GEIA-GEB-0002

TECHNICAL REPORT
Issued 2003-11
Stabilized 2014-10

Reducing the Risk of Tin Whisker-Induced Failures in Electronic Equipment

NOTICE

This document has been taken directly from the original TechAmerica document and contains only minor editorial and
format changes required to bring it into conformance with the publishing requirements of SAE Technical Standards. The
release of this document is intended to replace the original with the SAE International document. Any numbers
established by the original document remain unchanged.

The original document was adopted as an SAE publication under the provisions of the SAE Technical Standards Board
(TSB) Rules and Regulations (TSB 001) pertaining to accelerated adoption of specifications and standards. TSB rules
provide for (a) the publication of portions of unrevised specifications and standards without consensus voting at the SAE
committee level, and (b) the use of the existing specification or standard format.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: “This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is
entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising therefrom, is the sole responsibility of the user.”
SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be revised, reaffirmed, stabilized, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments and
suggestions.
Copyright © 2014 SAE International
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE.
TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) SAE values your input. To provide feedback
Tel: +1 724-776-4970 (outside USA) on this Technical Report, please visit
Fax: 724-776-0790 http://www.sae.org/technical/standards/GEIAGEB0002
Email: CustomerService@sae.org
SAE WEB ADDRESS: http://www.sae.org
 GEIA
ENGINEERING
BULLETIN
GEIA-GEB-0002

Reducing the Risk of Tin Whisker-

Induced Failures in Electronic
Equipment

GEIA-GEB-0002

NOVEMBER 2003

GOVERNMENT ELECTRONICS AND

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION

A Sector of the Electronic Industries Alliance

 NOTICE

GEIA Engineering Standards and Publications are designed to serve the public interest by
eliminating misunderstandings between manufacturers and purchasers, facilitating
interchangeability and improvement of products, and assisting the purchasers in selecting and
obtaining with minimum delay the proper product for their particular needs. Existence of such
Standards and Publications shall not in any respect preclude any member or nonmember of
GEIA from manufacturing or selling products not conforming to such Standards and
Publications, nor shall the existence of such Standards and Publications preclude their voluntary
use by those other than GEIA members, whether the standard is to be used either domestically or
internationally.
Standards and Publications are adopted by GEIA in accordance with the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) patent policy. By such action, GEIA does not assume any liability to
any patent owner, nor does it assume any obligation whatever to parties adopting the Standard or
Publication.
Technical Publications are distinguished from GEIA Standards in that they contain a compilation
of engineering data or information useful to the technical community and represent approaches
to good engineering practices that are suggested by the formulating committee.
This Bulletin is not intended to preclude or discourage other approaches that similarly represent
good engineering practice, or that may be acceptable to, or have been accepted by, appropriate
bodies. Parties who wish to bring other approaches to the attention of the formulating committee
to be considered for inclusion in future revisions of this publication are encouraged to do so. It is
the intention of the formulating committee to revise and update this publication from time to
time as may be occasioned by changes in technology, industry practice, or government
regulations, or for other appropriate reasons.
(From Project Number PINS-GEB2, formulated under the cognizance of the GEIA G-12 Solid
State Devices Committee)

Published by

© 2003 Government Electronics and Information Technology Association

Standards & Technology Department
2500 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22201

All rights reserved

Printed in U.S.A.
 PLEASE!

DON’T VIOLATE
THE
LAW!

This document is copyrighted by the Government Electronics and Information

Technology Association (GEIA) and may not be
reproduced without permission.

Organizations may obtain permission to reproduce a limited number of copies by

entering into a license agreement with our distributors.

For distributor information please see our web site www.geia.org/ or contact GEIA
at 703-907-7566
 Government Electronics and Information Technology Association
(GEIA)

Manual of Organization and Procedure

GEIA-OP-0001
Revision Description of change Date
- Initial Release 11/28/2003
 GEIA-GEB-0002

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The GEIA G-12 Solid State Devices Committee acknowledges the significant contributions of the authors
and organizations whose published works, cited in the bibliography, provided the foundation for this
document. Members of Task Group G0202 of the GEIA G-12 Solid State Devices Committee developed this
document. The Task Group and Committee would like to recognize the principle contributors shown below
and to extend gratitude to the many others who assisted in the evolution of this Bulletin.

Mr. Gary Ewell Aerospace Corporation

Mr. Henry Livingston BAE SYSTEMS
Mr. William Dieffenbacher BAE SYSTEMS
Ms. Anduin Touw Boeing Satellite Systems
Mr. Jan Bunting General Dynamics
Mr. Michael Cooper General Dynamics
Ms. Dottie Fields Microsemi Corp.
Mr. Kent Walters Microsemi Corp.
Mr. James Moffett Northrop Grumman Mission Systems
Mr. Jay Brusse QSS Group, Inc.
Mr. Michael Sampson NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Mr. David Hillman Rockwell Collins
Mr. John Nirschl Rockwell Collins
Mr. Jeff Jarvis US Army Aviation and Missile Command

We wish to express our sincere appreciation to the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Tin Whisker
Investigation Team for their significant contributions to this Bulletin.

