why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

wrote in message
...

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

It costs a bit more.

In article
,
wrote:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

If you're asking why 60-40 still exists, I'd chalk it up to residual
demand from when it *was* the universal standard. I suppose there are
companies around who still have that formulation in their process
specifications and it's easier to keep buying it than to rewrite the
documentation.

An old buddy of mine, his next door neighbor brother in law used to own
an old crapped out 1966 Alfa Romero convertible car.That was back in the
1970s.One afternoon, he was out there trying to patch up the rusted out
floor pan of that car with a bar of straight lead.Of course, that didn't
work out at all.
cuhulin

wrote in news:16430-476307C0-390@storefull-
3258.bay.webtv.net:

An old buddy of mine, his next door neighbor brother in law used to own
an old crapped out 1966 Alfa Romero convertible car.That was back in the
1970s.One afternoon, he was out there trying to patch up the rusted out
floor pan of that car with a bar of straight lead.Of course, that didn't
work out at all.
cuhulin



pure lead used to be used for filling body ripples and dents,before Bondo
and plastic fillers.
Lead's wide "plastic" range was well suited for that task.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

In article MiI8j.79$TZ4.1@trnddc02, mike wrote:

wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

You better hide under the sheets, now. The Non-Sequitur police are
coming to get you.

wrote:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

Uh... 63-37 has lead in it.

The 63 is tin, the 37 lead. Traditionally, tin has been more expensive than
lead, so eutectic solder cost more than 60-40.

"mike" wrote in message news:MiI8j.79$TZ4.1@trnddc02...
wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

Not true at all. There are plenty of organisations that are still legally
allowed to use 60/40..... Schools colleges/military/telecoms/space etc. Plus
many more who don't care about lead free....

In article ,
says...

"mike" wrote in message news:MiI8j.79$TZ4.1@trnddc02...
wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

Not true at all. There are plenty of organisations that are still legally
allowed to use 60/40..... Schools colleges/military/telecoms/space etc. Plus
many more who don't care about lead free....

Plus lead helps prevent the formation of 'tin whiskers'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_whiskers

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross

In article ,
"William Sommerwerck" wrote:

wrote:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

Uh... 63-37 has lead in it.

The 63 is tin, the 37 lead. Traditionally, tin has been more expensive than
lead, so eutectic solder cost more than 60-40.

I don't think you'll find that to be true these days (i.e., last twenty
years or so) because solder prices are driven more by volume than the
commodity values of tin and lead. As a WAG, maybe 100 times as much
63/37 as 60/40 is sold, so I believe the premium is on the less common
formulation. If you can show me a cite to the contrary, I *might* be
willing to stand corrected. It has been many years since I priced 60/40.

In article
,
wrote:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because sometimes you want mush.

Eutectic is either solid, or liquid.

Formulations off eutectic have a range of mushiness, which can be of use.

And they have higher melting points, which can be of use in multipart
assemblies, where you might use 50-50, 60-40 and 63-37 to assemble and
solder a series of parts.

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by

In article ,
Ecnerwal wrote:

In article
,
wrote:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because sometimes you want mush.

Eutectic is either solid, or liquid.

Formulations off eutectic have a range of mushiness, which can be of use.

And they have higher melting points, which can be of use in multipart
assemblies, where you might use 50-50, 60-40 and 63-37 to assemble and
solder a series of parts.

Interesting. I've not heard of this before. Do you speak from:

1 experience
2 rumor
3 speculation

Not wanting to be confrontational, just curious. Wikipedia lists melting
points as:

63/37: melts between 180-185°C
60/40: melts between 183-190°C
50/50: melts between 185-215°C

I'm not aware of any soldering process that is able to control
temperature so closely as to not melt one, while melting another of
those formulations. Can you elaborate?

Smitty Two wrote in
news
In article ,
Ecnerwal wrote:

In article
,
wrote:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because sometimes you want mush.

Eutectic is either solid, or liquid.

Formulations off eutectic have a range of mushiness, which can be of
use.

And they have higher melting points, which can be of use in multipart
assemblies, where you might use 50-50, 60-40 and 63-37 to assemble and
solder a series of parts.

Interesting. I've not heard of this before. Do you speak from:

1 experience
2 rumor
3 speculation

Not wanting to be confrontational, just curious. Wikipedia lists melting
points as:

63/37: melts between 180-185°C
60/40: melts between 183-190°C
50/50: melts between 185-215°C

I'm not aware of any soldering process that is able to control
temperature so closely as to not melt one, while melting another of
those formulations. Can you elaborate?

