dknguyen said:You only need 3% lead to stop whiskering. THe temperature thing is a pain in the ass though.
The maximum permitted concentrations are 0.1% or 1000 ppm (except for cadmium, which is limited to 0.01% or 100 ppm) by weight of homogeneous material. This means that the limits do not apply to the weight of the finished product, or even to a component, but to any single substance that could (theoretically) be separated mechanically—for example, the sheath on a cable or the tinning on a component lead.
speakerguy79 said:What is your take on the restrictions on lead used in solder and electronics components enacted by RoHS? Is it an effective and worthwhile policy, is it grossly flawed, or somewhere in between?
I know this sort of ventures into politics, but I've been doing a lot of reading on it lately and it's something that could have a dramatic effect on both the environment and industry.
jpanhalt said:My fear is that tin solder is a quick substitute, like the egr and other gimmicks, that did not work well in the long run. The difference is that electronics are used as critical components in many systems on which lives depend, and there is no practical back up. Moreover, such devices made today, will be around for many years.
John
fingaz said:ROHS restrictions do not apply to MEDICAL, MILITARY, or AEROSPACE devices.
Article 2.3 of the WEEE Directive states that equipment connected with national security or military purposes is excluded from the scope of the directive. However, the RoHS Directive does not grant a similar exemption, but the governments current position is...[that the WEEE exemption applies to RoHS though not explicitly stated].
This review [of possible exemptions] will be completed in 2006 and in the opinion of Paul Goodman at ERA Technologies, will eventually be included in the scope of RoHS although not until at least 2008 and more likely 2010.
jpanhalt said:Could you provide the citation for that?
I did a little searching and found that like so many regulations, implementation differs from intent. There are delays, amendments, and re-interpretations. Moreover, the government often doesn't follow the rules it writes.
Here are a few citations:
**broken link removed**
Another source stated in its Q&A:
From this brief review, it is unclear whether the so-called exemptions are based on questions of reliability and service or just a realization of the practical difficulty of dealing with so many small-volume, extremely specialized parts.
As a consumer, I have observed that non-RoHS parts are often more expensive and that a lot of medical equipment and devices is being converted or has converted. At the very least, it is using RoHS components, because equivalent non-RoHS components have disappeared from the market. Similarly, one finds replacement of components in aerospace. I don't know about the military (American), but then it uses Mil spec's that are decades old and cost is not a deterrent.
John
It's like asbestos. Lead and asbestos- the two most amazing and useful substances known to mankind that do just about everything...for a price. I suppose cadmium is also on the list.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?