More on lead-free junk solder

A 200W combo, UK made 2002, with one solder joint to a small on-end electrolytic failed so could be just due to vibration/resonance. But it is on a board with obvious conical solder joints so perhaps the most likely inherently weak joint to fail first. The larger (heatsinky) joints are shiny and conical, redone by hand with junk solder maybe, but all the other small joints look horribly grey. On the other board all conical joints but all bright silvery colour. What is the consensus of the panel - redo all the grey joints with Pb-Sn solder and leave the bright ones, or if it aint broke - don't poke. ?

-- Diverse Devices, Southampton, England electronic hints and repair briefs , schematics/manuals list on

formatting link

Reply to
N Cook
Loading thread data ...

Have you checked for zinc migration?

I have no idea if that is still common, but I have some older 70:s and

80:s stuff where this happens on some connectors and switches that appears to have been of incompatible material.
Reply to
Thomas Tornblom

There are some very nice silver-bearing electronics solders out there that do not fail under stress.

formatting link

Comes to mind. It ain't cheap... I have used it with success, with specific reference to R/C submarines... stressful conditions, high dampness, vibration, several amps on the connections and considerable heat.

Failing that, 63/37 tin/lead solder is your best bet, and my tipple of choice for my normal (vintage radio/audio restoration/repair) uses.

Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA

Reply to
pfjw

I really can't make my mind up on this. All the regulars on here know my views on lead-free solder, and I must admit that I am inclined to go over lead-free joints that look *particularly* suspicious, with //proper// solder, but as I've said here before, there are two schools of thought on this among the metallurgical experts as to whether mixing lead-free and leaded solder in the same joint, produces one with long-term compositional stability.

Add to this that now the full legislation for RoHS is in place, as UK repairers, we are fully obligated, officially under threat of EU law, to repair equipment originally constructed with lead-free solder, and placed on the market after July 2006, using *only* lead-free. This means that by reworking a lead-free joint on such an item with leaded solder, we are officially inviting the wrath of the solder police, and I guess, prosecution for what they are now calling an " eco crime ".

I haven't heard of any such prosecutions yet, but in these days that we have now where people are getting prosecuted and heavily fined for ( accidentally ) putting the wrong type of recycle waste in their household bins, I'm sure that the day can't be far away when some poor engineer gets tricked into breaching the legislation, by some over-zealous trading standards person ...

Arfa

Reply to
Arfa Daily

In message , Arfa Daily writes

Are you sure about this? My understanding is that leaded joints can still be repaired with leaded solder.

Ian.

Reply to
Ian Jackson

Read a bit more carefully - that's " lead-free " ....

Arfa

Reply to
Arfa Daily

In message , Arfa Daily writes

Oops! I misread that. Sorrrrry. Ian.

Reply to
Ian Jackson

No probs, Ian. You are right, of course. For those not familiar, the situation is that any equipment 'placed on the market' before July 2006, irrespective of what technology has been used to manufacture it, may be repaired by any technology that you see fit - ie by using leaded or unleaded solder. However, common wisdom is that if it was manufactured in lead-free, then it should be repaired in lead-free, likewise for leaded manufacture, used leaded solder. However, it is getting impossible to buy new components now that are not lead-free, which //may// mean that their legs have been dipped in a lead-free solder ...

Some manufacturers, notably Sony, have insisted for several years now, that all of their official service centres use only lead-free to repair *all* of their products, irrespective of original manufacture technology. The service bulletin that was sent out by them regarding this, actually caused considerable misunderstanding in the UK repair industry, with regard to what was the correct legal situation. I am of the opinion that you should probably not mix solder types if at all possible in a joint but, like most reading this I suspect, I just can't help myself when I come across a bad joint in a place that I know is not going to be reliable if reworked in lead-free.

Equipment placed on the market after July 2006, must have been manufactured in lead-free, and the directive says that we must not compromise this, so must use lead-free solder and RoHS compliant components to effect any repairs. The exception to this, is where an equipment has been granted an exemption from the directive. Such equipment includes avionics and medical and some military equipment. This will have continued to be manufactured in leaded solder, and marketed quite legally. Repair of such items can - and in my opinion *should* - be effected using leaded solder.

Arfa

Reply to
Arfa Daily

message

to

unleaded

lead-free,

components

been

that

of

service

what

manufactured

in

in

If the manufacturing date is not on the back of a bit of kit needing repair, then presumably its a matter of saying you cannot repair anything made in or after 2006 , then asking the owner when he thinks it was made, and then making the appropriate comment.

-- Diverse Devices, Southampton, England electronic hints and repair briefs , schematics/manuals list on

formatting link

Reply to
N Cook

As you say, this is one of the difficulties, and where a typical piece of euro-mumbo-jumbo, however well intentioned, comes unstuck for lack of being properly thought through in terms of the poor sods who have to be responsible for its implementation at the sharp end. In years gone by, date of manufacture was commonly stamped inside the cabinet, or on the chassis. Now we're going to have to rely on our abilities to read component date codes, or plastics moulding date clocks in the back covers.

