"Ignoramus25589" wrote in message
...
I will soon need to crimp many terminals on many short, but thick, 1
gauge or 0 gauge cables.

Crimpers are just too expensive.

Is there some way to get acceptable crimps without a crimper.

I guess, also, that I could buy one on ebay and later sell it, but I
would prefer to avoid that.

i


Solder

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:19:44 GMT, the renowned "Tom Gardner"
wrote:


"Ignoramus25589" wrote in message
...
I will soon need to crimp many terminals on many short, but thick, 1
gauge or 0 gauge cables.

Crimpers are just too expensive.

Is there some way to get acceptable crimps without a crimper.

I guess, also, that I could buy one on ebay and later sell it, but I
would prefer to avoid that.

i


Solder

For very, very low values of "acceptable". ;-)


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
. ..

"Ignoramus25589" wrote in message
...
I will soon need to crimp many terminals on many short, but thick, 1
gauge or 0 gauge cables.

Crimpers are just too expensive.

Is there some way to get acceptable crimps without a crimper.

I guess, also, that I could buy one on ebay and later sell it, but I
would prefer to avoid that.

i


Solder

Soldering, correctly done, is probably the best method for electrical
conductance, but solder isn't an acceptable mechanical joint. In many code
jurisdictions, soldering is prohibited -- mostly because many people won't
or can't do it well, but also because of the mechanical weakness of the
joint.

They always taught us in electronics schools, "Make a secure mechanical-wrap
before soldering; solder isn't glue."

LLoyd

In article , Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
says...

They always taught us in electronics schools, "Make a secure mechanical-wrap
before soldering; solder isn't glue."

Oddly this is actually incorrect. Yep, they taught the wrong
thing, but it is so widely accepted nobody ever questions the
mil-spec 'wrap three times before soldering' approach.

To convince yourself otherwise, make a simple lap joint using
stranded wire, with the lap being only two or three wire
diameters. Copper wire of course.

Then tension the joint until it fails by pulling on the wire
ends.

The joint does not come apart, even with standard 60/40 lead tin
solder.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , Ignoramus25589 says...


As far as soldering. I guess for larger cables I need to use a propane
torch. Is that right?

Or O/A. The trap here is that as you try to solder the joint,
the solder simply wicks up the stranded wire and leaves you with
a dry joint and effectively solid wire.

The trick is to mechanically compress the sranded wire so capillary
action cannot wick the solder up the line.

For smaller stuff I use a stainless hemostat.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

I recently had to solve this exact problem with zero budget and no time at all.
My workaround proved remarkably robust. I had to butt join two welding cables,
the light-gage kind used with smaller machines (don't know the number, sorry). I
cut a short piece of 3/8" soft copper tubing from the end of a roll I have, and
as it was tough to get over the wire, decided it needed the ends formed outwards
slightly like two mini-funnels on the ends. I took two 1/2" ball bearings, set
on on a bench block, held the short tube vertically touching the top of the
ball, put the other ball on top of the tube, and then tapped the top ball with a
hammer, driving the balls together. This did just what I needed, put a neat
little flare on both ends at once. Then I was able (just) to slide both
(stripped) cable ends into the opposing ends of the piece of copper tube. Then I
just put the tube in the bench vise and squashed it. It isn't particularly
pretty, but it seems quite strong. You may be able to see the joint in the
picture on this writeup, although a ground clamp is attached to it:

http://www.tinyisland.com/arcBlowFix.html

I don't know if this would work for the OP or not, but it worked well for me.

GWE

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:19:44 GMT, the renowned "Tom Gardner"
wrote:


"Ignoramus25589" wrote in message
...
I will soon need to crimp many terminals on many short, but thick, 1
gauge or 0 gauge cables.

Crimpers are just too expensive.

Is there some way to get acceptable crimps without a crimper.

I guess, also, that I could buy one on ebay and later sell it, but I
would prefer to avoid that.

i


Solder

For very, very low values of "acceptable". ;-)

I agree. A good mechanical connection is preferred.

Harold

jim rozen wrote:
In article , Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
says...


