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 -

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: 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

On May 28, 5:18*pm, Mike Silva wrote:
On May 26, 12:43*pm, "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.

73's

I've always burned off the insulation with a lighter, removed the
remaining ash with a couple swipes of very fine sandpaper, and
tinned. *Never had a problem yet.

Mike

Same idea but I use an alcohol burner like the ones that used to come
in chemistry sets. Those burners are incredably useul. Combined with a
blowpipe you can melt glass and braze small parts.

Jimmie

On May 29, 9:34�am, Michael Coslo wrote:
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.

Not really. See below.

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

Agreed.

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)

But it *is* dangerous stuff, and should have adequate warnings,
shouldn't it?

What does

"do-gooder done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything."

really mean? Are there too many warnings on dangerous chemicals?

More important, do we really *know* that Strip-X isn't going to cause
anyone harm unless intentionally abused?

Did every user of the stuff do so in a "well-ventilated area"? I think
not.

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.

AFAIK, it worked on all enameled wire. Teflon isn't an "enamel".

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.


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.

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.

Depending on the manufacturing process. The history of industry is
full of examples of people being slowly killed at work by exposure to
hazards. Asbestos, radium paint, carbon tet, MEK, all sorts of
wonderful stuff.

The fact that something doesn't kill everyone who gets near it doesn't
make it safe enough.

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.

'zactly.

It's all about avoidable risk.

Another example:

Once upon a time, cars had single main hydraulic brake systems. The
master cylinder had one pump that fed all four wheel cylinders.

It was simple and effective, but a failure anywhere in the system
(wheel cylinder, master cylinder, brake lines, etc.) meant total
hydraulic brake system failure.

Then the "do-gooders" pushed for dual brake systems, on the theory
that most single failures would leave half the brake system working,
plus a warning system.

Critics said that the cost and complexity were too much, and that
complete brake failure was very rare in then-modern cars with single
systems.

The "do-gooders" won, and dual brake systems with warnings became the
standard.

Was that excessive? I guess it depends on whether you've ever had the
brake pedal go right to the floor at a critical moment.

73 de Jim, N2EY

The best product for stripping enamel wire is one which not many
hobbyists will have around the home: a solder pot.

Foster Transformer in Cincinnati used this method for stripping enamel
and tinning the ends of transformer leads simultaneously. All they did
was do straighten out the leads and dip the wire ends into the pot for
about five seconds.

Dave K8MN

On Jun 1, 1:24�pm, Dave Heil wrote:
The best product for stripping enamel wire is one which not many
hobbyists will have around the home: �a solder pot.

Yup. I've used them.

Of course someone might protest that the discussion is about doing the
job *chemically*....

Foster Transformer in Cincinnati used this method for stripping
enamel
and tinning the ends of transformer leads simultaneously. �All they did
was do straighten out the leads and dip the wire ends into the pot for about five seconds.

Pretty much standard in the electronics industry, really. Faster and
less costly than Strip-X for production work.

At Southgate Radio, for multiple units, an improvised solder pot is
made by heating a cleaned-out tuna can full of solder splashes over a
propane torch or stove burner(with appropriate safety precautions).
For small jobs, a blob of solder on the 100 watt American Beauty iron
does the job.

Elecraft transceiver kits (except the K3) require that you wind
toroids and strip the wire ends. They recommend the solder-blob
method, and since the wire is relatively small you don't need a big
iron. My military-surplus Weller WCTPK kit does the job very well.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
On Jun 1, 1:24�pm, Dave Heil wrote:
The best product for stripping enamel wire is one which not many
hobbyists will have around the home: �a solder pot.

Yup. I've used them.

Of course someone might protest that the discussion is about doing the
job *chemically*....

Chemically-schmemically. Do they want to remove enamel or discuss
semantics?

Foster Transformer in Cincinnati used this method for stripping
enamel
and tinning the ends of transformer leads simultaneously. �All they did
was do straighten out the leads and dip the wire ends into the pot for about five seconds.

Pretty much standard in the electronics industry, really. Faster and
less costly than Strip-X for production work.

I think I've already related the tale in r.r.a.p. that I had the
President of Ideal Tool make a call on Foster with me. His plan was to
sell one of the company's new abrasive stone type enamel removing
machines. After the kindly chief engineer showed how Foster
removed/tinned with the solder pot, the man from Ideal told me that he
didn't believe there was much of a market for his machine.

At Southgate Radio, for multiple units, an improvised solder pot is
made by heating a cleaned-out tuna can full of solder splashes over a
propane torch or stove burner(with appropriate safety precautions).
For small jobs, a blob of solder on the 100 watt American Beauty iron
does the job.

Waste not, want not. I think I'd just wait until the XYL isn't home and
heat the can on a burner of the gas stove. Doesn't it sound like
something which could go terribly, terribly wrong?

Elecraft transceiver kits (except the K3) require that you wind
toroids and strip the wire ends. They recommend the solder-blob
method, and since the wire is relatively small you don't need a big
iron. My military-surplus Weller WCTPK kit does the job very well.

I've often used a razor blade or X-acto knife to get the job done.

Dave K8MN

wrote:
On May 29, 9:34�am, Michael Coslo wrote:
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.

Not really. See below.

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

Agreed.

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)

But it *is* dangerous stuff, and should have adequate warnings,
shouldn't it?

There's my magnitude issue. I'm in no way implying that there be no
warning on the bottles. I am implying that it is a useful product, and
legislating it out of existence, or just making it too much trouble for
a company to produce is not a good thing.

We do have a system that is pretty good. The MSDS reports are pretty
slick and non-sensational.

Of course, they won't fit on that little bottle! 8^)

I'd rather read that than something about what "The state of California
knows" you know, those strange postings beside gasoline pumps? This
product is know to the State of California as a carcinogen" type stuff.

I wonder how many people called up the state of California to talk about
that?


What does "do-gooder done did too much with all those warnings and
attempts to protect us all from everything."
really mean? Are there too many warnings on dangerous chemicals?


I don't mind the warnings too much as long as they are not stupid
warnings. What I do mind is when a useful product goes away.

More important, do we really *know* that Strip-X isn't going to cause
anyone harm unless intentionally abused?

Or salted codfish for that matter? I know that sounds a little
sarcastic, but the point is that there is a statistical correlation
between large consumption of salted and smoked fish with stomach cancer.



Did every user of the stuff do so in a "well-ventilated area"? I think
not.

One can only give guidelines, not enforce them.


Once upon a time, cars had single main hydraulic brake systems. The
master cylinder had one pump that fed all four wheel cylinders.

It was simple and effective, but a failure anywhere in the system
(wheel cylinder, master cylinder, brake lines, etc.) meant total
hydraulic brake system failure.

Then the "do-gooders" pushed for dual brake systems, on the theory
that most single failures would leave half the brake system working,
plus a warning system.

Critics said that the cost and complexity were too much, and that
complete brake failure was very rare in then-modern cars with single
systems.

The "do-gooders" won, and dual brake systems with warnings became the
standard.

Was that excessive? I guess it depends on whether you've ever had the
brake pedal go right to the floor at a critical moment.

For me at least, the comparison of mechanical with chemical issues is a
little hard to work. I have long advocated such radical technology as
strong roll cages, 5 point seat belts and fire suppression systems on
automobiles if we want to get serious about safety.

On the other hand, I've silvered my telescope mirrors in my garage. This
involves a litany of nasty stuff, from Silver nitrate to potassium
hydroxide to nitric acid. (now that stuff is scary) And oddly enough,
sucrose and citric acid. I'd hate to be not allowed to do such things
because someone thought I might get hurt.


- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Dave Heil wrote:
The best product for stripping enamel wire is one which not many
hobbyists will have around the home: a solder pot.

I've used them. They work like a champ. I think we dipped them in flux
for a second too.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -