People who say "because that's just how it is" or "end of discussion"
as a rule are not worth my time talking to.
I can't find any good statistics on ESD damage. There was one
reference to a comparative test that showed a reduction in production
rejects of about 1%, but it comes as an example out of a book
promoting ESD measures and there are no details about the type of
circuit or handling. It's not an easy experiment to make - how do you
create typical handling and how do you prove a part is damaged or not?
Once you introduced ESD measures you create no more data -
before/after comparisions are difficult since ESD measures are often
accompanied with other improvements in handling, such as preventing
mechanical damage.
I store all parts in (cheaper) non-esd safe containers (bins and
drawers made from polystyrene or polypropylene) and have never found
one that wouldn't work, that I could recall now. Same for the tools,
they are slightly cheaper in the non-ESD version so I use those.
Adding up the cost for ESD safe environment would easily run into
several hundred $, so that doesn't seem cost effective to me.
Half way measures can be more dangerous than nothing, for example
walking with regular shoes on ESD flooring builds much more charge
than on regular flooring, but of course there are some effective
measures that are also free, such as first touching the chassis or
ground.
By the way, did you know they sell wireless ESD wrist straps now?
<
http://www.amazon.com/Cables-Unlimited-ACC-1410-Wireless-Static/dp/B000A1E6FY>
Now make up your own opinion about _that_.
ST
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Benjamin Blumer <b3nzilla@...> wrote:
> It is compelling to have someone with credentials stand on one side of the
> fence. But I think it would be much more compelling, and more satisfying,
> to have said person explain their reasoning.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>