Wiring in conduit
Ivan Vegvary
code allow me to have a splice within the conduit? Seems like it is kind of
accessible since I can easily pull it from both ends in case of problems.
Two 90� bends are involved but I am using long sweeps.
Thanks for the info.
BTW, while I'm typically not a cheapskate, on my retirement allowance I
would rather not pay for a new roll of wire ($65) when I'm only shy a few
feet. Buying a single 75' piece, by the foot, will still set me back $30.
All replies appreciated.
Ivan Vegvary
Paul Franklin
>On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:44:39 -0700, "Ivan Vegvary" <iv...@reelart.us>
>wrote:
>No splices in the conduit, sorry.
But if the situation allows, you could put a box in the right spot
and make the splice in there....
Paul F.
dpb
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 02:11:42 -0400, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:44:39 -0700, "Ivan Vegvary" <iv...@reelart.us>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Running 3 #10's (stranded) in 1-1/2" PVC conduit. Total run 75 feet. Does
>>> code allow me to have a splice within the conduit? Seems like it is kind of
>>> accessible since I can easily pull it from both ends in case of problems.
>> No splices in the conduit, sorry.
>
> But if the situation allows, you could put a box in the right spot
> and make the splice in there....
Or, again if it works, you could make one of the bends at a box instead
of the sweep...
Whatever, "pullable for access" doesn't equate to "accessible" per NEC.
--
Smitty Two
"Ivan Vegvary" <iv...@reelart.us> wrote:
This is one of those instances where'd I'd say the code is a
"suggestion." Sort of like a stop sign in the middle of nowhere in the
middle of the night. If you can solder well and put a couple of layers
of shrink tube on it, I'd say go for it. I wouldn't do it with wire nuts.
Doug Miller
>In article <h249vv$8or$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "Ivan Vegvary" <iv...@reelart.us> wrote:
>
>> Running 3 #10's (stranded) in 1-1/2" PVC conduit. Total run 75 feet. Does
>> code allow me to have a splice within the conduit? Seems like it is kind of
>> accessible since I can easily pull it from both ends in case of problems.
>> Two 90� bends are involved but I am using long sweeps.
>>
>> Thanks for the info.
>> BTW, while I'm typically not a cheapskate, on my retirement allowance I
>> would rather not pay for a new roll of wire ($65) when I'm only shy a few
>> feet. Buying a single 75' piece, by the foot, will still set me back $30.
>>
>> All replies appreciated.
>>
>> Ivan Vegvary
>
>This is one of those instances where'd I'd say the code is a
>"suggestion."
Then your advice is worth exactly what the OP is paying for it. In many
places, the Code is _the law_.
>Sort of like a stop sign in the middle of nowhere in the
>middle of the night. If you can solder well and put a couple of layers
>of shrink tube on it, I'd say go for it. I wouldn't do it with wire nuts.
Code violation, and, if underground, unsafe besides. Electrical codes are
there for a reason. Don't advise people to disregard them.
RBM
"Smitty Two" <prest...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:prestwhich-3DA45...@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com...
I disagree. Certainly one can make a successful splice in a potentially wet
location. This is done with deep well pumps where the splice is actually
under water. The difference is that a qualified person knows that there is a
splice down in the well, so if the pump doesn't work, a few tests can
determine the problem and the mechanic knows where to look for the open
circuit. If a person wily nilly makes splices in inaccessible locations,
where they're illegal as per code, who would even think to look there.
Smitty Two
wrote:
> If a person wily nilly makes splices in inaccessible locations,
> where they're illegal as per code, who would even think to look there.
If there's no continuity from one end of the cable to the other, then
there's a break somewhere in between. Anyone would think to look there.
A well-made splice in the situation the OP describes is never going to
fail, anyway. And if it does, the length of wire is readily pulled and
replaced. Illegal? Sure. So what, says I. If you understand the reason
for the code, you understand under what circumstances you can ignore it,
particularly in your own home.
JIMMIE
> In article <prestwhich-3DA451.06491227062...@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com>, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <h249vv$8o...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > "Ivan Vegvary" <i...@reelart.us> wrote:
>
> >> Running 3 #10's (stranded) in 1-1/2" PVC conduit. Total run 75 feet. Does
> >> code allow me to have a splice within the conduit? Seems like it is kind of
> >> accessible since I can easily pull it from both ends in case of problems.
> >> Two 90° bends are involved but I am using long sweeps.
>
> >> Thanks for the info.
> >> BTW, while I'm typically not a cheapskate, on my retirement allowance I
> >> would rather not pay for a new roll of wire ($65) when I'm only shy a few
> >> feet. Buying a single 75' piece, by the foot, will still set me back $30.
>
> >> All replies appreciated.
>
> >> Ivan Vegvary
>
> >This is one of those instances where'd I'd say the code is a
> >"suggestion."
>
> Then your advice is worth exactly what the OP is paying for it. In many
> places, the Code is _the law_.
>
> >Sort of like a stop sign in the middle of nowhere in the
> >middle of the night. If you can solder well and put a couple of layers
> >of shrink tube on it, I'd say go for it. I wouldn't do it with wire nuts.
>
> Code violation, and, if underground, unsafe besides. Electrical codes are
>
> - Show quoted text -
Agreed especially since he mentioned soldeing the wires. The code
should be violated only by those who know how |:).
Jimmie
George
But that assumes that somehow you will always be there and available for
the life of the house. Standard practice makes tons of sense because
there is a common baseline and you don't have to scratch your head
because of corner cutting and hay baled work done by someone else.
David Nebenzahl
> In article
> <prestwhich-3DA45...@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com>,
> Smitty Two <prest...@earthlink.net> wrote: >
>
>> In article <h249vv$8or$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, "Ivan
>> Vegvary" <iv...@reelart.us> wrote:
>>
>>> Running 3 #10's (stranded) in 1-1/2" PVC conduit. Total run 75 feet. Does
>>> code allow me to have a splice within the conduit? Seems like it is kind of
>>> accessible since I can easily pull it from both ends in case of problems.
>>> Two 90� bends are involved but I am using long sweeps.
