Give us a break. When practical a properly done solder joint is always
more reliable than a connector.


I'll tell ya what, tnom/Brian/whoever: Both of you remember that I
have made challenges to you before. Brian refused accept my challenge
to test his claims about the harmonic specifications of his amp, and
tnom refused to accept my challenge to test his magic antenna (both
challenges are still open, BTW). So here's a REALLY SIMPLE challenge
to both of you, assuming you really are two different people (which I
seriously doubt):

Changing the subject now?

You are the one who has to disprove me. Put up or shut up.

Show me a connector of ANY age (a connector as I specified previously,
where the insulation is mechanically secured to the connector with the
wire) that failed due to lack of structural integrity and I'll
reconsider your argument.

I never said structural integrity. I said galvanic action, oxidation
and migration of foreign materials.

You only specified specific connectors after you stated that
connectors are more reliable than solder joints. I take it that this
means that your imaginary amp will use these specified connectors
because you know as I know that great care must be taken with
connectors that pass high current or low voltage. If you want them to
have any possibility to be sound after thirty years of use you must
use good connectors.

Because after 30+ years of experience on
hundreds upon hundreds of different pieces of electronic equipment,
from televisions to broadcast transmitters to transistor radios to
computers to military radio and telegraph equipment to you name it, I
have never seen one fail. Not one. And while you are looking, keep a
tally on how many wires you find dangling free after breaking off a
board, or hanging on to a solder joint by just a strand or two.

Any wire, using a connector or soldered, can break loose if allowed
to move repeatedly.

Until you find one, I'll consider this issue resolved.

You are full of crap if you are suggesting that thirty or forty year
old equipment will not have connector reliability problems when
compared to similar equipment with solder connections.

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 17:09:50 -0400, wrote in
:


Are you sure that the reason automobile manufacturers use connectors
is because they believe a connector is more reliable than a properly
done solder joint?


No, it also has to do with servicability, which is another reason
-not- to solder the modules together.

Now.... do you have an LEGITIMATE concerns or are you just trolling?


You actually suggested that for reliability reasons a connector is
preferred over a proper solder joint.

A quote from you:

" Interconnection wires that are soldered have a high rate of
failure in abusive environments. That's why auto manufacturers use
connectors, even under the hood"

Give us a break. When practical a properly done solder joint is always
more reliable than a connector.


I'll tell ya what, tnom/Brian/whoever: Both of you remember that I
have made challenges to you before. Brian refused accept my challenge
to test his claims about the harmonic specifications of his amp, and
tnom refused to accept my challenge to test his magic antenna (both
challenges are still open, BTW). So here's a REALLY SIMPLE challenge
to both of you, assuming you really are two different people (which I
seriously doubt):

Show me a connector of ANY age (a connector as I specified previously,
where the insulation is mechanically secured to the connector with the
wire) that failed due to lack of structural integrity and I'll
reconsider your argument. Because after 30+ years of experience on
hundreds upon hundreds of different pieces of electronic equipment,
from televisions to broadcast transmitters to transistor radios to
computers to military radio and telegraph equipment to you name it, I
have never seen one fail. Not one. And while you are looking, keep a
tally on how many wires you find dangling free after breaking off a
board, or hanging on to a solder joint by just a strand or two.

Until you find one, I'll consider this issue resolved.





Frank, give Brian a break, he's still trying to figure out how to make a 3x3
piece of metal work for a ground plane with the Wilson 1000. He's in way
over his head lately.

On 22 Sep 2006 04:55:24 -0700, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote:

+++Frank Gilliland wrote:
+++ As far as "matching problems", if you are referring to mismatched gain
+++ in transistor pairs, that only causes harmonics. If the mismatch is
+++ great enough to cause one transistor to run hotter than the other,
+++ that would be due either to component failure or ****-poor quality
+++ control.
+++
+++No, I'm talking about impedance matching problems. On the input is not
+++a big issue... only reducing the available drive... but a mismatch on
+++the output is critical... and causes big problems with excessive
+++transistor heating... leading to premature failure.
+++
+++www.telstar-electronics.com
**************

Mismatches only stress transisitors when they are driven beyond the
manufacturer's reccommended operating points. Like Frank said,
ampheads don't care about specifications. If a transistor is speced
for 100 watts then getting 150 watts out it is better.

james

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 21:20:20 -0400, wrote in
:


Give us a break. When practical a properly done solder joint is always
more reliable than a connector.


