Save
Email
Print
ShareScienceDaily (June 23, 2009) — Research carried out by a University of Leicester engineer aims to improve reliability of lead-free soldering alloys that are used to make electronic devices.
This attempt to take one more step towards implementing new environmentally-friendly materials in electronics production is supported by the Materials Research Group, Department of Engineering, University of Leicester.
Due to the considerable toxicity of lead, health concerns, environmental and legislation reasons efforts have been made to replace the traditional soldering alloys with new compositions. However, the reliability of the new Lead-Free materials requires further investigation.
Sergey Belyakov will be presenting his research at the Festival of Postgraduate Research which is taking place on the 25th June at the University of Leicester.
Belyakov said: “Traditional lead-based alloys have a 50 year history and there has been extensive investigation of their micro-structural stability and reliability.”
“New solder materials have been proposed to replace the traditional alloys but there may be a deterioration in the reliability of solder-joints and consequently, the reliability of a piece of electronic equipment.
“The objective of the research is to bridge the technical gaps and meet the challenges of lead-free solder application in the electronics industry through the fundamental understanding of lead-free assembly and reliability issues.
“The research also demonstrates the effect of lead-free solder alloy composition on the interfacial reactions and micro-structural features.”
Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:
Other bookmarking and sharing tools:
Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided by University of Leicester, via AlphaGalileo.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.
more 
