Steve -
Thanks for writing.
The original letter I responded to (concerning the removal of lead)
specifically addressed the electronic industry. Consistent with the format
of the TechNet forum I tried not to meander into discussing gasoline, paint,
mini-blind pigment, wheel weights, lead plumbing or lead-acid batteries.
Somewhere there's probably a TechNet equivalent for those other lead
applications where the Pro's and Con's are exchanged.
MANDATED CHANGE
Most of us are old enough to remember when this industry changed to no-clean
circuit assembly processing. The EPA basically drew a line on the calendar
and said as-of this date ya'll better be in compliance. There was a scramble
in the industry and an outcrying as 1.1.1 trichlor was ripped from our
fingers, and MEK and methylene chloride disappeared from our shelves, while
Freon vanished not only from our post-clean processing but from the very A/C
units that cooled our factories. How-in-the-world was aqueous solder mask
going to perform, and what-about stripping dry film plating resist, and can
we really expect to get circuitry cleaned-up without our magic solvents?
Well we did, but for several years there was a shake-down of which
alternatives worked, which didn't, and all the fine-tuning of Why's and
Why-Nots in between. Sort of like now with lead, only without the panic.
ENCOURAGED CHANGE
The EPA is now embarking on the removal of it's next tier of hazardous
materials. Lead, formaldehyde and other favorites of industry are on the EPA
hit-list, only this time the EPA is taking a different approach. Through a
program they devised called Design for the Environment (DfE), the EPA is
attempting to put an arm around circuit assemblers, vendors, professional
associations and certain universities, to encourage the Industry to find
it's own solution (pun!) to the removal of these materials. I believe the
DfE hopes to relieve the deadline stress and panic-driven trial & error
costs witnessed when the first tier was implemented, without losing focus
that these materials are to be eliminated.
If you'd like more information on the DfE check-out
http://www.ipc.org/html/dfe.htm . If you'd like to lobby for the
preservation of lead you might start with your State's EPA (I hear
California's tough).
BIG PICTURE
The issue of lead removal is over-played: The exciting news is that the
alternatives to lead happen to provide economical and technological
improvements as well. I'll risk this position: Steve, the Industry isn't
focused on lead removal. No. The industry is really focused on planarity. We
want a flat pad to solder to. Period. FLAT is the big 4-letter "F" word
around town today. "What'll get me flat?" That's the zillion-dollar
question. That's what we're debating. Gold might have embrittlement
problems...silver might migrate...OSP isn't the greatest in multi-pass
soldering...tin's got a bad early history...and palladium is, well, who
knows? But they all have THREE great attributes:
(1) They blow the doors off solder in the Flatness Department (And I mean
ANY solder)
(2) They will be (or already are) cheaper than solder.
(3) They happen to satisfy the DfE.
I'll need a new hard drive to handle the mail from this letter Steve, but I
say to you the Industry is crying for FLAT and CHEAP and they're going to
get it, and it just happens that the answers are all lead-free.
Ain't it Great!
Bob Lazzara
Circuit Connect Tech Support
Georgia Service Bureau
TEL: 800.560.9457 FAX: 888.453.0520 BBS: 603.889.5385
alternate eMail: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen R. Gregory <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [TN] Removal of Lead
>In a message dated 1/29/99 9:54:36 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
> (Interesting Pro and Con argument snipped...)
>
><< And THAT brings us back to our beginning!
>
> Bob Lazzara
> Circuit Connect Tech Support
> Georgia Service Bureau
>
> TEL: 800.560.9457 FAX: 888.453.0520 BBS: 603.889.5385
> alternate eMail: [log in to unmask] >>
>
>Yes Bob, indeed it does...
>
> I've read and watched this situation develop over the years, and
wondered
>when it will be, I would have to start soldering with some substance that
>everybody can eat, or inject in the jugular vein and not get indigestion,
or
>even a headache from. I mean that's the whole point right? We're all such
>slobs and so ecologically inept that we all threaten the health of the
whole
>world by what we do. Geeze, I can barely live with myself...
>
> The one thing that keeps sticking in my mind with all this lead banning
and
>alternative finish stuff, is how in the world did it come to pass that the
>electronics industry became the whipping post for the worlds lead hazards?
>Lead use in our industry is a fraction of a fraction of what's used in
>batteries, why don't we ever hear what they're doing to clean up their act?
>
> Out here in California it's required (and actually, I think it's
>federally mandated as part of the responsibilities you have as a toxic
waste
>generator) that we keep records of our bar solder and paste, what we buy,
and
>what we use. I think that should be sufficient, not a total ban.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm all for newer technologies and better ways of
>doing things, but for some reason I have this gut feeling that the whole
"ban
>lead in electronics" movement is being driven by forces other than a noble
>concern for everybody's health, as much as I hate to say it, I think it's
>money.
>
> Let's face it, Lead is such a easy substance to sit around and
>rationalize banning it, because no one will argue with you when you state
that
>it's not healthy to ingest. But what don't make sense to me is why it is
that
>there's all this fervor for us in electronics manufacturing to change when
>we're not the biggest users. It would seem to me that if it WAS such a
>problem, one wouldn't want to expend so much effort and energy for a such a
>small return when you compare us along with the rest of the worlds "Lead
>Abusers"...unless of course there IS some other agenda?
>
>Just my two-cents...
>
>-Steve Gregory-
################################################################
TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
################################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body:
To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name>
To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet
################################################################
Please visit IPC's web site (http://www.ipc.org) "On-Line Services" section for additional information.
For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312
################################################################
|
