by Zordak · · Score: 1

      I used to work on parts for high-reliability military systems, and this was a very real concern. No, nobody required us to use Pb-free, but that's all we could get from many suppliers. And they did indeed cause problems. We had several failures of parts that could be traced directly to shorts caused by tin whiskers. And even worse, as the blurb points out, you can't really predict them with accelerated life testing. This was for stuff that was designed to basically sit and "be ready" for its entire useful life, so there was plenty of opportunity for whiskers to just sit there and grow. This stuff was the bane of my existence.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  74. Some Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, the cause of tin whiskers is not known precisely (well, nobody has told me yet), but they are REAL.

    They have only been observed on tin-plated copper (or brass). Most likely, this is because the copper-tin intermetallic is less dense than either copper or tin (most intermetallics are denser than the constituents). The mechanism is not confirmed, so this is not certain. Furthermore, whiskers are only seen on fairly thin tin coating, such as plated coatings.

    Billions of tin-coated ceramic capacitors etc. have been manufactured and installed with no report of tin whiskers (both with RoHS and non-RoHS processing). Whiskering is rarely observed on tin soldering - the coating is too thick. Rare cases are further reduced by choice of tin alloy. There is still no agreement as to the best alloy, which is not surprising, it took about 50 years to standardise on a tin-lead solder.

    Whiskering is not dendritic growth. This is caused by inadequate clearances. There are a few simple additional precautions required with tin solder processing, and some parts will not withstand the higher-temperature processing. Overall, I have not had reports of more process-related failures with tin soldering, but it is early days yet, and my experience is with low to medium volume production.

    Some coatings are resistant to whisker penetration, the most commonly used type is not.

    Hope this helps.

  75. All I can say........ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    is they're a bitch when the cat rubs up against my leg.

  76. Uggh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I guard my rosin core solder like it's gold. I cannot stand the lead free solder.

    What made me laugh one night was when I was at the local DC401 group and we were assembling the RGB light kits. A few of the guys had vented soldering stations and warned to "wash you hands" after handling leaded solder.

    It was then that I brought up that if you lived in any area that was built up from the 19th century, more than likely your water distribution was via lead pipe. Not to mention the environmental lead you're exposed to every day.

    The hand washing is probably a good idea, and not inhaling the fumes might be helpful.

    But hell, I've been soldering stuff with lead based solder for many years. Maybe it explains why I'm so deranged.

  77. The Cost of Sobriety. by camperdave · · Score: 1

    She reached legal drinking age this year (21 where I live), but so far she's been very responsible with her drinking. (Probably has something to do with the price of gasoline).

    I know gas prices are high, but if you want to keep her sober, don't give her any of those ethanol blends.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  78. Parallels with.. processing parallelism by xant · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It occurs to me that this debate has lots of comparisons with the current minor furor over the rise of multiple CPUs. Many in the programming industry are despairing because we are being forced to design software that runs on multiple CPUs at once, rather than just getting more CPU speed. And again, it's due to externally imposed constraints. In the automobile industry, the catalytic converter was that constraint, in the lead electronics debate, the RoHS is that external constraint.

    In the programming world, I expect things to be resolved the same way: by superior engineering, taking advantage of the mountains of research and practical application of parallel processing designs that have been going on for decades. My favorite language Python is particularly sensitive to this debate due to something called the GIL, but solutions abound, including the newly accepted pyprocessing module or any number of things you can do with Twisted, both of which stand as examples of better, practical engineering taking advantage of known solutions to the problem.

    Engineering fixes most problems that changing standards and regulations cause, eventually.

    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
  79. Re:A question for those who have experience with t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Conformal coat doesn't seem to completely stop tin whiskers, but it will help reduce the odds that they will cause a problem, just because the conformal coat can help to deflect the whisker. My understanding is that we currently don't understand the full mechanisms that causes things to happen well enough to know for sure that we have stopped them, other than the time tested method of lead poisoning the tin finish. One thing with a mitigation scheme like conformal coat is that if it is too soft it won't do much to bother the whisker but if it is really rigid, it could create a localized stress and these stresses are what tend to cause the whisker to form in the first place.

    I'm not an expert on this, but I do work in an R&D organization at an avionics company and frequently help out our guru on the topic with data analysis and reviewing papers in tin whiskers and lead free assembly. Not sure if it is published yet, but I did see an industry paper on this that I believe was being done with the CALCE consortium at the University of Maryland.

