[HN Gopher] Tin whiskers: What happens when they spontaneously e...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Tin whiskers: What happens when they spontaneously erupt? (2018)
        
       Author : forgotthepasswd
       Score  : 139 points
       Date   : 2022-03-10 16:21 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.microcontrollertips.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.microcontrollertips.com)
        
       | atesti wrote:
       | Does anybody from Germany know where I can still buy leaded
       | solder? Unfortunately I forgot to order a lifetime supply while
       | it was still available
        
       | tejohnso wrote:
       | This is very surprising to me. I had no idea that certain
       | conductors had some kind of (stochastic, according to robomartin)
       | built-in time delayed short circuit mechanism that will, without
       | question, manifest itself given enough time.
       | 
       | Like some kind of natural electronics prank.
        
         | voakbasda wrote:
         | If you were feeling particularly cynical, you might wonder
         | whether this phenomenon has been incorporated into shipping
         | products, such manufacturers would be assured that their goods
         | would fail shortly after the warranty expired.
        
       | dmitrygr wrote:
       | Use lead solder, like NASA does: easier to use, and no whisker
       | issues. Just wash your hands afterwards
        
         | mmastrac wrote:
         | Better to solve these issues long-term. Lead's external costs
         | in full product lifecycles are just too high.
        
           | dmitrygr wrote:
           | As you read in TFA, there is no known solution, nor even a
           | known cause for whiskers
        
             | mmastrac wrote:
             | No known cause or solution _yet_
        
               | adrian_b wrote:
               | It is extremely unlikely to ever find any solution to the
               | tin whiskers problem, other than alloying tin with toxic
               | elements, i.e. either lead or antimony.
               | 
               | The reliability problem could be solved only by replacing
               | soldering with another method of making electrical
               | connections during PCB assembly, e.g. thermal/ultrasonic
               | welding of copper on copper, metal deposition in vacuum
               | etc.
               | 
               | While replacing soldering is possible, any known
               | alternative method would hugely increase the price for
               | the assembly of electronic equipment.
               | 
               | Soldering is not used because it is a good method for
               | making electrical connections, but because it is
               | extremely cheap, allowing many thousands of connections
               | to be made simultaneously, during a pass of a PCB through
               | a reflow oven, or over a soldering wave.
        
               | hulitu wrote:
               | > The reliability problem could be solved only by
               | replacing soldering with another method of making
               | electrical connections during PCB assembly, e.g.
               | thermal/ultrasonic welding of copper on copper, metal
               | deposition in vacuum etc.
               | 
               | The whiskers are not related to soldering. Of course
               | there are some soldering issues which facilitate whiskers
               | but that's about it. Tin is a normal plating material so
               | you can find whiskets in places which were not soldered.
        
               | Animats wrote:
               | _The reliability problem could be solved only by
               | replacing soldering with another method of making
               | electrical connections during PCB assembly, e.g. thermal
               | /ultrasonic welding of copper on copper, metal deposition
               | in vacuum etc._
               | 
               | There's been some interest in laser welding for PCB
               | assembly. But most modern components are not designed
               | with the pins out where you can get at them with a laser
               | beam. Laser welding is commonly used to weld the
               | connections in automotive battery packs, so it does work.
        
               | Animats wrote:
               | If you can get the parts you need in SSOP or TSSOP
               | packaging, with the pins visible from straight down,
               | laser brazing might work.
               | 
               | Brazing is done at higher temperatures than soldering,
               | but with a laser, you can apply the heat to just the area
               | of interest, and hopefully not cook the ICs. Laser
               | soldering already exists, and there are laser cutters, so
               | adapting one for laser brazing ought to be possible.
               | 
               | The advantage of brazing is that you can use many more
               | materials, most of which don't contain either tin or
               | lead. Low-cost aluminum brazing rod or wire might work.
               | Working temp around 700C. This is going to take careful
               | heat management. Worth a try for aerospace applications.
        
