Faults like tin whiskers are exactly the reason why the pedal sensor has two pots. The values of the two pots are compared against an expected profile and if there is any discrepancy, the sensor is deemed to be faulty and power is limited to "limp home" mode.
By the way, more modern sensors use hall effect sensing which is not prone to mechanical damage like pot wipers.
It's becoming increasingly obvious that the RoHS push for lead-free solder and platings was extremely poorly thought out.
As well as the tin whisker problem, lead-free solder requires higher temperature soldering (putting more stress on components), and solder joints are much more likely to suffer mechanical fatigue.
Just another example of environmentalists creating huge problems in the "real world".
Please don't forget that apart from needing almost twice the energy in production (I thought carbon emissions were to be avoided) lead free PCB's generally don't survive rework/repair due to copper migration from the PCB surface to the tin. This results in more scrap/waste. Also I have read that lead doesn't leach out of solder in land fill (one of the excuses for RoHS) and there has been no noticeable increase in lead levels of people performing materials recovery (the other excuse for RoHS) That said, many of the other substances banned under RoHS legislation are a problem and the world is better without them, eg. Chromium VI and Cadmium.
No doubt Prof. Gilbert was correct and tin whiskers could be one of the causes for rare cases of sudden acceleration.
"What I have done is, I have shown that in the fault detection strategy of the Toyota systems, there is a window of opportunity where [an error] could occur and not be detected."
also see discussions in:
Reduction of lead waste in the environment is the right thing to do. The problem was the way it was done. In hindsight, perhaps it would have been better to enforce rigorous re-collection of discarded PCBs for solder recycling (as is done with lead-acid batteries). It's not the environmentalists' fault if polluting industries fail to develop (or propose) better solutions for cleaning up their pollution.
In case of Lead Acid batteries, then Lead is always in nice big chunks, so recycling is easy.
On a PCB it is in form of an alloy melted onto other metals, with a conformal coating on the top.
This makes recycling far more challenging.
Lead-free solder enforcement is a very poor thought decision. It should be limited to low reliability short-life toys.
The reasons are: the reliability and the fact that lead going properly to landfill is not a big problem. The harm is in compounds created, when incinerated.
So, with the toys likely to be thrown to furnace, the lead elimination is OK.
But not at all with properly recycled automotive electronics.
yes, sure, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it, just because it's too difficult. Manufacturers can't have it both ways: lead is a persistent, dangerous pollutant and MUST be kept out of the environment. We can either recycle it, or stop using it. One or the other.
So just exactly how much lead are these regulations actually keeping out of landfills? The only numbers that I have heard implied that there were about six pounds of lead in each PC that was scrapped. That sort of damaged the credibility of the claimers, at least as far as my belief in their veracity. I would ask the same questions about lead leaching out of landfills from electronics. My guess is that we see a lot more lead from demolished building materials that contained lead paint, which was in a more soluble form to start with. Besides all of that, putting a deposit on electronics the same as on deposit bottles, would have been a far less damaging way to keep them out of landfills. A $50 deposit on every cell phone and Ipod and similar devices would be much better for keeping that half gram of lead from reaching anyplace except a recycler. Am I the only one who has thought up this idea? Yes, of course the logistics might be a bother, but we could keep a higher level of reliability in all our electronic toys.
Go back to using lead!
For those of you suggesting how dangerous lead is to the environment: Really? How many people should die as a result of electronic failures due to the lack of lead? How many have already died? The original reason given to pull lead from electronics was the suggestion that lead leaches out of electronics in landfills and gets into the ground water. More recent testing indicates that was wrong (even in areas with the worst acid rain on the planet). Therefore, as long as you don't eat it, lead is not nearly the problem in electronic assemblies that most folks were led to believe.
Go back to using lead and require all electronics to be recycled - oh yeah, that's right, even with lead free electronics; we are still required to recycle.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.