I'll tell ya what, tnom/Brian/whoever: Both of you remember that I
have made challenges to you before. Brian refused accept my challenge
to test his claims about the harmonic specifications of his amp, and
tnom refused to accept my challenge to test his magic antenna (both
challenges are still open, BTW). So here's a REALLY SIMPLE challenge
to both of you, assuming you really are two different people (which I
seriously doubt):

Changing the subject now?


Nope, just invoking your previously established lack of credibility in
response to your current whinings.


You are the one who has to disprove me. Put up or shut up.


In case you misunderstood this the first dozen times I explained it,
my challenge is an attempt to PROVE your claim; there is nothing to
DISprove because you proved nothing to begin with.


Show me a connector of ANY age (a connector as I specified previously,
where the insulation is mechanically secured to the connector with the
wire) that failed due to lack of structural integrity and I'll
reconsider your argument.

I never said structural integrity. I said galvanic action, oxidation
and migration of foreign materials.


While you are looking for that faulty connector, maybe you should also
dig up a 30 year old PC board and take a good close look.


You only specified specific connectors after you stated that
connectors are more reliable than solder joints.


You were the first to voice your "concerns" about connectors and this
was my reply:

"Connectors are a necessity, but they are only problematic if you make
them problematic. And since I haven't specified what connectors will
be used and where, don't you think you are jumping the gun a bit?"

Actually, I suspected that you weren't jumping the gun at all; that
you were just looking for reasons to trash the design before it even
got started. It appears that my suspicions were correct.


I take it that this
means that your imaginary amp will use these specified connectors
because you know as I know that great care must be taken with
connectors that pass high current or low voltage. If you want them to
have any possibility to be sound after thirty years of use you must
use good connectors.


Gee, you think?


Because after 30+ years of experience on
hundreds upon hundreds of different pieces of electronic equipment,
from televisions to broadcast transmitters to transistor radios to
computers to military radio and telegraph equipment to you name it, I
have never seen one fail. Not one. And while you are looking, keep a
tally on how many wires you find dangling free after breaking off a
board, or hanging on to a solder joint by just a strand or two.

Any wire, using a connector or soldered, can break loose if allowed
to move repeatedly.


I think it might be better to hold off your attack until at least some
aspects of the design have been finalized. That way you won't sound
like a complete moron and blow all your remaining credibility before
you have the chance to attack the design on a -reasonable- argument,
if there should ever be one.


Until you find one, I'll consider this issue resolved.

You are full of crap if you are suggesting that thirty or forty year
old equipment will not have connector reliability problems when
compared to similar equipment with solder connections.


Facts don't lie.


So where's that connector? Or are you passing the buck to your
tag-team partner?

On a sunny day (Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:43:01 -0400) it happened
wrote in :


Many connectors are these days just pressed on (ethernet, phone, etc) and just
as or more reliable then soldered connectors.

Over thirty years?

Possibly

You can slow down but you can't stop galvanic action, oxidation or
migration of foreign materials.

When the same materials are used, say copper clamped in copper (as in
the cable), and gold touching gold (as in the connector surfaces), and
if no motion (any connector is limited by a number of matings), there
will be little 'migration', no galvanic action.
Oxidation may happen and does any time with copper, and the same with solder!

If you look a bit at the practical side, I had a TV repair shop for many years.
The MOST frequent fault was, in TVs with connectors for the modules, that
the connectors pins became un-soldered in the main PCB, due to thermal cycling.
The copper pin expands, it pushes the solder outwards around it, then it contracts,
the solder stays where it is.
The same happens with other components that get hot, like coils, transformers,
transistors, and if you can still remember these, ALWAYS with tube sockets soldered
in PCBs.
I have made good money repairing TVs by just re-soldering the boards.

People who ever worked with wire-wrap will know that wire-wrap is more
reliable then soldering, and I KNOW soldering.

It is exactly the fact that solder - copper or whatever layer that can cause
problems.

But that does not mean you should not solder.

When I learned soldering, you had to put the wire through the hole, wrap it around the
pin or whatever, and _then_ solder it.
To prevent shearing of.

