开云体育

I had it forced on me at my day job. Partly due to the fact that we sold a lot of product to EU and other offshore customers. We retained some of our beloved 63/37 on the (valid) excuse that we serviced a 20 year old product line that was still in production and we needed both kinds of solder.

NASA has a web page devoted to this stuff which, among other things, hosts a paper that is a good send-up of the lead-free fiasco.



73

-Jim
NU0C

On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 12:28:41 -0800
"John Nightingale via " <if455kc=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

>? > Further to Prawlin's post: aquestion 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. FromPrawlin'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 wrote:
> > Thanks Erik. Just sending pic again hopefully at better resolution. If
> > you zoom a little, you can clearly see the places where the connector
> > legs originally were. I had only used the connector a few times and
> > had not knowingly exerted any excessive forces. Some insertion force
> > is unavoidable with that particular Jack design. I wonder if gentle
> > twisting of the Jack plug whilst inserting might reduce the risk? Then
> > again, it might increase the chances of the blobs fracturing by
> > twisting forces? Maybe adding a tiny dab of contact lube or silicon
> > grease might allow easier Jack insertion/removal? I’ve considered
> > carefully adding a tiny amount of thin cyano to bond the connector to
> > the PCB. It is unlikely to ever need replacing in the future (though I
> > can hear some groaning now as I write this)
> >
> > I still blame the lead free solder. I’m retired now but in my career
> > we lived through the introduction of lead free and it caused no end of
> > similar joint fracture problems.
> >
> > I’m glad the same didn’t happen with the USB C as that would likely
> > result in hard to fix or even unrepairable PCB (delaminating of those
> > tiny close pitch pins)!
> >
> > IMG_4115
> >?
> >> On 10 Feb 2024, at 15:05, Erik Kaashoek <erik@...> wrote:
> >>
> >> ?/g/tinysa/message/9042
> >> --
> >> Designer of the tinySA
> >> For more info go to ?
> >? ?



--

73

-Jim
NU0C