They always taught us in electronics schools, "Make a secure mechanical-wrap
before soldering; solder isn't glue."


Oddly this is actually incorrect. Yep, they taught the wrong
thing, but it is so widely accepted nobody ever questions the
mil-spec 'wrap three times before soldering' approach.

To convince yourself otherwise, make a simple lap joint using
stranded wire, with the lap being only two or three wire
diameters. Copper wire of course.

Then tension the joint until it fails by pulling on the wire
ends.

The joint does not come apart, even with standard 60/40 lead tin
solder.

Jim


Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT. If the joint is subject to
even slight vibration or flexure, the solder-only joint will eventually
fail. Maybe sooner than later. The reason for the mechanical connection
is to rigidize the joint before applying the solder. Then the solder is
NOT subject to excessive flexure.

This has become less important in most modern electronics, where the
solder joints have little mechnaical strain applied to them (due to the
tiny size and weight of many components).

Similar things can be said for corrosion and thermal expansion in the
solder joint.

Dan Mitchell
============

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:05:05 -0400, the renowned "Daniel A. Mitchell"
wrote:

jim rozen wrote:
In article , Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
says...


They always taught us in electronics schools, "Make a secure mechanical-wrap
before soldering; solder isn't glue."


Oddly this is actually incorrect. Yep, they taught the wrong
thing, but it is so widely accepted nobody ever questions the
mil-spec 'wrap three times before soldering' approach.

To convince yourself otherwise, make a simple lap joint using
stranded wire, with the lap being only two or three wire
diameters. Copper wire of course.

Then tension the joint until it fails by pulling on the wire
ends.

The joint does not come apart, even with standard 60/40 lead tin
solder.

Jim


Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT.

It certainly cold flows a lot.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

In article , Daniel A. Mitchell says...

Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT.

I don't think that alloy shows work hardening.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , Spehro Pefhany says...

Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT.

It certainly cold flows a lot.

I've never seen it cold flow, either, for that matter.

Not to be disagreeable but I've used simple lap joints in
vehicle electrics for *years* with no ill effects.
They don't embrittle and snap, they don't turn to
putty and ooze apart. At least none of mine have.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT. If the joint is subject to
even slight vibration or flexure, the solder-only joint will eventually
fail.

I have personally fixed a few "cold" joints in old TVs just by
reheating the solder joint. I suspect the failed connection was
related to mechanical stress.

On 13 Oct 2005 13:27:13 -0700, the renowned jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Spehro Pefhany says...

Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT.

It certainly cold flows a lot.

I've never seen it cold flow, either, for that matter.

Ever used screw terminals on tinned stranded wire?

Usually you have to re-tighten them the next day.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:47:45 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

Ever used screw terminals on tinned stranded wire?
Usually you have to re-tighten them the next day.

I've heard these described as "firestarters".

On 13 Oct 2005 21:48:53 GMT, the renowned Dave Hinz
wrote:

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:47:45 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

Ever used screw terminals on tinned stranded wire?
Usually you have to re-tighten them the next day.

I've heard these described as "firestarters".

LOL.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

In article , Spehro Pefhany says...

Ever used screw terminals on tinned stranded wire?

Usually you have to re-tighten them the next day.

I would say that's not cold-flowing - if you went back
in one minute they'd be just a loose as a day later.

The screw can muster enough force to permantly deform
the lead tin, as soon as you tighten it down.

This is different than what, for example, teflon does
under a screw, which is more of a long term creep effect.

Granted we are discussing semantics here, but there *are*
metals like indium for example, that really do cold-flow.
I can do indium seal flange bolts up tight to torque one
night, and the next night they really are slack again.
And it takes that long for it to relax.

My point is that there is no need to perform those western
electric 'wrap both way' splices, and no need to do the
'stick the wire though the tube socket lug and wrap it around
five times,' before soldering. Sure they taught that, but
if you do it the simple way the electronics are every bit
as robust and a heck of a lot easier to build and repair.

