Poll: electrical connector crimpers/dies

I have always soldered, cleaned and covered with heatshrink. I have NEVER
had a problem with soldered electrical terminals. On the other hand, I have
had many problems with crimped terminals done by others. As I get older, I
need one of those soldering jigs with a BIG magnifying glass.

Soldering is easy to learn and much more secure than crimped terminals.

Bill Daniels

"abripl" wrote in message
ups.com...

Crimped terminals are easier to learn.....
Thats probably the main reason why so many in aviation use it. I can
see the average person trying to solder with a clunky, 100W, steaming
iron and doing a bad job. With crimping there is "little" to learn. But
soldering is hardly a dying art. Zillions of hams, electronic buffs,
use it. A decent temperature controlled soldering iron with a little
practice will prevent wicking past the terminal into the wires - and
not really a problem in most cases. Cold joints can be inspected and
redone. Two big reasons for soldering: 1. Vibration - a real problem in
aviation, promotes crimps loosening. 2. Oxydation/Corrosion, especially
with disimilar metals - seen lots of corroded crimps while soldered
terminals are still holding.

"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message ...
:
: Soldering is easy to learn and much more secure than crimped terminals.
:
: Bill Daniels
:


That is just not true. The reality is that you do need to have the correct crimping tool, which is the topic of this
thread, and with those correct tools, the connection will be superior to a soldered connection. I solder my connections
because I do not have the correct crimping tools, not because it is more secure...

Dan DeVillers...

I solder my connections because I do not have the correct crimping tools,
not because it is more secure...

Did you have correct crimping tools in the past to verify they are
superior?

"abripl" wrote in message oups.com...
:
: I solder my connections because I do not have the correct crimping tools,
: not because it is more secure...
:
: Did you have correct crimping tools in the past to verify they are
: superior?
:

Yes, in the many (electrical/electronic) companies where I have worked.

".Blueskies." wrote in message
...

"abripl" wrote in message
oups.com...
:
: I solder my connections because I do not have the correct crimping
tools,
: not because it is more secure...
:
: Did you have correct crimping tools in the past to verify they are
: superior?
:

Yes, in the many (electrical/electronic) companies where I have worked.


Excellent point, because there are wear limits and approved methods of
testing connections, both for security and to verify that the correct
crimper was used. When applied correctly, the result is a "cold weld",
similar to that achieved in "wire wrap", rather than a gas tight seal.

I haven't checked in a *long* time, and don't have reference material
currently in my posession; but it stands to reason that any effective
testing of the security of a termination/connection would constitute
destructive testing. Therefore, if one is really dedicated to verifying
that the "secure", one would need to make a number of sample
connections--both before and after the actual production run for the
airplane project--and make all of the appropriate measurements on the
samples.

A partial list of good information sources might include:
Amp (for their terminals and related crimpers)
Burndy (for their terminals and related crimpers)
The Boeing Workmanship Manual
The McDonnell-Douglas Workmanship Manual (presumably out of print)
The ATA Spec. 100 Manual
(There are sure to be government publications as well, but I don't
know the titles)

Alternatively, soldering has been used successfully for many years, but
*requires* that the strain relief extend beyond the farthest point to which
solder may be wicked. This nearly always means larger, heavier, and more
expensive connectors and/or terminal strips.

Therefore, if you are trying to "only add lightness", avoid solder!

Peter

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
. ..
".Blueskies." wrote in message
...

"abripl" wrote in message
oups.com...
:
: I solder my connections because I do not have the correct crimping
tools,
: not because it is more secure...
:
: Did you have correct crimping tools in the past to verify they are
: superior?
:

Yes, in the many (electrical/electronic) companies where I have worked.


Excellent point, because there are wear limits and approved methods of
testing connections, both for security and to verify that the correct
crimper was used. When applied correctly, the result is a "cold weld",
similar to that achieved in "wire wrap", rather than a gas tight seal.

I haven't checked in a *long* time, and don't have reference material
currently in my posession; but it stands to reason that any effective
testing of the security of a termination/connection would constitute
destructive testing. Therefore, if one is really dedicated to verifying
that the "secure", one would need to make a number of sample
connections--both before and after the actual production run for the
airplane project--and make all of the appropriate measurements on the
samples.

A partial list of good information sources might include:
Amp (for their terminals and related crimpers)
Burndy (for their terminals and related crimpers)
The Boeing Workmanship Manual
The McDonnell-Douglas Workmanship Manual (presumably out of print)
The ATA Spec. 100 Manual
(There are sure to be government publications as well, but I don't
know the titles)

Alternatively, soldering has been used successfully for many years, but
*requires* that the strain relief extend beyond the farthest point to
which
solder may be wicked. This nearly always means larger, heavier, and more
expensive connectors and/or terminal strips.

Therefore, if you are trying to "only add lightness", avoid solder!

Peter


I see, with regret, that I neglected to include my final comment; which is:

I have not been working on airplanes lately; but when I do have to make
connections, I do solder for the same reason and with the same limitations
that .Blueskies already cited.

Peter