Scott wrote:


I just put a glob of solder on the soldering iron tip and dunk the
enameled wire into it until the enamel melts and the solder tins the end
of the wire. Been doing that for over 20 years now....


Really Scott, if it hasn't tinned after 20 years, it probably isn't
going to... hehe, sorry, couldn't help myself! ;^)

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Michael Coslo wrote:

Scott wrote:


I just put a glob of solder on the soldering iron tip and dunk the
enameled wire into it until the enamel melts and the solder tins the
end of the wire. Been doing that for over 20 years now....



Really Scott, if it hasn't tinned after 20 years, it probably isn't
going to... hehe, sorry, couldn't help myself! ;^)

- 73 de Mike N3LI -
LOL! Ha! Good one. I didn't even catch that one My high school
English teacher would probably slap me for that one

Scott
N0EDV

From: (Dave Platt) wrote on Mon, May 26 2008:

In article ,
W3CQH wrote:

Does anybody have the name of the substance that was sold years ago for
removing the enamel coating from wires, or maybe the name of something new?
You would soak the wire in it and it would soften the coating and then you
just wiped the goop off the wire.

I think you're referring to GC Electronics Strip-X. Doesn't seem to
be on the market these days, as best as I can tell.

I found a MSDS which states that it's 70% methylene chloride, 25%
cresol (isomers of cresylic acid), around 5% ammonia, plus some wax
and thickening agents.

General Cement's "Strip-X" hasn't been sold by them for at least
a dozen years. I sent them a letter some time ago, got a nice
reply to that effect from a female-named staffer "who had not
worked for them before that." :-) Their home office is also my
home town. :-)

"Strip-X" worked like a charm. For decades as an over-the-
counter product. Nothing over-the-counter now works as well as
it did from 1948 onwards to whenever they stopped repackaging it.
Note: GC did a lot of repackaging of bulk material and tools as
well as some manufacturing. GC went through a series of
corporate restructures, buys, and buy-outs, just aren't the same
company as when I left Rockford, IL, in 1956.

As a fellow professional, I've tried to find out what other
manufacturers use. Most use a mechanical "stripper" that
abrades coatings...but quite expensive, too much for the average
hobbyist. At least one "makes their own" but is very close-
mouthed on what their "own formula" is...:-)

One poster in an earlier thread stated that it was designed to work
with Formvar insulation, and might not work as well on the newer
Polythermaleze insulation.

The only problems I've ever had with "Strip-X" was with some
surplus Teflon-coated (!) magnet wire obtained decades ago. But,
my last bottle of "Strip-X" dried solid about 8 years ago.

There's a paint-and-finish stripper of a similar name (Klean-Strip
Strip-X) available these days. Like the wire-"Strip-X" it contains
methylene chloride, but it has no cresol or ammonia. Its other
ingredients include toluene, xylene, and methanol, plus a thickener
(it's relatively goopy and would probably have to be wiped off of the
wire using a paper towel or Q-tip or something like that).

I've tried to find one out of three different brands tested,
from Lowes, Home Depot, OSH (Orchard Supply Hardware), and
Do-It Centers. They remove oil-based paints with difficulty
and aren't even close to "Strip-X" for magnet wire, any
coating. Roughly a $60 experiment in trying for a substitute
all of which were unsuccessful. Bummer.

These chemicals all come with fire- and health-hazard warnings... if
you use 'em, do so with proper care and precautions!

The do-gooders done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything. :-( I'd only
been using Strip-X since 1947 and known lots and lots of folks
who stripped magnet wire using Strip-X. No "fires" caused by
the stuff and most of those I knew did not suffer from any
"health-hazards" inhaling (very briefly) the stinky odor from
Strip-X. It's sort of like anything with an odor should have
"Caution: Breathing will eventually result in death!" warnings.

At one time (just about 8 years ago), pure acetone was VERY
hard to get in pint/quart containers. It is an excellent
solvent for lacquers, brush-cleaning, etc. (not good for wire
stripping though). As of about 3 years ago it and a few other
aromatic hydrocarbons started appearing in do-it-yourself
stores. Maybe there's some relaxation in all those dire
predictions, warnings, etc., etc., etc.