               | formerly_proven wrote:
               | Okay, so here's what's what. Tin whiskers have been known
               | for ~100 years. Originally solder was just tin. Lead was
               | added specifically in the 30s or so to avoid tin whiskers
               | [1] though nobody knows why that works. RoHS/lead-free
               | has been around for ~20 years and there hasn't been a
               | definitive solution.
               | 
               | [1] (and because Pb63Sn37 or the inexplicably more
               | popular Pb60Sn40 are eutectic and near-eutectic,
               | respectively, which is nice for wire dipping and related
               | sports)
        
           | iancmceachern wrote:
           | Yeah, and we're not allowed to even put it in products
           | anymore by law (RoHs, reach, etc)
        
         | Steltek wrote:
         | On the contrary, I am not NASA. I'm not even a consumer
         | electronics company. I'm a hobbyist at home, soldering things
         | at my desk or table. Lead-free is the least of my problems when
         | building something and I don't believe "just wash your hands"
         | is sufficient for cleaning my workspace (or kitchen table?) of
         | possible lead contamination.
        
           | alar44 wrote:
           | It definitely is enough. I don't know where the myth that
           | looking at lead kills you started, but unless you are eating
           | it or breathing it in (soldering is not hot enough to
           | vaporize lead) there's nothing to worry about.
        
           | JaggedNZ wrote:
           | Fellow hobbyist here. Actually your biggest health risk is
           | industrial asthma from flux fumes. I know professionals who
           | have spent a good fraction of there lives soldering with no
           | lead poisoning issues. Lead needs to be consumed or inhaled
           | for it to be an issue. The guy I meet who did have lead
           | poisoning, large bore rifle shooting coach, from spending to
           | much time at the "wrong end" of the rifle range. Lots of lead
           | dust there.
        
         | Flozzin wrote:
         | I wouldn't recommend this. If you do use lead soldering, make
         | sure you don't breathe in any fumes.
        
           | foldr wrote:
           | The trick is not to end up inhaling or eating the solder in
           | its solid state. This is actually quite difficult to avoid,
           | as cleaning the tip of your iron will create lots of tiny
           | solder balls that fly everywhere and can persist in your
           | environment.
           | 
           | Personally I would say that in hobbyist electronics tin
           | whiskers are the least of your concerns when it comes to the
           | reliability of the devices you're making. I wouldn't risk
           | using leaded solder even if the risk is low.
        
             | mrob wrote:
             | Agreed. This, not lead fumes, is the real danger of leaded
             | solder. You can't hand solder reliably without cleaning the
             | iron, but both of the common cleaning techniques (damp
             | sponge and brass wool) inevitably break the soldier into
             | tiny balls, which bounce and roll all over the place. They
             | can get caught in clothes, and from there they might end up
             | getting into food. With the safe dose for lead being zero,
             | I don't think it's worth the risk.
        
               | trhway wrote:
               | During my elementary school years (beginning of 198x
               | USSR) the lead was a go to material for a lot of things -
               | using campfires we melted the lead out of Navy cables and
               | batteries (from the Navy dumps), no gloves, no masks, and
               | made a lot of things out of it - toy action
               | figures/soldiers for example, weights and weighted hooks
               | for fishing, bullets for DYI guns, gear for some games,
               | etc. (I'm a drop-out from PhD. program at a top Russian
               | Math school - didn't see money in it and thus went into
               | programming, so i guess the few IQ points i lost due to
               | lead (i score usually about 130) is what caused such poor
               | judgement :)
        
               | foldr wrote:
               | None of those activities pose the same risks as soldering
               | using leaded solder, for the reasons given above. (You
               | are unlikely to end up ingesting significant quantities
               | of the lead.)
               | 
               | It's probably worth emphasizing that this is risk with
               | home soldering, where you're likely to eat and solder in
               | relatively close proximity, and without being completely
               | rigorous about changing your clothes and cleaning.
        
           | the-dude wrote:
           | The boiling point of lead is 1749 degC (3180 degF).
        
             | turminal wrote:
             | That by itself does not imply fumes cannot form at lower
             | temperatures.
        
               | the-dude wrote:
               | Great. If we follow this line, standing next to a roll of
               | solder is just as dangerous. No need to fire up the iron.
               | 
               | If lead was so easily dissolved into air, wouldn't we
               | have had massive issues in electronics factories? I don't
               | recall ever reading such a thing ( as opposed to
               | _painters madness_ for example ). Not a native speaker,
               | probably doesn 't translate too well.
        