i
GEIA-GEB-0002

Introduction
As a result of world-wide consumer electronics demand for lead-free products, component
manufacturers are increasingly converting to lead-free materials. A popular choice for these
finishes is tin.
Tin finishes can be susceptible to the spontaneous growth of single crystal structures known as
“tin whiskers” which can cause electrical failures, ranging from parametric deviations to
catastrophic short circuits, and may interfere with sensitive optical surfaces or the movement of
micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS). Though studied and reported for decades, tin
whiskers remain a potential reliability hazard, particularly for space applications and for
equipment subjected to long term dormant storage and use (e.g. missiles and expendables).
There is no pending US legislation mandating lead-free electronic products, and should such
legislation arise, military, aerospace and medical equipment manufacturers would likely be
exempt. Nevertheless, Department of Defense and NASA believe that the use, and therefore the
risk, of tin finish on electronic components will increase because: 1) commercial industry have
stated initiatives to eliminate lead (Pb) from electronics, 2) defense and aerospace industry
trends show increasing usage of commercial components, and 3) continuing reductions in circuit
geometry and power means that even small whiskers may cause catastrophic failures.
Many factors can contribute to whisker formation, and their relative importance have not been
determined. The quantitative risks of whiskers under various sets of material, manufacturing, and
application conditions have not been determined. Historically, whiskers have been of greatest risk
to space and missile applications. This may be explained in part by: the longer lifetimes, the more
destructive effects in low-pressure environments, and higher reliability requirements. However, it
is felt by this committee that a wider community may have concerns about whiskers as pure tin
plating becomes more common and circuit geometries become smaller.
This Bulletin includes various findings of government and industry experts regarding
characteristics of tin whiskers and methods to mitigate future risks associated with them. It is
meant to summarize the literature on tin whisker growths, not mandate a particular risk mitigation
strategy. The appropriate actions will depend on the specific application, lifetime, and reliability
requirements.

ii
 GEIA-GEB-0002

Reducing the Risk of Tin Whisker-Induced Failures in Electronic Equipment

CONTENTS
1 Scope ....................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Tin Whisker Formation ............................................................................................................. 1
2.1 Common Tin Whisker Attributes ....................................................................................... 1
2.2 Tin Whisker Growth Mechanisms ..................................................................................... 3
2.3 Environmental Factors ...................................................................................................... 4
3 Methods to Reduce the Risk of Tin Whisker-Induced Failures................................................ 5
3.1 Application Specific Risk Assessment .............................................................................. 5
3.2 Parts and Material Selection ............................................................................................. 5
3.2.1 Avoid Using Components with Pure Tin Finishes If Possible.................................... 5
3.2.2 Physical Barriers ........................................................................................................ 6
3.2.3 Choice of Underplating or Substrate Material............................................................ 7
3.2.4 Select a Matte or Low Stress Tin Finish .................................................................... 7
3.2.5 Plating Process Considerations................................................................................. 7
3.3 Material and Assembly Processing................................................................................... 8
3.3.1 Avoid Applying Compressive Loads on Plated Surfaces .......................................... 8
3.3.2 Conformal Coat or Foam Encapsulation Over Whisker Prone Surfaces .................. 8
3.3.3 Heat treatments ......................................................................................................... 9
3.3.4 Solder Dip Tin-finished Surfaces ............................................................................... 9
3.3.5 Replate Whisker Prone Areas ................................................................................... 9
4 Conclusions............................................................................................................................ 10
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 11

iii
GEIA-GEB-0002

iv
 GEIA-GEB-0002

1 Scope

This Bulletin provides a brief description of tin whisker formation and describes various methods
recommended by government and industry to reduce the risk of tin whisker-induced failures in
electronic hardware. It is not a mandate nor does it contain any requirements.
A tin whisker is a single crystal that emerges from tin-finished surfaces. Tin whiskers can pose a
serious reliability risk to electronic assemblies that have pure tin finish. The general risks fall into
several categories: [1, 2, 3, 8, 16]
• Short Circuits: The whisker can create a short circuit, either by 1) growing from an area at one potential
to an area at another or 2) breaking free and later bridging these areas. In some cases, these shorts
may be permanent and cause catastrophic system failures. A transient short may result if the available
current exceeds the fusing current of the whisker, and the whisker can fuse open. The amount of current
needed to fuse open the whisker depends on the atmospheric pressure and the diameter of the whisker.
• Low-pressure-Induced Metal Vapor Arcing (Plasma): In low-pressure environments, even a transient
short can result in a catastrophic failure. Under certain current and voltage conditions (current more than
a few amps and supply voltage over 12 V), when a tin whisker fuses open, the vaporized tin may initiate
arcing or a plasma. The plasma can conduct over 200 A and may continue until all the available
exposed tin is consumed or the supply current is interrupted. [1, 8]
• Debris/Contamination: The tin whisker’s small diameter may allow it break free under handling or other
vibration. A free floating whisker may cause the same problems typically associated with free floating
particles, i.e., interfering with the movement of mechanical parts or contaminating optical surfaces. [1, 8]

2 Tin Whisker Formation

2.1 Common Tin Whisker Attributes

The following paragraphs provide an overview of some of the observed characteristics of tin
whiskers. These features are discussed in more detail in the following references:[1, 2, 3, 8, 9,
16, 19, 20, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 35]
• Shapes & Surface Features: True whiskers are cylindrical, needle-like crystals that can
grow either straight or kinked. The surface is usually striated longitudinally. Whiskers may
grow directly out of the surface or from pyramid-shaped nodules on the surface. Nodules,
which may grow tens of microns in length, may also appear without whiskers. Because of
their shorter length and larger diameter, they do not usually pose a reliability risk in and of
themselves. (See Figure 1 for examples)
• Incubation (Dormancy) Period: Experimenters report an incubation period ranging from
days to years before whiskers appear. This period is likely related to the amount of
compressive stress. [27] This period is of particular concern because experiments to
determine the propensity for a particular process to form whiskers may need to span very
long periods of time. This property also complicates decisions about whether applications
with short storage and usage lives are at risk for tin whiskers.
• Growth Rate: Growth rate of tin whiskers is also variable: rates from 0.03 to 9 mm/yr have
been reported. Some experiments also document non-linear growth rates and times when
the growth has stopped all together. [27, 30, 33] Interrelated factors such as substrate
materials, grain structure, plating chemistry, and plating thickness may influence growth rate.

1
GEIA-GEB-0002

Classic "needle-like" whisker Kinks and striations Pyramidal shaped whiskers

Nodules Nodules originating along a Whisker growing from a nodule

(note how it appears to originate from a mechanically induced surface scratch
very fine surface scratch)

Irregular shaped whisker tip Focused Ion Beam "cross section" of Whisker nodules beneath
a tin whisker conformal coat
(note the solid, not hollow, structure (growing preferentially along the line
and striations) of a surface defect)

Figure 1 - Whisker Shapes [8]

(Photographic images courtesy of NASA Goddard and The Aerospace Corporation)

2
 GEIA-GEB-0002

• Whisker Length: Tin whisker length obviously depends on growth rate and sustained
periods of growth. However, in experimental results, most measure between 0.5 mm and 5.0
mm. The longest reported length is 10 mm. [8, 23]
• Whisker Diameter: Whiskers are typically very thin with diameters between 1 and 5 microns
[8, 30], yet diameters between 0.006 µm and 7 µm have been recorded. [33] Whiskers are
not always the same diameter throughout their entire length. [33] Despite some early
hypotheses to the contrary, some whiskers have developed cross-sectional areas greater
than either the grain size of the original tin or the thickness of the plating. [8]
• Density of Growths: Although whisker densities up to 104/cm2 have been observed, this
measurement also varies greatly in the literature. [8] Variation may be due to an inconsistent
definition of what length should be counted [30] or to differences in the compressive stresses
in the tin or substrate layers [8]. Experiments also have recorded changes in whisker density
from both radiation [34] and plating thickness [29].
• Current-Carrying Capacity: Under normal atmospheric conditions, the capacity typically
measures between 10 and 32 mA. [23, 35] However, capacities as high as 75 mA have been
observed. [8] The capacity depends on the thickness of the whisker and on the environment.
Because air can provide cooling which might lead to higher current capacity, lower current
capacity might be expected in a vacuum or low-pressure environment. Here the dangers of
fusing a whisker in a low-pressure environment should again be noted. In a low-pressure
environment, under certain voltage and current conditions, the vaporizing of the tin may
initiate a plasma that can conduct hundreds of amps. The plasma may continue until all the
available tin from surrounding areas is consumed or the supply current is interrupted. [8]
• Mechanical Strength: Their crystalline structure makes tin whiskers surprisingly strong in
the axial direction. High forces in vibration and mechanical tests may be needed to damage
or break free whiskers. [35] These experimental results may not match all experiences,
however, as there are known examples of whiskers detaching and creating short circuits or
jamming mechanical mechanisms. [8] Shear strengths may be lower, particularly in long
whiskers. [8]

2.2 Tin Whisker Growth Mechanisms

The mechanisms by which tin whiskers grow have been studied since the 1950s. From the
earliest papers, research agrees that the growth occurs at the base of the whisker, not the tip.
[30] Although the exact mechanism of this growth is still not completely understood, early
research demonstrated that whisker formation and growth seemed to be correlated to localized
compressive stresses. At present, microscopic compressive stresses are believed to be the
driving force behind whiskers. References that discuss growth mechanisms in more detail include
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 25, 33].
Many factors can contribute to these stresses and therefore whiskers, and their relative
importance has not been determined. A list of what appear to be the most important drivers in tin
whisker growth is below:
• Residual stresses within the tin finish: These residual stresses are caused by factors
within the plating chemistry and process such as impurities, grain size, plating thickness, and
current density. Electro-deposited finishes are considered at greater risk because higher
current densities have been observed to produce higher residual stress and more whiskers.
Bright tin finish has a greater propensity to whisker formation than does matte tin finish,
perhaps due to the organic impurities used as brighteners. Tin with smaller grain sizes has
more whiskers than does tin with larger grain size. Platings between 5 and 10 µm also seem
to maximize whisker growth. [8, 14, 29] However, there have been no proven cases of tin
finish, regardless of process or brightness, that are fully resistant to whiskers over the long
term.

3
GEIA-GEB-0002

• Intermetallic Formation: Certain under-plates may diffuse into the tin. The intermetallics
formed may change the lattice spacing and create compressive stresses.
• Mechanical Loading: Spring fixtures or turning of nuts or screws can introduce localized
mechanical stress. These may contribute to whisker formation, although experimental results
have been mixed. [5, 8, 15, 23, 33]
• Damage to the Surface: Bending, stretching, scratching, or nicking of the plating, either
purposely or through handling damage, create local stresses that serve as nucleation point
for whiskers.[5, 8, 13, 23]
• Coefficient of Thermal Expansion Mismatches: Differences between the thermal
expansion of the substrate or under-plate and the tin finish can create stress at the interface.
[5, 8, 23]

2.3 Environmental Factors

There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding environmental factors that might affect whisker
formation. To date, there are no accepted test methods for evaluating whisker propensity, so
determination of causal relationships has been difficult. Much of the experimental data compiled
to date has produced somewhat contradictory findings regarding which factors accelerate (or
retard) whisker growth. [1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 16, 19, 25]
• Temperature: Elevated temperature increases diffusion and formation of intermetallics, so it
might accelerate whisker formation. However, high temperatures can also relieve internal
stresses. There is a growing consensus that temperatures of approximately 50° C may be
optimal for tin whisker formation (the recrystalization temperature of tin is 51º C-52º C), but
whiskers can grow well, and some experiments report faster, at room temperature (22° C to
25° C). There may be a maximum temperature for whisker formation, perhaps above 150° C
[20], but a lower bound on formation temperature has not been found as whiskers have been
observed to grow at temperatures as low as -40° C. [8]
• Barometric Pressure: Pressure seems to have little effect on whisker growth. Whiskers
have been observed to grow in both earth-based atmospheric pressures and low-pressure
(vacuum) environments. [8, 20] Because whiskers have been shown to grow under low-
pressure (oxygen starved) conditions, show that oxidation is not required for whiskers to
form.
• Humidity and Moisture: Experiments examining the effects of humidity have been
inconclusive. Some results have shown increased growth rate in high humidity (85% - 95%
RH), but others show no change. [8, 20]
• Thermal Cycling: There is also no consensus on whether temperature cycling affects tin
whisker growth. Some experiments, typically cycling between -40° C to +90° C, have shown
higher growth rates, but others have not demonstrated any effect. [4, 8, 30]
• Electric Field: Unlike dendrites, whiskers grow without an applied electric field. Recent
NASA-GSFC studies found that whisker growth is not related to electric bias. [9] However,
electric fields can create electrostatic attraction between whiskers and other surface and may
increase the likelihood of whisker-induced shorts.

4
 GEIA-GEB-0002

3 Methods to Reduce the Risk of Tin Whisker-Induced Failures

Below is a discussion of individual mitigation methods and other information to help reduce the
risk of failure due to tin whisker formation.
The effectiveness of the mitigation strategies presented here has been demonstrated to varying
degrees, but their relative effectiveness has not been quantified. Until the growth mechanisms
are understood, no accelerated test for whiskers can be developed. A reliable, repeatable
accelerated test will be needed before the risk to a system or the effectiveness of a mitigation
strategy can be accurately and quantitatively calculated. The only sure strategy to prevent tin
whisker induced failure is to avoid using tin but, a mixture of mitigation strategies may allow for
the use of pure tin for some applications or lifetime requirements. Strategies, along with
references to research evaluating them, are presented in the sections to help users qualitatively
evaluate their particular circumstances.

3.1 Application Specific Risk Assessment

Though tin whisker growth can occur in a broad range of applications, most incidents reported
are associated with space applications and with missile applications. This is likely due to the
longer required lifetimes without inspections or repairs and the plasma effects in low-pressure
environments. Given the environmental conditions associated with long-term dormant storage,
expendables may also be more susceptible to tin whisker growth.
In order to determine if tin whiskers pose a true risk, the criticality of the system or subsystem, its
desired life expectancy, and the risk and ramifications of rework all require assessment.
In addition, the circuit design should also be evaluated. Higher currents, particularly in room
atmospheres, may be able to quickly fuse the whisker and clear the short. The circuit geometries
should be examined. The geometries may be large enough that a whisker would not be able to
bridge and produce a short, but spacing between conductors or adjacent leads for many modern
high-density applications are smaller than 0.5 mm, well within the normal length range for
whiskers.

3.2 Parts and Material Selection

3.2.1 Avoid Using Components with Pure Tin Finishes If Possible

The safest strategy to prevent tin whisker induced failure is to avoid using pure tin finish on any of
the parts used in electronic hardware, such as lead finish, RF shields, mounting hardware, and
electronic enclosures. [1, 2, 3, 16] Based on NASA experience, the following commodities appear
to be those most at risk for whisker formation:
[4, 8, 17]
• Relays
• Connectors
• Filters
• Bus Wire1
• Multi-layer Ceramic Capacitors
• SMT Fuses

1
Studies sponsored by the US Air Force in the early 1993 indicate that tin coated copper wire does not exhibit whisker
growth. [20, 21]

5
GEIA-GEB-0002

• Mechanical components (terminal lugs, nuts, washers, etc.)

