Bravo indeed, Rex!  

Your comments should be carved in granite and placed as a totem in front of the IPC and EU headquarters.

Bob 

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stadem, Richard D.
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:47 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Lead Free solder has performed well...

A post for the Technet Hall of Fame! Great job, Rex. One big whompin' ATTABOY. Set 'em straight.

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rex Waygood
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 2:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Lead Free solder has performed well...

 

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ron Lasky
Sent: 10 August 2011 16:03
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Lead Free solder has performed well...

Folks,

I thought I posted this:

Rex: You did

Since there has been much discussion about what it has been assumed that I said about lead-free solder,  it would seem to be reasonable to share my actual thoughts on the status of lead-free.  So here are some of them.
Lead-free is here.  It is not going away.  

Rex: Unfortunately true. That doesn't make the original decision correct.

So let's understand how it affects us.  I don't have a problem with discussing lead-free's short comings, but spending a great deal of time acting like it will be repealed if we complain enough is a waste of time.  

Rex: Agreed but you did post twice.

Let's discuss reliability, process challenges, concerns over silver and tin costs and supply, electrical use, etc.  But let the discussions be based on data and analysis, not emotions.

I agree that lead-free solder was and is not now needed to protect the environment or the citizens of the European Union.  It has never been demonstrated that lead containing solders are a threat in land-fills and it has been demonstrated that leaded solders can be safely recycled. In addition, establishing lead-free assembly cost upwards of $50B and continues to present challenges and require investment.

Rex: I must of missed something here I thought that was the reason we were all forced to introduce this process. My recollection was that was exactly the justification used.

Although lead-free was not needed to protect consumers or the environment in the EU, since a large proportion of re-cycling is performed "illegally" in 3rd world countries, it is likely safer for the untrained and unregulated re-cylers of the 3rd world to recycle lead-free solders than leaded solders.

Rex: Unfortunately lead free doesn't tackle this problem for many years as the millions of tons of legacy WEEE will still be ending up where it can do its environmental and human damage. Also the illegal WEEE route doesn't just put lead into the environment and poison humans there are many other by-products of this process. Where is the evidence that tin is good for the environment? What could have been done with all that human effort if the illegal WEEE trade had been tackled? It still isn't being tackled and we are still poisoning people with things as well as lead. A UK recycling facility runs at half capacity because it is too easy to ship containers of WEEE as 2nd user goods (it isn't) to 3rd world countries and the chances of getting caught are too low.

Reliability of lead-free assembled commercial type products has been demonstrated in the lab and in the field.  

Rex: So what. Was this legislation necessary? Tin lead had 50 years plus of reliability data.

I am referring to 0 to 100C type thermal cycling and drop shock testing, with SAC alloys.  The experimental data of Henshall and Coyle presented last year at SMTAI support this.  Their work represents millions of dollars of testing by teams of major companies. Although RoHS is only 5 years old, Motorola has about 10 years of field data.  They claim equal or better reliability with lead-free.  Add this to the trillions of dollars of products manufactured since RoHS was enacted, with no major reliability problems and it would be hard to argue that commercial product reliability has not been demonstrated.

Rex: This is still retrospective justification for a poor decision. The point is we didn't need to do the change.  

But, I agree, harsh environment, mission critical, long-life reliability of lead-free solder has not been demonstrated.

Rex: Any reduction of the life of products is likely to increase the flow of WEEE into the illegal processing trade and will not make the situation better. At one point the average life of a phone in the UK was about a year!

It would be hard to over state the benefit of lead-free solder's poorer spreading enabling high performance mobile products.  

Rex: I don't believe it was necessary to burden the whole of the world's electronics manufacturing system to solve the problem of producing phones. If the CEMs making phones where unable to solve their process problems without invoking lead free then they were free to do so. This isn't actually something I believe anyway. Although our experience is small in comparison to phone manufacturers we have made thousands of boards using telephone technology parts using lead processes for the US telecoms market. It wasn't easy but the process problems were solved. We didn't say to the US customer you have to take lead free.

There are now 5.6 billion mobile phone subscriptions in a world of 7 billion people.  No electronic product has made such a market penetration.  Lead-free solder has aided this feat in enabling tremendous function in a small size.

Rex: Please provide proof that there were no other solutions to a processing problem and that to achieve this we had to force the whole world to change the manufacturing process.

Ron

Rex: Your post to me is like that provided by a politician who makes a very bad decision and then tries to justify it retrospectively with a complete red herring.


Regards
Rex


---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0 To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or
(re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the
posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] ______________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0 To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] ______________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0 To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------



______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------