               | mcguire wrote:
               | " _Results showed that the mean PbB concentration of the
               | exposed workers (6.12 +4.61 ug /dl) was significantly
               | higher than that of the unexposed workers (4.63+3.91
               | ug/dl ) (z = 4.96; p = 0.001). There was a significant
               | association between the blood lead concentrations with
               | the exposure to lead (2 = 437.72; p = 0.001)._" (https://
               | www.researchgate.net/publication/271077842_Occupatio...)
               | 
               | " _Epidemiological and experimental studies indicate that
               | chronic exposure resulting in blood lead levels (BLL) as
               | low as 10 ug /dL in adults are associated with impaired
               | kidney function, high blood pressure, nervous system and
               | neurobehavioral effects, cognitive dysfunction later in
               | life, and subtle cognitive effects attributed to prenatal
               | exposure. Pregnant women need to be especially concerned
               | with reducing BLL since this can have serious impact on
               | the developing fetus._"
               | (https://www.osha.gov/lead/health-effects)
        
               | amatecha wrote:
               | is that because they inhaled it in fumes, or because they
               | touched it? or something else?
        
               | the_jeremy wrote:
               | Mad Hatter[0] is a good example in English.
               | 
               | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism
        
               | kadoban wrote:
               | Or you could just look at the actual material property
               | that matters, which I believe is called vapor pressure.
        
             | xmodem wrote:
             | The boiling point of water is 100 degC, and yet my shower
             | seems to produce an awful lot of steam despite not being
             | anywhere close to that.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | at_a_remove wrote:
               | You have confused steam with small water droplets, akin
               | to what emerges from an ultrasonic mister. If it were
               | steam, you would be shrieking and then dead.
        
               | kimixa wrote:
               | I thought everyone did the experiment of leaving a saucer
               | of water out and seeing it evaporates over time, despite
               | being significantly lower than 100c.
               | 
               | And "Steam" is wooly term for high enough density of
               | water vapor that you see condensation - often caused by
               | higher temperatures in the majority of cases people
               | experience it in day to day life. So it doesn't really
               | have a precise definition. At what temperature point does
               | "mist" become "steam?" What %age of the volume of air
               | needs to be water vapor? If you lowered the pressure
               | water "boils" at a lower temperature - is that still
               | steam?
        
               | deathanatos wrote:
               | But it's still water, and it's still moving up and about
               | of its own accord in the local air which is the point.
               | That it isn't _technically_ steam doesn 't disprove the
               | point the person you're responding to is trying to
               | make...
               | 
               | The commenter's point isn't that the lead has technically
               | been boiled, it's that, if we analogize to "steam" in a
               | shower, I don't have to reach water's boiling point
               | before I'm breathing in water. Does that translate to
               | lead: i.e., even if I'm below lead's boiling point, could
               | I be nonetheless breathing in lead vapor, or something
               | like that? (I don't know the answer here, which would
               | push me towards lead-free solder. I.e., I don't know if
               | the precautions I'd take with lead would actually
               | suffice.)
        
               | jpindar wrote:
               | No, soldering doesn't send streams of liquid solder
               | through the air. And if an occasional drip of solder does
               | splash, it is so heavy, and has so much surface tension,
               | that it doesn't go far and doesn't stay in the air like
               | water droplets do.
        
               | B1FF_PSUVM wrote:
               | Good point. Also, steam is invisible. What we see - e.g.
               | from a boiling kettle - is condensation.
        
           | myself248 wrote:
           | Or just get your blood lead level measured.
           | 
           | A few months ago, I happened to be at the doctor getting some
           | other stuff checked out, and the week prior to the
           | appointment I had done a ton of soldering, like two 12-hour
           | days bashing out a whole batch of boards, both paste reflow
           | and hand-PTH work, with a fair bit of sucker rework, and of
           | course after that the lab needed a good tidying so I emptied
           | all the suckers and tip cleaners as part of that. All tin-
           | lead solder.
           | 
           | Zero gloves, and I only wore a mask part of the first day
           | (when there were other people around). And actually the
           | several weeks leading up to that also saw a lot of SMT rework
           | and other up-to-by-elbows-in-solder sort of activity.
           | 
           | So I figured, that's kind of a worst-case for my lead
           | exposure, hey Doc, can I get my blood lead level checked?
           | Sure why not, it's one extra vial on top of the bloodwork
           | already being ordered!
           | 
           | And the results came back below the test's detectable level.
           | 
           | So as far as I'm concerned, if that didn't do it, I don't
           | think I have anything to worry about. Now, I'm sort of a
           | germophobe and I never eat with my hands, so this doesn't
           | necessarily generalize, but as far as skin absorption or
           | vapor inhalation, I've gone from "not very worried" to
           | "abjectly unconcerned" after getting that result.
           | 
           | I would encourage everyone to get their level measured and
           | have actual data to make decisions with. Superstition does
           | not become us.
        