Using procurement specifications with clear restrictions against the use of pure tin is highly
recommended. Most, but not all, commonly used military specifications include prohibitions
against pure tin finish, but other non-military procurement drawings should also contain tin
prohibitions.
Some customers include restrictions concerning the use of pure tin finish within contract
documentation. When the use of pure tin finish cannot be avoided, the appropriate contract
mechanism should be used to communicate and resolve the issue with the customer. Examples
include Parts Review Board review, requests for deviation or waiver, etc. Justifications should
include a discussion of the application specific risk assessment, the alternatives considered, and
risk mitigation methods proposed.
Even with restrictions in the specifications or contracts, additional care should be taken to ensure
that the suppliers adhere to the requirements. Government and industry reports indicate,
however, that relying solely on procurement specifications prohibiting the use of pure tin finish, or
a supplier’s certification that pure tin was not used, are not consistently effective methods to
avoid the introduction of pure tin in electronic equipment. When the risk of whisker-induced
hardware failure is high, the finish composition of products received should be analyzed as an
independent verification. The frequency and sampling of this analysis should based upon the
results from researching the composition of finishes used and the probability of subsequent
plating changes by the component manufacturer.
It should be noted that some methods of analysis can under-estimate the amount of tin in the
alloy if the results are polluted by metals in underlying layers. Energy-Dispersive Spectroscopy
(EDS)2 is a suitable method for quantifying the elemental composition of surface finish. Whiskers
have been shown to grow to a limited extent in a variety of tin alloys, some with as much as 10%
lead by weight. [8, 14] In general, however, a minimum of 3% lead by weight is believed sufficient
for mitigating the risk of long whiskers even if some “nodular” whiskers appear. [8, 14] Other tin
alloys, such as tin-silver-copper, are also appropriate alternatives. Although some experiments
have shown whisker growth from alloys, the smaller nodular whiskers may be small enough not
to pose a serious risk to today’s circuit geometries.
Some manufacturers are beginning to offer self-described “whisker-free” tin products. It is difficult
to evaluate these products, as the phenomenon is not sufficiently understood to establish a
standard accelerated test for whiskers. Users should be cautious in reviewing the basis for these
claims and determining if the products are appropriate to their particular application. Although it
may be possible to produce a tin finish that is not at risk for whiskers, proving such a claim will be
difficult until the growth mechanism is fully understood.
When the use of pure tin finish cannot be avoided, the approaches described in the remainder of
this guideline should be considered to reduce the risk of whisker-induced hardware failure.

3.2.2 Physical Barriers

Perhaps the most obvious method to prevent whiskers from shorting out adjacent conductors is
creation of an insulating physical barrier between them. Placement of non-conductive washers,
spacers, staking compound materials, etc. as a physical barrier can prevent whiskers from
growing from one conductive surface to another. Because whiskers can grow through oils,
greases and the softer lacquers care must be taken in selecting the material of the barrier. In this
context, the harder materials (e.g. epoxies) are much more effective, provided they remain intact
[8, 19, 25] While a barrier may prevent a whisker growing from one conductive surface to
another, it cannot mitigate the risks associated with free-floating whiskers.

2
ASTM E1508-98, Standard Guide for Quantitative Analysis by Energy-Dispersive Spectroscopy, is intended to assist
those using energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) for quantitative analysis of materials with a scanning electron
microscope (SEM) or electron probe microanalyzer (EPMA) and covers procedures for quantifying elemental composition.

6
 GEIA-GEB-0002

3.2.3 Choice of Underplating or Substrate Material

The formation of intermetallics between the base metal and the pure tin finish may create
stresses that promote tin whisker growth. By controlling the underplate or substrate, the risk of
whiskers may be greatly reduced.
The chemistry, thickness, surface finish, grain size, and surface cleanliness and internal stress of
the substrate are all factors that may affect intermetallic compound (IMC) formation and growth.
The diffusion of the materials and the IMC create compressive stresses in the tin finish,
particularly along tin grain boundaries. If the stress reaches a critical level, tin may be extruded
from the surface, relieving the stress and creating a whisker. [5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 33]
A thin layer of nickel over the copper substrate should, in theory, reduce IMC diffusion and stress.
Studies investigating the effectiveness of nickel underplating on whisker growth have been
mixed. Some studies have shown a reduction in number and length of whiskers on tin plated
nickel than on tin plated copper [7, 9]. However, studies have also shown that whiskers will grow
despite a nickel barrier [22, 23, 24]. The effectiveness of nickel barriers to prevent whiskers may
depend on the properties of the base material and the process used for depositing the tin,
explaining the differences in the experimental effectiveness of the barrier.

