IC powders

Gold Refining Forum

Help Support Gold Refining Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
People are blind when gold is involved. People will do what they have to get to the finished product. I know they will and you know they will. Do we just say "don't do it under any circumstance"? Even though they labeled their product as causing cancer and lung disease, underweight newborns, advanced aging, tooth decay and a thousand other ailments, you would think people would treat cigarettes like the poison they are but, no. So just insisting that someone not do something for their own good health does not work. The next best thing is to try and educate people so that do what they are going to do anyway is done as safely as possible. That's why stressing safe handling of dangerous substances should come with every recommendation to incinerate.
 
I'm with you this Jeff.

I'd like to see the same warnings posted as part of advice especially for the substances I have mentioned as a matter of course. Those are truly terrible substances, far worse than HCl or Nitric and yet the perceived threat level is lower because of how we refer to them. Especially in the case of the sulphuric cell.

Heat concentrated sulphuric acid to 80 degrees plus to take off a few grammes of gold? No - - not in my lab. And my lab is kitted out well. It's just not worth the risk of horrible disfiguring injury and I would at least know what I am doing. The majority of people who are advised on using such a cell simply don't.

Thanks for the reply mate.

Jon
 
If you hit 80 C in your deplating cell then you are way out of recommended operating temperature.
GSP : "Maximum temperature is about 100-110F (38-43C)"
http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=22045&p=229563#p229563

As for cadmium in incinerated electronics it is a danger but it is getting smaller with time. The ROHS directive have kept most Cd from electronic components for the last 10 years. The most common use of Cd in plastics is as a color pigment and that isn't needed in most IC:s.

Here is Sweden cadmium in plastics have been banned since 1982.

For incineration I would be more concerned with flame retardants and to create nasty organic molecules from incomplete burning.

Göran
 
The real nasty in IC chips is beryllium - BeO is mixed in with the epoxy resin as a filler & the reason it is used as the filler is to reduce thermal expansion due to its thermal conductivity properties

The three common fillers used for IC chip epoxy molding are alumina, aluminum nitride, or beryllium oxide due to there thermal conductivity properties

The following is copied from the patent of the provided link below

In further implementations of the invention, alternate filler materials with high thermal conductivity may be used in the molding compound instead of alumina. For example, in some implementations, aluminum nitride having a thermal conductivity of around 180 W/m-K may be used. In other implementations, beryllium oxide having a thermal conductivity of around 260 W/m-K may be used. Metallic solids such as silver and non-metallic solids such as diamond, silicon, and silicon carbide may also be used. In some implementations, a combination of two or more of the above described filler materials may be used, such as a combination of two or more of alumina, aluminum nitride, and beryllium oxide. It should be noted that alternate filler materials having high thermal conductivities that are not specifically listed here may be used in accordance with implementations of the invention. For instance, in some implementations, alternate filler materials that may be combined with an epoxy for use in an integrated circuit package that have a thermal conductivity ranging from 10 W/m-K to 3000 W/m-K or more may be used. The key is using a filler material having a relatively high thermal conductivity that is compatible with the epoxy material used in the molding compound.

Read more: http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090004317#ixzz3xfw6ZJgE

Kurt
 
Are you sure about beryllium in plastic IC:s? A patent doesn't mean that beryllium oxide is used in any significant amount in standard circuits.

On the contrary, I only found documents from Dell and Apple that listed Beryllium as something that should be minimized in their products.
I believe that the high toxicity of beryllium oxide would prevent it's usage in all but very special applications. As the material declaration in packages are quite open any widespread usage should be easily found. So far I've not found any proof of BeO used as a filler material.

This is a typical declaration of materials used in a BGA chip.
http://www.cypress.com/file/207976/download
SiO2 filler is 85% of the encasing plastic. There are a undisclosed "Metal oxides" of 0.6% but that's too little to effect the thermal conductivity even if it was all BeO, it's probably a component of the epoxy.

Components containing beryllium oxide is usually marked. I've only run into one component that contained beryllium oxide as far as I know. A transistor in an old radio measurement device.

In this book beryllium oxide is only mentioned as a ceramic material and not as a filler.
https://books.google.se/books?id=c2YxCCaM9RIC&lpg=PA47&dq=beryllium&hl=sv&pg=PA47#v=onepage&q=beryllium&f=false

So unless we deal with high power radio equipment the risk of running into BeO is quite low. But we should be conscious about the risks in all we do.