  80. Re:Robert Cringley wrote it so its gonna be bolloc by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

    Unlike Cringley, said "experts" often had a lot of consulting fees riding on the perception of a global Y2K crisis. At least it made the COBOL folks feel important for a little while.

    --
    Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  81. Some low-traffic stuff that is in paper encyc's by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Just about every living and formerly-living species has or could have at least a stub in Wikipedia, and I would expect no less from a bookshelf-sized paper encyclopedia.

    I venture that 90% of these articles are not heavily watched.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  82. Re:Licking motherboards by Technician · · Score: 1

    You don't have to. The lead leaches from the city dump and is deliverd to your Mountain Dew bottler and delivers it.

    For non slashdotters, your pure spring bottled water. Most bottled water has fewer safety checks than tap water. Heavy metal contamination often discovered by municipal water systems where bottlers don't check.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  83. Tiiiiiiiiiin Whiskers!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rusted.

  84. Re:Silver immune from tin wiskers by Technician · · Score: 2, Informative

    These are completely immune to tin whiskers.

    I would be supprised if silver grew tin. Technicaly you are correct, Silver doesn't grow Tin whiskers.

    Silver whiskers is a real problem in industrial locations where Florene is present. The circuit breakers, buss bars and other industrial power components are prone to growing Silver whiskers. Failures are the result of increased contact reistance causing failure from overheating and arc flash failures from arcs initiated from the short. Both are serious failures.

    Refrence with photos, Of course:
    http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/other_whisker/silver/index.htm

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  85. What's the implication for hobbyists? by Ilyon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just went to the trouble of buying a temperature controlled soldering station so I'd have better luck transitioning to lead-free solder, and now I read about the problems with tin. So, what exactly is the implication for hobbyists? I'm soldering radio and power circuits. The solder I just bought from Radio Shack is labeled "Lead-Free Silver Bearing Solder 96/4". Does that mean it's 96% tin and 4% silver? Will my radio and power circuits be affected by the tin whiskering problem? Should I go back to lead-full solder and return my Weller soldering station?

  86. Whiskers - You bet they are real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a major supplier of electronic components and YES, without a doubt, whiskers are real (I've tested the parts my company makes and all of our competitors and we all grow whiskers on straight tin plated parts). Want to know why everyone is ignoring whiskers? Money and legislation. It costs money to run two different plating lines, so the Pb containing lines are being phases out and Pb containing parts are not being made in large volume. Companies are charging premiums for tin-lead plated finishes to the companies that have lead free exemptions. Money makes the world go round and if you can charge more or spend less you are todays hero at the price of tomorrows ability.

  87. Embedded controllers may need to last a long time by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Ford EEC IV engine controller from the 1980s was designed for a 30 year life span. (My 1985 Bronco still has its original unit.) No software updates, either; the program was masked onto the custom CPU chip. Never needed a recall. On the other hand, my 2007 Jeep Wrangler had three separate major software updates in the first year.

    Plenty of industrial hardware needs to be able to run for 30-40 years.

    Jenkins Valves used to boast of century lifespans. They had pictures of a valve installed around 1900 which had been removed during a water line replacement. It was still working fine, and after a few months of being photographed and shown off, it was re-installed in a new water line.

  88. Science is testable. by tjstork · · Score: 2, Insightful

    hat is, no one ever really knows anything about the Universe other than what they're told, and what they can work out in terms of internal consistency checks on what they're told.

    I have to disagree with this statement. Science, properly applied, gives mankind the tools to know things based directly on his or her experience.

    The beauty of good science is that you DON'T have to trust someone else's eyes. You can trust your own. While you may not discover the Higg's Boson or some other exotic subatomic particle in your own home, there is a surprising amount of fairly important experimental evidence that is cheap to do, that you can do yourself.

    Take for instance the solar system. Sure, Ptolemy could be ok if all you wanted was planetary timetables, but, then there's the occasional cases where they would be wrong, and for increased accuracy, you need Kepler for the ellipse and then Newton ultimately for calculus based gravity, and then when you want to get really accurate, you need Einstein to consider various relativistic effects. In each of those cases, the edges are well defined and serve as a model of where to look, and in all of the above cases, all you are doing is taking a decent telescope and a CCD camera and seeing where things are in the sky.

    Even at the smaller levels of physics, you can decide for yourself. You don't have to say that you are not sure if Maxwell or others were on the mark - you can take iron filings on top of a magnet and a piece of paper, move the thing around, and see that, yeah, all he's doing is describing in calculus the field that you see. You can follow in Einstein's footsteps and see the photoelectric effect by yourself - with a simple solar cell. You can perform the double slit experiment with sand and with water and then even light, and that's basically going to give you a pretty good heads up on quantum physics. Even the gold foil experiment is probably not out of reach for the determined amateur.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Science is testable. by NetSettler · · Score: 1

      The beauty of good science is that you DON'T have to trust someone else's eyes. You can trust your own.

      If you go back and re-read my post, you'll see I didn't say what you think you're responding to. I didn't say science wasn't testable, just the opposite. I suggested societal experimentation with coming up with decent credentials, precisely based on the notion that there is some hope of objective truth at that level.

      And, in part, my remarks about consistency-checking is exactly what you just said as well. By not trusting someone else's eyes, you're saying to check what they say for consistency.

      The place where you probably went astray is when you thought I was talking about doubting science. I was talking about doubting one's senses. That is the fundamental leap of faith. You know what science tells you because you believe your senses. But how do you know your senses tell you anything useful, and that life is not one big VR game, like in the Matrix. You don't, actually. You simply accept it as the rules of the game because there seems no alternative. This is what you would have learned from my Dark Star reference.

      But relating it back to Wikipedia, my point was simply by analogy, Wikipedia has a hard time knowing what is true because it only knows what it is told. You can make credentials for it, and then it will know what credentialed people think, but then that's only as good as the credentials and the will of the people with them to get to the truth. Even if the Wikipedia standard were one of truth (and I'd like that better, frankly, imperfect as it might be) rather than a standard of documentability, it would still be wrong sometimes. But not because of some sinister reason--just because there is no objective standard to actually measure truth and to know when it was right and wrong.

      So my post wasn't off-topic, it was just marked that way, presumably by someone with credentials. Credentials get you only so far toward the truth. You can credential the credentialers, as happens here with metamoderation. But at some point there's always a leap of faith and you just shrug and say "good enough" and get on with life, even knowing it's imperfect.

      As to judging tin whiskers, my point was not that there wasn't truth to be had, it was that for all its faults, the one virtue of Wikipedia's approach is that at least when it's wrong, it's supposed to contain a paper trail that leads you to original source material to learn why someone thought the wrong thing. That's not perfect either. But it is at least a defensible theory. And for more than that, there's the free market and other models.

      I took away my own karma bonus on this to save someone the trouble of moderating me down if they continue to erroneously think I'm off topic. I just wanted to respond here and say I don't really have a disagreement with anything you said. I am a strong proponent of the scientific method. I just think you mis-read my intent.

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    2. Re:Science is testable. by tjstork · · Score: 1

      But how do you know your senses tell you anything useful, and that life is not one big VR game, like in the Matrix.. credentials... etc

      Well, this is actually not a new idea at all. Decartes struggled with this concept quite a few hundred years ago, and, I think he ultimately came up with that, if you are being put into some sort of a world that is a lie, then you have to be exist with some sort of free will in order to be lied to. What we would call virtual reality today, he would call, "an evil God". Thus, you don't need to have virtual reality as a framework to ask, is "reality real". Religion works quite nicely, and, to some extent, one could even say that the Matrix was, in a way, about religion.

      AS far as credentials go, I think the university system is important. However, science doesn't require that people -have- Phds in order to make contributions. You do, however, have to have that knowledge, and the university system is the quickest way that man has devised that gives people some sort of a way to prove that they have expertise in a particular field and can thus be taken seriously. Still, science is ultimately about building things, so, if you can build it, they will come.

      For example, there is a great web page of some of the great unsolved problems on science. There's the question of complexity - does P = NP? And, honestly, if you can even understand what the question really means, can go through the math about it, you will find that probably self study will take longer than would otherwise be required by going through an academic setting. However, science is about results, first, and credentials second, so if you walked into any university with a computer program that could, say, factor a 200 digit number on a PC, you'd be fairly well noted. Or, in physics, if you came up with a device that actually changed the mass of an object, that would get you noticed. IF you could alter that repulsive force that keeps atoms from fusing into another that would get you noticed.. But, you have to do something physical, real, and novel... and to understand what novel is, means, you have to educate yourself, in some way.

