Soldering Lead Free Solder

Do you ever have a need for a "low temperature" solder (meaning an alloy that melts at less than 175C)?

You may have delicate components that cannot withstand standard reflow temperatures, or maybe you are looking to reduce costs by lowering the reflow temperature, or you may be step soldering.  Whatever your reason, there are two unique metals that are used extensively in low temperature solder alloys.

The first one I am sure you can guess: Indium.  The other one is Bismuth. While these two elements are used extensively in the over 100 alloys available in the 50C to 175C range, they couldn't be more different from each other.

Indium is a very soft, malleable metal and remains so even at cryogenic temperatures. It melts at 156C.  Bismuth, on the other hand, is very brittle, even at room temperature, and melts at 271C.  But both lend themselves very nicely to solder alloys that melt below 175C.

Let's look at the two most common alloys in these families.

The two alloys:

• 52In 48Sn (Indalloy #1E) Melts at 118C
• 58Bi 42Sn (Indalloy #281) Melts at 138C

What they have in common are:

• Both are lead-free
• Both are tin-based
• Both are eutectic (liquidus and solidus temperatures are the same, with no plastic range)
• Both can be made into a wide variety of solder forms and can be used in low temperature applications

But the indium-based alloy will give you better compensation of coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) mismatch than the bismuth alloy.  The bismuth alloy has greater tensile strength but has a lower shear strength than the indium alloy and is generally not recommended in applications where the product has potential to be dropped (like cell phones).  The indium alloy will give you greater thermal conductivity than the bismuth, as well.  The bismuth will give you a cost advantage.

So, which alloy do you use?  Well, that depends on the metallizations you are working with and the environment in which your final product will be operating. For example, if you are soldering to two different surfaces that expand at different rates, then you will want to go with the indium alloy - to keep your solder joints from cracking.  But, there are a lot more considerations when choosing a low temperature solder, and we can help you sort through them.  Check out our Low Temperature Solder page on the web or contact us at AskUs@indium.com or contact me directly at cgowans@indium.com and we can answer your questions or put you in touch with one of our local experts to review your entire process for the best solution.

Let us help!

Carol Gowans

Reducing the surface oxides of Nitinol is just the first step in getting a good solder joint with this versatile medical assembly material.

Next you have to choose the right solder alloy.  You will probably want to stay away from anything containing lead, cadmium, or antimony, particularly in medical applications.  And you will want something with a high tensile strength.

The best choice is Indalloy #121 (96.5Sn 3.5Ag).  It has a tensile strength of 5,620 PSI and a melting temperature of 221C and is obviously lead-free.  It wets well to the cleaned Nitinol.

If you need a higher melting temperature solder (one that can withstand autoclave temperatures for example) you should consider Indalloy #182 (80Au 20Sn) which melts at 280C, has a tensile strength of 40,000 PSI, and has long been considered a highly reliable solder.  Additionally, this alloy is available in very fine diameter solder wires to minimize waste.

Soldering temperatures should be 25C to 50C above the liquidus temperature of whichever solder you use and proper cleaning should be always be performed afterwards.

Contact us at medical@indium.com for more information about soldering for medical devices or visit our web site at www.indium.com/medical

Carol

I recently had a chance to catch up with a friend and colleague, Jasbir Bath. If you’ve spent time in the electronics assembly industry you have most likely met him, heard of him, or used an industry standard that he has helped create. Jasbir is a founding member of The Solar Engineering & Manufacturing Association,  SEMA. Who better to talk to about a new association than a founding member?

Jim: The Solar Engineering and Manufacturing Association (SEMA) is a relatively new association for engineers in the solar industry. Can you tell me a little about why it was created?

Jasbir: It was created about 2 years ago based on a need by the solar engineering/manufacturing base to address issues in the industry. There are many organizations in the solar industry but none are wholly dedicated to the engineering/manufacturing profession. SEMA was formed to address this need. We are working to address a number of gaps in the industry highlighted by the SEMA membership which include Education, Training, Standards, Reliability, Cost Reduction and Technology Gaps.

SEMA is a group of engineers, manufacturers and related professionals in the solar manufacturing and related disciplines who volunteer to conduct activities in the organization. The projects/programs we work on are driven by the active involvement of the membership.

Further details on SEMA and what we do can be found on the SEMA website at www.solar-ema.org

Our membership costs are low as we are not an organization looking to make a profit but to encourage participation and work to advance the solar industry as well as advancing education, training and collaboration within the solar manufacturing industries.

Jim: I heard there’s a new solar conference coming up? Can you tell me what makes this one different than all the other solar conferences we go to throughout the year?

