XO-1.5's sudden death - oven resurrected!
cjlhomeaddress at gmail.com
Tue Oct 16 00:27:00 EDT 2012
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
<mavrothal at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Mon, 10/15/12, Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: XO-1.5's sudden death - oven resurrected!
>> To: "James Cameron" <quozl at laptop.org>, "Yioryos Asprobounitis" <mavrothal at yahoo.com>, "OLPC Devel" <devel at lists.laptop.org>
>> Date: Monday, October 15, 2012, 4:41 PM
>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 4:33 PM,
>> James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org>
>> > I recommend never using that household oven for food
>> again, because we
>> > have no clear idea what poisons might be ingested, or
>> what effects
>> > they might have.
>> James raises an important safety issue. In spite of
>> OLPC's careful
>> attention to "green design", electronics manuafacturing (or
>> re-working) certainly involves a some level of exposure to
>> materials. With heating there are potentially toxic
>> metal vapors or
>> volatile organic components from the plastics (particularly
>> halogenated organic molecules) that could present a food
>> safety risk.
>> If you find yourself unable to take his advice to dedicate
>> that oven
>> to non-food use, I would at least check to see if it has an
>> cleaning" cycle of prolonged high heat and I would do this
>> in a
>> well-ventialted work environment.
> Safety was/is certainly a concern and is good that is brought up here.
> I did make sure I was alone in the house in a well ventilated kitchen with the hood running at the time and I did run the oven for an additional hour at 250 C to get rid of any possible residue.
> I would certainly not recommend turning one's kitchen to reflow repair facility, but I must contest the logic of "avoid what you do not know". Living in a world that less than 0.1% of the chemicals that we are coming in contact with every day have pass any serious, if at all, safety testing, this approach is more philosophical than useful or protective.
> Having said that, in cases like the XO boards I think that we could and *should* know, at least the chemicals involved
This link is the RoHS declaration for the XO-1. I have no knowledge
of the potential changes in chemical composition between the XO-1 and
the XO-1.5 or of the availability of the RoHS certificate for the
XO-1.5 at this point in time.
I imagine this would probably be a reasonable approximation of what an
XO-1.5 RoHS sheet would look like, but that is purely speculation on
More information about the Devel