      I know this may sound crazy, because, yeah, the business world places such a premium on advanced degrees... but, just pick up any text book on any topic in any scientific field. You will find all sorts of blurbs about various pioneers in fields, Bohr, Einstein, Fermat, Laplace, Maxwell, Newton, and all of those blurbs are about what the guys did, not, where they went to college, if they did at all!

      --
      This is my sig.
    3. Re:Science is testable. by NetSettler · · Score: 1

      AS far as credentials go, I think the university system is important. However, science doesn't require that people -have- Phds

      Actually, I didn't mean credentials have to be of the university kind. In suggesting exploring credentials, I didn't mean to be restrictive at all. Slashdot's karma points and personal-relationships (friends and friends of friends) are not category-specific, so wouldn't do much for science, but are examples of credentials at least. In Blade Runner, Roy Batty visits his creator using his chess expertise as a credential. I meant it in the most general sense, not to presuppose any particular mechanism, only to say that ultimately everyone uses some mechanism and the only question is whether there is institutional help in figuring out what you need to test and what not. After all, the number of testable questions in the world exceeds the time you have to test them all, so even if the answer to P or NP was P, at some point you'd have to just trust again, because there isn't even enough time in the world to run even a polynomial-time query on every factoid you end up trusting in a single day. So the question isn't whether you'll trust, it's only whether when you do trust, you "trust well" or "trust poorly"...

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

  89. Re:Cars by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

    Drive-by-wire can be done properly. If it's good enough for large passenger planes, then it's good enough for cars. Although, the two industries are quite different in the way they do things (costs, redundancy, etc). Still, it's seems to be creeping more often into the auto industry, too.

  90. Re:Robert Cringley wrote it so its gonna be bolloc by moderators_are_w*nke · · Score: 1

    You gotta give those guys credit for planning their retirement:

    1. Introduce Millennium bug
    2. Wait till 1998
    3. Become consultant
    4. Fix millennium bug.
    5. Profit!

    --
    "XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, use more." - Anonymous Coward
  91. Xbox 360's RROD is also linked to this by AbRASiON · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In order to gain RoHS (?) compliance they have lead free solder in the system, rumour has it that this (amongst other issues also) is one of the reasons the machine has issues.

    Obviously there's a heat / warping problem and the board is rumoured to bend at high heat, none the less the solder has been listed as a problem too.

    Oh by the way SOUL-DERR
    SOULLL-DER
    NOT 'sodder'

    1. Re:Xbox 360's RROD is also linked to this by ^_^x · · Score: 1

      Yes. I have heard that is not due to whiskers, but the fact that the lead-free solder they use is much less ductile/more brittle than traditional types. ...but it's also an engineering issue as other products go lead-free without issues. It is a bit easier to pop off though.

      Bunnie Huang recently looked at an RROD'ed system and found inconclusive results, but there are an assortment of reasons that could contribute to it.

      http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=223

    2. Re:Xbox 360's RROD is also linked to this by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      Oh by the way SOUL-DERR
      SOULLL-DER This is about as pointless as starting an argument about "aluminium" versus "aluminum". Move beyond it.
    3. Re:Xbox 360's RROD is also linked to this by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      No, the Americans spell 'aluminum' differently - that's fine, if they want to do that, weird but fine.
      Solder however is spelt 'solder' but they chose to omit the L for some strange unknown reason and well it just sounds stupid.

  92. Thin Whiskers ? Yeah right, the b00bjob. by IhuntCIA · · Score: 0, Troll

    Tin Whiskers ?
    I have Philips radio from 1939. Nothing special. Long waves, medium waves, short waves, bakelite case, quite small for tube radio. It still works thanks to the leaded thin soldering alloy. It just needs to be kicked hard sometimes because it tends to make whistling like noises.

    Thin Whiskers !
    Stop kidding me, if such thing existed, my radio would stop working 50 yeas ago.

    The only reason why RoHS is so much enforced is throw it to the landfill recycling policy for the modern electronic.

  93. WEEE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is already done in europe under the WEEE directives. As an electronics retailer, we are bound to accept any product that we have sold back for recycling at the end of its life. There is a requirement that the customer have their reciept, but otherwise it's pretty straightforward.

    The problem is that this cost is borne by the retailers, not the manufacturers, so any pressure on the manufacturers to reduce that cost will come from retail - and in the case of larger companies like HP or Samsung, we need them more than they need us.