I have, however, started to see the legend "PBF" or "PbF" appearing on PCBs. Whilst I accept that this doesn't necessarily mean a build date ( or marketing date ) of post July 2006, it does at least confirm what we might already suspect just by looking at the dubious grey joints on the board, and in theory, if only for the reason that no-one is really sure of the long-term effects of mixing solder types, it would indicate that we should be using lead-free to repair it.

At the end of the day, all of this is just another way to make our lives unnecessarily complicated for no well-defined reason. For many years, my wife owned a childrens' day nursery. It got buried in more and more and more layers of rules and regulations until the whole day was spent in writing reports, and trying to avoid breaching any childcare guidelines, or worse, actual legislation, much of which was at best unnecessary and obstructive, and at worst, total euro-nonsense. Eventually, like many independents, she gave it up, and sold it to one of the big chains, who now dominate the childcare business, and are the only ones who can afford to employ the legal people to make sure that they are complying. I can see us independent repair agents being driven out of our businesses over the next few years for the same reasons ...

Arfa

Reply to
Arfa Daily

Lead-free solder joints do look grey. And they have poorer resistance to vibration induced failure AIUI.

If you use Sn-Pb solder to repair a board with PB-free you're *breaking the law* and Mr Lead Free Man may come along and fine you £5000 !

Graham

Reply to
Eeyore

Zinc ?

Graham

Reply to
Eeyore

Correct. He said 'lead-free'.

Graham

Reply to
Eeyore

Hi Graham. Agreed on the vibration thing. As far as the 'breaking the law bit goes, only if the equipment was " placed on the market " post July 2006. Equipment prior to that date *can* be repaired totally legally using any type of solder and components you like, *even* if it was originally constructed using lead-free and RoHS compliant components ... RoHS compliance, and maintenance of that compliance, is not required or enforcable on pre-July 2006 equipment.

Arfa

Reply to
Arfa Daily

Yes.

Some connectors and switches have been made using material (brass?) in which zinc may migrate from the pin into the solder joint, and form a ring of isolating zinc oxide. Using a magnifying glass one can see a thin grayish ring on the otherwise perfect solder joint.

My old Apple Macintosh plus had this problem in the deflection circuit where it would lose vertical deflection.

Resoldering the joint gave it a few more years before it happened again.

I also had a preamp with switches that suffered from this problem.

Thomas

Reply to
Thomas Tornblom

on

formatting link

Is this a leadfree product??? leadfree does not always look shiny and good. older formulations are not as good as todays. Hand soldering leadfree is an art form. Untrained workers that used lead products does not mean they know what they are doing. Must be retrained. I have been in manufacturing for 25 years and with leadfree its a bitch.

Reply to
bick

Reply to
Roy the Rebel

Pillocks indeed. It is an ill-thought-through piece of legislation intended to protect the environment from a threat which many of us believe did not exist from lead in its solder form, in the first place. It is a typical bit of euro-nonsense, but unfortunately, this "save the planet" hysteria, whilst being laudable in principle, and absolutely fine if applied with common sense, has now taken on almost the mantle of a religion, with green as its god, and anyone who goes against it is branded as a worthless heretic.

There are now euro-zealots in just about every local council, who pursue people through the courts for incorrect recycling or 'fly-tipping' for putting their garbage bins out on the footpath a day early, or placing stuff beside a locked bin at their local recycling centre and any number of other ridiculous things that I read about in the papers just about every day. It even now has its own name - "eco crime", and the perpetrators are "eco criminals".

So, whilst I agree with you 100%, I'm not sure that I want to become the first person to be pursued, persecuted, and ultimately treated to a £5000 fine, possible prison, and a criminal record, for using the 'wrong type' of solder. Like it or not, I guess that we've got to just follow the rules, until someone a lot more powerful than us, manages to prove that the whole thing is a pile of gonads. Otherwise, one of us is going to finish up like that poor greengrocer guy that stood up for his right to sell loose bananas to little old ladies, in pounds and ounces, and finished up pursued, villified, prosecuted and imprisoned, until the poor sod had a heart attack and died. Just this week, his stand has proved that it can be worth it, as the euro-crap which was going to force this ban on us totally from 2010, has now been dropped. But I for one, don't want to test the dubious strength of my heart, from the stress that would inevitably result from taking on these people, do you ?

Arfa

Reply to
Arfa Daily

Fortunately we now have the power of the internet. Pester the MPs with emails. Pester the "Greens" pester anyone you can think of. Email the newspapers. Tell everyone that this bloody madness has got to stop. I WILL NOT USE LEAD FREE SOLDER. This is not a "green" issue, its an electronics reliability issue. All the extra new equipment being produced to replace the failed stuff because of crap joints, not to mention houses burning down is NOT the way forward. Its time we put these legislative bird brains in their place. The revolution starts now!

Reply to
Roy the Rebel

In message , Arfa Daily writes

It appears that the reason for relenting was because they realised that this could affect trade with the USA who, of course, still use the imperial system (even if the do get some of the measurements wrong), and wouldn't accept things labelled only in metric. It's a long time since we had something to thank the Americans for. Ian.

Reply to
Ian Jackson

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.