When I worked as a process engineer for Sprague Electric Co, in the early
70's, making capacitors and resistors, we used 95/5 solder, I think it was
tin/lead with a small amount of silver, to assemble the capacitors and
resistors.

One reason for that choice was so that the parts would withstand normal
60/40 soldering when boards were assembled.

Like you, I have some doubts about the kind of close control that would be
needed to use mixes as close as the ones given.






--
bz 73 de N5BZ k

please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.

remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap

bz wrote in
98.139:

63/37: melts between 180-185°C
60/40: melts between 183-190°C
50/50: melts between 185-215°C

I'm not aware of any soldering process that is able to control
temperature so closely as to not melt one, while melting another of
those formulations. Can you elaborate?

When I worked as a process engineer for Sprague Electric Co, in the
early 70's, making capacitors and resistors, we used 95/5 solder, I
think it was tin/lead with a small amount of silver, to assemble the
capacitors and resistors.

One reason for that choice was so that the parts would withstand
normal 60/40 soldering when boards were assembled.

Like you, I have some doubts about the kind of close control that
would be needed to use mixes as close as the ones given.



I doubt it can be that accurately done. I use various indium based solders
for making small assemblies of optics and electronics when I want to get
different melting points, and you need well defined narrow ranges for ech
solder, with at least 10 degrees apart between each rangem ideally, because
an assembly might easily see several degrees variation unless you're
prepared to control the conditions with expensive rigour and to wait a long
time for equlibrium to settle each time you change the temperature. Two
solders wth overlapping ranges for melting would be useless.

mike wrote:
wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

Not true, most if not all UK wholesalers still sell 60/40 leaded solder.

Ron(UK)

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because sometimes you want mush.

Eutectic is either solid, or liquid.

Formulations off eutectic have a range of mushiness, which can be of use.

....
Not wanting to be confrontational, just curious. Wikipedia lists melting
points as:

63/37: melts between 180-185°C
60/40: melts between 183-190°C
50/50: melts between 185-215°C

I'm not aware of any soldering process that is able to control
temperature so closely as to not melt one, while melting another of
those formulations. Can you elaborate?

It's not whether you can melt it, it's how it hardens. Eutectic solder
hardens very suddenly. 60/40 solder goes through a fleeting stage of being
viscous but not yet completely hard. I'd like to hear more about this, but
I'm told some people prefer the "feel" of one vs. the other.

In article ,
"mc" wrote:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because sometimes you want mush.

Eutectic is either solid, or liquid.

Formulations off eutectic have a range of mushiness, which can be of use.

...
Not wanting to be confrontational, just curious. Wikipedia lists melting
points as:

63/37: melts between 180-185°C
60/40: melts between 183-190°C
50/50: melts between 185-215°C

I'm not aware of any soldering process that is able to control
temperature so closely as to not melt one, while melting another of
those formulations. Can you elaborate?

It's not whether you can melt it, it's how it hardens. Eutectic solder
hardens very suddenly. 60/40 solder goes through a fleeting stage of being
viscous but not yet completely hard. I'd like to hear more about this, but
I'm told some people prefer the "feel" of one vs. the other.

If you're going to quote me, I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't snip all
contextual relevance out of the discussion. As it is, your post might
appear to the casual observer as bearing some relevance to the topic at
hand. It may be a response to the OP, but it certainly isn't relevant to
the sub-topic of sequential soldering using a variety of formulations.

"Smitty Two" wrote in message
news
In article ,
"mc" wrote:

It's not whether you can melt it, it's how it hardens. Eutectic solder
hardens very suddenly. 60/40 solder goes through a fleeting stage of
being
viscous but not yet completely hard. I'd like to hear more about this,
but
I'm told some people prefer the "feel" of one vs. the other.

If you're going to quote me, I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't snip all
contextual relevance out of the discussion. As it is, your post might
appear to the casual observer as bearing some relevance to the topic at
hand. It may be a response to the OP, but it certainly isn't relevant to
the sub-topic of sequential soldering using a variety of formulations.

I am indeed trying to discuss the original topic of the thread. The
original poster's question interested me, an nobody has responded to it.