My late father-in-law was a polymer chemist. He died in 1977
so can't help me. I just hope that some chemist could come to
the aid of us hobbyists using coated magnet wire and provide
us with a GOOD product like Strip-X was. Meanwhile, it's back
to being VERY careful with a sharp X-Acto knofe and scraping
coatings. With #34 AWG that requires Zen-like calmness...

73, Len AF6AY

In
AF6AY wrote:

General Cement's "Strip-X" hasn't been sold by them for at least
a dozen years.

Here's a link to the "Material Safety Data Sheet" for Strip-X which
shows its components with % by weight of each.

http://www2.itap.purdue.edu/msds/docs/1451.pdf

[67% methylene chloride, 17% phenol, 4% ammonia, 20% inert thickeners]

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN

AF6AY wrote:
...
The do-gooders done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything.

Naaa, it's the people who think they should be rewarded for stupidity
and basic capitalism that took all that stuff off the market. Some
idiot did something stupid with the product and decided to sue. The
company looked at a long legal fight or settlement and settled. They
looked at a couple settlements and decided it would be more profitable
to eliminate the product and concentrate on other things as they're not
in the business to keep consumers satisfied, just get their money and
keep as much of it as possible.

- W8LNA

On May 28, 8:03*am, gwatts wrote:
AF6AY wrote:
...
The do-gooders done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything.

If a product is dangerous, why shouldn't it have warnings?
Particularly when
there are known carcinogens and other health hazards involved?

It's not being a "do-gooder" or "doing too much" to discover hazards
and
eliminate or contain them.

Sure, not everyone who uses Strip-X will get cancer. But some of the
components of it are known carcinogens, and a proven hazard. More
important,
we can't know ahead of time who the susceptible folks are.

Naaa, it's the people who think they should be rewarded for stupidity
and basic capitalism that took all that stuff off the market. *Some
idiot did something stupid with the product and decided to sue. *The
company looked at a long legal fight or settlement and settled.

Maybe. But I doubt it.

More likely, they looked at the *possibility* of such a lawsuit, the
scientific
evidence of the hazards of the ingredients, the limited profit and
declining
sales, and just stopped making the product.

Once a chemical is shown to be dangerous, the manufacturers can't
claim
ignorance anymore.

They...decided it would be more profitable
to eliminate the product and concentrate on other things as they're not
in the business to keep consumers satisfied, just get their money and
keep as much of it as possible.

Profitability is what "capitalism" and "business" are all about.
Without
profitability, a capitalist company just disappears.

Since the formula for Strip-X appears to be in the public domain,
anybody
can make it and sell it. Would *you* be willing to set up shop to make
it
and sell it, with all the risks that entails, and the very limited
market for it?

73 de Jim, N2EY

If a product is dangerous, why shouldn't it have warnings?
Sure, not everyone who uses Strip-X will get cancer. But some of the
components of it are known carcinogens, and a proven hazard. More
important,
we can't know ahead of time who the susceptible folks are.
Naaa, it's the people who think they should be rewarded for stupidity
and basic capitalism that took all that stuff off the market. Some
idiot did something stupid with the product and decided to sue. The
company looked at a long legal fight or settlement and settled.

Maybe. But I doubt it.

More likely, they looked at the *possibility* of such a lawsuit, the
scientific
evidence of the hazards of the ingredients, the limited profit and
declining
sales, and just stopped making the product.

Once a chemical is shown to be dangerous, the manufacturers can't
claim ignorance anymore.
===================================
And (quite rightly)the FDA , EPA and other relevant agencies at Federal
and State level will be taking action .

In Europe action against dangerous substances is nowadays increasingly
taken through legislation by the European Parliament. I welcome that

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

wrote:
On May 28, 8:03 am, gwatts wrote:
AF6AY wrote:
...
The do-gooders done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything.

If a product is dangerous, why shouldn't it have warnings?
Particularly when there are known carcinogens and other health hazards involved?

It's not being a "do-gooder" or "doing too much" to discover hazards
and eliminate or contain them.

I think it a matter of magnitude.

Some items such as Benzene are pretty dangerous and have an established
track record of making people sick. Those should go whenever possible.