Jasbir:  SEMA is collaborating with SMTA (Surface Mount Technology Association) to develop a conference meant for engineers and managers in the field to look at the areas of concern in the industry and develop ways to address them. We don’t see a similar conference to this which covers such a broad range of subjects which is specifically focused to address the needs of the industry. The program will consist of presentations and discussion covering the reliability testing of PV Modules covering gaps and where future work needs to be done. It will highlight various reliability programs being done in the industry with an assessment of current and evolving standards in manufacturing and reliability.

We are pleased to have a great line up of speakers and presentations. SEMA will present its reliability report assessing the reliability of PV modules at the conference. We will also have speakers from UL, IPC and NREL to discuss international solar standards together with a discussion of the work of the PV QA Task Force forum from leaders in that Task Force group. Areas covered will include temperature, humidity, voltage, mechanical and UV testing of PV modules and diode testing.

We will also have presentations on the reliability of microinverters/inverters and future trends from organizations including Sandia. PV Manufacturing Issues will be discussed by companies including Flextronics. The Global Solar Outlook will be reviewed by companies including Navigant, Custer Consulting and Prismark. Finally we will review general PV Module hazardous issues such as Electrical and Fire Concerns and well as Module Warranty/ Traceability Issues.

In addition we have industry leading training courses at the event on PV Module Manufacturing and Troubleshooting and PV Standards in addition to exhibitions.

The SEMA/SMTA Conference, Training Courses and Exhibition are from March 21^st to 23^rd at the Fairmont Hotel in San Jose. Further details on the program and sign up can be found at http://www.smta.org/solar/

Jim: One more question for you Jasbir. I know from working with you in different associations, that you are personally invested and involved in the future of module assembly. What attracted you to this field, and what keeps you interested in it?

Jasbir: I have been involved previously in the electronics manufacturing industry during the transition from tin-lead to lead-free soldering due to environmental legislation requirements. This was a challenge being involved in both from a technical and logistics perspective, but it was also fun as you saw the rewards of your efforts when the transition occurred successfully.

The solar/PV industry has challenges in addressing how to produce good quality and reliable products at lower cost, and it gives me the opportunity to try to make a positive contribution in an evolving expanding industry.

Jasbir and I look forward to seeing you in San Jose!

~Jim

Folks,

A reader writes:

My company makes an electronic product that requires a 40 year shelf life. We assemble with tin-lead solder on FR-4 PWBs. The product is to replace older technology (i.e. 1960-70s), but has some newer components such as BGAs, SOICs, and PQFPs. The product will be stored in dry nitrogen at 70F.  We take great care in manufacturing, by cleaning, inspecting, and testing the end product.

My question is, do you know of any studies that would discuss the reliability of products stored or in use for 40 years?

My sense is that our reader will be successful, but his question is profound and hard to answer with confidence. The military would like their electronics to perform for that long, but realistically much of it is replaced every ten years or so. If you look at something like the B-52 bomber, which debuted in 1952, the electronics have been upgraded regularly. So there isn’t as much 40 year electronics experience as one might think. An exception being the IBM AP-101 computer. This computer was kept in service for over 30 years, because it served its function and had survived the rigorous and expensive military qualification testing.

However, anecdotal data might support optimism for 40 year shelf life. In a class I teach at Dartmouth, The Technology of Everyday Things, I have sought out some old transistor radios from the late 1960s and early 70s to show the class how this old technology works. Anytime I have every found an old device like this, they always work, unless the batteries have leaked inside the radio.

This question raises an interesting thought. Although those of us in electronic assembly are concerned with tin-lead and lead-free solder joint life, what about the modern devices inside the components? Forty years is a long time. How will the 3D-22 nanometer copper circuit lines in a modern microprocessor hold up over this amount of time? These circuit lines lines are so fine that the 22 nanometer width is only about 70 atoms.  In addition, copper integrated circuits are still a relatively new technology. I’m sure much accelerated life testing has been done on such circuits, but would such testing confirm 40 years of shelf or service life?

I would appreciate any thoughts that readers have on these questions.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Two categories of solder are available to choose from when the in-service environment for a device reaches above 125°C either in continuous operation or thermal cycling accelerated life testing. These categories are those comprised primarily of lead, and those of gold. From the electronics industry’s drive to eliminate lead, many manufacturers who have traditionally used lead solders are treading cautiously, looking now at the gold solders, primarily at Indalloy 182 (80Au20Sn).

