Talk:Soldering

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Metalworking, an attempt to cleanup, categorize and expand Wikipedia articles related to metalworking. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page, where a list of open tasks is maintained.

I removed the How-to section by User:216.138.194.68, since it was very long, concerned mostly/only with pipe soldering. If the user wishes to write a how-to (a good thing in itself!), I've suggested (on that user's talk page) that it should be in a Wikipedia:How-to article oa a Wikibook. --Janke | Talk 10:04, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] What is the first stuff in the top of the article doing there?

[edit] Pronunciation

We might want to add a note about this: in the UK it tends to be soul-dering, whereas in the US it's sodder-ing, with a silent L.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 15:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Does anybody know why that is? I've always said solder, but everybody else here says sodder. 205.174.22.28 23:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Just to add to the confusion, I often hear it said (in NE USA) as if it were spelled saudering, or even sauldering. To keep myself honest, I just rotate between all the pronunciations. human 23:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Obsolete technologies

The electronics section seems to be talking about through-hole components. There's nothing wrong with that, but we should point out that that's a (very) old technology....surface mount is completely dominant these days.

[edit] solder melting temp error?

I think the melting temp of solder is below 450 F (not C as in the article). Comments?? This would be aout 232 C.Nicolem23 16:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I think celsius degrees are OK. Although 200°C is around the melting point of most of the solders used in electronics, other solders exist with a much higher melting point. CyrilB 16:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
60-40 Tin-lead solder has a melting temperature around 370 degrees F. What the article says is that any alloy that melts below 450 C is considered a solder, higher melting-point alloys are considered brazes. 60-40 Tin-lead certainly qualifies as a solder, melting at 370 F. Might not be a bad idea to clear that up if you'd like. Middlenamefrank 18:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Solder as a filler?

This article talks about solder as a filler, but in silver soldering there is never ANY gap between the two pieces to be joined - in fact any gap between the two will usually mean that the join will not be very good. I was once told that if I could see light through the gap between the two pieces, then the join was not tight enough.

Another issue is the silver content of silver solder. This article lists the silver content cutoff point at 40%, but I know for a fact that you can get it up to 76% silver content, and sometimes higher for specialist applications such as jewelery (I've known some jewelers to use pure silver as if it were solder, but that's a different kettle of fish).

Just wanted to know what people's views were on this. ▫Bad▫harlick♠ 00:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm an EE, so my real-life experience is from an entirely different professional position, but it looks to me like we're on the same page here. As the article says, the (rather arbitrary) cutoff point between 'soldering' and 'brazing' is 450 °C (842 °F). I see from the silver page that the melting temp of pure silver is 961.78 °C, or 1763.2 °F. That places it way beyond the 'soldering' threshold. I'm no expert on the formulations, especially given the inclusion of other elements (bismuth?, lithium??), but maybe 40% silver is pretty near to the 450C limit? So anything over 40% silver is TECHNICALLY silver brazing, not solding or 'hard soldering'? It doesn't sound like we're on different pages. A better structural joint (brazing) requires closer setup tolerances.Middlenamefrank 06:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I've not heard of "hard soldering" referred to as "brazing", so I'm quite sure that there's a definition between the two that nobody has noticed yet. I can cite sources if need be - I'm pretty sure that 70% silver content solder and above is still considered solder and still has a fairly low melting point in relation to pure silver. Don't forget that it only takes a little bit of tin to reduce the melting point of a metal quite drastically. Even so, I don't quite agree that there is any kind of established cutoff point in temperature or silver content - even if there was an average level I don't see how we could verify such a claim. Metal generally doesn't seem to care about what someone else has decided - it'll still work as a solder whether someone agrees with it or not. :) ▫Bad▫harlick♠ 15:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Additional Flux Information

It would be good to add something about "no clean" fluxes. With their wire use it seems appropriate to have information about them here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Schneimn (talk • contribs) 20:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

Look at the middle paragraph in the "flux" section. It says "no-clean" fluxes are available and oftentimes perfectly adequate, but might not give sufficient performance in a poorly-controlled, non-production environment. What else would you like to say about them? Middlenamefrank 02:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
The Kester web site and other source say cleaning of rosin-based flux residue is optional and only for appearance; that the residue is non-conductive unless the equipment runs hot enough to melt the residue (over 70 C). --Wtshymanski 17:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I thought removal of non-activated fluxes (R) was optional, but activated (RA) and mildly-activated (RMA) fluxes required removal. Not true? Middlenamefrank 19:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


"a very mild 'no-clean' flux might be perfectly acceptable for production equipment, but not give adequate performance for a poorly-controlled hand-soldering operation."

rosin cored solder usually ued for electronics hand soldering is no-clean, yet is not a problem for hand soldering, even of old parts. It is perhaps inaccurate to describe no-clean as very mild - although certainly far milder than killed spirits. Tabby (talk) 03:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I've read that a large percentage of manufacturers clean "no-clean" fluxes as well as RMA and RA types, mostly to avoid changes in their processes. The R, RMA and RA classifications, as well as the new style (ROL0, ROL1, REM1, etc) provide broad category descriptions for different types of fluxes, but there's a lot of variation between manufacturers, so I don't think you can extract a general cleaning rule from these. For what it's worth, the IPC (general industry and military standard) J-STD-001 Handbook says that ROM1 fluxes (Kester RA "44") do not need to be cleaned for class 1 electronics: consumer electronics that will not cause major loss of money or life if they fail. I think "no-clean" is more of an advertisement than a rule about whether cleaning is truly necessary. In general, you want a flux that is active but won't corrode, and although these two attributes compete, Kester seems to be claiming their "44" flux has achieved both. I sell solder and flux to hobbyists, and spent a lot of time trying to decide what a safe flux would be for non-production projects, and also whether cleaning is necessary. I'd love it if someone could tell me otherwise, but for now my conclusion is that the use of most activated fluxes (at least Kester's RMA and RA)--even without cleaning--will likely not lead to corrosion in non-extreme environments. Manufacturers, of course, are making hundreds of thousands of devices that may need to survive 100 degree F temperature over 10 years in high humidity, and for them to have a very low defect rate, no-clean flux may be the only option. CuriousInventor (talk) 13:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How-to not an encyclopedia article

WP:NOT says under Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information that Wikipedia is not an instruction manual. A tutorial on how to make a soldered connection is part of a Wikibook, not the Wikipedia. An encyclopediac article must avoid second-person address and should not have the flavor of a how-to guide. --Wtshymanski 17:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a good point. Should we just scrap the 'how-to' sections? If we're going to do that I'd rather move them somewhere and link to them, since I think a fair number of people looking up 'soldering' want to know how to do it. Do you know if there is a wikibook entry somewhere for soldering? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Middlenamefrank (talk • contribs) 19:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC).


how-to sections are generally easily converted to encyclopaedic style content by rephrasing them. Tabby (talk) 11:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Another option is to create a wikihow article on www.wikihow.com - it could be even more detailed that way and focus on the how-to aspect. Userafw (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stained Glass

Has anyone noticed that the section on stained glass soldering has absolutely nothing to do with stained glass? 75.5.180.33 14:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Electronic components (pcbs) Beginnerspeak

A fair bit of beginner speak exists in this section.


"A soldering gun at 100 watts output may provide too much heat for printed circuit boards, while a 23 watt iron will not provide enough heat for joining copper roof flashing or large stained-glass lead came."

In fact 100w guns tend to provide to little heat for pcb work, not too much. The reason is time, a gun only on for 20 seconds doesnt develop the heat of an always-on 25w iron. (This is not the only problem with these guns.)


"For attachment of electronic components to a PCB, proper selection and use of flux is the best way to ensure that all solder pads and device terminals remain clean and oxide-free"

It doesnt do that though, it only helps avoid oxidation during soldering. It doesnt prevent oxidation during soldering, as anyone with soldering experience can testify, nor does it ensure joints are clean. Anyone who has soldered old component leads can testify to that.


"The devices must be mounted on the circuit board properly."

not at all, I've successfully and reliably soldered a huge number of entirely unrestrained joints. Its whats recommended to beginners because it simplifies the process, but its in no way a requirement.

Soldering is a very forgiving process, but components ought not to be solely supported by the solder joint - for example, wire leads should be wrapped around lugs on a tag strip before soldering, so that the component will stay put before the joint is completed; through-hole leads should be clinched to hold the part before soldering, also. Having said this, I have used a touch of solder instead of jumper clips for temporary connections - but you shouldn't find this technique in anything intended to be a reliable product. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
My opinion is somewhere in between these two. Small parts (almost all PCB mounted parts in fact) don't need any other mechanical means of attachment. Heavier parts may. Middlenamefrank (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"To achieve a properly heated joint, the soldering iron and the solder must be applied separately to the surfaces to be joined, rather than the iron being applied directly to the solder."

No, again its just beginners advice. Again I've soldered huge numbers of joints reliably by applying the solder to the iron. One merely has to then complete the joint before the flux ceases being active. Beginners are given this advice because they can tend to take an excessive time to make the joint, a time exceeding the life of the hot flux. However if you want to solder rapidly, or to solder with minimum component heating, applying solder direct to the iron is usually the way to achieve both those things.

Again, none of the sources I've read recomment heating the joint through liquid solder - the problem is that this leads to high solder consumption and a good chance of a blob of molten solder running off the joint and landing somewhere it shouldn't. A properly tinned bit is important for heat transfer, since a completely dry tip will have a high thermal resistance (air gap) between the soldering bit and the joint - but you can't drown the joint, either. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Again I'm somewhere in the middle. I almost always use a bit of molten solder on the tip of the iron to increase thermal transfer to the joint, and on small joints that's often all that's needed. Make sure the flux is still active though! Middlenamefrank (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"When the surfaces are adequately heated up, the solder will melt and flow into the joint. The solder supply is then removed from the joint, followed by the heat source."

The solder source is normally removed before the joint flows, not after. It is almost impossible to get proper flow while solder is still being applied to the joint, as flow requires a higher temperature than solder melting point. When enoug solder has been applied the iron is usually kept on the joint a little longer to achieve full wetting & flow.

I dont think even distribution of solder throughout the joint is an aim, nor the norm, nor a requirement for a succesful bond. An uneven distribution with a shape I cant think of the name for is in fact the characteristic appearance of a good through-hole pcb joint.

Again, not my experience - a joint where only 1/3rd the circumferance of the through-hole via is soldered is a joint that will fail, in my experience. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
This time I'll take a side. I don't know of an inspector anywhere that would allow a joint that's not at least ALMOST completely wetted out. If it isn't, it probably wasn't properly flux'ed or heated. Middlenamefrank (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"Excess solder and unconsumed flux and residues must be wiped from the soldering iron tip between joints"

beginner-speak.

Not necessarily - a large blob of carbonized gunk on the tip will make it difficult to make new joints. Again, every reference I've read says keep the tip clean and tinned, borne out by my own experience. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree with shy here too. It may not be NECESSARY to have a clean tip to make a good joint, but it sure makes life easier! Middlenamefrank (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"but the tip of the iron must be kept wetted with solder ("tinned") constantly when hot to prevent oxidation and corrosion of the tip itself."

mostly, yes, but constantly, no. When reprofiling a tip it is normal to heat it up as bare copper, and apply solder only once hot.

Cue controversy now... many seem to think that the popularity of coated tips somehow prohibits the use of uncoated copper tips.

And keeping the tip wetted does not prevent corrosion - this is precisely why coated tips are so popular. Tabby (talk) 11:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I've used unplated and plated tips - the plated ones do last longer, but even a bare loop of #14 copper wire chucked into a soldering pistol will last a long time in an emergency. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I've used 'em both too, and I do believe that keeping any tip tinned makes it last longer. I once broke the tip off a dart when I needed an exceptionally fine point. Middlenamefrank (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"applying solder direct to the iron is usually the way to achieve both those things."

This method can yield soldered pcb joints in about 2 seconds each. Solder on the iron first means greater area of thermal contact to the joint for quicker heating, and as long as the joint is done within a few seconds there is no problem caused. This is pretty standard where high speed hand assembly is used. A high power iron is needed, either thermostatic or one with power boost. Tabby (talk) 03:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I also have a big problem with this sentence as it depends on the type and brand of soldering iron used. "A 100 watt soldering iron may provide too much heat for printed circuit boards, while a 25 watt iron will not provide enough heat for large electrical connectors" It seems he is talking about the old soldering irons that had the premise that more power was better. Modern soldering irons mainly used in the electronics assembly and rework today have a cartridge configuration. The cartridge is composed of a hollow tube with wires inside that in the most advanced systems have a power (24V), ground and sensor cables connected to the very end of the tip where a heating element or resistance is. The resistance then transfers power to the copper (Cu) tip, which in turn melts the solder while transferring energy or heat to the joint or application worked on. While power is important, so is thermal transfer, tip mass and thermal recovery. There are microprocessor controlled 20W irons that will outperform a 70w iron as they have a low mass/power ratio, and great thermal recovery to maintain the temperature and be able to provide continuous stable power. See short video link. http://www.jbctools.com/KB/videosKB/2210penny.wmv —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.8.208.229 (talk) 01:03, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External Link for Consideration

I am certainly in a conflict-of-interest situation, so I would like others to judge the value of the content available at this link:

Video and Joint Gallery A 7 minute overview video, large gallery of good and bad joints, and list of references to other guides.

The site is commercial, but this page is mostly encyclopedic in nature with an attempt to provide references for almost all claims. CuriousInventor (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for being upfront with your conflict of interest, and discussing it here instead of persistently re-adding the link; all unlike some other contributors. This is definitely in the spirit of wikipedia. I've no personal opinion about the site, but I want to thank you for handling the matter so nicely. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 14:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)