No more International Recitifier

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Member
Joined 2003
Paid Member
Since IR has been bought out by Vishay, its a little tougher to come by IR parts. Fairchild's crossover for the IRFP240 is FQA19N20C which seems to look better as far as datasheets go. I seem to remember Nelson saying he prefers Fairchild over IR. What do you think?


and the complement for the F4 builders.
FQA12P20
FQAF12P20

FQA12P20
FQA19N20C
 
MEGA-amp said:
Since IR has been bought out by Vishay, its a little tougher to come by IR parts.


Maybe you could 'splain that to us -- there are thousands of IRF devices available at Digikey, Allied, Newark, Future etc. -- there is a changeover going on (just as at On Semi) with lead free devices supplanting their parents so the devices will have the suffix "PBF".
 
Re: Re: No more International Recitifier

jackinnj said:



Maybe you could 'splain that to us -- there are thousands of IRF devices available at Digikey, Allied, Newark, Future etc. -- there is a changeover going on (just as at On Semi) with lead free devices supplanting their parents so the devices will have the suffix "PBF".


Oh yes the poor quality joint and tin whisker, short circuit encouraging leading to throw away electronics and buy new every year when stuff dies as the internally, poorly attached Parts Break Free, PBF conspiracy.
 
I've heard a great deal of near-hysteria over the shift to lead free parts and solder, but have seen no evidence to indicate that such an extreme viewpoint is warranted.
Everyone I have spoken to around here is terrified of lead-free solder, yet they can't give a single instance where the sky actually fell on Chicken Little's head. They all lapse into vague hand waving, "something might go wrong twenty years from now," "it's not the way my grandfather did it" noises.
Harrumph.
I'm going to reserve judgment until I see a consistent pattern of failures that can be inescapably linked to new lead free parts and/or solder. So far, the only complaint that can be substantiated is that things are more expensive. Hell, I can live with that if it keeps lead out of the aquifer around here. There was a Super Fund site less than a mile from my old house. Try it sometime...it's an uneasy feeling. I'm not anxious to leave any time bombs that my children will have to face when they get older. If paying a dollar more for solder is all it takes, then I will pay the dollar. I can afford a buck.

Grey
 
jackinnj said:
the U.S. D.O.D. has not sanctioned lead-free components.

The military has done little to impress me lately. I don't intend to loose any sleep over their approval--or lack of same--of solder and parts.
I buy some MILSPEC parts, but mostly stuff that's not. The things I buy that are MILSPEC aren't chosen with that in mind--they just happen to fit my needs. I'd be buying the same parts either way.


MEGA-amp said:
leaded or unleaded...whatever. IRFP240 vs FQA19N20C?


Actually, it's pretty much a moot point. The IRF parts are available. The Fairchild ones are not. If you want to build something, you'll have to use IRF parts for the time being.
Incidentally, given that the FQA19N20C is a relatively new part, I would not be surprised to see Fairchild come out with an updated P-ch complement.

Grey
 
GRollins said:
I've heard a great deal of near-hysteria over the shift to lead free parts and solder, but have seen no evidence to indicate that such an extreme viewpoint is warranted.

Grey

Grey,

Here ya go.

http://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/background/#q6

I think the switch to lead free solder for the electronics industry is a hoax to make a few people rich....again. Consider that one improperly disposed of car battery will counter the ecological efforts of the no lead solder in domestic electronics industry for what, 10 years?

More smoke and mirrors folks, only now the mirrors grow whiskers and can short out, creating yet more smoke. :smash:
 
Virtually every statement in that link gives conflicting information--which they're graceful enough to admit. More to the point, I did not see any analysis of failure rates. Is it every device, one in ten, one in a hundred, one in a thousand...?
I repeat: I have yet to see evidence that leads me to believe that such an extreme viewpoint is warranted.
To say that one improperly disposed-of car battery negates the effect of lead free components and solder is poor logic. It's like saying that one improperly installed shingle negates the benefit of an entire roof. Yes, you may have a leak as a result, but a roof with a leak is still better than no roof at all.
Of course, you could simply dispose of the battery properly.
The entire problem exists for two reasons:
1) Although the toxicity of lead has long been known, no one anticipated that so much lead would ever be thrown away, or that it would leach into soil and acquifers. This has been exacerbated by the fact that things are no longer repaired--they're discarded.
2) No one thought to implement decent methods for recycling hazardous stuff to keep it out of the environment. This is a direct outgrowth of the first problem, but has become an issue in its own right.
Now, belatedly, and with much foot dragging by those whose profit margins will suffer in the short run (and those who are simply opposed in principle to anything that is inconvenient or different from the way they're used to doing it), we're starting to see sporadic movement on both fronts. I fully anticipate problems of one sort or another, whether it turns out to be tin whiskers or something else. There are always problems and tradeoffs. But there is not and never will be a perfect plan for dealing with everything. The best we can do is successive approximations.
Which is exactly what's happening now.
Think of it as negative feedback. The system is in error and a corrective signal is being sent to bring things closer to an ideal solution. We won't achieve 0% distortion, but it'll be better than it was.

Grey

P.S.: All of which leads me to wonder how gain devices feel about feedback. Do they resent it? Do they feel that they were doing just fine before the intrusion of that stupid feedback? I mean, really, no one likes criticism, even if it's "constructive" criticism.
Hmmm...
Might be a story idea hidden in there...lemme think about this.
 
Living near 6 coal burning power plants, three of which have archaic pollution controls and kick out 3 times the pollutants of the other three, I do think theres better places to put the effort. Tidbit: coal contains ~1ppm uranium and 2-4ppm thorium. If a hospital put out in a year what a plant does in a day, there'd be a hoopla. Its not old pcbs that give the fish here 100% of the US RDA of mercury.

A related pondering, how does the mercury content of a compact fluorescent bulb compare to the reduced mercury emissions from the energy savings?

That lead battery is just a smidgen of the car related environmental impact. At least its not using lead gas, Ethyl has to push MBTE now.

1) Were not citizens, were consumers.

2) Reminds me of towns objecting to people salvaging things from the recycling center rather than see it melt it down, see also: 1.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.