You like soldering, I will show you something, now I have to go to the attic
to find some board, be right back,
OK, have it, now some pictures:
Z80 processor board, component side:
ftp://panteltje.com/pub/s/z80_board.jpg
same, _wiring_ side:
ftp://panteltje.com/pub/s/wiring1.jpg
ftp://panteltje.com/pub/s/wiring2.jpg

To give you an idea, it is about 544 connections, all fly-by-wire so to speak,
none are marked, this board still works after what is it? 20 years?
Has been upgraded for some more newer chips 10 years ago or so.
Was a computer prototype, build in 3 evenings.

You will note it collected dust, has been dropped, thrown around, abused.
and still all wires are intact, 544 solder connections by hand with multi-
strand cable, you need 1) good vision, 2) steady hand, 3) good soldering iron,
4) absolute memory what you did already route.
In this time, when I did this sort of thing, there were no user affordable
PCB CAD programs, let alone user affordable multi-layers PCBs.

So, anyways, I think I know about soldering, like it even, so I am not biased
if I say it is not perfect.

On a sunny day (22 Sep 2006 16:11:13 -0700) it happened "Telstar Electronics"
wrote in
. com:

wrote:
Give us a break. When practical a properly done solder joint is always
more reliable than a connector.

Right on...

100% wrong, see my other posting.

On a sunny day (Fri, 22 Sep 2006 21:20:20 -0400) it happened
wrote in :


You are full of crap if you are suggesting that thirty or forty year
old equipment will not have connector reliability problems when
compared to similar equipment with solder connections.

mmm, that board I did show you in the other post?
The 64 pole ac connector works 100% after 20 years.
And likely always will.
Even if you put it on a vibration bench where all the wring will fall off.

wrote:
Give us a break. When practical a properly done solder joint is always
more reliable than a connector.

wrote in
Right on...

Jan Panteltje wrote:
100% wrong, see my other posting.

Jan, you saying that a connector is more reliable than a solder
connection in my opinion is outrageous. Please provide some evidence to
support your claim. You should be able to provide us a few web sites...

www.telstar-electronics.com

On a sunny day (23 Sep 2006 11:49:37 -0700) it happened "Telstar Electronics"
wrote in
.com:

wrote:
Give us a break. When practical a properly done solder joint is always
more reliable than a connector.

wrote in
Right on...

Jan Panteltje wrote:
100% wrong, see my other posting.

Jan, you saying that a connector is more reliable than a solder
connection in my opinion is outrageous.

You are free to your opinion, please read my other posting,
look at the pictures provided too.

Please provide some evidence to
support your claim.

I suggest you learn how to use google.
The URL is:
www.google.com

You _will_ have to specify the context of your tests,
that is the scientific method.
I _never_ did say 'any connector' is more reliable then 'any solder
connection'.

So define your connector and define your solder connection.
You are just generalising the subject, YOU make claims that are not specified,
so if you have some experience, other then mains plugs, let us hear about it.
And mains plugs do not normally fail, at least not over here.

Bye ;-)

"Telstar Electronics" wrote in message
oups.com...
Frank Gilliland wrote:
Ok. So what does that have to do with the difference between a PCB
mounted amp and a chassis-wired amp?

I think the problem here is always one of repeatability. Anyone can
fiddle around for a time impedance matching and make one amp work...
but when you plan to make a number of units... having wires running all
around, and putting components in different physical locations
unit-to-unit makes performance unpredictable. There is another problem
that shouldn't be overlooked about the wiring method... that is the
problem of manufacturability. The PCB version is usually much easier
and faster to build... not a insignificant advantage when building
numerous units.

www.telstar-electronics.com

Point to point wiring does not have to mean the birds nest constuction you
describe. RF wiring could well be stamped out metal pieces mounted on Teflon
or ceramic. very repeatable, very stable. It could also mean the isolted pad
constuction where smalll sqares of PC board are glued to a substrate. This
has proven reliable, obviously an improvement over PC board material could
be found.and better mounting methods than glue.

There are two big problems I see with most amp designs. One is biasing, even
the cheapest Boomer would be much improved if it had an adequae bias
circuit. The other is proper setup. I doubt if someone mostly interested in
how well they can make the power meter swing will pay much attention to
setup instuctions. Attenuators on the front end would be a joke. How would
establish proper drive for a given setup with only a cheap power/VSWR meter.
FET amps really dont have a stability problem if properly designed. The idea
of using a switching power supply to take the voltage up to 50 volts or more
is a good one that has already been proven in audio amps. It is impossible
to make an amp idiotproof, just when you thingk you have along comes a
better idiot.