The most common concern regarding this switch relates to the strength of AuSn, which is much higher than the lead solders. The degree that this should be of concern however, should be realized within the scope of the application.

For instance, review this case scenario:

Indalloy 159 (90Pb10Sn) was used in a device for years to adhere high temperature sensors to a calibration probe that is slowly cycled in operation from 350K (~75°C) to 500K (~225°C). The solder joins a nickel and gold plated Kovar™, or platinum or platinum coated, nickel lead to a tinned copper lead. The solder joint is not placed under tension or shocked.

Considering the high temperature solder options in this scenario, the AuSn would be mechanically preferred.

Why?

Well, tin-bearing soft solders will leach gold from gold metallizations during soldering, creating a brittle Au-Sn intermetallic layer within the solder joint. The more gold available, the more consumed, and the greater the thickness of the resultant intermetallic layer. The brittle nature of this layer, situated intimately next to the relatively soft PbSn solder layer, creates differential stresses that promote crack propagation upon thermal cycling.

AuSn was not considered previously because the engineers were familiar with its hardness and, given the cracking failure described using a softer solder, they did not anticipate improvement. It was a pleasant surprise to them to find that switching to a lead-free solder would not sacrifice the quality of their device. AuSn is a brittle alloy but, unlike the description above, no differential stresses are involved. 

Note: Eutectic gold solders have been used for many years to solder nickel plated Kovar™ lids to high reliability ceramic packages and have a good history of fatigue performance.

Folks,

I thought I would post a few short thoughts as the new year begins. Here it goes:

1.    A billion hours ago the stone-age was the future, a billion minutes ago Caesar ruled Rome, a billion seconds ago Jimmy Carter was President, a billion passives ago you took your last break (about 4 hours ago). As exciting as the latest quad core microprocessor is, the largest number of components that we assemble is passives, approaching two trillion per year. That is about 6 billion a day. If you lined up all of the 7 billion people in the world, each year you could give every man, woman and child several hundred passives from all of the passives that are produced. If two trillion passives (assume 0402s) were lined up end to end they would circle the earth 50 times!

2.    Schools in Indiana are no longer required to teach cursive writing. Key board skills are considered more important.  Yikes! I’m all for keyboard skills, but I want my grandkids to be able to write in cursive. If not, how do they write their names? Are we less than a generation away from people writing their names as an “X?”

3.    Thoughts on lead-free solder reliability in long term mission critical environments from a NASA study:

        “Test vehicles assembled with lead-free materials (notably tin-silver-copper) exhibited lower reliability under some test conditions.”

Some people would respond to this statement by saying, “I told you that lead-free solder was no good.” However, another way of stating the results would be, “Lead-free solder performed better in more tests than tin-lead solder did.” The ratio, by my count, was about 5 to 3 in favor of lead-free. However, I agree that lead-free is not ready for mission critical (>20-year) service life. The main reason being that, in some cases, when lead-free solder joints failed in these types of studies, the results were much, much worse than tin-lead solder joints. These failure modes need to be understood and addressed. In addition, tin whiskers and pad cratering are looming problems in these, mission critical, long service life quadrant D applications as discussed in the Navy's Manhattan Project (http://www.navyb2pcoe.org/pdf/LFEMP_book.pdf).

4.    SACM has arrived. SACM is a SAC105 alloy that is doped with manganese. Work performed on SACM by Liu, Lee, et al was reported in a May 2009 ECTC paper, Achieving High Reliability Low Cost Lead-Free SAC Solder Joints Via Mn Or Ce Doping. The thorough testing reported in this paper suggests that SACM has promise as a material candidate for quadrant D applications mentioned in #3. In explaining the superior performance of this material the authors state:

“The mechanism for high drop performance and high thermal cycling reliability can be attributed to a stabilized microstructure, with uniform distribution of fine IMC particles, presumably through the inclusion of Mn or Ce in the IMC.”

We have had to wait awhile for this material to become commercially available as it is a challenge to manufacture doped solders like this in large quantities.  I think this paper should be on you "must read" list.

5.   I had not planned on reading Steve Job’s biography , as I thought I knew quite a bit about him from reading recent articles in Forbes, Fortune and Business Week. But I went ahead and downloaded it to my Kindle anyway. This work by Walter Isaacson is a masterpiece. To share one tidbit from it that relates to those of us in electronic assembly: 

"In almost all cases electrical engineers first design the circuits that perform the functions of some device like a mobile phone or tablet. Mechanical Engineers are then left to fit the circuits into the “box.” (Hence MEs are often called “box stuffers” by EEs). Jobs completely changed this approach. He told the engineering team how he wanted the product to look and function first, then they had to determine how to make it work that way. I’m convinced that only through this approach are the revolutionary design concepts that Jobs and Apple came up with possible."