Göran
 
g_axelsson said:
Are you sure about beryllium in plastic IC:s?

Göran

Yes I am sure - some time back (6 -8 months ago) I read it on a chip manufactures web site wherein they made the claim of better thermal conductivity of their chips due to BeO used as filler in the epoxy molded packages - can't for the life of me find that web site again - but it caught my attention "for sure" considering I process ICs in rather large lots of 40 - 60 pounds at a time

Kurt
 
As Kurt said above.

Here's a link to a specific patent that utilises BeO for that specific purpose in ICs. http://www.google.com/patents/US20090004317
 
The existence of a patent doesn't mean there are a real application or use of that patent.

For example, here is a patent on unlimited free energy (free as in beer). It's an energy multiplier and gives off more energy than you put into it.
http://www.google.com/patents/EP2583374A1?cl=en

It seems to be really hard to find any example of a chip where a producer is mixing in BeO as a filler in plastic. What that tells me is that you will probably never run into it unless you process really exotic equipment. Electronics designed for usage in vacuum, for example on a satellite, would benefit from a plastic like that as there are no convection in vacuum, all heat has to be conducted away. Even then there should be warnings about it on the components so I don't see the danger as that big.

Finally I managed to hit that sweet search terms that produced the result I was looking for. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ielx7/5503870/6678367/06626580.pdf?tp=&arnumber=6626580&isnumber=6678367
Three filler material candidates have bulk κ > 200 W/mK
(AlN, BeO, and hBN), but they are either very expensive
(e.g., tens or hundreds of dollars per kilogram) or pose a
health hazard (i.e., BeO)
, or both. The literature is rich with
the consideration of AlN-EMCs [8]–[18] as they could be
viable options for noncost-conscious, high-end applications
as long as AlN’s hydrophilic nature is managed and if its
particle morphology can be controlled to allow desirable flow
characteristics. Respiratory concerns (berylliosis) with the use
of a BeO filler delegitimizes its candidacy for almost all
the applications.
(My emphasis)

It also reveals the price of BeO and it's huge! $800-$1000 per kilo. That's about twice as much as silver. You won't find that in a low price product.

Göran
 
Goran I don't follow the logic your post mate.

I agree that a patent doesn't mean that all ICs would have BeO in them, and I also agree that as a material it is expensive. The counterpoint is that you and I have seen on this forum quite a range of people who are in fact processing high grade equipment containing radio equipment for telecoms. Many people also process high grade ICs from high end IT equipment.

So why take the approach that it's not likely to be in the components rather than the approach that should be taken - namely that it's possibly there and to process accordingly? That's the approach taken in many other situations.

I appreciate fully that people would rather turn a blind eye to this because it would mean that they would have to put more thought into their incineration process but whilst we are strong on safety here in many areas we appear to be weak in this one.

Jon
 
So assuming BeO can be present in at least "some" chips, how can they be processed safely?

If done in a nice pyrolysis rig like the one NoIdea posted, would BeO survive the heat and still become airborne? Or would it be more of a problem with just open incineration.

This thread has gotten me a bit worried about the 10-15 lbs. of chips I've harvested so far. A good portion of those came from older telecom and med-spec boards. I've seen the BeO warning on quite a few of them, and its definitely not something I want to be breathing.
 
A cheap respirator from Lowes or any paint supply will work for airborne particulates.

http://www.lowes.com/pd_430975-98-8511PA1-2QPBN___?productId=4754370&pl=1&Ntt=respirator

dust mask.jpg

Or if you are very terribly concerned and want an extra few layers

http://www.lowes.com/pd_215253-98-65021HA1-C___?productId=3652073&pl=1&Ntt=respirator

respirator.jpg
 
Jon, my logic is that we should worry about the dangers that most people will encounter, not one that might affect very few members. And so far all we have shown for a real product is a patent text.

It's like during the anthrax attacks in USA a few people died, causing an irrational fear among office workers. Many people were so afraid they didn't go to work for several days or even weeks. At the time I made an approximation that it probably saved more people from dying in car crashes than died in anthrax attacks, still people were afraid for a very unlikely scenario of dying from anthrax while no one thinks about the dangers of commuting to work.

The real dangers I see is inclusion of mercury, arsenic, bromated fire retardant, phosphate, various organic molecules... the stuff we know could end up among incinerated IC:s and that we are a lot more probable to encounter.

Beryllium oxide is a nasty ceramic and should be avoided as far as possible. It's thermal properties is fantastic though and therefore it is used in a few critical applications as for example power transistors in radio transmitters. People working with this kind of equipment should be aware of the dangers and take precautions. Often the equipment is marked with a warning triangle and Be or beryllia.

But for Joe the scrapman who picks up a computer at the curb, the risk of processing it is not in beryllium but in other things.

This is the one time I've run into beryllia since my days in the army, servicing radio equipment.
DSC04621-beryllia.jpg

UncleBenBen, if you see a beryllium warning I would thread very carefully at that point. The main danger is dust and since it usually is a white or pink ceramic component I would treat every one I encounter at that point as lethal. The one above I left as is and took it to a recycling center in a closed container.

Still, I would not be concerned for any black IC containing beryllium filled plastics. There are a lot of other techniques where good thermal contact can be achieved without using beryllia.

Göran
 
Goran

First please bear in mind that I am debating with you, nothing less gentlemanly. You've got three people already on this thread who are all coming across BeO. That's three people before you even ask who else has come into contact with it, we can agree on that I assume?

So your comment that says "we should worry about the dangers that most people will encounter, not one that might affect very few members" is I am afraid patently incorrect. You also have more to go on that just a patent, you have experience of this product being talked about.

The analogy with Anthrax, and drawing a parallel with causing irrational fear is just wrong. So wrong. If you processed the amount of gear that some of the members do Goran, you would be more aware in practical terms of what I amongst others are saying, and speaking member to member here- just because you don't know something doesn't make it irrelevant.

No offence intended old friend but I respectfully have to stand my ground and disagree with you on this one.

Jon
 
Geo is illustrating my logic quite good.

- Joe the scrapman picks up a few computers and learns that there's gold in them boxes... comes here and reads about incineration and it could give off beryllia dust. Then he sees the post about a dust mask. He picks up a mask, puts it on and feels safe. But that mask won't stop mercury vapors or bromated organic molecules which is a much bigger danger in my opinion. But with the mask on he feels safe and is probably more in danger of inhaling any toxic vapors given off from a bad incineration than he were without the mask.

At least that's my opinion and I'm not going to loose any sleep over possible beryllia dust in black chips until someone is showing an application where it actually is used.

But I will treat any smoke from incineration as dangerous and avoid it because of the known dangers it contain.

Be aware, don't be afraid!

Göran
 
Jon, if I was any closer to you I would buy you a beer in the closest bar. I'm also just debating this and I'm sorry if it looks like I'm angry, I'm not. I'm just trying to express how I'm looking at this topic. 8)

I'm not saying that BeO isn't out there. It is and it should be generally known. What I'm saying is that no one so far have been able to show a black plastic IC with BeO in it as a filler, except as a patent application and that is proving nothing.

I have the utmost respect for beryllia and I'm avoiding it as the plague. Beryllia is one of these chemicals that builds up in the body and can cause severe problems over the rest of your life. And as far as I know there is no treatment for it.
If you see a beryllia warning sign, treat every white or pale ceramic component as toxic waste.

We should teach people about the dangers associated with refining and especially recovering gold from electronic scrap. But we should not scare them about dangers that by all practical means isn't out there. And until I see proof of a real application that uses beryllia filled plastic I'm going to treat that danger as not worthy to worry about. I'm going to put my energy into worrying about the other nasty stuff coming off any incineration.

If we still disagree, then we have to agree on disagreeing and then head down to the bar, the first round is on me! Cheers friend! 8)

Göran
 
Trying to find out what the exact make up of each chip is will probably never happen. IMHO treat all of them as having the possibility of being dangerous to protect yourself and others. Probably trying to find out the information would be equal to trying to find the formula for Coke or Pepsi products. IMHO it revolves around trade secrets of the manufacturing of the products.
 
