Do/Don't? Soldering Wire Tips Before Sticking into Terminal Block

[D Yuniskis]

Hi Joseph,

Hi John,

On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 13:07:14 -0700, D Yuniskis

Hi Joe,

J.A. Legris wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
nospam wrote:
[hmmm... that begs the question: what term to use
to refer to describe the "side" (direction) that you
turn *into*? E.g., what I have called "right" in
this example]
The side into the wind would be "windward" side, so the other side
would be "leeward". ;-)
wise *ss! :>

My question is serious: how do you refer to the "clockwise
side" of something? etc.
CW to the right, CCW to the left. In 2-D algebraic geometry CW is
negative angular displacement and CCW is positive.
Yes, I know CW from CCW. :>

What I was getting at is how do you concisely (ha! me and concise,
what an idea! :> ) refer to the situation I was describing above.

I.e., you wrap a wire around a screw/post clockwise so that
tightening the screw draws the wire around the screw *with*
the screw's motion. How do you describe the "initial placement"
of said wire? I.e., it wants to be "to the left" <frown>
of the post (but left and right have no meaning in this
context; and clockwise/counterclockwise only refer to
the direction in which you *wrap* the wire -- not *place* it!)

For example, placing the wire such that tightening the
screw *frays* the individual strands is A Bad Thing.
How do you refer to the "side" of the screw that causes
this result? (without saying "wrap the wire around the post
in a clockwise manner" -- since some wires are NOT
wrapped around a post ... e.g. solid wire that under some
sorts of connectors)

No, you're still missing the distinction! The direction the wire
*approaches* the screw from plays a role. E.g., Red Right Return
is different from Red Right Depart! :>

So, you have to think in terms of the tip of the wire in
relationship to the balance of the wire. I.e., if you are standing
at the tip WITH THE REST OF THE WIRE BEHIND YOU, then your approach
to the screw would keep *it* on your right. If, OTOH, you were
standing at the tip with the balance of the wire IN FRONT of you,
then you would keep the screw on your left.

Or, from your analogy, whether the wire approaches you (standing
on the head of the screw) "head on" or creeps up on you from behind.

There are two references here -- how you refer to the wire
and how you refer to the screw (post).

Think of how you would explain this to "a guy off the street"
(not someone in s.e.d)

Since you do not like JL's description how about threadwards? It
goes around the screw the same direction the screw goes into the
terminal.

Ah, that's good. Still has ties to CW but it's different enough
to force people to think about it -- instead of blindly assuming
they know what it means. I am always amazed at how often I see
people doing this "the wrong way" -- even folks who *should* know
better (EE's, electricians, etc.)

 

[D Yuniskis]

Not that i have heard of. What i am seeing is terminal blocks, switches,
and other wiring devices that are rated for use with stranded wire.

I know that IBM didn't let us do it when we were sub'ing work from
them. IME, that usually meant there was wither some written
standard (that they were complying with) *or* they had determined
(not just opined) that it was A Bad Thing.

 

[JosephKK]

Hi Joseph,

Hi John,

John Fields wrote:
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 13:07:14 -0700, D Yuniskis

Hi Joe,

J.A. Legris wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
nospam wrote:
[hmmm... that begs the question: what term to use
to refer to describe the "side" (direction) that you
turn *into*? E.g., what I have called "right" in
this example]
The side into the wind would be "windward" side, so the other side
would be "leeward". ;-)
wise *ss! :>

My question is serious: how do you refer to the "clockwise
side" of something? etc.
CW to the right, CCW to the left. In 2-D algebraic geometry CW is
negative angular displacement and CCW is positive.
Yes, I know CW from CCW. :>

What I was getting at is how do you concisely (ha! me and concise,
what an idea! :> ) refer to the situation I was describing above.

I.e., you wrap a wire around a screw/post clockwise so that
tightening the screw draws the wire around the screw *with*
the screw's motion. How do you describe the "initial placement"
of said wire? I.e., it wants to be "to the left" <frown>
of the post (but left and right have no meaning in this
context; and clockwise/counterclockwise only refer to
the direction in which you *wrap* the wire -- not *place* it!)

For example, placing the wire such that tightening the
screw *frays* the individual strands is A Bad Thing.
How do you refer to the "side" of the screw that causes
this result? (without saying "wrap the wire around the post
in a clockwise manner" -- since some wires are NOT
wrapped around a post ... e.g. solid wire that under some
sorts of connectors)
---
Since a normally-threaded screw is turned clockwise to tighten it, the
correct wire placement would always be on the left hand (port) side of
the screw when viewing it from the headed side of the screw.
No, you're still missing the distinction! The direction the wire
*approaches* the screw from plays a role. E.g., Red Right Return
is different from Red Right Depart! :>

So, you have to think in terms of the tip of the wire in
relationship to the balance of the wire. I.e., if you are standing
at the tip WITH THE REST OF THE WIRE BEHIND YOU, then your approach
to the screw would keep *it* on your right. If, OTOH, you were
standing at the tip with the balance of the wire IN FRONT of you,
then you would keep the screw on your left.

Or, from your analogy, whether the wire approaches you (standing
on the head of the screw) "head on" or creeps up on you from behind.

There are two references here -- how you refer to the wire
and how you refer to the screw (post).

Think of how you would explain this to "a guy off the street"
(not someone in s.e.d)

Since you do not like JL's description how about threadwards? It
goes around the screw the same direction the screw goes into the
terminal.

Ah, that's good. Still has ties to CW but it's different enough
to force people to think about it -- instead of blindly assuming
they know what it means. I am always amazed at how often I see
people doing this "the wrong way" -- even folks who *should* know
better (EE's, electricians, etc.)

It was selected to help support cases of (uncommon) LH threaded screws.

 

[Paul Keinanen]

Is it ok to solder the tips of stranded wire before inserting into a
terminal block?
I like soldering the tips so that there's no wire fraying or free
strands.
But...Does the solder slowly compress after awhile and the wire gets
loose?

In the early 1970's I saw same badly molten mains plugs that had used
soldered stranded wires and a short circuit had occurred on the load
side.

After that, I have never used soldered stranded wires in situations,
in which large currents could (e.g. in a failure situation) flow
through the wire. Apparently some mains wiring standards are against
using solder for this reason too.

For small current conductors, the main problem is the transition
between the soldered and non-soldered part of the wire if there is
some wire movement e.g. due to vibration.

 

[D Yuniskis]

Hi Michael,

'dolts and idiots'

Abbey Somebody <[email protected]>
AnimalMagic <[email protected]>
Archimedes' Lever <[email protected]>
AtTheEndofMyRope <[email protected]>
AwlSome Auger <[email protected]>
Bart! <B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig**!.org>
BigBalls <[email protected]>
BillyPilgrim <[email protected]>
Bungalow Bill <[email protected]>
Capt. Cave Man <[email protected]>

[snip]

You *do* realize many of these are the same idiot ^H^H^H individual?
(at least my filter claims they are)

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

'dolts and idiots'

The author of the post is one. His name is Terrell. His jaw hurts, and
it makes him hate others. He spends time here venting his utter
stupidity.

His last few posts are prime examples of such utter stupidity.

Just fucking DIE already, asswipe!

 

[GoldIntermetallicEmbrittlement]

In the early 1970's I saw same badly molten mains plugs that had used
soldered stranded wires and a short circuit had occurred on the load
side.

After that, I have never used soldered stranded wires in situations,
in which large currents could (e.g. in a failure situation) flow
through the wire. Apparently some mains wiring standards are against
using solder for this reason too.

For small current conductors, the main problem is the transition
between the soldered and non-soldered part of the wire if there is
some wire movement e.g. due to vibration.

Solder creep occurs regardless of the current involved in the circuit,
ya dopey ditz.

 

[TheQuickBrownFox]

Hi Michael,

'dolts and idiots'

Abbey Somebody <[email protected]>
AnimalMagic <[email protected]>
Archimedes' Lever <[email protected]>
AtTheEndofMyRope <[email protected]>
AwlSome Auger <[email protected]>
Bart! <B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig**!.org>
BigBalls <[email protected]>
BillyPilgrim <[email protected]>
Bungalow Bill <[email protected]>
Capt. Cave Man <[email protected]>

[snip]

You *do* realize many of these are the same idiot ^H^H^H individual?
(at least my filter claims they are)

You really are not all that bright, you dumb fucktard.

When are you going to issue the challenge to post past your retarded
filters, BOY?

Oh... that's right.. You know that I would succeed! And it would be
100% legal too! MY HOOKS. You wouldn't even catch it. I could post for
a week, and then whop you upside your fat head with it again.

The fact is that NONE of my nyms make ANY attempt at hiding my identity.
So all the "troll" retards, and all the "nymshift" claiming retards can
kiss my 100% legitimate ass.

 

[[email protected]]

Hi Michael,

'dolts and idiots'

Abbey Somebody <[email protected]>
AnimalMagic <[email protected]>
Archimedes' Lever <[email protected]>
AtTheEndofMyRope <[email protected]>
AwlSome Auger <[email protected]>
Bart! <B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig**!.org>
BigBalls <[email protected]>
BillyPilgrim <[email protected]>
Bungalow Bill <[email protected]>
Capt. Cave Man <[email protected]>

[snip]

You *do* realize many of these are the same idiot ^H^H^H individual?
(at least my filter claims they are)

Sure, they're undies from Nymbecile's mommy's hamper. That was Michael's
point.

 

[D Yuniskis]

All of those are sock puppets of the dimbulb troll, and they still
don't add up to 5% of it having a personality.

My list has more names on it. :> I'll have to double check
to see if my filter is being too "aggressive" :-/

 

[StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt]

All of those are sock puppets of the dimbulb troll, and they still
don't add up to 5% of it having a personality.

And that 5% is an order of magnitude more than you have.

Your fucking jokes are 50 years out of date. That shows how far
disconnected from modern society you are, jackass.

 

[StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt]

NymNoNuts is even simpler to filter... you don't need all those names
listed. Contact me privately for information.

...Jim Thompson

Put up the challenge, asswipe.

Your only hope would be to filter the entire cox local domain, IF I
were so inclined that I wanted to prove it to you, I could easily get
past all but the "filter it all" mentality that a retard like you reverts
to..

So, challenge me, PUSSY BOY!

 

[D Yuniskis]

Hi John,

Just filter bodies that have references to the common synonyms for
poop.

Ha! I suspect that would work -- in "his" case.

I've been working on a filter that, so far, seems to work
quite well. If I tell it *not* to look at IP address, name,
organization, etc. (i.e., all of the "easy" things that can
be manipulated) it still manages to find every targeted post.
(well, so far, no false positives... I haven't done an exhaustive
check on flase negatives, yet).

I've been recently trying to beat it (*knowing* how I designed
it) by posting from different IP's, different names, different
news clients, etc. and, so far, it's been spot on (no false positives
*or* negatives, in my case).

Unfortunately, my current implementation (prototyped) is slow
when I ask it to search an entire newsfeed. :< This is overkill
(you would typically only "apply" it to a particular newgroup)
but in this test case, I want to give it lots of "grist for the
mill" -- lots of stuff to analyze -- without having to type all
of that myself. :-/

In the short term, look at headers for easy ideas on this particular
flamer. (note in some alter egos he tries to "act nice" but
the filters never lie :> )