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?"

75 of 459 comments (clear)

  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 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.
    2. 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??
    3. 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.
    4. 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.

  2. Paging Dr Moggles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

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

  3. 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 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.

    3. 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
    4. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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 RiotingPacifist · · Score: 4, Funny

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

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    3. 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
    4. 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.........
    5. 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.
    6. 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.

  6. 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
  7. 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

  8. 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 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/

    3. 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.

  9. 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 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
    5. 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.
    6. 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.

    7. 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.
    8. 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.

  10. 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 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
    3. 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.

  11. 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.
  12. 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.

  13. 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 QuoteMstr · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Percussive maintenance."

  14. 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
  15. 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 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
    4. 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.

    5. 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.
    6. Re:Is lead truly that dangerous ? by marxmarv · · Score: 3, Funny

      Kosher ham, I trust.

      --
      /. -- the Free Republic of technology.
    7. 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
  16. 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.
  17. 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 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.

    4. 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?

    5. 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.
    6. 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
    7. 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.

    8. 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)
  18. 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: 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.

    2. 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
  19. 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...

  20. 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.

  21. 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.

  22. 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."
  23. 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.

  24. 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!).

  25. 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.

  26. 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.