3.2.4 Select a Matte or Low Stress Tin Finish

“Bright” tin finish contains additives that can cause internal stresses in the tin. A “matte” tin finish,
or a relatively dull finish, is preferred because it does not contain these additives.[3, 8]
Although a matte tin is preferable to a bright tin, some researchers report it may not prevent the
formation of whiskers. One study found whiskers up to 2 mm long on matte tin-plated steel. [22,
23, 24] Other researchers have suggested that matte tin may be very effective, particularly when
combined with other mitigations [8, 9, 14]. The effectiveness of matte tin may be dependent on
process controls during plating and the particular environment during use. Matte tin should be
considered an improvement over bright tin, but the specific process and application should be
carefully reviewed before use.

3.2.5 Plating Process Considerations

Several other aspects of the plating process beyond underplate selection and brightness of finish
appear to influence the occurrence of tin whiskers: [8, 18]
• Plating Baths: Process controls on the plating baths can help reduce the risk of whisker
formation. Contamination in the bath creates nuclei for internal stresses promoting whisker
growth. By controlling contamination and refreshing the baths often, these stresses can be
limited. Process control is also recommended for current density, temperature, and plating
speed. Higher current densities, and therefore quicker plating, may be more prone to greater
whiskering. [15]
• Hot-Tin Dipped Coating: Hot-tin dipped parts should also come from controlled production
lines. Even though the layer of tin during dipping, theoretically, should be less stress inducing
than electroplating, variation in plating thickness and handling damage from multiple
processing steps can introduce stresses. [10, 15]
• Reflowing, Fusing, and Annealing: Heat treatments have been promising in preventing
whisker formation, but test results are not consistent. It has been hypothesized that reflowing
the tin (taking it above its melting point) or even fusing or annealing it (heating but not above
its melting point) should reduce the risk of whiskers because the high temperatures involved
should help to reduce the internal stresses and increase grain sizes. The heating should be
done in an inert atmosphere and followed by a slow cooling to minimize stresses reforming. A
variety of temperature and time conditions are recommended in the literature. Although many
seem to increase the incubation time or reduce whisker density, they have not yet been
proven to permanently prevent whiskers. [1, 2, 3, 8, 13, 15, 19]

7
GEIA-GEB-0002

• Handling: Because nicks and scratches have been shown to be common sites for whiskers
to initiate, contacts with probes, vacuum chuck pickup heads, and tweezers (anything but
low-pressure bars) should be minimized or eliminated [9, 10, 15]

3.3 Material and Assembly Processing

3.3.1 Avoid Applying Compressive Loads on Plated Surfaces

Additional care should be taken to avoid mechanical damage to tin finished surfaces because
external compressive stress has been thought to be a driver in whisker formation. Spring fixtures
or turning of nuts or screws can introduce localized mechanical stress. Compressive stress can
also be introduced through bending operations. These external stresses may contribute to
whisker formation, although experimental results have been mixed. [3, 5, 8, 15, 23, 33]

3.3.2 Conformal Coat or Foam Encapsulation Over Whisker Prone Surfaces

If components with tin finish must be used, government and industry subject matter experts
strongly recommend the application of a conformal coating to retard possible tin whisker growth,
to contain any whisker growth within the coat, and to prevent any whiskers from shorting exposed
conductors. [1, 2, 3, 8, 12, 15]
Obvious limitations of using conformal coating or foam encapsulation over tin finish are the
possible variability in the quality and thickness of the coating coverage. Experts warn that when
applying conformal coating to dense assemblies, the coat should not bridge the gap from one
surface to another, providing a direct path for potential whiskers. Coating fully under mounted
components such as Pin Grid Arrays (PGAs), Ball Grid Arrays (BGAs), and Chip Scale Packages
(CSPs) may also be difficult. When conformal coating is applied in a spray process, the coat must
be sprayed from several angles to prevent shadow areas created by high profile components. [3,
20]
Experiments using Uralane 5750 conformal coating indicate that the coating reduced the growth
rate, and therefore whisker length, but whiskers still grew and were strong enough to grow
through conformal coating. A NASA-GSFC experiment reported whiskers growing through 0.25
mil thick Uralane 5750 after 2.5 years of storage at room ambient. No whiskers penetrated a 2 mil
thick coat after 3 years. [11]
It has been shown by analysis that an exposed whisker cannot penetrate another coating layer
as the whisker begins to buckle. [12] However, whiskers that have grown through coating can still
short to exposed surfaces or to other whiskers. There is some evidence that whiskers may be
attracted to each other through electrostatic forces increasing the likelihood of whiskers shorting
to other whiskers. [11, 12, 20]
It has also been demonstrated experimentally that conformal coating can restrict the availability of
tin sufficiently to minimize the risk of plasma formation in low pressure environments. However,
the type of coating material and the minimum thickness of coating necessary to preclude plasma
formation has not been determined. Similarly, it has been shown that foam can prevent sustained
arcing, but the effects of foam type, foam density, pore size, etc. have not been evaluated. [1, 8]
Although Uralane 5750 is the only material with substantial experimental data regarding
whiskers, it is thought that other materials should reduce whisker growth rate as well. There are
multiple considerations when selecting a conformal coat material. Other characteristics, such as
modulus and CTE should be considered to prevent cracking coated part bodies. Properties of
some potential conformal coat materials are provided in Table 1. [3]

8
 GEIA-GEB-0002

Table 1 – Potential Conformal Coat Materials [3]

Material Silicone Parylene Urethane Acrylic Epoxy
Modulus (MPa) 1-4 45-75 24 8-11 14-69
Shore Hardness 30A Rockwell 80R 50A NA 65-89
o
CTE (ppm/ C) 160-190 35-70 140-510 55 20-100
o
Tg ( C) -45 NA 40-70 15-43 120
o
Temperature Range ( C) -65 to 200 NA -65 to 125 -65 to 125 -65 to 200
Reworkable Acceptable Difficult Acceptable Good Acceptable
Whisker Resistance No data available. No data available. 50µm thick No data No data
Uralane 5750 available available
Currently not Likely to be able found to constrain
considered to to constrain tin whiskers from a
have sufficient whiskers. whisker prone test
strength to contain coupon for over 3
conductive years.
whiskers.