The book also points out his many flaws (e.g. Jobs would regularly park in handicap spots, the author reports several times that Jobs just didn’t think the rules applied to him, etc.). Another interesting thought (read it and see if you agree with me) that if Steve was not Paul Jobs' adopted son, Apple would have never happened.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Folks,

I’m taking a few moments from Wassail Weekend , held annually in my village, Woodstock VT, “The prettiest small town in America”, to write a post about last week’s workshops at ACI.

Indium colleague Ed Briggs and I gave a 3 hour presentation on “Lead-Free Assembly for High Yields and Reliability.” I think Ed’s analysis of “graping” and the “head-in-pillow” defect is the best around. 

There was quite a bit of discussion on the challenges faced by solder paste flux in the new world of lead-free solder paste and miniaturized components (i.e. very small solder paste deposits.) One of the hottest topics was nitrogen and lead-free SMT assembly. There seemed to be uniform agreement that solder paste users should be able to demand that their lead-free solder paste perform well with any PWB pad finish (e.g. OSP Immersion silver, electroless nickel gold, etc.) without the use of nitrogen. Not only does using nitrogen cost money, but it will usually make tombstoning worse. However, in the opinion of most people, nitrogen is a must for wave soldering and, since it minimizes dross development, it likely pays for itself.

After Ed and I finished, Fred Dimock, of BTU, gave one of the best talks I have ever experienced on reflow soldering. He discussed thermal profiling in detail, including the importance of assuring that thermocouples are not oxidized (when oxidized they lose accuracy). He also discussed a reflow oven design that minimizes temperature overshoot during heating, and undershoot when the heater is off. Understanding these topics is critical with the tight temperature control that many lead-free assemblers face.

Fred Verdi of ACI finished the meeting with an excellent presentation on “Pb-free Electronics for Aerospace and Defense.” Fred’s talk discussed the work that went into the “Manhattan Project.” A free download of the entire project report is available.

There appears to be agreement that acceptable lead-free reliability has been established for consumer products with lifetimes of 5 years or so, but not for military/aerospace electronics where lifetimes can be up to 40 years in harsh service conditions. These vast product lifetime and consequences of failure differences are depicted in the Fred's chart (above). Commercial products are in quadrant A and military/aerospace products in quadrant D.

One of the greatest risks faced by quadrant D products is tin whiskers. Fred spent quite a bit of time discussing this interesting phenomenon. One of the challenges of this risk is that there is no way to accelerate it, so you can’t do an equivalent test to accelerated thermal cycling or drop shock. Fred mentioned that there have now been verified tin whisker fails, the Toyota accelerator mechanism being a confirmed one.

In addition to tin whiskers, lead-free reliability for quadrant D products (with a service life of up to 40 years) in thermal cycle and other areas remains a concern.  I mention that tin pest was not on the list of issues for this quadrant.

Fred and the Manhattan Project Team have identified many "gaps" that need to be addressed to determine and mitigate the risk of lead-free assembly for quadrant D products.  They plan to start this approximately $100M program in 2013.

For those that missed this free workshop, ACI host Mike Prestoy is planning another one in 6 months.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Here is a list of tricks to help you overcome the issues that can arise while hand soldering silicon-based solar cells (and other applications as well). Some of these ideas are obvious for most, but all the suggestions can help you form a better solder joint - and build a better final product:

1)    Use the correct soldering tip. I’ve made the mistake of using an inappropriate solder tip before, and so have many of my customers. It’s a frustrating problem you will only let happen to you once: everything is set up perfectly but nothing will melt, until you notice the solder tip is not the correct size or shape. This has happened to many of my customers who were initially using cone point soldering tips when they were working with 2mm wide solder coated tabbing ribbon. Simply changing the tip to a 2mm wide chisel point made all the difference, and promoted soldering readily. Why such a big difference in performance? The chisel tip allows heat to flow across the ribbon, instead of only heating a single point. More heat flow = more heat in your solder joint.

2)    Pre-tin the soldering iron. Just as an appropriately sized soldering tip will distribute heat across the soldering surface, a bit of molten alloy can help create a thermal interface to maximize heat transfer. Remember to melt a small amount of solder onto the tip of your iron before soldering, and be sure it’s the same alloy you are soldering with. (Leave the custom alloying to us ;)

3)    Consider the alloy you are soldering. All the heat your typical soldering iron can produce will not be enough to melt some of the highest temperature alloys. Be sure to have a good understanding of the alloy you have selected. In some cases with low-temperature alloys (like bismuth or indium alloys), excessive soldering temperature can de-wet the alloy and char low temperature fluxes.