Particulates and fumes are two different things. In my experience, anything that fumes is not good for you. Temperature plays a big part of the fuming process. Normally, the higher the temperature, the more fumes are generated. Incineration produces a large amount of fumes. A lot of solids is actually mostly gasses that is in a stable state. Once they are heated, the gasses are liberated and the mass and volume of the solid is reduced. It is a rendering down process that we call refining. Most of the bad stuff has a pungent smell and a sting when it enters the nose and eyes. These are warnings that we should not stand over the fire. Even burning wood fumes off some really nasty compounds. If it wasn't for mans ability to burn wood safely, humans would have died off long ago. Take the iron "pot belly" stove for instance. People use it to burn coal in the center of their home. From http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heavy_metals_and_coal

Heavy metal refers to any metallic chemical element that has a high density and is toxic or poisonous at low concentrations. Coal contains many heavy metals, as it is created through compressed organic matter containing virtually every element in the periodic table - mainly carbon, but also heavy metals. The heavy metal content of coal varies by coal seam and geographic region. A variety of chemicals (mostly metals) are associated with coal that are either found in the coal directly or in the layers of rock that lie above and between the seams of coal.[1][2]

It has been this way since it was discovered that iron could be fashioned into a way to burn coal in a home so it wouldn't choke people to death. It's not impossible to work with even poisonous materials without being exposed. You just have to know what you are working with and the best way to deal with it when you do.

Isn't it ironic that someday, someone that has never been exposed to pollution and has always eaten healthy all of their life and exercised everyday will wind up in a bed dying from absolutely nothing.
 
I read the patent on the BeO. It is for ceramic chips described as "flip-chips" and "ball grid arrays" (BGA). It list other fillers such as alumina. This lets me know that they are not describing epoxy IC packages. Two totally different animals altogether. We are suppose to be the "go to" source for information on this type of thing. We don't want to go screaming that the sky is falling and scaring people over a fractional possibility that there might be something harmful in what we are handling. I am 100% on safety but I don't want to be so frightened that I'm scared to leave the house in case a plane falls from the sky.
 
For me it's real easy, anything other than the air we require to survive is poison and I do everything I have to do, to keep it out of my once in a lifetime lungs.
 
g_axelsson said:
Are you sure about beryllium in plastic IC:s? A patent doesn't mean that beryllium oxide is used in any significant amount in standard circuits.

Göran

Goran

Like Jon I don't wish to argue - when you asked the above I replied
Yes I am sure - some time back (6 -8 months ago) I read it on a chip manufactures web site wherein they made the claim of better thermal conductivity of their chips due to BeO used as filler in the epoxy molded packages - can't for the life of me find that web site again - but it caught my attention "for sure" considering I process ICs in rather large lots of 40 - 60 pounds at a time

Here is the thing - I started posting about this both here & on Kens forum shortly after I read about it on the above mentioned chip manufactures web site (not a patent) Because I process chips in larger batches then most here it caught my attention when I read it (which is why I have posted about it ever since)

The chip manufactures web site I am talking about was something I ran across in a totally un-related search because at the time I had no idea about it being in epoxy chips until I saw it on that web site (which is why I can't find that web site again, because I have no idea what I was actually searching at the time) also I looked back on my posting about it & one of the earliest post I could find was here in this post :arrow: http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=22561#p236534 & it was probably 4 - 6 months before that post that I had read it on the afore mentioned web site - so more like a year ago

If I had not read this on a chip "manufactures" web site I would not even be posting about it as a concern that members should be aware of when processing chips

Now with that said what I can totally agree with you on is the FACT that there are "many" other "nasties" in processing chips that in the first place requires/demands that safety precautions be taken when incinerating &/or handling the ash - I HIGHLY recommend the use of a "good" respirator - by that I mean a good cartridge respirator with cartridge's that filter fumes as well as dust - I do not recommend a cheap dust mask because not only don't they filter fumes (when incinerating) but they also do not fit tight on our face & dust tends to make it past the edges so they may reduce dust but they don't eliminate it

Finally - though BeO is not the only concern (& maybe not even the major concern) there still exist a likelihood of it & therefore worthy of mention

So now - if only you, I & Jon all lived closer - we could all get together for a few beers & laughs - I know I would enjoy the heck out of that :mrgreen:

Kurt
 
Back
Top