I have a roll and a half of a roll of old solder, I bought back in the
1960s/1970s.A few old soldering irons too.Two of them are American
Beauty (brand name) soldeing irons and another one is an Ungar with
several interchangable tips in a metal box and I have a few old (I like
old, old, old stuff) Weller soldering irons.My favorite kind of a
soldering (electric) iron I use is an old electric wood burning iron.
When you are through using some solder from a roll of solder, use some
pliers to squeeze the end of the solder on the roll tight.That keeps the
liquid inside of the solder roll from leaking out.I don't like the new
solder.If you want lead, buy some made in China toys.
cuhulin

wrote in news:a232ec67-c9bd-42ad-99f3-
:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Probably because the gradual solidification makes dry joints less likely.
I'm not even sure it it does make them less likely, but I bet it does
because you're not relying only on ductility of a solid to maintain good
structure during thermal contraction. If the two metals in the alloy don't
solidify together, one can flow to fill pores that might form in the other,
or between the solder and the parts joined with it.

Lostgallifreyan wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Probably because the gradual solidification makes dry joints less likely.
I'm not even sure it it does make them less likely, but I bet it does

If by "dry joints" you mean what I was taught as "cold solder" -- where
the solder crystallizes and looks like the dull side of a sheet of
aluminum foil, then you've got it backwards.

63/37 solder passes from liquid to solid so fast that there's almost no
chance for the solder to crystallize (which is usually caused by
movement during the cooling phase) and so has _less_ chance of forming
cold joints. 63/37 also has a lower melting point than 60/40 which
means that theoretically it puts less heat stress on the component being
soldered.

In practice I don't think the difference in melting points makes much
difference, at least for hand soldering, since the iron's tip
temperature isn't controlled that tightly. But I can definitely say
from personal experience that cold solder joints are much less frequent
with 63/37 than 60/40. Not impossible, though.

--
Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com
It's bad luck to be superstitious

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:31:48 GMT, Lostgallifreyan wrote:

wrote in news:a232ec67-c9bd-42ad-99f3-
:

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Probably because the gradual solidification makes dry joints less likely.
I'm not even sure it it does make them less likely, but I bet it does
because you're not relying only on ductility of a solid to maintain good
structure during thermal contraction. If the two metals in the alloy don't
solidify together, one can flow to fill pores that might form in the other,
or between the solder and the parts joined with it.

From my days at Mullard in the early 1960's, I seem to remember that
thermostatically controlled irons were not used, there were horrible large
things like an ice pick!

Multicore set the standard in the UK for many years and what they
suggested/supplied was what industry used. As everything was hand soldered then,
it had to be a solder and flux with as wide an operating temperature range as
possible.

Peter
--
Peter & Rita Forbes
Email:
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel
http://www.stationary-engine.co.uk

"Peter A Forbes" wrote in message
...

Multicore set the standard in the UK for many years and what they
suggested/supplied was what industry used. As everything was hand soldered
then,
it had to be a solder and flux with as wide an operating temperature range
as
possible.

During my brief stint in England (1977-78) I got some Multicore solder and
found it very easy to work with. Is it still available? In the USA?

On 60/40 vs 63/37 solder see:

http://www.kester.com/en-us/technica...KnowledgeID=29

Kester says that because of the gradual solidification, 60/40 gives thicker
coatings when you want to tin things with it. This may or may not be
advantageous depending on what you're doing.

mc wrote:
"Peter A Forbes" wrote in message
...

Multicore set the standard in the UK for many years and what they
suggested/supplied was what industry used. As everything was hand soldered
then,
it had to be a solder and flux with as wide an operating temperature range
as
possible.

During my brief stint in England (1977-78) I got some Multicore solder and
found it very easy to work with. Is it still available? In the USA?



Ersin Multicore Savbit, 5 core solder. lovely stuff, it has a small
percentage of copper added to the alloy to preserve bit life, and still
available in the UK.

Ron

mc wrote:
"Peter A Forbes" wrote in message
...

Multicore set the standard in the UK for many years and what they
suggested/supplied was what industry used. As everything was hand soldered
then,
it had to be a solder and flux with as wide an operating temperature range
as
possible.

During my brief stint in England (1977-78) I got some Multicore solder and
found it very easy to work with. Is it still available? In the USA?



I refer the honourable gentlemen to the following data
http://www.farnell.com/datasheets/85070.pdf
Ron

One of my old Popular Mechanics (maybe it was Popular Science) magazines
I read back in the 1960s had an article about how to solder anything.Get
a small round wire brush for your electric drill (drill motor) and load
the brush up real good with solder.Apply the loaded up with solder wire
brush to a piece of wood, plastic, whatever, and you can solder a piece
of wire to the whatever.I never tried it out though.
cuhulin

wrote in message
...
One of my old Popular Mechanics (maybe it was Popular Science) magazines
I read back in the 1960s had an article about how to solder anything.Get
a small round wire brush for your electric drill (drill motor) and load
the brush up real good with solder.Apply the loaded up with solder wire
brush to a piece of wood, plastic, whatever, and you can solder a piece
of wire to the whatever.I never tried it out though.