OTOH, the little bottle of Strip-X with it's foul stench is probably not
going to cause anyone harm outside of self inflicted (i.e. suicide attempts)

Of course, I'm not so sure if Strip-X was discontinued because of health
concerns or that it just didn't work any more on new generations of
enameled wire.


Sure, not everyone who uses Strip-X will get cancer. But some of the
components of it are known carcinogens, and a proven hazard. More
important,
we can't know ahead of time who the susceptible folks are.
Naaa, it's the people who think they should be rewarded for stupidity
and basic capitalism that took all that stuff off the market. Some
idiot did something stupid with the product and decided to sue. The
company looked at a long legal fight or settlement and settled.

Maybe. But I doubt it.

More likely, they looked at the *possibility* of such a lawsuit, the
scientific evidence of the hazards of the ingredients, the limited profit and
declining sales, and just stopped making the product.

Once a chemical is shown to be dangerous, the manufacturers can't
claim ignorance anymore.

They...decided it would be more profitable
to eliminate the product and concentrate on other things as they're not
in the business to keep consumers satisfied, just get their money and
keep as much of it as possible.

Profitability is what "capitalism" and "business" are all about.
Without profitability, a capitalist company just disappears.

Since the formula for Strip-X appears to be in the public domain,
anybody can make it and sell it. Would *you* be willing to set up shop to make
it and sell it, with all the risks that entails, and the very limited
market for it?

There you touch on the real issue with items like Strip-X. The
manufacturing side. While I might have my little bottle that I get out a
time or two during the day, the people making the stuff have exposure
issues well beyond that.

As an aside:

The butter flavor on your popcorn (diacetyl) has a nasty side effect
for the people who make it (and apparently at least one microwave
popcorn addict) when it vaporizes, it can pretty seriously impair lung
function. It is a natural substance, but the way in which it is used is
the problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diacetyl

http://www.butterflavoringlunginjury.com/index.htm

http://defendingscience.org/Diacetyl-Background.cfm

But I digress. My main point is that while we might not get much
exposure, those who produce it just might be getting serious contact
with nasty chemicals.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

AF6AY wrote:
From: (Dave Platt) wrote on Mon, May 26 2008:

In article ,
W3CQH wrote:

Does anybody have the name of the substance that was sold years ago for
removing the enamel coating from wires, or maybe the name of something new?
You would soak the wire in it and it would soften the coating and then you
just wiped the goop off the wire.
I think you're referring to GC Electronics Strip-X. Doesn't seem to
be on the market these days, as best as I can tell.

I found a MSDS which states that it's 70% methylene chloride, 25%
cresol (isomers of cresylic acid), around 5% ammonia, plus some wax
and thickening agents.

General Cement's "Strip-X" hasn't been sold by them for at least
a dozen years. I sent them a letter some time ago, got a nice
reply to that effect from a female-named staffer "who had not
worked for them before that." :-) Their home office is also my
home town. :-)

"Strip-X" worked like a charm. For decades as an over-the-
counter product. Nothing over-the-counter now works as well as
it did from 1948 onwards to whenever they stopped repackaging it.
Note: GC did a lot of repackaging of bulk material and tools as
well as some manufacturing. GC went through a series of
corporate restructures, buys, and buy-outs, just aren't the same
company as when I left Rockford, IL, in 1956.

As a fellow professional, I've tried to find out what other
manufacturers use. Most use a mechanical "stripper" that
abrades coatings...but quite expensive, too much for the average
hobbyist. At least one "makes their own" but is very close-
mouthed on what their "own formula" is...:-)

One poster in an earlier thread stated that it was designed to work
with Formvar insulation, and might not work as well on the newer
Polythermaleze insulation.

The only problems I've ever had with "Strip-X" was with some
surplus Teflon-coated (!) magnet wire obtained decades ago. But,
my last bottle of "Strip-X" dried solid about 8 years ago.

There's a paint-and-finish stripper of a similar name (Klean-Strip
Strip-X) available these days. Like the wire-"Strip-X" it contains
methylene chloride, but it has no cresol or ammonia. Its other
ingredients include toluene, xylene, and methanol, plus a thickener
(it's relatively goopy and would probably have to be wiped off of the
wire using a paper towel or Q-tip or something like that).