           | semi-extrinsic wrote:
           | The vapor pressure of lead at 300 degC is around 10^-6 Pa. In
           | laymans' terms, there is zero evaporation of lead happening
           | during soldering. Ice at -40degC evaporates (sublimates) 10
           | million times faster.
           | 
           | The fumes from soldering are from the flux or rosin, and that
           | is just as dangerous if you are using lead free solder.
           | Always use adequate ventilation and/or filtration to avoid
           | inhaling fumes.
        
         | adrian_b wrote:
         | Besides lead, there is a second element which greatly reduces
         | the risk of tin whiskers, when alloyed to tin: antimony.
         | 
         | However the proposals of replacing the tin-lead alloys withe
         | tin-antimony alloys have been rejected due to the fear that
         | antimony is also toxic.
         | 
         | While antimony in high doses is indeed quite toxic, it is less
         | dangerous as a pollutant than lead, because it does not have
         | the same tendency for very long time accumulation in animal
         | bodies and such a strong effect on the nervous system.
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | Much more info here:
       | 
       | https://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/
        
       | jwilk wrote:
       | > _as fast as 15 nanometer per second to 1 mm per year_
       | 
       | That doesn't sound right. 15 nm/s is ~47 cm/year.
        
         | coryrc wrote:
         | They break off if they get too long and will run out of
         | material at some point.
        
         | greggsy wrote:
         | I don't think it's a steady growth rate.
        
       | RicoElectrico wrote:
       | > No one has been able to eliminate whiskering, as the phenomenon
       | is not yet fully understood.
       | 
       | It's the kind of stuff we should be embarrassed not to
       | understand. I get that understanding living things can be tricky
       | due to complexity and issues with controlling conditions, but a
       | lump of metal? Whatever we find out will at least save us money
       | in damaged devices, and hopefully drive some progress in
       | metallurgy as well.
       | 
       | We had an era in semiconductor manufacturing when despite the
       | relative simplicity the process was not understood/controlled
       | fully, which took the toll on yield. E.g. CMOS was super fussy
       | due to difficulties in creating gate oxide - impurities in air
       | like halogens made the yield seasonal [1]. But now I assume that
       | if any problems arise, they're due to bona-fide complexity.
       | 
       | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28178612
        
         | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | robomartin wrote:
         | > It's the kind of stuff we should be embarrassed not to
         | understand.
         | 
         | We understand it. Onset is stochastic. Mitigation is impossible
         | given current regulations in consumer-land. Read my longer
         | comment for further details.
         | 
         | EDIT: What I mean by "we understand it" is that we know that
         | lead-free solder chemistry leads to tin whisker growth. When I
         | was taking a deep dive into this many years back, the
         | researchers I was working with at NASA told me "Growth onset
         | can be 0 days to 3 years after manufacturing. Your guess is as
         | good as mine.". And, BTW, you can have growth start in a few
         | days in one corner of the PCB and a few months later elsewhere.
         | It's a complex relationship of materials properties.
         | 
         | We know that tin whisker growth in lead-free solder is as much
         | of a reality as gravity is between two celestial bodies. In
         | other words, it will happen. We simply have no way to predict
         | when or how quickly they will grow. It might just be too
         | complex to compute/predict given the variables involved.
        
           | gowld wrote:
           | That sounds like not understanding it.
        
             | robomartin wrote:
             | Not quite. We understand that we can't build an anti-
             | gravity device and don't even know how to go about thinking
             | of one. Understanding that something is impossible (or
             | likely impossible) is understanding. We might not like the
             | answers (I sure didn't at the time) yet they are a based on
             | knowledge and decades of research by some of the smartest
             | scientists I have ever met.
        
             | hulitu wrote:
             | There are parts of the process which we do not underestand.
             | Testing is expensive especially at this level and nobody
             | wants to pay for things which _could_ happen.
        
         | semi-extrinsic wrote:
         | A lot of the challenge here AFAIK is that the process needs to
         | be understood at the molecular level, where we measure time in
         | picoseconds (10^-12), while this process takes something like
         | 10^6 seconds. The disparity is an absolutely astronomical
         | factor of 10^18.
        
       | ChuckMcM wrote:
       | It really is an amazing phenomena. Effectively atoms of tin are
       | moving from the tin out to the end of the whisker. We spent a
       | week talking about whiskering(sp?) in my materials science class
       | at USC because it was such a big deal in the EE world.
       | 
       | Prior to that class my world view was that only electrons could
       | travel through metal, only to find that metal can travel through
       | metal too!
       | 
       | Locally at NASA Ames they had an experiment where they had a
       | bunch of different assemblies being exposed to various conditions
       | (high electric fields, non-ionizing radiation, etc) and one of
       | the things they were measuring was the production of whiskers and
       | other changes in material properties (strength, toughness, Etc.).
       | Always amazing what we know and what we don't know about what we
       | know.
        
         | zdragnar wrote:
         | > that metal can travel through metal too!
         | 
         | I recommend watching clips of mercury amalgamations forming
         | (nile red has some great videos on youtube).
         | 
         | There is something about it that is both disturbing and
         | beautiful to me.
        
           | cjameskeller wrote:
           | That was a welcome rabbit hole. Thank you!
        
         | rootusrootus wrote:
         | > Effectively atoms of tin are moving from the tin out to the
         | end of the whisker.
         | 
         | Don't tin whiskers get built from the base up, though? So the
         | tip was the first thing built, and just gets pushed farther
         | away.
        
       | prutschman wrote:
       | Could potting prevent this, or can the whiskers "push through"
       | epoxy?
        
         | dr_orpheus wrote:
         | Yes? In my experience (some spacecraft electronics stuff) this
         | is also on the list of things where we think conformal
         | coating/potting helps prevent tin whiskers. But there are still
         | instances where Tin whiskers have grown and pushed through
         | conformal coating on a PCB.
         | 
         | Edit: Go look at the more detailed response from robomartin
        
         | robomartin wrote:
         | No. Can't prevent it. Yes, they can push through epoxy or
         | buckle under it (which isn't a solution). Read my longer answer
         | for details. These things are a nightmare.
        
         | jccooper wrote:
         | Yes; satellite boards tend to have conformal coatings, it helps
         | but it's not a complete solution. (The coatings also help avoid
         | shorts from junk floating around, and launch vibration.)
         | Because of the inherent unreliability and difficulty in
         | replacement, they also try really hard to avoid lead-free
         | solder requirements.
        
       | Damogran6 wrote:
       | State of Colorado Datacenters got them. The response to them were
       | weird...if any machine were in any of the affected areas, they
       | were persona non grata...they could never leave those datacenters
       | as functional server.
       | 
       | It DID lever some money for an awesome off-site backup
       | datacenter...which was eventually our only datacenter for
       | 'reasons'.
       | 
       | In our case, I think one of the datacenter's raised floors got
       | carpeted (don't judge, it predated me, I was equally baffled) and
       | a grounding issue caused a voltage drift causing the tin to
       | migrate...
        
         | walrus01 wrote:
         | raised floors in general are a nightmare for
         | grounding/bonding/differences in potential between racks, the
         | steel floor structure, the building, and electrical conduits.
         | 
         | there's a reason why almost nobody builds them new from a
         | clean-sheet-of-paper design anymore for serious datacenter
         | applications or ISP/telecom purposes, which are racks/cabinet
         | on concrete slab and everything overhead now.
         | 
         | it's _much_ easier to ground /bond everything together using
         | some very fat copper cables run along ladder rack overhead, and
         | bond all the racks to that.
        