  94. Maybe it's because of too many kind of isotopes? by chiui · · Score: 1

    Is it possible that whiskers grows because the metal has quite abundant different isotopes?
    That may cause an imbalance in the crystal structure of the metal and gradually push out the lighter isotopes when the metal is subjected to vibrations, stresses etc...
    Just a thought, I'm not qualified at all to talk about metallurgy, but...

    --
    Moderation is overrated.
  95. Wikipedia..nope you can't trust it... by Evil+Kerek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm so happy to see you ask this question.

    As I've pointed out several times, it can't be trusted. It's only as accurate as the last person to edit it and you have NO way to know if the last person was an idiot, a corporate sponser or someone that actually knew what they were talking about. That said, let's dissect a bit further - those of you that consider yourself experts in your field - how many of the people around you in that field do you actually think know nearly as much as you do? Exactly.

    And of course once the subject becomes a little bit fuzzy (global warming, Iraq war, oil drilling) all bets are off with the liberal edit most likely winning (or the points of view of the various 'neutral' overlord editors).

    EK

  96. Trust wikipedia? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

    I should point out that the Wikipedia page linked to above states that tin whisker problems 'are negligible in modern alloys,' but can we trust Wikipedia?

    If course not! I left my cat alone with wikipedia and wikipedia huffed it!

    Never trust wikipedia. It'll huff anything.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  97. Wikipedia analogy by jetkins · · Score: 1
    Can't recall where I read it, but I particularly liked this analogy:

    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" as "Library" is to "Line of people at a bus stop".

  98. Re:Cars by kidgenius · · Score: 1

    You're right. Aerospace has been doing it, starting with the military, for 30-40 years now, but I just don't trust the auto manufacturers/ You'll have 30 different companies making 30 different types of systems....frightening. Drive by wire gas is fine. Drive by wire brakes is not.

  99. Re:Robert Cringley wrote it so its gonna be bolloc by mollymoo · · Score: 1

    We were going to have massive computer chaos on a global scale until all the important stuff got fixed. Come the end of 1999 I don't recall most experts saying there would be chaos, because thy knew the huge effort required to fix all the systems had been made. The fact that Y2K was a damp squib isn't evidence that there was never a problem, it's evidence that the problem was fixed in a timely fashion. It was fixed precisely because the experts made a fuss about it.

    --
    Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
  100. They're real, and they have caused fauilures. by OmniGeek · · Score: 1

    In the satellite business, we've known for years about tin whiskers. When lead-free parts started becoming common, the problem started showing up in instruments built for NASA.

    In one case that I read a report on, a tin whisker grew a distance of an inch or so and shorted a power supply connection. So, it's a real phenomemon and a real concern.

    Tin whiskers (crystals, really) grow out of a pure tin surface, especially one subjected to mechanical or thermal stress; they will grow right out through plastic conformal coating on a PC board, and can grow to a length of inches. They can short adjacent connector pins, break off and float around in high-voltage supplies under zero G, and generally be a nuisance.

    ANY part (electrical parts, sheet metal, connector shells) with a pure tin coating can grow whiskers.

    Alloying the tin with lead or antimony (think, solder-dipping tinned leads in tin/antimony solder) will prevent whisker growth; conformal-coating your PC boards after assembly will also help (won't prevent whiskers growing OUT, but will keep them from touching exposed conductors).

    Incidentally, tin is a pretty weird metal in general; it has a powdery gray non-metallic phase that is stable below 13.2 degrees C (Google "tin disease"), and there have been cases where tin items (such as tin church organ pipes) have spontaneously crumbled to powder in cold climates when the metal underwent a phase change to the nonmetallic state.

    --

    "My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
  101. The next big thing by phorm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think that this might be partly because, by the time a lot of this stuff breaks down, it's somewhat obsolete and a new, bigger model is out.

    27" TV breaks after 3 years, don't worry, now you can get a 32" for less than the old one cost.

    Your 1.6Ghz Pentium-M laptop died... no worries the new Dual-Core Centrino is $100 less and a whole lot faster.


    I find this happens a lot in terms of computer hardware. I have a 2.8Ghz P-4 laptop myself that has been kicking around for longer than expected (HP Pavillion zx7000): drive still works, no dead pixels, etc. I've been thinking on getting a newer laptop for quite awhile but for now I think I'm just going to keep this one until it dies.

    To be fair, I keep good care of my machine by regularly dusting it out to make sure all the fans are running, not blocking the intakes etc. After seeing how a lot of people handle their electronic equipment I'd say that cheap manufacture is only part of the problem.

  102. Re:HAM from cows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, where do you think HAMburgers come from?

  103. Nasa by Gen.+Malaise · · Score: 1

    Nasa also has information and research into this: http://nepp.nasa.gov/WHISKER/

  104. Mod Parent Up by mathmathrevolution · · Score: 1

    My girlfriend is doing her PhD on tin-whiskers. True: Tin whiskering is not fully understood, and studies suggest contradictory causes of whiskering. But whiskering _is_ a very real phenomenon, certainly in the realm of "Fact" and not "Fiction".

  105. Old TVs are worn out. by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    There really aren't that many consumer electronics items from the 1950s and 1960s in general use, ... There were hundreds - possible thousands - of millions of radios and TVs made during that time, for example. These are 100% electronic items, unlikely to have failed due to mechanical problems (wear and tear), nor incompatible (in practice) with current standards and systems. Where are they now? The high voltage doughnuts (flyback transformers) start making a noise only bats and musicians can hear, then they start making a noise like frying bacon, then they start making periodic "popping" noises with the screen going to black at each "pop" and coming back from a white dot, then the windings arc to the chassis, the metal melts, and (if the fuse doesn't blow) the set catches on fire.

    After that happens, it might cost you twice as much to fix as you'd spend on a newer, better set.

    TVs from before 1960 are generally black & white, anyways. My family still had the only color set in our neighborhood in 1962, and I knew plenty of people still using B & W sets in the early 70s.

    Now, those telechron clocks, those last forever.
  106. Re:Will my silver foil hats by klubar · · Score: 1

    I believe to be effective, tin foil hats must be made out of silver foil -- or at least the wearer must believe that it's silver foil (although the roll says aluminum foil).

  107. Re:Cars by couchslug · · Score: 1

    "If it's good enough for large passenger planes, then it's good enough for cars."

    Only if they get identical inspection and maintenance!

    Aircraft are maintained by AMTs or equivalent who are trained and experienced. Strict maintenance and inspection schedules are (supposed) to be followed. Almost no one does a preflight or postflight or phased inspection in their wheeled vehicle.

    This is not remotely how the average schlub maintains his car or truck.

    (I speak from plenty of aircraft experience to, including 21-ish years of F-16 maintenance (engines and crew chief).

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  108. Re:A question for those who have experience with t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whiskers will punch right through the coating as if it didn't exist.

  109. Re:Embedded controllers may need to last a long ti by nasch · · Score: 1

    Awesome. Um... does that have something to do with my post? :-)

  110. Re:Robert Cringley wrote it so its gonna be bolloc by fpp · · Score: 1

    Don't forget the media and pretty much everyone else said there was going to be chaos. Cringely got LOTS of emails about the subject at the time, most of them pointing out how wrong he was, and that the world was indeed doomed. My point was that Cringely HAS said something sensible.

  111. Bad joint detection by Bazman · · Score: 1

    Take back off television, switch on television, switch off room lights, thump television, look for little sparks. That's how it's done.

  112. Special Tin? by PalmKiller · · Score: 1
    Maybe they are using something like this process in the tin they are using now...

    http://www.semiconductor.net/article/CA170390.html

  113. Jury is still out by sjames · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Really the Wikipedia article says the jury is still out. Since the tin whisker problem develops over time and the formulations that meet ROHS are new, we have no idea how it will play out in the coming years.

    I wouldn't be at ALL surprised if ROHS creates a sort of landfill doomsday in a few years where the levels of electronic waste skyrocket due to failures.

    The real way to be more green is to ban crappy gear that ends up in the landfill after a couple years. Want to cut hazardous landfill by 2/3? Make the useful life 3 times longer! Take the weasels that build in obsolescence and actually expend extra time and money to make sure the existing device can't be upgraded out back and shoot them (with steel bullets so we don't pollute the graveyard :-)

    Imagine the number of devices in the landfill just because replacement LCD screens are made of pure unobtanium or very deliberately priced just below the cost of a whole new device (or occasionally MORE than the cost of a new device).

