>>> how would Lasky be so certain such incidents never happened?<<< Murphy wrote: "Enough research will tend to support your conclusions" The RoHS "Do-Gooders" tend to be like the global warming "enthusiasts"...1. find research to support your pre-concieved opinion; 2. ignore that which does not; 3. shout down those who disagree; and, 4. discredit the messenger when they bring opposing truthful data that cannot be denied. (So far, most of then are at #2). RoHS failures are like medical failures...the evidence gets buried. Especially in consumer electronics. Except for us ham operators who like to keep equipment going 50+ years, the average consumer electronic product smaller than a 30" plasma is generally in the garbage by the time three years has rolled around, superceeded by "new and improved", or now boring to the owner. The industrial market COULD be a good source of actual life data...but no manufacturer will talk about THEIR failure rate! Electric utility equipment such as metering and relays used to have a life expectancy of 25+ years. With personnel retirements and newer blood in the workforce, TEN years is becoming acceptable. A lot if it isn't making THREE! Our lab regularly services control equipment that hasn't had need for service since it's installation during the LBJ administration. We are seeing a lot of gear into our lab whose 1 year warranty expired last month. I don't think we are really making progress as an industry... Shew ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Landman To: tin whiskers forum ; '(Leadfree Electronics Assembly Forum)' Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 6:37 PM Subject: [tinwhiskers] Lasky looks at RoHS 3 years later http://www.designnews.com/blog/Lead_Free_Zone_Blog/21260-Lasky_looks_at_RoHS_3_years_later.php Lasky looks at RoHS 3 years later August 18, 2009 "Dr. Ron Lasky put out a blog indicating that the transition to RoHS-compliant electronic components has been a success. In his blog, "RoHS 3 Years Later http://www.indium.com/blogs/Dr-Lasky-Blog/RoHS-3-Years-Later/20090726,12,3433/ ," Lasky - who has spent 10 years following the lead-free movement - notes that more than $1 trillion dollars worth of RoHS compliant electronics have been manufactured "without significant incident." He notes that the $1 trillion figure is derived by the total parts produced since the July 1, 2006 RoHS deadline and includes parts that go into countries that don't have RoHS laws. Since most component manufacturers did not run two lines of compliant and non-compliant parts, even parts going into areas without RoHS laws were RoHS compliant.He explains that part of the success of the RoHS conversion was the lack of hard monitoring by the European Union. The relaxed compliance atmosphere allowed the industry to make a smooth transition without interruptions in supply of electronic parts and finished goods." "Lasky also notes the unintended benefit of the RoHS conversion. "In third-world countries, electronics are recycled for usable electrical components and scrap metal," says Lasky. "Almost all of this recycling is performed unsafely. With RoHS-compliant products, this unsafe recycling will be done more safely."" Posted by Rob Spiegel http://www.designnews.com/blog/profile/8931-Rob_Spiegel.php on August 18, 2009 | How would Lasky know this to be true? Where's the data? Dr. Henning Leidecker at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21151552/wid/11915829/ has advised me that there are failures. NASA is sworn to disclose them or they would not be told about them. Catch 22. Why? Lawsuits, that's why! Has anyone died due to failures in Medtronic pacemakers (which were subject to an FDA recall due to tin whisker shorts)? http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/Inspections/InspectionGuides/InspectionTechnicalGuides/ucm072921.htm FDA does not say in this report. There is nothing in the open literature that I've been able to find. That leads me to conclude that the cases were settled out of court and the records sealed. Does anyone here know otherwise? According to this blog http://scadaperspective.com/pipermail/scada_scadaperspective.com/2008-June/000748.html there are failures (again, the company experiencing them is not mentioned): "... according to the factory manager of one of the largest industrial automation and embedded computing companies in the world, it isn't fiction. What they've done is increase infant mortality testing, heightened quality requirements, gone six sigma, and they are still seeing a sharp rise in warranty claims due to solder issues." Isn't 3 years too soon to tell? Three to five years is the expected time for whiskers to grow long enough to cause shorts. Lets not pop the champagne cork just yet. Se also http://www.calce.umd.edu/tin-whiskers/TINWHISKERFAILURES.pdf It is premature to suggest at this time that there have been no "significant incident" failures due to tin whiskers. Unless the persons doing the analysis knows how to detect them (10% of them are visible to the naked eye, the rest require magnified inspection and special lighting, knows where to look for them (presuming they are not vaporized in the shorting incident), how would Lasky be so certain such incidents never happened? Bob Landman, President Life Senior Member, IEEE IEEE Power & Energy/Reliability Societies IEEE Standards Association H&L Instruments, LLC www.hlinstruments.com/