       | robomartin wrote:
       | I have dealt with the tin whisker problem in the context of
       | aerospace applications (both space-borne and terrestrial flight),
       | including extensive consulting with subject matter experts from
       | NASA.
       | 
       | The bottom line is quite simple:
       | 
       | Tin whisker growth onset is a stochastic process. We cannot
       | predict when it will start and we cannot prevent it.
       | 
       | Once they start growing it is almost impossible to contain them.
       | They will poke through conformal coatings such as parylene and
       | arathane. If they don't, they will buckle (coil-up) under the
       | coating.
       | 
       | While buckling sounds like a desirable outcome, this could lead
       | to shorting of adjacent contacts in todays fine pitch integrated
       | circuits and components.
       | 
       | Growth rate can be in the order of 10 mm per year. This means
       | that adjacent leads of something as mundane as a SOIC-16 package
       | can be shorted by a tin whisker in 28 days or less.
       | 
       | The take away is: There's nothing we can do about tin whiskers
       | that is 100% guaranteed to prevent growth or slow it down by a
       | non-trivial amount. The only path that prevents their growth is
       | to use lead-based solder. This is why, as an example, we would do
       | such things as send out BGA's with RoHS compliant solder balls to
       | be re-balled with leaded solder.
       | 
       | Time for a bit of a rant: All my work in this area led me to look
       | at the RoHS initiative as yet another example of something that,
       | while well intentioned, it will likely have precisely the
       | opposite effect from what was intended.
       | 
       | The fact that lead-free solder is susceptible to tin whisker
       | growth means that 100% of all consumer electronic products are
       | ticking time bombs when it comes to failures. This means that all
       | kinds of consumer, commercial and industrial electronic products
       | will fail over time in ways we might not be able to explain. The
       | reason for this is that nobody does deep forensics when products
       | fail. There is no reporting from the likes of Apple, Samsung, LG,
       | Visio, Sony and myriad other manufacturers on failure rates and
       | causes. In fact, they might not even have this data as consumer,
       | commercial and industrial users simply replace the devices as
       | they fail and move on.
       | 
       | In other words, it is likely RoHS has caused --or will cause--
       | massively more garbage in landfills. As a simple data point, my
       | 40 year old HP-41 calculator still works perfectly fine. It is
       | impossible to imagine a RoHS-compliant calculator not ending up
       | in a landfill way earlier than 40 years.
       | 
       | There was a bit of a movement to roll back RoHS around the time
       | it was being enacted. Going up against many nations and
       | politicians using "save the planet" to get elected proved
       | impossible for those who rightly brought-up that the transition
       | to lead-free solder required far more research before we fully
       | understood the potential consequences.
       | 
       | It wasn't about not wanting to go lead-free, it was about making
       | the move when the science and math indicated that it would not
       | create the massive problem we now likely have on our hands. The
       | data on electronics waste due to tin whiskers is probably
       | impossible to find. It might not even exist. Which is a tragedy.
       | 
       | If you want to learn more about this, here are a couple of good
       | links:
       | 
       | https://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker./background/index.htm
       | 
       | https://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/reference/tech_papers/kadesch2...
       | 
       | https://www.google.com/search?q=tin+whisker&hl=en&tbm=isch
       | 
       | https://web.calce.umd.edu/tin-whiskers/
        
         | xmodem wrote:
         | Do you happen to know if tin whiskers have anything to do with
         | passing current? (in other words, will a device that's in
         | constant use develop them faster than a physically identical
         | device that's switched off and in storage)
        
           | hulitu wrote:
           | Yes. Voltage has a big effect on whiskers.
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | Passing current means thermal cycling...
           | 
           | And thermal cycling definitely accelerates whisker formation.
        
         | twofornone wrote:
         | Are there any easy ways to clean up a PCB that's developed
         | whiskers? And once a whisker erupts on a given PCB, does that
         | generally indicate that others are likely to form on that board
         | in short order?
        
           | oceanplexian wrote:
           | Well actually, there is a way, but you might kill said PCB.
           | 
           | Heat everything up in an oven, the solder will reflow, and
           | you might temporarily fix the board. It's a similar idea to
           | the Towel/Xbox 360 fix. I can attest to having successfully
           | saved lots of random electronics this way.
           | 
           | All of this started with the eco-friendly alternatives to
           | lead solder, I have a lot of old computer hardware and
           | motherboards, and the hardware from the early 2000s is the
           | least reliable, whereas most game consoles, motherboards,
           | etc. from the 80s and 90s works flawlessly. To this day I
           | swear by the leaded stuff for personal use, it flows better,
           | doesn't crack, and is superior in every way.
        
