 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / May 2006Lead Solder
Gentlemen A reminder -- you have just one month left before the EU-wide directive banning the use of lead-based solders comes into effect on 1st July. From that date it will be illegal to sell or use it for routine applications. -- Chris Edwards (in deepest Dorset) "....there *must* be an easier way!" > Gentlemen > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Chris Edwards (in deepest Dorset) "....there *must* be an easier way!" Lead solder will still be useable for: - repairing older equipments that used lead solder - military equipment - 'high reliability' equipments (that says it all!) thus it will still be available. You may need 'contacts', though. >> Gentlemen >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >thus it will still be available. You may need 'contacts', though. There's a glaring loophole though. Cars are exempt, they have to be or throw the battery away. So all products are marked "Automotive Use ONLY " -- Regards, John Stevenson Nottingham, England. Visit the new Model Engineering adverts page at:- http://www.homeworkshop.org.uk/ >Gentlemen > > A reminder -- you have just one month left before the EU-wide >directive banning the use of lead-based solders comes into effect on 1st >July. From that date it will be illegal to sell or use it for routine >applications. Chris - The regulations do not apply for non-commercial uses (e.g., use in your own personal workshop) and for repair work to equipment that was built pre-July 2006. So lead based solder will continue to be used legally and should be avaiable for some while yet. Regards, Tony >>Gentlemen >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >built pre-July 2006. So lead based solder will continue to be used >legally and should be avaiable for some while yet. Tony Thanks for the clarification. The real point of my post was to alert folks to the fact that time is running out to wander into your local hardware store and pick up a reel of resin-cored off the shelf. I'm encouraged that the overall group response seems to be that there will be no problem with future supply....we'll see. Personally, I'm going to assume the worst and stock up while the going's good! -- Chris Edwards (in deepest Dorset) "....there *must* be an easier way!" > Gentlemen > > A reminder -- you have just one month left before the EU-wide > directive banning the use of lead-based solders comes into effect on 1st > July. From that date it will be illegal to sell or use it for routine > applications. You're not trying to sell it by any chance are you 8-), there's a large scare mongering add by Carrs in Railway Modeller this month clearly praying on people's ignorance. The fact is that it is only a restriction not a ban, and only applies to electrical and electronic equipment, hence the name Restriction of Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (RoHs). Even within this scope it has so many exemptions that it was recently estimated that over 90% of UK electronic manufacturers are claiming an initial exemption!, I happen to know about this as I work for one of them. For lead there are exemptions for military, high reliability, medical, automotive and here's the big one: industrial control equipment. Here's a useful summary of the directive: http://uk.farnell.com/images/en/ede/pdf/PKG153.pdf The directive covers other nasties, but as far as lead is concerned is estimated to have negligible benefit since the vast majority of lead is used in car batteries(exempt for the foreseeable) of which most are recycled anyway, and another directive (WEEE) is going to take care of the recycling of electronics anyway so the lead will be extracted and won't go into landfill. The exemptions are expected to be phased out over time so any sensible manufacturer is working towards compliance, and in practice will be driven to because component makers are not prepared to make both leaded and unleaded, a nightmare for those who really need the reliability. So what affect will this have on the availability of solders etc ? practically none as far as I'm aware!. Greg > The fact is that it is only a restriction not a ban, and only applies to > electrical and electronic equipment, hence the name Restriction of Hazardous [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > http://uk.farnell.com/images/en/ede/pdf/PKG153.pdf > So what affect will this have on the availability of solders etc ? > practically none as far as I'm aware!. > > Greg In another area the "restrictions" have been blamed for the early phasing out a somewhat overpriced, but unique, camera, the Hasselblad "Xpan". It's got the facility to make very wide view shots on 35mm film (>36mm wide) and these can be intermixed with normal width, 36mm, shots. It's been the darling of many landscape photographers, giving them wide views without having to carry much heavier gear. I think Hasselblad are claiming low sales making any "no lead" re-engineering to be not profitable, but if the camera had been sold in Europe at a similar price to what its manufacturer, Fuji, was charging elsewhere, the sales might have been very much higher. As I've written elsewhere, these Regulations etc. are not new, and have been a long time coming. The problem as I saw it before I retired (6 years ago) was getting something as non-sexy as WEEE and non-lead solder even on to the site manager's in-tray - let alone discussed as to how this might affect long term investment. Personally, I ensured that I would have enough Ersin 60:40 solder to last me out.  