4)    Use the correct flux. Fluxes are quite different, I’ve spent my entire soldering career trying to get that point across. There are fluxes for high temperatures or low temperatures, cleaning with water or not cleaning at all. There are specialty fluxes for specialty alloys and there are fluxes for different soldering surfaces. Use the correct flux. If you don’t know what the best flux for the application is - just ask; that’s what I am here for.

5)    Use a bottom side heater. Silicon is known to pull heat away – that c-Si solar cell that needs to be soldered is a heatsink! Some solder equipment vendors also provide underside heating pads to help prevent excessive heat loss.

6)    Keep your soldering iron clean. That black crud that builds up on your soldering iron tip, it’s not helping you form a good solder joint. Those oxides and charred flux residues can easily be removed by wiping the hot iron across the wet sponge (that should be at your soldering station). A clean tip will lead to better heat transfer, and it will make the fluxes you use more effective.

This is the soldering station I use, it’s a PS-900 supplied by OK International. Just about any soldering iron will work, but they won’t all work as well – or come with as good support.

I’m still learning all the tricks to hand soldering, so feel free to share any you have learned over the years!

~Jim

Folks,

The Guadalajara (GDL), MX Chapter of the SMTA held their first meeting on November 9 and 10 at CETI in GDL.
Approximately 70 engineers from local companies attended. It was a great success. 

The agenda was:

November 9^th, 2011

0830-0900am    Registration and Exhibits Open

0900-0915am    Welcoming Remarks and Exhibition starts

0915-1045am    Inventec: “Reliability Assessment regarding Flux residues"

1045-1215pm    Sanmina-SCI: “Capabilities of a Failure Analysis Lab”

1215-1315pm    LUNCH

1315-1445pm    DEK: "Optimizing the Print Process for Mixed Technology"

1445 -1615pm   Vitronics Soltec: “How to Choose a Robust Configuration for Equipment
                          for Defect Free Soldering - Reflow, Wave and Selective”

1615-1745pm    KIC: “Fixing Reflow and Wave Related Defects as Well as How to Avoid 
                          Them in the First Place”

 November 10^th, 2011

0900-1030am    Sanmina-SCI: “Process development of 01005 components”

1030-1200pm    Indium: "Lead-Free Assembly for High Yields and Reliability."

1200-1300pm    LUNCH

1300-1430pm    Universal Instruments: "Tutorial on Failure Analysis"

1430-1600pm    Zestron: “PCB cleaning before conformal coating”

1600-1730pm    Kester: “Understanding Soldering Chemistries - Reducing Costly
                          Defects, Increasing Yields and Reliability.

I spoke on “Lead-Free Assembly for High Yields and Reliability." We had several raffles and gave away autographed copies of my book “The Adventures of Patty and the Professor,” which has just recently been formally published. 

As usual, I had dinner at Santo Coyote, one of my favorite restaurants, however my Mexican friends also took me to Sacromonte, claiming it had better food. They were correct. I was convinced to try chicken mole which I liked. It is tough to beat Santo Coyote’s ambiance, however.

I can’t cite data for this, but I am quite sure that GDL has the largest number of workers in electronics assembly outside of Asia. It is great news that they now have an SMTA chapter to help the local engineers network and continue to grow in their skills.  It was great to play a small part in this success, but most of the credit must go to Indium Corporation’s Ivan Castellanos who is chapter president and Kester’s Miguel Vazquez, chapter vice president.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Folks,

Some time ago, I mentioned that I was working on a consensus of the status of lead-free/RoHS compliant assembly. My hope is to find data and facts that will support the consensus. I am making progress, but at this time I would like to share the subtopics in the consensus. Look them over and see what you think:

1.       Was/Is lead-free electronics/RoHS needed to protect the environment?

2.      Is lead-free solder easier and safer to recycle than lead-containing solder?

3.      How has the increased use of tin and silver affected their supply and price?

4.      How much did it cost to implement lead-free/RoHS compliant electronics?

a.      What is the cost adder to a typical lead-free product?

5.      What are the process challenges of lead-free assembly?

a.      Are these challenges being addressed?

b.      If so, how?

6.        What is the reliability of lead-free vs leaded electronics for commercial applications?

a.      E.g. 0C to 100C thermal cycle, drop shock

7.        What is the reliability of lead-free vs leaded electronics for harsh environment/military applications?

a.      E.g. -55C to 125C thermal cycle, other Mil stress tests

8.      What is the threat of tin whiskers, tin pest and other similar lead-free related reliability phenomena?

9.      What is the status and need for halogen-free assembly?

Help me by suggesting topics that I have left out.     
Contact info here.
Cheers,
Dr. Ron

Folks,

In a recent posting we discussed that the higher melting temperatures of lead-free solder require reflow soldering temperatures to be higher, thus more electricity is used in lead-free assembly. However, as we calculated, this increased use of electricity is very small compared to all electricity used in the world.

An additional concern that some have voiced is the claim that RoHS, with its lead-free requirement, actually makes the environment worse because more tin and silver is used in lead-free solders.   They argue that the increased use of these metals, creates mining pollution and has driven the price of these metals sky high. Let’s examine these claims.

Prismark has estimated that approximately 90,000 tons of solder are used in electronics, with about 80,000 used in wave soldering and 10,000 tons for SMT soldering. It is important to remember that electronics solder is a subset of all solder. All solder (alloys for brazing pipes etc) uses about 190,000 tons of tin. Solder is the single largest user of tin. See Figure 1. 

Figure 1. Solder is the largest end use of tin. Tin is the base material for almost all solders. 

If tin-lead solder were still used predominantly, approximately 57,000 tons of tin (90,000 x 63% tin) would be used annually. With lead-free solder, about 88,000 tons (90,000 x 98% tin) of tin are used per year. This is an apparent increase of about 30,000 MT of tin used each year. However, an interesting thing to consider is that lead-free solder is about 14% lighter than tin-lead solder. Knowing that, and knowing that solder used in wave soldering (remember wave soldering accounts for almost 90% of all solder used in electronics assembly) is consumed by volume not weight (i.e. assuming approximately the same fillet size), about half of this increase is canceled out. 

This is all a bit confusing however, so it may be best to just to look at tin use. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), about 300,000 tons of tin are mined each year. Figure 2 is a graph of world tin production at mines per year (this graph does not show recycled tin.)  The amount of refined tin used each year in the US is depicted in Figure 3. Figure 3 includes about 15,000 tons a year of recycled tin. Recycling solder is very cost effective. Scott Mazur just pointed out (Printed Circuit Design and Fab and Circuits Assembly, p 36, August 2011), that recycling solder dross is 10 times as cost effective as recycling aluminum cans.

Looking at these graphs, it is hard to say that the amount of tin used has gone up since RoHS. It would appear that tin use is likely more affected by the economy and that it is really difficult to see an effect from RoHS’s July 2006 enactment.

Figure 2. World Tin Production at Mines. 

Most wave soldering solders have low or no silver. So, about 3% of the 10,000 tons of SMT solder, or 300 MTs of silver, are used in electronics. This is about 1.5% of the 22,000 MTs of silver produced each year. Silver use in electronics does not make anyone’s list of top silver usage.

Figure 3. US consumption of tin has decreased since RoHS was enacted.

So electronics solder use since RoHS has not caused tin use to increase, nor is it a significant factor in silver use. Therefore it is highly unlikely that electronics' use of tin or silver has been a prime driver in their stunning price increases in 2011.

 Folks,

In gathering information on the status of lead-free soldering, some helpful friends pointed out two great sources of information: NASA and The Navy. NASA sponsored an impressive lead-free reliability investigation: "Lead-Free Solder Testing for High Reliability Project 1." This project is finished and the reports are online. There is a follow-on project: NASA DOD Lead-Free Electronics Project 2 which is currently underway. The Navy sponsored a project with ACI and the summary is here. I am currently studying these documents to help develop the consensus.  Some preliminary info follows:

Regarding -20^°C to +80^°C thermal cycling, NASA concluded:

“Under the conditions of this test, Sn3.9Ag0.6Cu (SAC) and Sn3.4Ag1.0Cu3.3Bi (SACB) were always more reliable than eutectic SnPb regardless of component type (CLCC, TSOP, BGA or TQFP).

It has been shown that conditions that highly stress the solder joints by maximizing the CTE difference between the PWB and the component will favor SnPb over SAC6. Conversely, conditions that minimize the stress put on the solder joints (e.g., compliant components such as BGA’s and/or a thermal cycle with a small delta T) will favor SAC over SnPb. The current test falls into the latter category and we can say with some confidence that the lead-free alloys tested will outperform eutectic SnPb under field conditions that are even less stressful than the -20 to +80^°C thermal cycle test conditions.”

For -55^°C to +125^°C thermal cycling, the conclusions were more cautious, likely because the data were mixed:

“The feasibility of using Pbfree solder alloys in place of SnPb solder alloys for new product designs was demonstrated under thermal cycle test conditions. Additional investigation and characterization of Pbfree solder alloys will be required as a segment of a Pbfree solder alloy implementation plan. The application/introduction of Pb-free soldering processes for legacy product designs is not recommended without extensive materials characterization and product design review.”

These results seem to be consistent with what others report, lead-free assembly produces good thermal cycle results for commercial-type thermal cycling, but the results are mixed for harsh environment thermal cycling.

Folks,

Recently I posted a note about a flurry of Technet posts in which I was misquoted regarding the status of lead-free electronics assembly.  Harvey Miller then weighed in.  I responded. And this in turn raised more comments.

All of this caused me to wonder, is it possible to achieve a consensus on the state of Pb-free assembly?  I think it might be and am going to try.  The main thing that I think is important in this quest is that any points for the consensus, or lack thereof, be supported by data and analysis, not emotion.

If you have a point to add, that is backed by data and analysis, please share it with me.  One of the things I hope to accomplish is to develop a list of references, that can be referred to to support the consensus.

Stay tuned for more info on this effort.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Folks,

An obvious disadvantage of lead-free electronics soldering assembly is that the oven must be hotter and therefore will use more electricity (versus 63Sn37Pb soldering). But is the extra amount of electricity significant? Bill O’’Leary claims that a typical SMT oven uses $7K of electricity a year at $0.072/Kilowatt hour (Kwh) or about 100,000 Kwh. That number strikes me as about right, as a household uses about 5-20,000 Kwh per year.

In the late 1990s there were 35,000 SMT lines in the world, at a 3% growth rate that would be about 50,000 lines now. So worldwide SMT reflow oven use would be about 5E9 KWhr (50,000 ovens x 100,000 Kwh/per year) world wide.  

With most heat loss be due to convection, the increase in energy use will be approximately proportional to the difference between the oven temperature and the room temperature (25C). An oven processing tin-lead solder would run at about 210C versus lead-free’s 250C. So the added energy for a lead-free oven would be about (250-25)/(210-25) or about 22% more. So if all assembly lines in the world are SMT the added energy use would be about 0.22x 5E9 Kwh = 1E9 Kwh. The cost of this extra electricity would be about $100 million (US) at $0.10/ Kwh. The electronics industry generates about $1.5 trillion in sales. So this added cost would be about 0.0067% of sales. Since world electrical use is about 150,000 E9 Kwhr per year, this increase is about 1/150,000 of all of the electrical use or 0.00067%.

So although more electricity is used, the increase is not significant to the value of the electronics sold or the total world use of electricity.

Thinking about higher temperatures reminds me that my Indium Corporation colleague Dr. Ning-Cheng Lee is presenting a paper this week on a high melting temperature lead-free solder based on a BiAgX alloy system. Higher melting temperature solders are often needed in what is referred to as a solder hierarchy. Solder hierarchies have solders that melt at decreasing temperatures in multiple soldering steps, starting with the highest melting solder.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Folks,

It was five years ago today that RoHS was launched, amid concerns that the world of electronics would collapse due to the many challenges of lead-free (Pb-free) soldering. Well, we have five years of field data with no “the sky is falling” lead-free reliability events. But, has it been just five years?

No. As I mentioned in a recent post, Motorola implemented lead-free soldering around 2001 to take advantage of lead-free solder’s poorer spreading.  Hmmmm,  so it has been ten years! Not too bad!

Well it is actually better than that. SnAg3.5 solder has been used for decades in both:

1.     Step soldering:  with a eutectic temperature of 221C, SnAg3.5 can be used as the step previous to soldering with Sn63 or similar Pb-Free solder. The principle is to solder first with the SnAg3.5 and then with a lower melting temperature solder. The second soldering step is performed at a lower temperature, therefore not disturbing the SnAg3.5 solder joint or bond. 

2.      Mid-Temp Pb-Free alloy:  when a solder that melts somewhat above the melting point of a “standard” solder alloy is needed, and it must be Pb-free, SnAg3.5 is often the choice.  The automotive industry has used SnAg3.5 in these applications for decades.

While I still agree that lead-free solders need some time and experience, especially in harsh environments, to establish acceptable reliability for mission critical applications, the experience with SnAg3.5 is adding to lead-free solder’s reliability portfolio.

This information came to light with the recent announcement by a major solder materials supplier that they would no longer supply SnAg3.5. But take heart, Indium Corporation still supplies SnAg3.5.  

• High thermal conductivity (33W/mK)
• Higher melting point than SAC alloys (221C)
• Low tensile stress, so suitable for large die (5800psi)
• Excellent thermal cycling properties (-55 to 125C)

1.  Preform (a specially-shaped solder piece) with TACflux® used to hold the preform and die in place
2.  Solder paste, which holds the die in place with no extra materials added 
3.  Soft solder die-attach wire, a fluxless type of solder wire, which is melted onto the substrate metallization under an inert cover gas, and the die directly mounted onto the molten solder pool, then allowed to cool.

Folks,

Here is an interesting turn of events related to the reliability of lead-free (Pb-free) soldering reliability. 

I was reminded recently by something Carl Sagan said, or, actually, did not say: Billions and Billions Although this term is strongly associated with him, he never said it. Sagan believed that this term was connected to him because Johnny Carson mimicked him and used the term.

 
Although not even close to being in Sagan's league, I find that I am now equally unfairly associated with the term,  "lead-free solder is a grand success." This came about in an interview by Rob Speigel, which he summarized in a blog post.

In reading Speigel's post, you will see that,  "lead-free solder is a grand success," is Rob’s term, not mine. Well, Rob's post resulted in a string of postings on IPC’s Technet .

One person opined:

Irresponsible statements like "lead-free solder is a grand success" should NOT be ignored. Those who make such statements in the face of all of the contrary evidence should be noted, and treated as motivated only by greed. Lead-free soldering certainly has been known for many "thousand$" of successes.

I have learned that it is not even worth the bother to refute such statements with those who make them. It may be a "grand success" for PhDs who contract to solder paste companies, but it certainly has not been a "grand success" to literally thousands of companies dealing with the reliability elephant sitting in the room getting larger by the day, and the associated fallout as a result.

Ouch!

Another shared:

I disagree with the stated and implied affect of RoHS, on PWBs expressed in this article. Lead free assembly reduces reliability by 50%. There can be no doubt about that. There are too many studies that confirm lead free assembly significantly degrades reliability. There are so many studies that demonstrate a reduction in reliability that Rod's contention is almost laughable. We are now faced with increased failures of copper interconnections and dielectric material due to high assembly temperatures. There is an increase in crazing that can support CAF, significant copper dissolution, and cratering in assembly, Switching to lead free in most HDI applications is a significant challenge. Lead free assembly has a profound affect by degrading PWB's organic component (epoxy) due the temperature required and copper interconnection and also the exaggeration of the z-axis expansion of the dielectric.

I have asked for copies of the many reliability studies referred to. No response yet.

Finally someone hit the heart of the matter:

I'm curious if "grand success" were Dr.Lasky's words or Rob Spiegel's editorializing. Lasky does mention the lack of long term results, and Speigel, in the comments,  enumerates a number of reliability problems. ISTM that neither truly believes  those words.

Correct!, Thanks. 

Here was my response that I posted on Technet:

Folks,

Pete is correct. I never said lead-free implementation was a grand success. These were Rob's words in his blog post. 

I have said repeatedly that adequate lead-free reliability has been demonstrated for consumer products like mobile phones, PCs, portable electronics with service lives less than 5 years. This level of reliability has been demonstrated in numerous studies and more importantly with field data. Vahid Goudarzi, of Motorola, stated that field reliability of lead-free assembled mobile phones has been equal or better than leaded assembly units. His data go back to 2001 (not 2006. Motorola started early for reasons discussed below).

 The reason Motorola shipped early with lead-free products is due to the fact that lead-free solder does not spread as well. Because of this poorer spreading, Motorola was able to decrease lead spacings without getting shorts, thus increasing the amount of electrical function in a smaller space. Since increased function in a smaller space is the defining attribute of portable electronics, the importance of this lead-free advantage cannot be overstated. Admittedly, lead-free's poorer wetting is a challenge in other regards, especially hole fill in wave soldering, but the Motorola Droid X2 could not be assembled with leaded solder, there would be too many shorts. Since the packaging density of the iPhone and similar devices is on a par with the Droid X2, I suspect this statement is true for most mobile products.

I have also repeatedly stated that lead-free reliability for long term service, mission critical devices has not been demonstrated. As a result, these types of devices should not consider lead-free solder at this date.

I regularly discuss these topics in my blog (http://blogs.indium.com/blog/an-interview-with-the-professor). The most recent post shows a striking photo of leaded solders spreading -which is too "good" for portable electronics.

Cheers,

Dr, Ron