3.3.3 Heat treatments

As stated in Section 3.2.5, heat treatments have been very promising in preventing whisker
formation, but test results are not consistent. These sorts of treatments can often be performed at
the printed circuit board level. It should be noted that these methods will not impact already
existing whiskers and care must be taken not to damage other components on the board. [1, 2, 3,
8, 13, 15, 19]

3.3.4 Solder Dip Tin-finished Surfaces

Hot solder dipping of tin-finished leads and surfaces using a tin-lead-based solder will help
reduce whisker formation by relieving stress in the tin. The heat can increase grain size, and the
tin-lead alloy is less prone to whisker formation. Because many parts, particularly those with
glass-to-metal seals, can be damaged through thermal shock during the solder dip, most cannot
be dipped all the way to the body. This standoff distance, usually between 10 and 50 mils, would
still be at risk for whisker growth. There is also a risk of whiskers on any pure tin inside the device
that could not be solder dipped. [1, 2, 3, 8]

3.3.5 Replate Whisker Prone Areas

Some manufacturers may be willing to strip the pure tin plate from finished products and re-plate
using a suitable alternative plating material such as tin/lead or nickel. Such processes should be
reviewed to determine the potential for affecting the reliability of the original product (e.g.,
chemical attack on component materials). [1, 2, 3]

9
GEIA-GEB-0002

4 Conclusions

The recent use of pure tin (Sn) finishes as an economical lead-free (Pb-free) plating option has
renewed concern over the threat of electronic system failure due to tin whiskering. Much of the
technical information needed to eliminate or significantly mitigate the risk imposed by tin whiskers
remains unknown and will require extensive additional research. Large variation in growth rates
and dormancy periods, difficulty in test repeatability, and the lack of a well understood
acceleration mechanism makes reliable testing difficult. Quantification of the risk or reliability over
time is simply not possible with the present knowledge base. The most obvious mitigation
strategy for removing the threat of tin whiskers is to avoid parts with pure tin finishes and to be
vigilant in reviewing parts received. However, each user will need to review their applications and
risk tolerance on a case-by-case basis.

10
 GEIA-GEB-0002

Bibliography
[1] "NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Tin Whisker Home Page”, http://nepp.nasa.gov/whisker/
[2] "Tin Whisker Concerns and Recommendations." GIDEP Agency Action Notice AAN-U-02-104, 11 July
2002
[3] M. Osterman, "Tin Whisker Mitigation Guide - A guide for mitigating the risk of tin-whiskers as a failure
source in electronic hardware." CALCE EPSC and the University of Maryland, Release 1.0, Created
7/3/2002 Updated 8/28/2002
[4] J. Brusse, "Tin Whisker Observations on Pure Tin-Plated Ceramic Chip Capacitors", Proceedings of the
American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers (AESF) SUR/FIN Conference, 24-28 June 2002, pp. 45-
61
[5] W.J. Choi, T.Y. Lee, K.N. Tu, N. Tamura, R.S. Celestre, A.A. Macdowell, Y.Y. Bong, L. Nguyen, G.T.T
Sheng, “Structure and kinetics of Sn whisker growth on Pb-free solder finish”, Electronic Components
and Technology Conference, 2002. Proceedings. 52nd , 28-31 May 2002, pp. 628 -633
[6] K.N. Tu, K. Zeng, “Reliability issues of Pb-free solder joints in electronic packaging technology”,
Electronic Components and Technology Conference, 2002. Proceedings. 52nd, 28-31 May 2002, pp.
1194 –1200
[7] R. Schetty, “Tin Whisker Growth and the Metallurgical Properties of Electrodeposited Tin,” Proceedings
of the IPC/JEDEC International Conference on Pb-free Electronic Assemblies, pp. 137-145, held in San
Jose, CA, 1-2 May 2002.
[8] J. Brusse, G. Ewell, and J. Siplon, "Tin Whiskers: Attributes and Mitigation", Capacitor and Resistor
Technology Symposium (CARTS), pp. 67-80, 25-29 March 2002.
[9] Y. Zhang, C. Xu, C. Fan, J. Abys, A. Vysotskaya, "Understanding Whisker Phenomenon: Whisker Index
and Tin/Copper, Tin/Nickel Interface", Proceedings of the IPC SMEMA Council APEX, pp. S06-1-1 thru
S06-1-11, January 2002
[10] C. Xu, Y. Zhang, C. Fan, J. Abys, L. Hopkins, F. Stevie, "Understanding Whisker Phenomenon - Driving
Force For The Whisker Formation", Proceedings of the IPC SMEMA Council APEX, pp. S06-2-1 thru
S06-2-6, January 2002
[11] J.S. Kadesch, and J. Brusse, "The Continuing Dangers of Tin Whiskers and Attempts to Control them
with Conformal Coat", NASA's EEE Links Newsletter, July 2001
[12] H. Leidecker, and J.S. Kadesch, "Effects of Uralane Conformal Coating on Tin Whisker Growth",
Proceedings of IMAPS Nordic, The 37th IMAPS Nordic Annual Conference, pp. 108-116, 10-13
September 2000.
[13] Y. Zhang, "Electroplated Tin: Whisker Test, Results and Prevention", Proceedings IPC Works
Conference, Miami, USA, 2000.
[14] R. Schetty, "Minimization of Tin Whisker Formation for Lead-Free Electronics Finishing", Proceedings
IPC Works Conference, Miami, USA, 2000.
[15] L. Hymes, "Shaving Tin Whiskers", Proceedings IPC Works Conference, Miami, USA, 2000.
[16] J. Brusse, "Tin Whiskers: Revisiting an Old Problem", NASA's EEE Links Newsletter, December 1998.
[17] NASA Parts Advisory NA-044A, “Tin Whiskers,” NASA/GSFC Code 562, 17 December 1998
[18] ASTM B545–97e1, “Standard Specification for Electrodeposited Coatings of Tin”, 10 October 1997
[19] P. Harris, “The Growth of Tin Whiskers”, International Tin Research Institute (ITRI), Publication No. 734,
1994.
[20] M.E. McDowell, “Tin whiskers: a case study”, Aerospace Applications Conference, 1993. Digest., 1993
IEEE , 1993, pp. 207-215.
[21] “Electronic Component, Tin Plating, Whisker Growth”, GIDEP Problem Advisory BA-P-92-01, 19 July
1992
[22] Wolfert & Vo, “Assessment of Pb-free Finishes for Leadframe Packaging,” IPC Elec. Circuits World
Convention 2002, paper IPC56