This from somebody who's been inside more halicrafters radios
than he cares to admit.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Chuck Sherwood" wrote in message
...
Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT. If the joint is subject to
even slight vibration or flexure, the solder-only joint will eventually
fail.

I have personally fixed a few "cold" joints in old TVs just by
reheating the solder joint. I suspect the failed connection was
related to mechanical stress.

More likely due to corrosion. I've experienced such a phenomenon on a
microphone input, which had started acting as a detector and sending a radio
station to the amplifier. "Honest, Mr. Madsen, I didn't have a radio on
while I was running the sound system."

I was vindicated when I found the corroded connection.

Harold

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Lloyd E.
Sponenburgh
says...

They always taught us in electronics schools, "Make a secure
mechanical-wrap
before soldering; solder isn't glue."

Oddly this is actually incorrect. Yep, they taught the wrong
thing, but it is so widely accepted nobody ever questions the
mil-spec 'wrap three times before soldering' approach.

To convince yourself otherwise, make a simple lap joint using
stranded wire, with the lap being only two or three wire
diameters. Copper wire of course.

Then tension the joint until it fails by pulling on the wire
ends.

The joint does not come apart, even with standard 60/40 lead tin
solder.


Aw, Jim! I'm not parrotting some mantra I heard a few times. I was a pro
in electronics for decades until I retired, then started a new business.

A solder joint may start out stronger than the wire -- if you do some
'overlap' as you cite. (But that's not a compact joint.) But solder
strength deteriorates with age and mechanical and thermal cycling.

If you don't provide a mechanical joint before soldering you are
deliberately inviting a failure down the road. Since I've seen many
thousands of such failures, that's not speculation on my part.

LLoyd

In article , Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
says...

Aw, Jim! I'm not parrotting some mantra I heard a few times. I was a pro
in electronics for decades until I retired, then started a new business.

I've been a pro the business too, for decades. Still am in fact.
And I've never seen solder joints simply deteriorate over time for
no reason. If exposed to weather or chemicals, yes. But then even
a triple wrapped tube socket will come undone if you leave it out in the
rain for a few years.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Lloyd E.
Sponenburgh
says...

Aw, Jim! I'm not parrotting some mantra I heard a few times. I was a
pro
in electronics for decades until I retired, then started a new business.

I've been a pro the business too, for decades. Still am in fact.
And I've never seen solder joints simply deteriorate over time for
no reason.

But I didn't say, "for no reason". A solder joint never exposed to heat,
oxidation, or mechanical stress will last virtually forever. That's not the
case with joints in most 'normal' physical environments.

A tour through the insides of an old BC-458 will give you a good look at how
well soldering can be done for _rugged_ use. An old "Silvertone" Sears TV
will show you the opposing case study.

LLoyd

jim rozen wrote:

In article , Daniel A. Mitchell says...


Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT.


I don't think that alloy shows work hardening.

Jim


Agreed that the term 'work hardening' (in a metallurgy sense) was ill
used. Fatigue would be a better term.

What I meant was that it loses it's ductility, fatigues (crystallizes)
under flexure, and loses it's integrity to such an extent that the joint
fails mechanically (as well as electrically).

The composition of the particular solder used has a lot to do with this.
High lead solders fatigue more than high tin solders. The addition of
some silver can increase the ductility.

Many solder joints can be disconnected by merely flexing them a few
times. Add heavy components, ill mounted and free to move around
(including the cables themselves), and the joints will likely fail due
to fatigue. That's the reason for the strong mechanical mounting of all
components including the cables ... it relieves the sensitive solder
joint of much of this strain, flexure, and vibration.

As stated, the much less massive components now used, as well as PC
Boards and other modern mounting techniques, have greatly reduced the
need for such strong mechanical mounting. It was the norm for most good
soldering circa W.W.-II however.

Dan Mitchell
============

In article , Lloyd E.
Sponenburgh says...

A tour through the insides of an old BC-458 will give you a good look at how
well soldering can be done for _rugged_ use.

And I've got a half dozen a****er kent radios that have been well used
over the years. They all use simple lap joints and none of them
have any degradation.

Look the properties of lead tin solder are well known. It doesn't
cold flow, it doesn't work harden. If something is attacking
lead tin solder chemically, wrapping the wire around the terminal
a half dozen times isn't going to help. The joint's still going
to fail.

Solder joints rely explicitly on the mechanical properties of
the solder to form a gas-tight joint. Think about it: if the
mechanical connection has a chance to take *any* strain then the
gas-tight nature of the joint's been compromised.

All that mil-spec gear looks great (and I love the aroma, too) and
it was a great idea to quantify the skills and train the solderers
in a uniform fashion. But the joints are excessive IMO.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" wrote in message
.. .

| Soldering, correctly done, is probably the best method for electrical
| conductance, but solder isn't an acceptable mechanical joint. In many
code
| jurisdictions, soldering is prohibited -- mostly because many people won't
| or can't do it well, but also because of the mechanical weakness of the
| joint.
|
| They always taught us in electronics schools, "Make a secure
mechanical-wrap
| before soldering; solder isn't glue."
|
| LLoyd

I stayed out of this one to see what would come up, but what I've seen
and worked has yet to be mentioned, so I'll offer my experience:

1. Cold joints started out as bad from the very beginning. It's only by
luck that they passed through life without causing a problem, so it's not a
matter of _if_ they fail, it's when. Only when corrosion and moisture can
work its way down inside the joint defect will the mechanical contact that
got the joint by for so long will send the joint into final electrical
failure. You can go a long way towards not having cold joint problems by
using eutectic solder (63/37) which doesn't have that temperature zone the
joint passes through where movement will cause crystallization and
separation of one component of the alloy. I can't recall for sure which
component has a lower melting point (tin?) that will crystallize.
2. What we often call a cold joint is really an incomplete flow of the
joint, in other words, a bad fillet with insufficient wetting. The flux
can't be removed from inside the joint, so eventually the above failure mode
pops up. Often there's a mechanical failure involved, too. Flux has this
lovely habit of attracting moisture, which is why the flux must be removed.
Acid fluxes are very bad for electrical and electronic connections for
similar reasons.
3. Stranded wires and soldering are rarely a good idea unless the wire
connection can be supported. If soldering stranded wires, a heat sink
should be used to prevent wicking of solder up inside the strands of the
wire. Where the rigid solder-soaked strands stop and flexible wire begins
there will be a spot highly prone to fatigue, and a guaranteed place to
break. When soldering stranded wires to terminations for whatever reason,
you MUST provide mechanical support, either in the form of a shrink
sleeving, mechanical support such as ties or clamps, or whatever suits the
application. It's more expensive tooling-wise to crimp wires, but the
strands have an evenly tapered flex section that distributes mechanical
movement over a larger part of the wire, thus reducing fatigue. Soldering
solid wire strands to a terminal is no big deal, usually, since the wire
itself is the mechanical support, but only in purely static equipment will
solid wiring ever be used. It's also a lot harder to work with, as many
know.
4. For the sake of welding cable, flexibility and high current capacity is
the reason for the high strand count. The less strands you have for a given
outside diameter the less circular area (thus ampacity) and less flexibility
you have. Since the individual strands are that much smaller, crimping is
even more critical due to the lower individual strength of the strands,
which will flake away at a soldered joint where the wicking ends. You can
support the wire all you want, but for the hassle of keeping the wire from
wicking and providing mechanical support either way, crimping is the more
reliable way to go hands down.
5. When the solder joint itself is the sole point of mechanical support, the
solder alloy will fatigue, work harden, and fail just like any other metal
will. Since the solder is so much softer than the metal it's joining, the
conductor needs the mechanical support (either inside or out of the joint)
to prevent the solder from being a stressed part of the connection.
Electronic technicians are familiar with large components on circuit boards
that must have mechanical support to keep things from ripping apart. I
recall capacitors on an A-4 upper beacon which was always coming in with
broken solder joints. I started securing it with a tie and RTV and never
had one of my own repairs ever come back to me. How the A-4 managed to have
a service life of over thirty years and not have that corrected baffles me
still.