I've tried to find one out of three different brands tested,
from Lowes, Home Depot, OSH (Orchard Supply Hardware), and
Do-It Centers. They remove oil-based paints with difficulty
and aren't even close to "Strip-X" for magnet wire, any
coating. Roughly a $60 experiment in trying for a substitute
all of which were unsuccessful. Bummer.

These chemicals all come with fire- and health-hazard warnings... if
you use 'em, do so with proper care and precautions!

The do-gooders done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything. :-( I'd only
been using Strip-X since 1947 and known lots and lots of folks
who stripped magnet wire using Strip-X. No "fires" caused by
the stuff and most of those I knew did not suffer from any
"health-hazards" inhaling (very briefly) the stinky odor from
Strip-X. It's sort of like anything with an odor should have
"Caution: Breathing will eventually result in death!" warnings.

I wonder if items such as Strip-X became obsolete due to changes in
insulation composition, i.e. not working on new types of insulation. But
I do agree about the folk who would protect us from ourselves. Strip-X
was pretty innocuous stuff.

Did you by any chance try some old style enameled wire in your
experiment above?


At one time (just about 8 years ago), pure acetone was VERY
hard to get in pint/quart containers. It is an excellent
solvent for lacquers, brush-cleaning, etc. (not good for wire
stripping though). As of about 3 years ago it and a few other
aromatic hydrocarbons started appearing in do-it-yourself
stores. Maybe there's some relaxation in all those dire
predictions, warnings, etc., etc., etc.

The acetone issue is a strange one. Acetone is one of the safer
solvents out there, heck our body even produces some acetone. Aside from
the obvious precautions for flammable materials, the biggest problem
with it is for people who wear contact lenses of the plastic variety.
Splash some in your eye, and if it gets to the edge of the contact,
capillary action will suck it under the lens, and weld the contact to
your eye. Removal effectively blinds the person. Otherwise it's pretty
safe stuff. I just don't wear contacts - even under safety goggles -
when I use it.

My late father-in-law was a polymer chemist. He died in 1977
so can't help me. I just hope that some chemist could come to
the aid of us hobbyists using coated magnet wire and provide
us with a GOOD product like Strip-X was. Meanwhile, it's back
to being VERY careful with a sharp X-Acto knofe and scraping
coatings. With #34 AWG that requires Zen-like calmness...

That is an understatement1 8^) I have to make sure I am in a good mood,
and no coffee for me that day before I attempt that sort of thing.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

From: Michael Coslo on Thurs, May 29 2008 6:02 am:

AF6AY wrote:
From: (Dave Platt) wrote on Mon, May 26 2008:
In article ,
W3CQH wrote:

I wonder if items such as Strip-X became obsolete due to changes in
insulation composition, i.e. not working on new types of insulation. But
I do agree about the folk who would protect us from ourselves. Strip-X
was pretty innocuous stuff.

As far as I could tell from communications with General Cement,
it was FEDERAL REGULATIONS that was the issue. GC already had
over a hundred products in its catalog so they weren't going to
suffer any real loss in income. They've been making 'radio'
chemical products for over 75 years.

Did you by any chance try some old style enameled wire in your
experiment above?

"Experiment?" The only experimentation I did was well AFTER
my last bottle of Strip-X was used up, residue dried out. Strip-X
from GC worked for me the first time I tried it long, long ago.
That experimentation I wrote about was to find a possible
substitute for GC Strip-X.

GC Strip-X has worked on enamel-coated magnet wire, PolythermalEze
(a trade name), different kinds of wire-wrap wire. It didn't work
on the surplus Teflon-coated #25 AWG magnet wire I got surplus
from a transformer maker (#25 is an odd gauge, heh heh, but the
transformer makers use practically every gauge in the AWG table).
Tetrafluouroethylene is pretty inert stuff so few chemicals will
affect it. Teflon also abrades easily compared to other
insulations so it is relatively easy to strip with a knife.


The acetone issue is a strange one. Acetone is one of the safer
solvents out there, heck our body even produces some acetone.