This is a joke, right? First you're telling us about nails made red-hot by
microwaves, now you're telling us how to solder to plastic.

If it is a joke(s), then I guess the hard back book about the magnetron
and my old magnazine I read about soldering anything are jokes.Page 103
in my January 2008 Popular Science magazine has an ad about Chrome
Anything.The ad says, Now you can chrome wood, plastic, metal, even
ceramic with no special equipment required.Seeing is Believing.Real
mirror finish.Get your sample at www.alsacorp.com or by phone at
(323) 581 5200
cuhulin

wrote:
If it is a joke(s), then I guess the hard back book about the magnetron
and my old magnazine I read about soldering anything are jokes.Page 103
in my January 2008 Popular Science magazine has an ad about Chrome
Anything.The ad says, Now you can chrome wood, plastic, metal, even
ceramic with no special equipment required.Seeing is Believing.Real
mirror finish.Get your sample at www.alsacorp.com or by phone at
(323) 581 5200
cuhulin


x ray spex anyone?

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:18:04 -0500, "mc"
wrote:

"Peter A Forbes" wrote in message
.. .

Multicore set the standard in the UK for many years and what they
suggested/supplied was what industry used. As everything was hand soldered
then,
it had to be a solder and flux with as wide an operating temperature range
as
possible.

During my brief stint in England (1977-78) I got some Multicore solder and
found it very easy to work with. Is it still available? In the USA?


Multicore is now owned by Henkel, and the solder products seem to have been
dropped, although solder pastes etc are still produced.

We buy our cored solder in from France.

Peter
--
Peter A Forbes
Prepair Ltd, Rushden, UK

http://www.prepair.co.uk
http://www.prepair.eu

wrote in message
...

If it is a joke(s), then I guess the hard back book about the magnetron
and my old magnazine I read about soldering anything are jokes. Page 103
in my January 2008 Popular Science magazine has an ad about Chrome
Anything.The ad says, Now you can chrome wood, plastic, metal, even
ceramic with no special equipment required.Seeing is Believing. Real
mirror finish.Get your sample at www.alsacorp.com or by phone at
(323) 581 5200

But this isn't the same thing.

Chrome and other metals have commonly been applied to plastics. The Polaroid
SX-70 is an outstanding example, but hardly the only one. Metal plating is
usually done by applying copper layer to the plastic, then electroplating.

Soldering is not plating. Soldering consists of forming an alloy bond
between two metals.

In article , "William Sommerwerck" wrote:

wrote in message
...

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

It costs a bit more.

If you wiggle the connection. you have a lot better chance
of making a connection with 60-40. First thing I think of.

greg

In article , (GregS) wrote:
In article , "William
Sommerwerck" wrote:

wrote in message
...

why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

It costs a bit more.

If you wiggle the connection. you have a lot better chance
of making a connection with 60-40. First thing I think of.

Well, maybe I'm wrong.
One way to find out.

greg

About thirty years ago, I read an article in a motorcycle magazine.The
article was about do not solder up wire connections.Article stated that
vibrations can make those rigid soldered up connections break loose.
cuhulin

Get a straight bar of lead and a gas torch and try to ''fix'' a rusted
out floor belly pan on a 1966 Alfa Romero convertible car.
Tell her I Love her.
cuhulin

wrote in message
...
About thirty years ago, I read an article in a motorcycle magazine.The
article was about do not solder up wire connections.Article stated that
vibrations can make those rigid soldered up connections break loose.

So what keeps the connection "connected", if not solder? Are the wires
wrapped around a bolt and nut? That isn't very stable. What about wire nuts
(which are commonly used in household wiring)?

huh ????

that solder has 37 % lead in it.!!!!
and thats crap , i work in a company that uses exclusively 60-40 solder and
we ship weekly 3500 pcbs a week to the eu .
where u get your info ?



all
"mike" wrote in message news:MiI8j.79$TZ4.1@trnddc02...
wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.

all
"mike" wrote in message
news:MiI8j.79$TZ4.1@trnddc02...
wrote:
why is 63-37 eutectic solder not universally preferred?

Because you can't sell it in the EU if it's got lead in it.




"mark krawczuk" wrote in message
...
huh ????

that solder has 37 % lead in it.!!!!
and thats crap , i work in a company that uses exclusively 60-40 solder
and we ship weekly 3500 pcbs a week to the eu .
where u get your info ?


When the EU find out, how you get out of jail ?

Arfa