           | robomartin wrote:
           | All else being equal, once growth starts it is likely to
           | start everywhere on that board. This is a probabilistic
           | assumption based on the likelihood of all of the solder on
           | that board being from the same batch and having been applied
           | with the same process parameters. The same cannot be said of
           | the device leads, where each manufacturer and batch could
           | very well be different.
           | 
           | It's quite a nightmare, particularly when you are trying to
           | figure out if this stuff can kill people you want to send
           | into space. The only real mitigation is lead-based solder and
           | coatings on components.
           | 
           | Cleaning? That can be both dangerous and highly ineffective.
           | The whiskers are very strong due to their molecular scale.
           | Mechanical brushing might fracture longer whiskers. Then you
           | have the problem of ensuring that they don't go under devices
           | or in-between contacts. The process would likely have to be
           | repeated many times and include both manual and automated
           | optical inspection as well as x-ray imaging (which might not
           | be able to detect fine whiskers). And then there's the
           | reality that you probably don't want to inhale these things
           | at all.
           | 
           | So, off to the landfill we go. It is likely better to build a
           | new board than to try to clean one. I can't even begin to
           | compute the delta in carbon footprint between making a board
           | with lead-based solder that will last decades and the
           | "clean/green" RoHS board that is sure to end-up in a landfill
           | (cleaning/fixing it is bound to have a massively larger
           | carbon footprint that making a new board).
        
             | HPsquared wrote:
             | Is this why space electronics often use wire-wound
             | connections? Maybe welding the contacts together instead of
             | soldering?
             | 
             | I assume for the really critical components, you'd need to
             | avoid solder completely.
        
               | sydbarrett74 wrote:
               | Unfortunately, all consumer electronics companies have
               | this fetish for making products ever smaller and thinner.
               | It dovetails with their profit motive: make things less
               | reliable so we all have to buy more frequently.
        
         | Ottolay wrote:
         | RoHS does not just restrict lead. It also restricts use of
         | mercury, cadmium, and several toxic compounds.
        
         | Steltek wrote:
         | > In other words, it is likely RoHS has caused --or will
         | cause-- massively more garbage in landfills. As a simple data
         | point, my 40 year old HP-41 calculator still works perfectly
         | fine. It is impossible to imagine a RoHS-compliant calculator
         | not ending up in a landfill way earlier than 40 years.
         | 
         | Environmentalists can only wish that people were disposing of
         | their electronics because of tin whiskers. Long lived consumer
         | electronics needs a cultural overhaul more than it needs leaded
         | solder.
        
         | ghostly_s wrote:
         | I did not know these whiskers had been implicated in the Toyota
         | unintended acceleration scandal:
         | https://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/reference/tech_papers/2011-NAS...
        
         | dilyevsky wrote:
         | Miniaturization trend definitely doesn't help here either...
        
         | stefan_ wrote:
         | The _Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive_ (RoHS) is
         | not about preventing garbage in landfills, and frankly it 's
         | been 18 years and the sky is not falling.
        
           | MisterTea wrote:
           | Yes but the parent is not stating that. They are stating that
           | a "save the environment" effort is not very environmentally
           | friendly if it makes more waste.
        
             | _Microft wrote:
             | They are assuming that these devices would be used long
             | enough for tin whiskers to become a problem. I seriously
             | doubt that RoHS will be causing more waste - because at the
             | point that devices become unusuable, they are on in the
             | trash anyways for completely unrelated reasons (think:
             | bezel to large to be popular, plastic backshell instead of
             | metal or glass, device is too thick, device is too heavy,
             | ...).
        
               | hulitu wrote:
               | Tin whiskers continue to grow even after you device is in
               | the landfill. You basically have a dust of tin which goes
               | into landfil.
        
             | mmastrac wrote:
             | Saving the environment by reducing actively, acutely
             | hazardous materials and saving the environment via reducing
             | landfill/carbon emissions are completely different goals.
             | 
             | As others have pointed out in this thread, reducing
             | landfill waste from electronics is a much more complex
             | problem and just adding leaded solder will not solve it.
        
             | nomel wrote:
             | That assumes waste reduction is the goal, rather than lead
             | reduction. With toxic, intelligence reducing [1], materials
             | like lead, maybe some extra waste is a perfectly good trade
             | off.
             | 
             | 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30600539
        
               | hulitu wrote:
               | Last i checked tin was not an edible material. There is a
               | small difference between having tin dust, which you
               | cannot contain, and having electronics containing lead
               | which you can colect and store in a warehouse ( asuming
               | you want to address the problem in the first place).
        
               | cinntaile wrote:
               | Are you saying that electronics devices continuously let
               | out tin dust so we end up breathing in this stuff?
        
             | stefan_ wrote:
             | Uhm, that is exactly the point that I'm making? That the
             | goal was never save the environment, but rather reduce the
             | exposure to toxic-at-any-concentration things like _lead_?
             | 
             | Hence why I quoted the program name.
        
             | Steltek wrote:
             | Devices are disposed of (becomes waste) long before they
             | become broken from whiskers. That makes RoHS a net-win by
             | reducing toxic materials from landfills full of phones with
             | broken screens and kitschy doodads with broken plastic.
        
           | adrian_b wrote:
           | The sky is not falling in large part because the transition
           | to lead-free solder was simultaneous with the transition to
           | electronic devices that are not repaired and which frequently
           | have a lifetime not much longer than their warranty time.
           | 
           | Most current electronic devices are dumped much earlier than
           | when they would fail due to the tin whiskers.
           | 
           | Many consumer electronic devices made 50 years ago are still
           | usable without any problems caused by the aging of the
           | soldering or of the semiconductor devices (but old
           | electrolytic capacitors may have to be replaced). The
           | electronic devices that are made now do not have any chances
           | of such a long lifetime, with the exception of a few devices
           | made for special requirements, e.g. military/aerospace.
        
             | zozbot234 wrote:
             | Consumer electronics used to break down all the time 50
             | years ago. Metal whiskers are not even close to being
             | relevant when other factors impact reliability and
             | durability to a far greater extent.
        
               | hulitu wrote:
               | They used to break down and they could and were repaired.
               | Nowadays if something breaks it goes in the garbage can.
               | I had an extension cable which died staying in the
               | basement for a year. When i opened it to check the reason
               | i was shocked. It looked like a spider net made of dust
               | but this was metal.
        
               | adrian_b wrote:
               | Consumer electronics used to break down all the time, but
               | in almost all cases that was due to manufacturing
               | defects, which were much more frequent, because many
               | operations that are now automated were still done
               | manually then.
               | 
               | The consumer devices which survived infant mortality,
               | because they were free of manufacturing defects, had a
               | negligible aging rate after that.
               | 
               | Modern electronic devices have far fewer initial
               | manufacturing defects, due to automated production, but
               | all age much quicker, due to very small component sizes,
               | lower safety factors, surface semiconductor devices (MOS
               | transistors) instead of bulk semiconductor devices
               | (bipolar transistors), lead-free soldering and other
               | similar changes in technologies.
        
               | squarefoot wrote:
               | > Consumer electronics used to break down all the time 50
               | years ago
               | 
               | But they could be easily repaired.
        
               | oceanplexian wrote:
               | Once things started going to multi-layer PCBs it was the
               | end of reparability. It's too bad because I have fond
               | memories of fixing broken components on PC hardware and
               | game consoles, even as someone who's not an expert and
               | simply a hobbyist.
        
         | alfor wrote:
         | Does wisker form inside semiconductor also or do they use
         | metals immune to that?
        
           | hulitu wrote:
           | Yes they do but slower. In the past gold was used for wires
           | from terminal to pads. Gold as far as i know is not so
           | subceptible to form whiskers. But gold is expensive and now
           | they use copper instead of gold.
        
             | [deleted]
        
       | mmastrac wrote:
       | After seeing the articles on ice spikes, I wonder if this is
       | somehow a related phenomenon.
        
         | thanatos519 wrote:
         | Indeed. Maybe they are also related to bone spurs!
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | Remind me more of this, only in slow-mo:
         | https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2015.16771
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | FpUser wrote:
       | Accepting RoHS was in my opinion one of the most idiotic
       | environmental initiatives that was rammed through without much
       | thinking about long term cost / benefit analysis.
        
         | hulitu wrote:
         | A repaired device is one less device sold new. At the end what
         | matters is money.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-03-10 23:00 UTC)