I really like what's called copalum splices and terminals, even for copper
wire, because the intense pressure actually causes the aluminum to flow into
and around the wire completely, making a 100% sealed and perfect connection,
but they aren't cheap and the tooling even worse. The high quality of the
connection is the reason they're used for aluminum terminals, since the lack
of any resistance or corrosion entry point prevents any thermal movement
which causes fatigue and fires and gave aluminum wiring a very bad name. The
terminals allow aluminum wire to work to its best adantages.

If I made a boo-boo or need correction/clarification somewhere, by all
means have at it!

This thread is almost over and everyone will go home without anyones
mind being changed. But I will put in my bit anyway.

I think making a mechanical connection before soldering is usually a
good thing. Not because it is needed after the joint is soldered, but
because it prevents any movement while the joint is cooling. You all
have seen the frosty look of a joint that was moved as the solder
solidified. So I agree with Jim that a mechanical joint is not
necessary, but it may prevent a " cold ' solder joint.

And then I agree with Carl too. A solder joint is only so strong. If
it is being mechanically stressed very much it will fail.
But if the solder is only supporting a short bit of wire, the stress
will be well below the yield point of the solder, and you won't have
any fatigue problems.

And I think the reason you should not tin stranded wires being held by
screws, is not so much that solder cold flows, but you do have thermal
changes to contend with.
You get the solder deforming when there is expansion, and then oxygen
can get in when there is contraction.

Dan

Harold sez: ". . .More likely due to corrosion . . ."
That's about it - but - the joint has to be open in the first place for
corrosion to occur. A good solder joint won't corrode to the extent of
failure; a bad solder joint is already an "open" invitation for corrosion.
Corroded joints act, electrically, as diodes. A piece of loose "tie-wrap"
(tower jargon for radiator hose clamp) on a tower can form a diodes capable
of supporting destructive intermodulation interference to receivers on the
tower. That's probably what got into Harold's microphone. Motorola's
famous engineer, Russ Larson, once found corrosion inside a large neon sign
to be the cause of extreme intermod on a building antenna site in Kansas
City. Russ proved the point by pouring some motor oil down into the sign.
This type of corrosion-diode formed interference is recorded ad infinitum in
the history of crowded radio communications sites.

Bob Swinney


"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Sherwood" wrote in message
...
Perhaps, but solder work-hardens ... a LOT. If the joint is subject to
even slight vibration or flexure, the solder-only joint will eventually
fail.

I have personally fixed a few "cold" joints in old TVs just by
reheating the solder joint. I suspect the failed connection was
related to mechanical stress.

.. I've experienced such a phenomenon on a
microphone input, which had started acting as a detector and sending a
radio
station to the amplifier. "Honest, Mr. Madsen, I didn't have a radio on
while I was running the sound system."

I was vindicated when I found the corroded connection.

Harold

In article , Robert Swinney says...

Motorola's
famous engineer, Russ Larson, once found corrosion inside a large neon sign
to be the cause of extreme intermod on a building antenna site in Kansas
City. Russ proved the point by pouring some motor oil down into the sign.

I love stuff like this. This is the same as the doctor who proved
that ulcers are caused by bacteria, by infecting himself deliberately
and then curing it with antibiotics.

Or Manx's propensity to showing racers that their carbs bowls were
frothing on the track, by unhooking the carb bowl from the body
(this was when they were two piece btw) and suspending them from
the frame with one of his shoelaces. Smoothed the bike right out,
always.

Working in a research environment has lead me to understand that
the best *aha* moment often is accompanied by an educated guess
followed immediately with a practical test, using whatever materials
and tools are at hand. I worked with a guy named John Chi who was
famous for doing that sort of thing, he would say "I think that
rf is getting into the cryostat" and would wrap the thing in alumium
foil and festoon it with battery clips to hold it all on tight, and
the boing the real signal would show up as the interference went
away.

One guy like that is worth about a hundred others who only know how to do
powerpoint presentations. Give me the masking tape and aluminum foil
fellow any time to figure the stuff out. Only then do I ask for the
swiss modelmaker....
Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================