>
>> Sort of like a stop sign in the middle of nowhere in the middle of
>> the night. If you can solder well and put a couple of layers of
>> shrink tube on it, I'd say go for it. I wouldn't do it with wire
>> nuts.
>
> Code violation, and, if underground, unsafe besides. Electrical codes
> are there for a reason. Don't advise people to disregard them.
Ditto. Unsafe, as I have seen with my own two eyes what happens when
water gets inside conduit and finds its way inside conductors (this
happened when the insulation was nicked when the wires were pulled).
Result was a corroded spot in the wire which caused an open circuit.
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
RBM
You are demonstrating your inexperience in your statement. For one thing
"your own home" becomes someone else's home at some point. True, one can
determine that the conductor is shorted or open, but when things are not
done by the book, it invariably takes longer to find the problem, since we
begin looking for the most logical location to find the problem. Another
thing, when multiple conductors are pulled in a conduit, they're pulled
together. In the process they get twisted around each other. Often you
cannot just "readily" pull a conductor out of the bunch. Sometimes the
"stuff" that accumulates in underground conduits acts as a glue, and can
make it difficult or impossible to remove the conductors intact, especially
if you've got some lump of a splice in there. Do it once, do it right. You
may have every right to muck up your own home, but I would refrain from
recommending that it's OK for others to do it
Larry The Snake Guy
75 feet sounds like a long way to pull #10 through PVC, especially if
you decide later to pull afew extra wires, which I assume is the
reason for using such a large diameter.
Of course, if it's underground, that gets a little more complicated.
Doug Miller
>On Jun 27, 10:24=A0am, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>
>> Code violation, and, if underground, unsafe besides. Electrical codes are
>> there for a reason. Don't advise people to disregard them.
>Agreed especially since he mentioned soldeing the wires. The code
>should be violated only by those who know how |:).
Soldering isn't a Code violation.
Larry The Snake Guy
> >"suggestion."
>
> Then your advice is worth exactly what the OP is paying for it. In many
> places, the Code is _the law_.
I'm pretty sure he wasn't disputing that. He just meant that no one
would ever know...
On the other hand, I do think it's a bad suggestion. He hasn't said so
yet, but I highly suspect that this is to go underground. If that
solder joint fails, damages the other wires and melts the conduit
someday, he's going to hate life when he has to dig it up and replace
it.
aemeijers
Code ain't for you. Code is for the poor SOB 20 years from now, and a
couple of owners later, trying to reverse-engineer what the hell you
did. Yeah, odds are an in-line splice would work, and if done properly,
would never fail. But how much would it cost to buy a long enough cable,
or put a proper junction box in the middle? Shortly after I moved in
here, I found a badly-done butt splice floating in the bathroom wall,
because previous owner was too cheap or lazy to run a new wire, all of
about 15 feet. Just recently, I discovered the 4' fluorescents in the
basement were hooked up above the drop ceiling, by shoving the ends of
the romex into duplex outlets wired into the octagon boxes that once
held the original porcelain fixtures. I still need to rewire those, so I
can have light in the basement again...
--
aem sends...
Metspitzer
>
>"Smitty Two" <prest...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:prestwhich-A1243...@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com...
>> In article <4a464478$0$22517$607e...@cv.net>, "RBM" <r...@noemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If a person wily nilly makes splices in inaccessible locations,
>>> where they're illegal as per code, who would even think to look there.
>>
>> If there's no continuity from one end of the cable to the other, then
>> there's a break somewhere in between. Anyone would think to look there.
>> A well-made splice in the situation the OP describes is never going to
>> fail, anyway. And if it does, the length of wire is readily pulled and
>> replaced. Illegal? Sure. So what, says I. If you understand the reason
>> for the code, you understand under what circumstances you can ignore it,
>> particularly in your own home.
>
>
>
>You are demonstrating your inexperience in your statement. For one thing
>"your own home" becomes someone else's home at some point. True, one can
>determine that the conductor is shorted or open, but when things are not
You should be able to do what you want in YOUR home. After all, it
would be YOUR family and YOUR friends that could be killed. :)
RBM
"Metspitzer" <kilo...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:uq3d45hgke7jh1eim...@4ax.com...
Again, the reason we have building codes, electrical codes, life safety
codes etc., is because Your home will at some point be someone else's home,
someone who has no idea what ass backwards , possibly dangerous
installations you made, when it was your home. Not to mention that it is
against the law to kill your own family
>
>
Smitty Two
wrote:
Good grief. I knew I was going to get some shit about this, but a well
soldered and insulated splice in a spacious conduit with wide sweeping
turns is hardly dangerous, the damn code be damned. There's about a one
in ten billion chance it will go short or open in the lifetime of the
house, and if it does either, it's STILL not dangerous or difficult to
diagnose or repair. If the retired homeowner on a fixed income wants to
save a few bucks on wire, let him splice the shit if he knows how.
Millions of people survived the advent of electricity before there were
all these laws to protect us from ourselves.
RBM
I'm not saying that splicing the wire in the conduit is dangerous, just that
it may become a nuisance to someone in the future. I probably costs less in
the long run to do things properly. You say, "let him splice the shit if he
knows how". In all manner of things, how many people think they know how,
and don't.
Doug Miller
>Good grief. I knew I was going to get some shit about this, but a well
>soldered and insulated splice in a spacious conduit with wide sweeping
>turns is hardly dangerous, the damn code be damned. There's about a one
>in ten billion chance it will go short or open in the lifetime of the
>house, and if it does either, it's STILL not dangerous or difficult to
>diagnose or repair. If the retired homeowner on a fixed income wants to
>save a few bucks on wire, let him splice the shit if he knows how.
>Millions of people survived the advent of electricity before there were
>all these laws to protect us from ourselves.
Please stop giving electrical advice.
John Grabowski
">>>> If a person wily nilly makes splices in inaccessible locations,
>>>> where they're illegal as per code, who would even think to look there.
>>>
>>> If there's no continuity from one end of the cable to the other, then
>>> there's a break somewhere in between. Anyone would think to look there.
>>> A well-made splice in the situation the OP describes is never going to
>>> fail, anyway. And if it does, the length of wire is readily pulled and
>>> replaced. Illegal? Sure. So what, says I. If you understand the reason
>>> for the code, you understand under what circumstances you can ignore it,
>>> particularly in your own home.
>>
>>
>>
>>You are demonstrating your inexperience in your statement. For one thing
>>"your own home" becomes someone else's home at some point. True, one can
>>determine that the conductor is shorted or open, but when things are not
>
>
> You should be able to do what you want in YOUR home. After all, it
> would be YOUR family and YOUR friends that could be killed. :)
*Killing your own family and friends would certainly be rewarding enough for
doing whatever you want in your own home.
Phisherman
wrote:
>Running 3 #10's (stranded) in 1-1/2" PVC conduit. Total run 75 feet. Does
>code allow me to have a splice within the conduit? Seems like it is kind of
>accessible since I can easily pull it from both ends in case of problems.
>Two 90� bends are involved but I am using long sweeps.
>
NEC does not allow this. Connections must be made in an accessable
approved electrical box.
Smitty Two
spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
No. You want to give code advice, fine. I'll give common sense advice
all I want.
Doug Miller
You haven't given any common sense advice yet -- dangerous practices that
violate the Code are *not* common sense.
HeyBub
>>>
>>> You are demonstrating your inexperience in your statement. For one
>>> thing "your own home" becomes someone else's home at some point.
>>> True, one can determine that the conductor is shorted or open, but
>>> when things are not
>>
>>
>> You should be able to do what you want in YOUR home. After all, it
>> would be YOUR family and YOUR friends that could be killed. :)
>
>
> *Killing your own family and friends would certainly be rewarding
> enough for doing whatever you want in your own home.
And if the extension he's planning is to his son's iron lung that he has to
have because he can no longer afford the expensive care at the nursing
facility?
There's always an exception to almost every rule, law, or code.
Smitty Two
wrote:
> In all manner of things, how many people think they know how,
> and don't.
Most. People are idiots, by and large. But it isn't up to me to judge
the skills of the OP. And if he misjudges his own skills, so what?
Freedom includes the freedom to shoot yourself in the foot.
All these damn rules and regulations about every tiny little thing that
might cause someone to stub their toe, annoy me. And people that are
terrified to break one of them now and again because they think they can
imagine some absolutely astronomical possibility that some catastrophe
could result, annoy me even more. Kill your family, someone postulated?
Sheesh. Better not let your wife change a light bulb, or operate a steak
knife.
So y'all can go out there and fill up your fat arteries with your
mcdonalds crap and drive five feet off the next guy's bumper at 80 miles
an hour and then go home and pray to the NEC god all ya want.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Soldering stranded cable CAN be.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
And anyone who is on these forums will soon know who to ignore.
Doug Miller
Cite, please.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Not 100% true any more.
There are now "T-Tap" devices approved by the NEC, UL, and CSA for
making connections without a junction box in non-accessible locations.
I would never use them or advise anyone to use them, but they are
(currently) legal and available.
Aluminum wire and Urea formadehyde insulation were both legal and
available in the not so distant past as well.
However, the NEC has not (yet) allowed a splice inside a conduit.
Smitty Two
spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
> In article
> <prestwhich-67AFA...@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com>, Smitty
> Two <prest...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >In article <6ax1m.1784$bq1...@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> > spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <prestwhich-EFC22...@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com>,
> >> Smitty
> >> Two <prest...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Good grief. I knew I was going to get some shit about this, but a well
> >> >soldered and insulated splice in a spacious conduit with wide sweeping
> >> >turns is hardly dangerous, the damn code be damned. There's about a one
> >> >in ten billion chance it will go short or open in the lifetime of the
> >> >house, and if it does either, it's STILL not dangerous or difficult to
> >> >diagnose or repair. If the retired homeowner on a fixed income wants to
> >> >save a few bucks on wire, let him splice the shit if he knows how.
> >> >Millions of people survived the advent of electricity before there were
> >> >all these laws to protect us from ourselves.
> >>
> >> Please stop giving electrical advice.
> >
> >No. You want to give code advice, fine. I'll give common sense advice
> >all I want.
>
> You haven't given any common sense advice yet -- dangerous practices that
> violate the Code are *not* common sense.
Yeah, I know you're a code junkie, Doug. And I respect your knowledge
and your professionalism. And I understand the reason for the code. And
I realize that a hidden, inaccessible splice is a violation of the NEC.
Now, when was the last time you drove one or more miles per hour over
the speed limit? How could you possibly put your own life, and the lives
of your family, and the lives of children and other innocent strangers,
in such grave danger, by willfully violating a law that is designed to
protect us all from tragedies great and small?
If you think that a *properly soldered and shrink-wrapped* splice in a
wire in a conduit as described by the OP constitutes a *danger*, then
you and I define the word differently. I think the dictionary is on my
side, though.
RBM
I mostly agree with what you are saying. I think the OP however, is trying
to do the right thing as correctly as possible, which is why he asked the
question. I am not fond of our nanny society where everything has to be
built to protect us from ourselves, but imo, backed up by many years of
practical experience, the most practical, common sense solution, is to get a
longer piece of wire, then nobody has to be concerned about it's integrity
down the road
Doug Miller
And on that basis, you should not advise people to do that.
>
>Now, when was the last time you drove one or more miles per hour over
>the speed limit? How could you possibly put your own life, and the lives
>of your family, and the lives of children and other innocent strangers,
>in such grave danger, by willfully violating a law that is designed to
>protect us all from tragedies great and small?
Irrelevant, because I do not advise people to exceed the speed limit. You
*have* been advising people to knowingly violate the NEC.
>
>If you think that a *properly soldered and shrink-wrapped* splice in a
>wire in a conduit as described by the OP constitutes a *danger*, then
>you and I define the word differently. I think the dictionary is on my
>side, though.
It certainly poses a greater *potential* danger than does complying with the
Code. The principal risk is water penetrating an underground conduit and
corroding the splice.
George
But you aren't doing that. You obviously have an extreme distaste for
what you perceive as being told what to do. That greatly colors your
view so you think it is normal and "common sense" but really only to you.
JIMMIE
> In article <0fe81402-d940-4c25-a911-15d14e93f...@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>, JIMMIE <JIMMIEDEE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
> >On Jun 27, 10:24=A0am, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>
> >> Code violation, and, if underground, unsafe besides. Electrical codes are
> >> there for a reason. Don't advise people to disregard them.
> >Agreed especially since he mentioned soldeing the wires. The code
> >should be violated only by those who know how |:).
>
> Soldering isn't a Code violation.
I dont know what the NEC says about soldering but its a bad idea.
Solder joints cant handle 20 amps of current unless they are made
extremely well. Ive known to many really fine electricians that
couldnt solder worth anything. Even a pretty good solder joint will
melt with 10 amps. Cycle the load on an off a few times and the joint
will soon have more resistance than the hair dryer someone had been
using on the circuit.
Jimmie
Doug Miller
>On Jun 27, 1:52=A0pm, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>> In article <0fe81402-d940-4c25-a911-15d14e93f...@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.=>> >On Jun 27, 10:24=3DA0am, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>
>> >> Code violation, and, if underground, unsafe besides. Electrical codes =
>are
>> >> there for a reason. Don't advise people to disregard them.
>> >Agreed especially since he mentioned soldeing the wires. The code
>> >should be violated only by those who know how |:).
>>
>> Soldering isn't a Code violation.
>
>I dont know what the NEC says about soldering but its a bad idea.
>Solder joints cant handle 20 amps of current unless they are made
>extremely well. Ive known to many really fine electricians that
>couldnt solder worth anything. Even a pretty good solder joint will
>melt with 10 amps. Cycle the load on an off a few times and the joint
>will soon have more resistance than the hair dryer someone had been
>using on the circuit.
Complete nonsense (except for the part where you say you don't know what the
NEC says -- *that*, I believe).
benick
Well said Smitty...Well said....
Gordon Shumway
<prest...@earthlink.net> wrote:
If you ever decide to sell your house please let everyone here know
where is so we can avoid it like the plague. God only knows what you
have done to it during your ownership!
G.S.
Ivan Vegvary
<cl...@snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
news:hkfd45hfe21tnona3...@4ax.com...
That should have been 'whom to ignore'. Objective case.
Ivan Vegvary
Ivan Vegvary
"Larry The Snake Guy" <ldfi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1275a275-054f-4354...@y9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
> Personally, I like the idea of adding a box. In fact, I would add 2.
> 75 feet sounds like a long way to pull #10 through PVC, especially if
> you decide later to pull afew extra wires, which I assume is the
> reason for using such a large diameter.
>
> Of course, if it's underground, that gets a little more complicated.
Almost all 75 feet is underground, ergo, I cannot add boxes. Am using
1-1/2" conduit because it makes for easy pull and, by the way, is only a
little over $2 per 10 foot stick. Why use anything smaller?
Ivan Vegvary
John Grabowski
>>>> thing "your own home" becomes someone else's home at some point.
>>>> True, one can determine that the conductor is shorted or open, but
>>>> when things are not
>>>
>>>
>>> You should be able to do what you want in YOUR home. After all, it
>>> would be YOUR family and YOUR friends that could be killed. :)
>>
>>
>> *Killing your own family and friends would certainly be rewarding
>> enough for doing whatever you want in your own home.
>
> And if the extension he's planning is to his son's iron lung that he has
> to have because he can no longer afford the expensive care at the nursing
> facility?
*All the more reason to do the work properly to prevent failure.
> There's always an exception to almost every rule, law, or code.
*Yeah I've heard about that "Needed killing" defense in some states.
Doug Miller
>
>"Larry The Snake Guy" <ldfi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1275a275-054f-4354...@y9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
>> Personally, I like the idea of adding a box. In fact, I would add 2.
>> 75 feet sounds like a long way to pull #10 through PVC, especially if
>> you decide later to pull afew extra wires, which I assume is the
>> reason for using such a large diameter.
>>
>> Of course, if it's underground, that gets a little more complicated.
>
>Almost all 75 feet is underground, ergo, I cannot add boxes.
Well, actually, you can -- you just have to bring the conduit up above ground
for the box containing the splice, then back underground to complete the run.
Possibly it would be convenient for you to have a receptacle above-ground at
that point?
> Am using
>1-1/2" conduit because it makes for easy pull and, by the way, is only a
>little over $2 per 10 foot stick. Why use anything smaller?
Absolutely.
BTW, if you're concerned about the cost of a full-length run of wire, keep an
eye out in your local newspaper for going-out-of-business sales at hardware
stores. When an Ace Hardware in my area closed a few years ago, I was able
to buy about a couple of *miles* of THHN wire (10, 12, and 14 gauge) for less
than a penny a foot. I may not ever need to buy that stuff again. <g>
dpb
...
> Almost all 75 feet is underground, ergo, I cannot add boxes. ...
Outside the already suggested obvious, then, you have one of two
choices--do the fully-right-code-compliant way or bite the bullet and
make the splice (on the assumption by the time there's a problem it
won't be yours to solve, anyway :) ).
If you do choose the splice route, just be sure it's made to handle the
underground conditions to be expected and sturdy enough mechanically to
handle the pull.
I had to repair a buried (no conduit) line to the well (wouldn't you
know that in an open area of a couple acres after eyeballing the run
from the pumphouse to the well I'd manage to set a post directly on the
run. If I'd been _trying_ to find it, otoh, I'd been all around.. :( ).
It's been almost 10 years so far w/ no problems so it can be done
physically; it's still not going to be code-compliant if that were to be
an issue (needing permits, etc., ...).
All in all, it would seem the extra investment in the wire is moderately
cheap given all else that must be going into the project (one assumes
there's something going on the end of the run... :) ).
Perhaps, even, one could get something back from the other wire via
Craig's list or similar to defray a portion of the outlay if $$ really
are _that_ tight...
--
JIMMIE
>
> - Show quoted text -
I know that solder joints are forbidden on primary power circuits by
contract in many applications because there are reliabilty problems
with them. I also know that I have the skill to make such connections
reliably. In my job I dont keep up with the NEC anymore but I do know
that they were allowed years ago but thought that this would be
removed one day, this was a consideration back in the 70s because it
allowed on the skill of the electrican to make mutiple connections
without ever making a mistake. Used to, and Im paraphrasing a lot
because I dont have a copy of the NEC and I will take your word for it
that it is still allowed, the joint had to be of a quality where you
didnt really need the solder before it was soldered and the connection
must not rely on the solder for a circuit path, I take it this is
still true. I am sure you will let me know if it is not. The problem
is that solder will melt with just a few amps of current passing
through it. Once it melts and cools it may form a "cold joint" with a
high resistance. HIGH is a very relative term in this case as it may
mean conderably less than one ohm but much greater than the fraction
of a milliohm resistance of a good joint. These damaged splice would
work fine for years as long as the load on them was low but the first
time someone added something to increase the load on them they would
fail. In the 80s we had to remove all the soldered splices from our
wireways for the above reason, they were considered substandard. This
is quite different from the philosophy of the 60's when I was taught
that soldered joints were the acme of electrical splices and wirenuts
were a fire waiting to happen.
I cant think of a single reason anyone would want to use a soldered
joint for primary power wiring with the exception of what the OP
wanted to do and that was to circumvent other NEC specifications.
Jimmie
dpb
...
> I cant think of a single reason anyone would want to use a soldered
> joint for primary power wiring with the exception of what the OP
> wanted to do and that was to circumvent other NEC specifications.
That has always been proscribed--NEC (won't quote Sections) prohibits
soldered connections in service wires, ground wire or a grounding wire.
Even where solder joints were prescribed, the solder was not to take the
place of the proper mechanical joint, only to maintain its integrity w/
time.
I've assumed (which I probably ought to correct) in another post to OP
that the run he's speaking of is a branch circuit and thereby is fused
upstream given it's #10 that would seem a safe bet.
--
The Daring Dufas
Many years ago, soldering was used in house wiring. The
electricians used those big hunk of metal soldering irons
and if I remember, the things were not electric, they had
to be heated by a torch. The connections were insulated
by that old black friction tape. I come across it along
with knob and tube wiring in very old houses and buildings.
TDD
The Daring Dufas
I think that's called "The Texas Defense". Texans are known
for their pragmatism.
TDD
RBM
"The Daring Dufas" <the-dari...@stinky.net> wrote in message
news:h28595$fq3$1...@news.motzarella.org...
When I started in the early 70's we still had a few electric soldering irons
in the shop. I don't think they used them since the 50's. The splices were
wrapped in rubber tape, then covered with friction tape. Unless they made a
"cold" joint accidentally, those splices lasted forever, or at least until
the next guy came along to add to it
aemeijers
It wasn't that long ago. In getting my grandmother's 1961 house ready
for sale, I was changing out a crapped-out pull chain fixture in the
basement. Much to my surprise, the pigtail on the daisy-chain circuit
was neatly soldered and taped- no wirenuts. And this place was wired in
Romex, albeit the fabric-covered kind. I've worked on similar era houses
that had modern-style wire nuts (all black, of course, no color coding
in those days), so this must have been an old electrician near the end
of his career.
--
aem sends...
HerHusband
> Does code allow me to have a splice within the conduit? Seems like it
> is kind of accessible since I can easily pull it from both ends in
> case of problems. Two 90� bends are involved but I am using long
> sweeps.
> I would rather not pay for a new roll of wire ($65) when I'm only shy
> a few feet. Buying a single 75' piece, by the foot, will still set me
> back $30.
I wouldn't recommend a spliced connection in conduit. I don't believe code
allows it, but even if you made a successful soldered and insulated splice
that section of the wire would be "stiff" compared to the rest of the
flexible wire. It may make it more difficult to pull the wire through
conduit bends, and if the splice is not "mechanically" as strong as the
wire, you could pull the splice apart when pulling the cable. You would
never know if there is damage to the splice until you have an electrical
problem. For example, say a portion of the splice breaks but leaves a
strand or two of the stranded wire. It would work fine until put under
enough load to overheat the wire. This could melt the insulation on
adjoining cables and cause a short.
You didn't mention what this conduit run was for, but I suspect $30 for a
piece of wire is minimal compared to the rest of the project. Have you
compared the cost of the wire and conduit, against just running a bare UF
rated underground cable? If you're running conduit, you're probably
spending a little extra to do the job right and allow flexibility in the
future. Why cheap out on the last little piece of wire?
If you're REALLY strapped for cash, watch your local Craigslist for people
getting rid of electrical supplies, and/or post an ad that you're looking
for some. I sold a couple hundred feet of various cables a few months ago
for $10, and see contractors selling surplus all the time. There wouldn't
be any harm using a "larger" wire than you need (i.e. Using a #6 or #8
gauge wire in place of your #10), so that widens your options a bit.
If you're going to do the job, you might as well do it right...
Good Luck,
Anthony
Doug Miller
> The problem
>is that solder will melt with just a few amps of current passing
>through it.
Absolute nonsense.
Smitty Two
<2fa4a983-8319-48e9...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
JIMMIE <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> The problem
> is that solder will melt with just a few amps of current passing
> through it.
Well that's completely untrue. Electric current doesn't melt solder.
RBM
"JIMMIE" <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
news:2fa4a983-8319-48e9...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Jimmie
Considering that solder melts at 374 degrees F, there would be an awful lot
of fires going on, if you were correct.
The Daring Dufas
> should look something like this with a good mechanical connection
> before they are soldered.
>
> http://gfretwell.com/electrical/splices.jpg
>
> The open question is how you would insulate these splices.
>
>
It's funny that those splices were developed back in the
days of the telegraph and the things still work well now.
TDD
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
>In article <s9fd45ton7jcjgft3...@4ax.com>, cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>>On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:52:46 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <0fe81402-d940-4c25...@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
>> JIMMIE <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>>>>On Jun 27, 10:24=A0am, spamb...@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Code violation, and, if underground, unsafe besides. Electrical codes are
>>>>> there for a reason. Don't advise people to disregard them.
>>>
>>>>Agreed especially since he mentioned soldeing the wires. The code
>>>>should be violated only by those who know how |:).
>>>
>>>Soldering isn't a Code violation.
>>
>>Soldering stranded cable CAN be.
>
>Cite, please.
In aircraft use soldered connections are verbotten because solder
wicks back the cable and the cable becomes brittle - causing vibration
to break the wire. Same in industrial control panels. Not sure of NEC
application in residential wiring - but bad practice, regardless.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
>
>When I started in the early 70's we still had a few electric soldering irons
>in the shop. I don't think they used them since the 50's. The splices were
>wrapped in rubber tape, then covered with friction tape. Unless they made a
>"cold" joint accidentally, those splices lasted forever, or at least until
>the next guy came along to add to it
>
That practice went out with knob and tube wiring. A "western union" or
"lineman's " splice was used. This was all well before a unified code
was in existance, IIRC.
Maximum load in those days was about 50 amps for the whole house -
with a "ring topology" meaning the load was shared over both ends of
the circuit - totally different system in North America today - with
single loads often exceding the total house load of years gone by.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
And most of the early "wirenuts" had set-screws that clamped the wires
together, and the bakelite insulator cap screwed onto that - none of
the "twist-on" devices like today (the old "Marr "connector, vs the
"Marrette" today IIRC)
Doug Miller
>On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 00:51:57 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>wrote:
>>>>Soldering isn't a Code violation.
>>>
>>>Soldering stranded cable CAN be.
>>
>>Cite, please.
>In aircraft use soldered connections are verbotten because solder
>wicks back the cable and the cable becomes brittle - causing vibration
>to break the wire. Same in industrial control panels.
Unless those applications are covered by the Code, then it's not a Code
violation.
>Not sure of NEC
>application in residential wiring - but bad practice, regardless.
Bad practice in some applications, perhaps. But a Code violation? Not that I'm
aware of.
RBM
<cl...@snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
news:f5gg45pcghjmtltpm...@4ax.com...
These are typical twisted wire splices, made in junction boxes, not western
union, the same type you'd put a wire nut on today
>
The Daring Dufas
The set screw wire connectors are still available and
used for motor lead wires and other commercial equipment
that has to be replaced or repaired on a regular basis.
Back in the late 1980's I worked out on a Pacific atoll
and we had housing units that were manufactured in the
great country of Australia, they do funny things there.
The electrical wiring had connectors that resembles wire
nuts but had a small setscrew reached through a molded
in shroud on the side of the connector. The things worked
and were rated at a thousand volts because their house
wiring is 250 volts for a regular outlet. Oh yea, metric
Edison base light sockets, off just enough so that the
standard American bulb would not easily screw in. The
toilets swirled in the wrong direction too.
TDD
Ken
> Good grief. I knew I was going to get some shit about this, but a well
> soldered and insulated splice in a spacious conduit with wide sweeping
> turns is hardly dangerous, the damn code be damned. There's about a one
> in ten billion chance it will go short or open in the lifetime of the
> house, and if it does either, it's STILL not dangerous or difficult to
> diagnose or repair. If the retired homeowner on a fixed income wants to
> save a few bucks on wire, let him splice the shit if he knows how.
> Millions of people survived the advent of electricity before there were
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, I guess I'm that 10 billionth person. Had an outlet go dead,
started troubleshooting, traced it to a break somewhere between a
particular junction box and the outlet. This was on a circuit in
conduit. I just said what the heck, let's pull this wire out and
replace it since I don't know what's going on. Pulled the wire out
and found a splice in the middle of the conduit. Someone decided to
save 10 feet of wire and splice two 5 foot pieces together. The
splice failed. Replaced said wire and everything was fine.
Ken
bud--
>
> In aircraft use soldered connections are verbotten because solder
> wicks back the cable and the cable becomes brittle - causing vibration
> to break the wire. Same in industrial control panels. Not sure of NEC
> application in residential wiring - but bad practice, regardless.
Last time I looked at UL508A, which is the UL standard for industrial
control panels, it didn't say anything about solder.
"Wicking" only happens with stranded wires. It is not obvious to me that
a soldered connection is less reliable than a wirenut connection when
exposed to vibration.
The NEC appears to prohibit solder for connecting ground wires in a box
(250.148-E - "solely" is not entirely clear). My recollection is you
can't solder connections for the wire to system grounding electrodes
(GEC). Other than that I am not aware of NEC prohibitions on using solder.
Solder was used into the BX days. The wires were twisted first. I
believe the splice was pointed down and a solder pot was lifted to
immerse the connection. I have seen 2 failures of soldered connections,
one in K&T, the other BX. Both were "cold joints" - the wire did not
bond to the solder. Soldering, when done by a competent installer, is
probably at least as reliable as wirenuts. It is much less convenient,
not cost-effective, and a major PITA if you have to rework the connection.
--
bud--
JIMMIE
> In article
> <2fa4a983-8319-48e9-a3c9-17ad515c9...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> JIMMIE <JIMMIEDEE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> > The problem
> > is that solder will melt with just a few amps of current passing
> > through it.
>
> Well that's completely untrue. Electric current doesn't melt solder.
In a poorly made splice it certainly will. If there is not a good
copper to copper contact the solder will melt. The NEC does or did
make this clear.
Jimmie
Smitty Two
<5b56dd81-4629-4712...@y17g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
JIMMIE <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
Having spent the last 25 years as the production manager of a
manufacturing facility engaged largely in electronic assembly work, I
think I know a bit about solder. Current plus resistance = heat, but
solder is made of tin and lead (still in the U.S. anyway) and could
hardly be classified as a resistor. Here, try this link:
<http://www.allmeasures.com/Formulae/static/formulae/electrical_resistivi
ty/30.htm>
The resistivity of solder is given as
Electrical Resistivity (rho)
app 0.000000165 ohm.m
and the resistance of a 10' length of solder of 1 sq. mm. cross
sectional area is calculated as 1/2 ohm.
If you have a cite that supports your contention that the NEC thinks
electric current will melt solder, I'd be most interested in seeing it.
Metspitzer
All those numbers have nothing to do with a circuit with a overload.
It is true that the resistance of the solder can be considered 0, but
that doesn't keep the temperature of the wire from getting hot under
an overload. The overload doesn't have to be caused by a bad splice.
You should stick to 12V BTW
Smitty Two
Metspitzer <kilo...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> All those numbers have nothing to do with a circuit with a overload.
> It is true that the resistance of the solder can be considered 0, but
> that doesn't keep the temperature of the wire from getting hot under
> an overload. The overload doesn't have to be caused by a bad splice.
WTF does an overload have to do with it? You can't just go throwing
random faults into the discussion on a whim. If you've got an overload
that's heating up the wires beyond the melting point of solder, and you
haven't tripped an overcurrent protector somewhere, you've got worse
problems than melted solder.
Jimmie says that more than two amps of current through solder will melt
the solder. Are you in his corner on that or not?
>
> You should stick to 12V BTW
No thanks, I'm comfortable with AC. It doesn't scare me like it does
some folk.
Metspitzer
<prest...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>In article <4emi4596j86ojpfep...@4ax.com>,
> Metspitzer <kilo...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> All those numbers have nothing to do with a circuit with a overload.
>> It is true that the resistance of the solder can be considered 0, but
>> that doesn't keep the temperature of the wire from getting hot under
>> an overload. The overload doesn't have to be caused by a bad splice.
>
>WTF does an overload have to do with it? You can't just go throwing
An overload has everything to do with it.
>random faults into the discussion on a whim. If you've got an overload
Are you suggesting that random faults don't occur?
>that's heating up the wires beyond the melting point of solder, and you
>haven't tripped an overcurrent protector somewhere, you've got worse
>problems than melted solder.
>
Not really. I have seen suggestions in this very group that it is ok
to go ahead and use 14 gauge wire on that light you want to put at the
end of a run that is fed by a 20 amp breaker.
>Jimmie says that more than two amps of current through solder will melt
>the solder. Are you in his corner on that or not?
>
Yes and no.
2 amps of current might melt solder on those printed circuit cards you
use, but it would be negligible on 12-14 gauge wires that are used in
houses. It would take something like using a toaster oven and a Fry
daddy on the same circuit. That could bring the wire close to a
temperature that would melt solder. A short circuit (random fault)
would for sure. That is why the NEC requires splices to be
mechanically secure before using solder.
It is obvious when you ask the question......will 2A melt solder...
you really don't understand what is going on.
Smitty Two
Metspitzer <kilo...@charter.net> wrote:
> It is obvious when you ask the question......will 2A melt solder...
> you really don't understand what is going on.
It's obvious to me that you're choosing not to follow the conversation,
and to change things to suit your own perversions. I do know what's
going on, but you're making up all kinds of random shit to satisfy
yourself that I don't. Even Doug the NEC junkie told Jimmie he was flat
wrong with his statement. Used practically the same words I did.
Out.
Metspitzer
Can 2 amps of solder melt current in house wiring. No
Can 2 amps melt solder.....yes.
Take a test lead and put it on one end of the solder and put 2 amps of
current on it. Keep extending the length of the solder.
You don't agree Doug?
JIMMIE
> In article <cr2j451sl1ebsidkddorvg2eh7p1kpa...@4ax.com>,
>
> Metspitzer <kilow...@charter.net> wrote:
> > It is obvious when you ask the question......will 2A melt solder...
> > you really don't understand what is going on.
>
> It's obvious to me that you're choosing not to follow the conversation,
> and to change things to suit your own perversions. I do know what's
> going on, but you're making up all kinds of random shit to satisfy
> yourself that I don't. Even Doug the NEC junkie told Jimmie he was flat
> wrong with his statement. Used practically the same words I did.
>
> Out.
Please show me where I said 2 amps, I'll send you a dollar.. Yes the
NEC permits soldering but unless you are extremely competent at it its
a bad idea. Where I work we have 3 very capable electricians one with
32 years of experience but I know for a fact none of them can make a
decent solder joint. They were never taught how. It is no longer a
required skill in any electical training program I know of. Back in
its day you flunked your apprenticeship if you couldnt make a proper
solder joint so yes those were good connections.My grandfather was a
master electrican who later ran a depot for the railroad( not sure if
that was a promotion or not) but he taught me to solder a splice. I
must have soldered a hundred of them to have him tear them apart even
though after the first four or five they were all good splices.
According to him that was the normal training method of the time.
Anyone on this NG that has to ask whether they can use a soldering
joint is going to to get a resounding NO from me. I figure those who
are truly competent to do it have no need to ask. The same applies to
anyone asking to bend the the rules of the NEC.
Jimmie
HeyBub
Okay, I'm convinced solder joints are bad. I have another question:
How do you wire-nut copper pipes?
Doug Miller
>2 amps of current might melt solder on those printed circuit cards you
>use, but it would be negligible on 12-14 gauge wires that are used in
>houses. It would take something like using a toaster oven and a Fry
>daddy on the same circuit. That could bring the wire close to a
>temperature that would melt solder. A short circuit (random fault)
>would for sure. That is why the NEC requires splices to be
>mechanically secure before using solder.
To quote your own words: "It is obvious ... you really don't understand what
is going on."
That is *not* why the NEC requires soldered splices to be mechanically secure
without the solder. The NEC requires that because solder lacks the strength
necessary to make a connection mechanically secure.
Doug Miller
The discussion was in the context of soldered splices, not infinite lengths of
solder being used as circuit conductors. (That's a Code violation too, BTW)
Do try to keep up.
Doug Miller
>
>Please show me where I said 2 amps, I'll send you a dollar..
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.home.repair/msg/b0c1b2922e1bd483
"The problem is that solder will melt with just a few amps of current passing
through it."
That simply isn't true.
>Yes the
>NEC permits soldering but unless you are extremely competent at it its
>a bad idea. [more nonsense snipped]
That isn't true either. If a soldered joint can be "ripped apart" as you
described, then it wasn't properly mechanically secured -- which means the
joint wasn't any good *before* it was soldered.
bud--
And the NEC requires splices to be "mechanically and *electrically*
secure without solder" before they are soldered. It is probably not
possible to make a splice mechanically secure without it being
electrically secure. The solder does not carry the full current. There
is very little solder that carries any current. There are a huge number
of soldered splices out there that have not been a problem for over 50
years. I have never seen a failed solder joint that was not defective
from the start. If soldered joints were getting even a fraction as hot
as claimed the insulation would be destroyed. The NEC allows solder to
be used because a properly soldered splice is reliable.
--
bud--
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
I thought the OP mentioned stranded wire - but I could be wrong.
I was responding to soldering STRANDED wire.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Not common practice, and not normally used in the old knob and tube
wiring.. At least not up here.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
<prest...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>In article
><5b56dd81-4629-4712...@y17g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
> JIMMIE <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 28, 1:05 pm, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <2fa4a983-8319-48e9-a3c9-17ad515c9...@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
>> >
>> > JIMMIE <JIMMIEDEE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>> > > The problem
>> > > is that solder will melt with just a few amps of current passing
>> > > through it.
>> >
>> > Well that's completely untrue. Electric current doesn't melt solder.
>>
>> In a poorly made splice it certainly will. If there is not a good
>> copper to copper contact the solder will melt. The NEC does or did
>> make this clear.
>>
>> Jimmie
>
>Having spent the last 25 years as the production manager of a
>manufacturing facility engaged largely in electronic assembly work, I
>think I know a bit about solder. Current plus resistance = heat, but
>solder is made of tin and lead (still in the U.S. anyway) and could
>hardly be classified as a resistor. Here, try this link:
>
Where do you buy leaded electronic solder in the USA?
Can't get in Canada for about 5 years now.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Don't need to go that far. How many amps does a 30 watt soldering iron
draw? How about a 100 watt soldering iron? 150 watt soldering iron is
a BIG iron - and still less than 2 amps on 1 115 volt nominal circuit.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Never seen a compression union, eh?
Doug Miller
> I thought the OP mentioned stranded wire - but I could be wrong.
>
>I was responding to soldering STRANDED wire.
Immaterial -- it's not a Code violation to solder either stranded or solid
wire.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
>In article <bf29bf83-c631-4064...@e21g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, JIMMIE <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
Training involved soldering "western union" and "linesman" splices,
which the instructor then attempted to dissassemble with a linesman's
pliers. When dissassembled you could easily see how well the solder
had penetrated and wetted the conductor - right through the joint.
It was common practice - just like welding training involves
fracturing the weld to see how good the weld penetration was.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
>In article <cr2j451sl1ebsidkd...@4ax.com>, Metspitzer <kilo...@charter.net> wrote:
In part. Also the joint MUST be able to stay mechanically connected IF
the solder joint fails The copper wires must be able to form both a
solid mechanical and electrical connection - the solder just seals the
joint to prevent oxidation and prevent the joint from working loose.
Doug Miller
Totally irrelevant to the discussion. A soldering iron generates heat by
passing an electric current through a heating element, and it should be no
surprise to anyone that a heating element designed to get hot enough to
melt solder will in fact do so. The claim under discussion was that passing
electric current through *solder* -- specifically a soldered splice -- will
generate enough heat to melt the solder. And that claim is complete nonsense.
Doug Miller
>On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:55:11 GMT, spam...@milmac.com (Doug Miller)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <cr2j451sl1ebsidkd...@4ax.com>, Metspitzer
> <kilo...@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>>2 amps of current might melt solder on those printed circuit cards you
>>>use, but it would be negligible on 12-14 gauge wires that are used in
>>>houses. It would take something like using a toaster oven and a Fry
>>>daddy on the same circuit. That could bring the wire close to a
>>>temperature that would melt solder. A short circuit (random fault)
>>>would for sure. That is why the NEC requires splices to be
>>>mechanically secure before using solder.
>>
>>To quote your own words: "It is obvious ... you really don't understand what
>>is going on."
>>
>>That is *not* why the NEC requires soldered splices to be mechanically secure
>>without the solder. The NEC requires that because solder lacks the strength
>>necessary to make a connection mechanically secure.
>>
>>
>>
>In part. Also the joint MUST be able to stay mechanically connected IF
>the solder joint fails
That's what I just said: "require[d] ... to be mechanically secure without the
solder" .
>The copper wires must be able to form both a
>solid mechanical and electrical connection
Yes, we know that. It's already been pointed out several times.
> - the solder just seals the
>joint to prevent oxidation and prevent the joint from working loose.
Wrong. If solder is needed to prevent the joint from working loose, then it
was in fact *not* "mechanically secure without solder" and therefore was not
properly made.
Tony Hwang
If soldering job is poor or/and the wire was undersized. It can melt and
separate. I 've seen it many times in my working days. You can make any
kind of splice between two piece of wires; soldering, mechanical
crimping/clamping, twisting together. wire nut..... If done properly all
works OK.
Tony Hwang
hi,
As a result of poor soldermanship(?). I was mil-spec. soldering
certified by U.S. DOD in my working days. I never made a solder joint
like that. Simply it couldn't happen!
HeyBub
>
> Where do you buy leaded electronic solder in the USA?
> Can't get in Canada for about 5 years now.
Uh, Ebay?
Metspitzer
wrote:
>In article <rchl45d4mjg83r12m...@4ax.com>, cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
It is if you are not doing it in a junction box.
Do keep up. :)
Doug Miller
Oh, bulls**t. Solder has negligible resistance to electrical current. An
electric arc can melt solder, sure, but solder _will not_ melt simply from
"a few amps" passing through it as "JIMMIE" claimed.
Doug Miller
If you keep changing the subject, you might eventually hit upon one you
actually know something about.
Smitty Two
cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> Where do you buy leaded electronic solder in the USA?
Anywhere and everywhere. RoHS hasn't been adopted in the USA.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Even a perfectly soldered western union splice CAN be dissassembled.
Not easily - for sure.. Solid wire, of course.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Semantics. You can untwist a secure mechanical connection by hand -
but not when soldered.
Doug Miller
So what? You said the solder is there to "prevent the joint from working
loose." That's false. And also completely irrelevant to whether the joint can
be untwisted by hand.