I think that should be 'acetyls' in the human body, not
acetone per se. shrug

Acetone won't strip off enamels or other polymers used on
magnet wire. I tried that, too, also toluene.

Acetone as a solvent was dropped from the model hobby industry
chemicals once gas-powered models started using "hot fuel," the
methanol-based stuff for glow plug engines that took over from
real spark plug ignition model gas engines in the late 1940s.
Methanol softened acetate-based paints, whereas the 'ordinary'
gasoline used in spark ignition engine fuel did not affect
acetone-solvent lacquer commonly called "dope" in model hobby
industry jargon. For years Testor Chemical Company, also in
Rockford, IL, had lacquer paint bottle labels of DOPE in all-
capitals, something you just CANNOT DO in today's restrictive
society. Building model airplanes was fun, the "dope" smelled
very nice, so the blue-noses made all kinds of bad noises
about the "evils" of having fun in a hobby. Sigh.

Digression: The first small two-cycle gasoline engines used
real spark plugs of very small size. I still have two
Champion brand spark plugs in a storage area...less than a
half-inch long...and those are for the big class C and D
engine displacements. I learned to solder wires properly
by making the spark ignition packages for gas-powered
models. The "spark coil" for those was a tiny one that was
picked up by the first electronic flash units for camera use
in the 1950s...ideal for igniting the Xenon flash tubes that
replaced the one-shot photoflash bulbs.

Yes, I was emitting "spark" RF in the late 1940s with those
spark-ignition engines, all without being licensed to do so.
So were other gas-engine modelers and just about EVERY
running automobile of that time! :-)


My late father-in-law was a polymer chemist. He died in 1977
so can't help me. I just hope that some chemist could come to
the aid of us hobbyists using coated magnet wire and provide
us with a GOOD product like Strip-X was. Meanwhile, it's back
to being VERY careful with a sharp X-Acto knofe and scraping
coatings. With #34 AWG that requires Zen-like calmness...

That is an understatement1 8^) I have to make sure I am in a good mood,
and no coffee for me that day before I attempt that sort of thing.

Coffee calms me down. Always has. Makes for good moods. :-)

Actually, I use a fine emery finishing paper to strip fine
gauges of enamel-coated wire. I've used X-Acto hobby knives
for the heavier gauges. Emery paper (easy to get at do-it-
yourself stores) allows a gentle stroking of a folded emery
paper over the wire. I find it works better to draw the
emery paper over the wire rather than pulling the wire through
the paper. Less nicking than with a knife blade for #28 to
#34. I just finished a few small toroid inductors using #34
enamel-covered last week. Not recommended for beginners. :-)

PATIENCE (in all-caps) is needed to make toroids of the T37
size (about 3/8" OD), drawing a very-carefully-folded wire
bundle through the center hole in a toroid core. :-) THAT is
the "Zen" thing. Good self-control is absolutely necessary,
can't use slap-dash hurry-up behavior.

By the way, don't use "Q-Dope" for coating finished inductors,
any type. Despite what the ads say, it does NOT enhance the
coil's Q. Trials of before-after measurements on a Q-Meter
haven't shown goodness. ALL coatings degrade inductor Q.
I've found that oil-based 'maritime' clear varnish to result
in less degredation of Q than other coatings. I've used
McCloskey "Gym-Seal" brand with good success on making
inductor coatings that adhere to windings for years. It is
available nationally in do-it-yourself stores.

Q-Dope (originally acetate-solvent based, now probably using
toluene solvent) will "lift" from smooth surfaces within a
year in climates with only moderate humidity. Q-Dope only
adheres well to all-polymer-based surfaces, won't get into
fine pores. 'Maritime' varnishes NOT polyurethane based DO
grab porous surfaces. I've tried various polyurethane-
based varnishes with mixed results; the makers of those
apparently have a rather large variation of ingredients.
Varnishes take 2, 3 days to properly cure if used on coils.
That's the down-side of using the stuff in hobby applications.
However, on a Q-Meter the characteristics of 'maritime'
varnish coated inductors don't change much after it has
reached a tacky state, roughly 12 hours after application.
It ain't for 'weekender' projects started on a Saturday and
'finished' on Sunday.

73, Len AF6AY