Keyboard Shortcuts
Likes
Search
Lead free solder and q.c.
开云体育
> Further to Prawlin's post: a question for the q.c. engineers present. > In the long long ago this writer, doing bench repairs of high end transceivers for a big company, had imposed upon him the use of lead free solder. That lead to bitter complaints until, a couple of months later, the same "little man" who had confiscated our good old eutectic solder had come around again with his cart and had taken back the lead free solder and replaced that with rolls of the lead containing eutectic solder that we knew so well. The arrogant V.P. of Q.C., who would not listen, had been forced to climb down! > Lead free solder had become
"fashionable" in his professional circle and he was going to
thrust it upon us. He had probably never made a quick, competent
and shiny solder joint in his life; a degree is not enough.
Fortunately, some of the very senior engineers in the company,
one a ham of the old school, "had dirt under their finger nails"
and knew a good solder joint when they saw it. > Now many of us on this list will know
the nuisance lead free solder was in earlier days. From Prawlin's post it appears that the problems
have not all been resolved. The stuff might be alright for
equipment down at the consumer level. The question that arises
is what high end users specify today. What does the N.A.S.A. the
European Space Agency and any operation engaged in making man
rated systems do to ensure reliable joints? Should we ordinary
mortals, soured by early experience, be attempting to use lead
free solder? Is it today as good as Kester 44 eutectic and
similar? > Those of us in the know about lead
free solder in its early days would not care to board a space
vehicle or even a commercial aircraft relying on what we knew at
the time as lead free solder. The passengers on the "Gimli
Glider" and others involved learned about solder joints that
come apart. > John, > at radio station VE7AOV. ++++++++
On 2024-02-10 08:35, Prawlin via
groups.io wrote:
--
|