11
GEIA-GEB-0002

[23] B. Dunn, “Whisker formation on electronic materials,” ESA Scientific and Technical Review, vol. 2, no. 1,
1976
[24] S. Lal, “An Evaluative Study of Lead-free Deposits in High-speed Applications,” American Electroplaters
and Surface Finishers SUR/FIN Conference 2001
[25] Tobin, M., “Tin Whiskers: An Overview of the Mechanisms That Drive Their Growth”, Proceedings IPC
Works Conference, Miami, USA, 2000.
[26] Baudry, I. etal, “Focused Ion Beam in Microelectronics Packaging Applications – Leadfree Plating
Analysis”, Soldering & Assembly Technology, No. 3, 2001
[27] R.M. Fisher, L.S. Darken, and K.G. Carroll, “Accelerated Growth of Tin Whiskers,” Acta Metallurgica,
vol. 2, 1954, pp. 368-372
[28] G. Stupian, “Tin Whiskers in Electronic Circuits,” Aerospace Report No. TR-92(2925)-7, pp. 1-21,
December 20, 1992
[29] V.K. Glazunova, “A Study of the Influence of Certain Factors on the Growth of Filamentary Tin Crystals,”
Kristallografiya, vol. 7, no. 5, 1962, pp. 761-768. As reported in [30].
[30] G. Galyon, “Annotated Tin Whisker Bibliography,” Monography published by NEMI, 2003
[31] C.H. Pitt and R.G. Henning, “Pressure-Induced Growth of Metal Whiskers,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 35, 1964,
pp. 459-460
[32] J. Franks, “Metal Whiskers,” Nature, vol. 177, 1956, p. 984
[33] B. Dunn, “A Laboratory Study of Tin Whisker Growth,” European Space Agency (ESA) STR-223, 1987,
pp. 1-50
[34] S.M. Arnold, “The Growth and Properties of Metal Whiskers,” Proc. Am. Electroplaters Soc., vol. 43,
1956, pp. 26-31. As reported in [30].
[35] B. Dunn, “Mechanical and Electrical Characteristics of Tin Whiskers with Special Reference to
Spacecraft Systems,” European Space Agency (ESA) Journal, vol. 12, 1988, pp. 1-17.

12
 GEIA Document Improvement Proposal
If, in the review or use of this document, a potential change is made evident for safety, health, or technical
reasons please fill in the appropriate information below and mail or FAX to:

Government Electronics and Information Technology Association (GEIA)

Standards & Technology Department
2500 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22201
FAX: (703) 907-7968

Document No. Document Title:

Submitter’s Name: Telephone No.:

FAX No.:
E-mail:
Address:

Urgency of Change:
Immediate: At next revision:
Problem Area:
a. Clause Number and/or Drawing:

b. Recommended Changes:

c. Reason/Rationale for Recommendation:

Additional Remarks:

Signature: Date:

FOR GEIA USE ONLY

Responsible Committee:

Chairman:

Date comments forwarded to Committee Chairman: