Re: Solder vs. Crimp

[quk@isham-research.demon.co.uk (Phil Payne)]

In message <3736DC9D.9C2F2D1B@together.net> John Cunningham writes:

> yeah, that's kind of what i figured, and i can agree with.  my guess is Audi had
> more trouble with bad mechs melting insulation and doing bad mechanical joint
> solder jobs than it was worth.  BUT to claim some propaganda about crimping
> being better than soldering is ridiculous.

As a specialist trained cable and wire engineer ...

Soldered joints don't react well to flexing.  Solder tends to advance
down the wire (technically a 'flexible', or 'flex' for short) because
of capillary attraction, and extends further down the centre than is
visible at the surface.  For as far as the solder travels, the wire
is stiffened, so the flex point moves away from the connector by
differing amounts on the inside and the outside of the wire.

Fundamentally, soldering is better for joints that don't have to flex.
You will notice that where a flexible cable is joined using solder,
there is _always_ provision for strain relief so that the actual
flexing action doesn't reach the joint.  Hi-fi connectors are a good
example - solder one to a cable without clipping it into the strain
relief, and how long does the joint last?

--
 Phil Payne
 Phone: 0385 302803   Fax: 01536 723021
 (The contents of this post will _NOT_ appear in the UK Newsletter.)