SignatureM Stewart Milton Keynes, UK http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm > In another area the "restrictions" have been blamed for the early phasing > out a somewhat overpriced, but unique, camera, the Hasselblad "Xpan". And that's the farce of the RoHS directive, it's wiping out things like that because their industry hasn't found an excuse, yet doing little or nothing to reduce the lead going into landfill since that is already taken care of by the WEEE recycling directive. The biggest loser is the consumer since grey and white goods are going to cost more and be even less reliable. > Personally, I ensured that I would have enough Ersin 60:40 solder to last me > out. There's no reason to believe that lead solder will be any harder to obtain since it's used for many non-electrical purposes, can be used for repair, and on all the exempt categories. Greg >Even within this scope it has so many exemptions that it was recently >estimated that over 90% of UK electronic manufacturers are claiming an >initial exemption!, I happen to know about this as I work for one of them. > >For lead there are exemptions for military, high reliability, medical, >automotive and here's the big one: industrial control equipment. Greg, Can you elaborate more on the industrial control equipment exemptions ? -- Regards, John Stevenson Nottingham, England. Visit the new Model Engineering adverts page at:- http://www.homeworkshop.org.uk/ >Can you elaborate more on the industrial control equipment exemptions >? I believe that the exemption is for non-consumer applications, which covers almost anything that is 'industrial' and not sold to the man in the street. Like the WEEE regulations, it is not well thought out at all, and is aimed at PC, white goods and consumer electronics makers. We went to a seminar in Cambridge last year, run by the DTI and most of what we do is exempt from nearly all these reg's as we are not volume/consumer producers. We still have got stocks of solder though as we have lots of stuff on the shelf that is held as stock and manufactured a while back. Components ditto, we have stockpiled a lot of the components that we use as we cannot get a lot of leaded ('leeded') parts now as it is all going to surface mount. Peter -- Peter A Forbes Prepair Ltd, Luton, UK prepair@easynet.co.uk http://www.prepair.co.uk > Greg, > Can you elaborate more on the industrial control equipment exemptions John it's in there somewhere! I manufacture an alarm as a subcon job which is used for glass tube flowmeters used in industry. My customer claims they are excempt, and we are doing nothing about it for the time being. They are a serious outfit, and I'm sure they have researched it fully. On the other hand they will still be responsible for EMC compliance and disposing of the units at end of life. Even EMC can be "got around" if the product is designed to be part of a larger system. I used to manufacture a strain gauge displacement transducer which we simply supplied without a plug, just tinned wires. The data sheet had a declaration stating the product would not function until it was incorporated into a larger system which we had no control over. > Can you elaborate more on the industrial control equipment exemptions We got a firm of consultants in and after examining what we do, manufacturing the control systems for the generating industry, they declared that we were covered by an examption. I think the link I posted earlier explains it: "large-scale stationary industrial tools. (This is a machine or system, consisting of a combination of equipment, systems or products, each of which is manufactured and intended to be used only in fixed industrial applications)" If the whole is exempt then any part there of must also be exempt, and the interpretation of "large-scale" etc is so woolly that it's being used to cover most industrial things. From what I can see only the consumer electronics industry is going to change over in a big way, but of course there's not a lot of that made in the UK any more 8-(. One of the UK's big sub-contract assembly houses has recently stated in the trade press that 90% of there customers were claiming an exemption so they're having to maintain two lines, one leaded and one unleaded, at huge cost. The overall benefit has to be seriously questioned when only 10% of UK manufacturers are going to go lead free. Of course the fear now is that the government and/or Europe is going to retaliate against this apparent challenge to their power by withdrawing exemptions, so anyone with any sense is changing over anyway just not by the deadline. That's certainly our plan and being forced on us by the component manufacturers who are simply not prepared to keep on making leaded components for the industrial market when the bigger consumer market requires lead free. Many are concerned that high reliability applications are just not going to be able to get leaded parts so catastrophic failures are inevitable, remember that Buncefield was caused by a single sensor failure... It would be far far better if the small amounts of lead were allowed to remain inside electronic products, where they are completely harmless and greatly increase reliability, and it was then extracted from the products as part of the recycling process. As the WEEE directive mandates such recycling of all the leaded products in current use, there is literally no rational reason for restricting it in RoHS, but who ever accused Europe of being rational 8-). If you're looking for solid facts about the legislation for your own situation then I'm afraid you're going to be disapointed, the whole legal position is fuzzy and if anything it's getting worse. Greg > Many are concerned that high reliability applications are just not going to > be able to get leaded parts so catastrophic failures are inevitable, > > Greg While I think some of these rulings are part of a daft growing nanny state, I am interested to know about the link between lack of 'leaded parts' and 'catastrophic failure being inevitable'. Surely they have a substitute solder - is it not suitable in some way ? Steve > > Many are concerned that high reliability applications are just not going > to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > 'catastrophic failure being inevitable'. Surely they have a substitute > solder - is it not suitable in some way ? Although lead/tin solder was invented before they could possibly understand such things, it is in fact a superb piece of engineering and the best alternatives we have today are very much inferior. The alternatives are basically solid tin with very small amounts of other metals, most popular is copper and silver, this results in a solder that is stiff and brittle so fails due to fatigue in a high vibration environment, lead makes solder flexible. Also pure tin grows 'tin whiskers', a general name for at least two failure mechanisms involving the growth of very fine conductive threads outwards from a solder joint, either across a surface or along the strands of glass in a PCB. These mechanisms are still being investigated and are not fully understood, but the consequence if a random failure of the circuit due to shorts, lead is the only known metal to prevent this. Another problem is that all lead free alloys have a higher melting point so the circuitry has to be subject to a higher temperatures which reduce it's reliability, especially problematic for surface mount components since the entire component has to be heated not just the pins. These higher temperatures also cause more oxidising and so require more aggressive fluxes which can themselves lead to corrosion and failure if not completely consumed or cleaned off, again particularly difficult with surface mount as there are very small crevices between the PCB and component. PCB's used to be effectively cleaned in an ultrasonic bath of Arclone but all such solvents are now banned and the cleaning processes available are inferior. Lead also helped slow down oxidation of component leads and PCB finishes during storage, the lead free solders oxidise much faster even when dry packed and many components and boards are now being quoted as having only a 3 month shelf life, barely manageable even in a medium volume manufacturer like ours and almost unworkable for small companies. This again results in a need for a more aggressive flux with all the problems that brings, and where do the fumes go?, up a chimney straight into the environment!. Some experts have calculated that the lead ban will actually increase overall pollution not decrease it. Lead free electronics is in it's infancy and much of the needed research is only now being done, far too late, Europe has rushed this matter without any real understanding or concern for the consequences, driven by certain members who are totally paranoid. In short we're going to see a significant reduction in the reliability of electronics, bad enough in consumer products but imagine the consequences of failure of a critical system in a chemical or a nuclear plant or in aircraft systems. Greg Thanks Greg I suspected higher temperatures would be likely, but I didn't realise about the other aspects. The funny thing is that I though tin was far worse for the environment, isn't tin banned from anti-fouling paints because it is so nasty ? Component failures in ciritical systems are always an issue, and systems should be designed so that dire consequenes are infrequent (by fail-safe, redundancy, voting, more intelligence in testing signal quality, etc) - however if the overall failure rate goes up, then the frequency of incidents goes up, including all those managed incidents which nonethless shut down production, ground aircraft, cause your car to fail to start, blow a fuse, or cause the train to be cancelled, etc. Surely the key factor is the mean time before failure (MTBF) for components, often declared by manufacturers. If manufacturers cannot meet existing levels, then the new failure frequencies will have to be declared, and that will make the issue visible. I would have thought that all safety critical components should have an MTBF declared by the manufacturer - any sign these will be reduced ? Steve >Thanks Greg > >I suspected higher temperatures would be likely, but I didn't realise about >the other aspects. The funny thing is that I though tin was far worse for >the environment, isn't tin banned from anti-fouling paints because it is so >nasty ? That's TriButyl Tin (TBT) in antifouling, not metallic tin. TBT does seem to be pretty nasty stuff environmentally, I don't know about metallic tin but it's been used for foodstuff containers for a very long time. Cheers Tim Dutton Dry-Dock Traditional & Modern canal craft repairs Vintage diesel engine service > That's TriButyl Tin (TBT) in antifouling, not metallic tin. TBT does > seem to be pretty nasty stuff environmentally, I don't know about [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Cheers > Tim Dead right Tim, Don't have a secret supply of the good stuff do you (TBT I mean) ? There was a yacht where I used to go sailing with a hull made of cupro-nickel (called Pretty Penny) - I don't think she needed anti-fouling. I bet pure tin would work too. I was being provocative. Its one thing after another, yesterday it was mercury, now its lead, what next - maybe tin, maybe zinc, maybe cadmium (if its iron then we are in trouble!) ? We have already been told old engine oil gives you cancer (I should be long dead), also smoking, or peanuts, or speeding, or sex, even sunshine, and now I am not even able to wire my own house (which means I am not able to fix the dangerous wiring due to a former occupant - like mains sockets next to the kitchen sink !). Good of Greg to warn us to stock up, but this topic goes way beyond model engineering. Apologies for going OT (again) ! Steve >I was being provocative. Its one thing after another, yesterday it was >mercury, now its lead, what next - maybe tin, maybe zinc, maybe cadmium (if [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >house (which means I am not able to fix the dangerous wiring due to a former >occupant - like mains sockets next to the kitchen sink !). Yes, that was a particularly offensive bit of interference. Spent the last half of Dec 2004 finishing off some rewiring. Not sure how they can enforce it, although I did notice that some cable I bought in late 04 had a date stamped on it (I seem to have over-bought...). Big brother probably is watching you. David SignatureDavid Littlewood > Its one thing after another, yesterday it was > mercury, now its lead, what next - maybe tin, maybe zinc, maybe cadmium Actually RoHS restricts Cadmium too! Greg Well I hope the flux cored solder is still available in just lead/ti composition. I've used some of the lead free stuff for soldering wires an components and I think it's crap,my old Weller copper tip iron now ha a much shorter tip owing to the way the lead free solder eats holes i a copper tip.I've cleaned the tip up and gone back to normal "proper solder and the tip just needs a wipe now before use like it used to. Getting a bit fed up of this PC correct nanny state interfering all th time. :( Alla -- Allan Waterfal > Component failures in ciritical systems are always an issue, and systems > should be designed so that dire consequenes are infrequent (by fail-safe, > redundancy, voting, more intelligence in testing signal quality, etc) - It should be but isn't, unless there is regulation to enforce it such as in the aviation industry, other industries are governed by market forces which usually won't pay for anything like that. The generator industry is a case in point, even though they may be providing backup power for something as critical as a hospital no one will pay for true reliability. > Surely the key factor is the mean time before failure (MTBF) for components, > often declared by manufacturers. It's a while since I did MTBF calculations for the military and aerospace sectors but back then we could rarely get figures from manufacturers and I've no reason to believe they are any more forthcoming now. We had to use the figures from MIL Handbook 217 which is the bible of reliability prediction and is notoriously biased against anything new and unproven, I don't know what the latest issue has to say about lead free but the fact that the military and aerospace have an exemption probably says it all. There simply isn't sufficient experience of lead free to be confident of anything and what evidence has emerged is all bad, there's a well documented but anonymous story about a very large phone company who tried to go lead free a couple of years to get some commercial advantage over their competition but had huge failure rates and was forced to go back to lead. Information from component distributors is that most companies who are going lead free have left it very late in the hope of some sort of reprive and are now having huge problems, you can get to maybe 90% lead free components but the last 10% is very hard. There are also lots of fake lead free components on the market and if you have just one lead component on a board and put it through a wave soldering or selective soldering machine you contaminate the whole solder bath and have to throw away not only thousands of pounds worth of solder but also the bath itself as you can't clean it properly. It's going to be the last nail in the coffin of some UK firms, and for what?, WEEE is going to force the recycling of the products anyway!. Greg Greg Wrote: > Lead free electronics is in it's infancy and much of the neede > research is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Greg The paranoia isn't necessarily the major factor. There was quite an issue over the use of asbestos in its various forms which seemed to hinge largely on a carefully misworded report issued t the EU authorities concerned. Given that the authorities who woul make the decisions were largely ignorant of the accuracy of what the read, it was pehaps unwise of them to use the firm who made 'the onl substitute' as the consultancy to write the report. As a result ther was a lot of remedial work of dubious necessity and a substantial cal on the provision of the substitute. Thus at one nuclear installation all the fire doors had to be replaced despite the fact that all the relevant material was both inaccessibl and unlikely to be accessed and that the replacement material had higher risk factor than the asbestos product it replaced. (While I agree that certain kinds of asbestos provided a significantl higher risk factor than others, it was interesting that the consultanc in question seemed to have got their figures at some odds to thos assessed by the AEA internal team.). It was also interesting to discover that beech and other hardwoods hav a higher carcinogenic factor while being worked than some forms o asbestos. Robi -- rss > The paranoia isn't necessarily the major factor. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > was a lot of remedial work of dubious necessity and a substantial call > on the provision of the substitute. Yes I know that the asbestos risk has been exaggerated, from what I've read many believe that white asbestos didn't even need banning, but if you read the HSE's material you'd think it could kill on sight 8-). But I'm not aware of any alteria motives for banning lead from solder, the same companies are selling both types and the biggest beneficiaries are the production equipment manufacturers who can't keep up with orders for new reflow ovens and flow solder machines, but I doubt they have much clout with Europe as it's a relatively small industry. The component manufacturers have paid dearly for the change and are huge, powerful companies. No in this case I'm fairly sure it's just the environmental lobby gone completely over the top. Greg >No in this case I'm >fairly sure it's just the environmental lobby gone completely over the top. I would agree with that analysis. RS produces a series of info leaflets on the progress of RoHS - I read with amusement in one of those that toxic fumes were never an issue with leaded solder, but because of the higher soldering temeratures, and consequently, the larger volumes of toxic stuff given off by decomposition of the *fluxes* used, they recommend the use of fume extraction hoods with lead free soldering processes. Regards, Tony > RS produces a series of info leaflets on the progress of RoHS - I read > with amusement in one of those that toxic fumes were never an issue > with leaded solder, but because of the higher soldering temeratures, > and consequently, the larger volumes of toxic stuff given off by > decomposition of the *fluxes* used, they recommend the use of fume > extraction hoods with lead free soldering processes. I've seen quite a few reports in the trade press from those who believe the overall effect is going to me more pollution not less, and that the focus should be on recycling at the end of the products life not on replacing one problem with another, but the EU is completely blinkered on this. Greg >Many are concerned that high reliability applications are just not going to >be able to get leaded parts so catastrophic failures are inevitable, >remember that Buncefield was caused by a single sensor failure... I think most would say it was failure of the design rather than any construction or assembly method. Of course those designers could have been distracted by a bunch of crappy euro legislation and forgotten the real reason why they are there :) > I think most would say it was failure of the design rather than any > construction or assembly method. Yes the design was unable to cope with a sensor failure, but it still remains an example of how the failure of a single electronic device can cause a major disaster. Greg > Gentlemen > > A reminder -- you have just one month left before the EU-wide > directive banning the use of lead-based solders comes into effect on 1st > July. From that date it will be illegal to sell or use it for routine > applications. I've got enough to last me about 50 years! Alan > -- > > Chris Edwards (in deepest Dorset) "....there *must* be an easier > way!" > > Gentlemen > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I've got enough to last me about 50 years! As a manufacturer of electronic assemblies, I have wondered if a clause in the guarantee to the effect 'This equipment is not guaranteed in the event of failure due to defective soldering. In that case, please apply for compensation to the EU (address given).' > As a manufacturer of electronic assemblies, I have wondered if a clause in > the guarantee to the effect > > 'This equipment is not guaranteed in the event of failure due to defective > soldering. In that case, please apply for compensation to the EU (address > given).' That's a good one 8-), but from recent experience it doesn't seem to matter what you put in your guarantee it won't stop companies going to law for the smallest thing. Greg |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.