  114. Tin Whiskers largely a non-issue now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    While you can't totally eliminate all risks associated with Tin Whiskers, it's possible to make them **extremely** unlikely to occur if you use the right procedures. Proper ways to handle this include using a matte tin finish (rather than a bright tin finish) and annealing the tin. Refer to the following standards for more information:
    * JEDEC/IPC JP002 "Current Tin Whiskers Theory and Mitigation Practices Guideline" (http://www.jedec.org/DOWNLOAD/search/JP002.pdf)
    * JEDEC JESD201 "Environmental Acceptance Requirements for Tin Whisker Susceptibility of Tin and Tin Alloy Surface Finishes" (http://www.jedec.org/Catalog/catalog.cfm)

    Further work is ongoing within JEDEC, IPC, iNEMI, and other groups to further refine industry practices. See http://thor.inemi.org/webdownload/newsroom/Presentations/Sn_Whisker_Symposium_2008.pdf for one example of this.

  115. Tim Whiskers by the_olo · · Score: 1

    Major electronic equipment manufacturers are pursuing a way to eliminate tin whiskers.

    However, tim whiskers' current location is unknown. Recently he's been known to have been hiding from justice among the Taliban guerillas near the Pakistani border.
  116. What? I've eaten silver... by Medievalist · · Score: 2, Informative

    My understanding is that no one has ever documented lead leaching out of a tin-lead solder into ground water. However, silver - which is commonly used in lead-free solders will leach out and is somewhere around 100x (at least) more toxic than the lead anyway. The concept of lead-free solder having anything to do with safety or environmentalism is downright silly... Where in the world did you get the idea that silver is more dangerous than lead? If you eat too much silver, you get argyria, which makes you turn grey and is pretty easy to spot before it really harms you. Lead poisoning by comparison is both vastly more common and far more subtle and difficult to detect.

    I've eaten a fair amount of silver in my day, with no harm done. Hindus eat a lot of it too. And I've applied silver-based cream to burns (makes 'em heal faster). Westerners used to mark cattle by slipping a silver dime into a cut, that way you could check with your fingers to see if somebody had re-branded cattle they'd rustled from your spread.

    Silver's a doddle. And there most certainly is plenty of documentation and research on lead leaching into ground water.
  117. Feh... by msauve · · Score: 1

    most military electronics are "entertainment systems" for the brass.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  118. Tin plating in 2008 is not Tin plating from 1990 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The main issue when discussing Tin Whiskers is the confusion with several reports from 10+ years ago reporting how dangerous Tin plating is. And yes, the Tin plating they tested were very bad, and potentially dangerous in important situations.
    BUT,
    This is not the same as what is being used now. The knowledge manufacturers have now is much more than before. There are additional procedures in the plating process to reduce the chance of whisker growth, the plating and under-plating are also different then before to improve overall performance and whiskering.
    Can whiskering occur now, Yes, but what is being seen now is well under 50Âm. This size of growth is no true concern for most applications, the exception is for very high density ICs but Tin isn't normally used anyway.

    The main problem with this new RoHS is not the whisker growth but the effort needed to properly evaluate a new plating material and process. In the early days of RoHS there were several reliability issue from manufacturers simply dropping the lead from their line without evaluating or testing their pin connections properly.
    So does Tin Whisker occur, Yes, is it a problem, now with proper care and testing.

  119. Re:Cars by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I did kinda point that out, probably not clear enough. Also, and I could be wrong here, but electronics generally aren't checked in the same way a mechanical components are, right? Do aeronautical engineers take apart the electronics and manually inspect each component on the PCB? My impression was that they relied on redundancy and well designed systems instead. Electronics are generally supposed to reduce maintainance over mechanical systems.

    Also, there is no reason there can't be more strict servicing schemes for cars that need them. The new Accord has a accelerator by-wire system. Although, as the above poster mentioned, brake-by-wire probably won't be coming anytime soon. Although, steering may soon be at least partially by-wire.

  120. No, conformal coating doesn't solve the problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whiskers grow from the base, are very sharp, and stronger (per unit cross-sectional area) than any polymer coating.

    Thus, the growth isn't affected by whatever you put on top, and conformal coatings won't stop them.

    One thing that seems to help a lot is an annealing step. They sppaear to be caused by the formation of large-volume copper/tin intermetallics at the coating boundary, and a post-plating bake (something like 150C for a couple of hours) forms a simple stable intermetallic layer, while at room temperature, the intermetallics grow along crystal boundaries and create the compressive stresses that lead to tin whisker growth. STmicro has some papers available on the subject.

  121. whateverrr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you guys are nerds get a life.
    nobody cares about tin whiskers...most people dont even know what they are.