part 1 1041 bytes content-type:text/plain; (decoded quoted-printable)
Been meaning to try hand-soldering a SOIC surface-mount for a long time, but finally felt fearless today. With a small scrap of PCB, I laid out a few SOIC patterns and hand-soldered it with a regular Weller SP12 soldering iron.... very small, light, and low-cost ($13), with a decently small tip (though I've seen smaller-tipped irons). Pic of this first attempt attached.
I've electrically tested it, and it seems to all be good. Whereas it's not aesthetically perfect, neither was my first attempt at regular thru-hole soldering. No magnifier used either. Chip is a 50-mil pitch generic 74LS244 I picked up for a few cents some time back.
Please, no comments on the scrap PCB, which I cut with a pair of scissors.
This opens up a new world to me, and I highly recommend it to anyone else who's been sceptical.
Cheers,
-Neil.
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
part 2 10249 bytes content-type:image/jpeg; (decode) part 3 2 bytes -
> Been meaning to try hand-soldering a SOIC surface-mount for a
> long time, but
> finally felt fearless today. With a small scrap of PCB, I laid out a few
> SOIC patterns and hand-soldered it with a regular Weller SP12 soldering
> iron.... very small, light, and low-cost ($13), with a decently
> small tip
> (though I've seen smaller-tipped irons). Pic of this first
> attempt attached.
>
> I've electrically tested it, and it seems to all be good.
> Whereas it's not
> aesthetically perfect, neither was my first attempt at regular thru-hole
> soldering. No magnifier used either. Chip is a 50-mil pitch
> generic 74LS244
> I picked up for a few cents some time back.
>
> Please, no comments on the scrap PCB, which I cut with a pair of scissors.
>
> This opens up a new world to me, and I highly recommend it to anyone else
> who's been sceptical.
Way to go, it actually looks far better then MY first attempt... SOIC
soldering isn't too bad, solder wick is generally the only additional tool I
need over what I use for through hole soldering, and I've been needing it
much less frequently.
I find for SOIC a regular tip is usable, while a fine tip is far better a
regular tip will do. Now of course since you've crossed this bridge you must
go smaller! Those tiny 4 resistor resistor packs are REAL fun to hand
solder! :) One good thing about being nearsighted as I am is you don't need
a magnifying glass, I just hold everything close to my eyes. People around
me always ask whether I can actually see anything that close... :) TTYL
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
> This opens up a new world to me, and I highly recommend it to
> anyone else who's been sceptical
Fun, eh ? I was particularly pleased I could do this when the only
AVRs in stock were SMT. Dead easy to make an SMT to DIP
adapter
Here's something to try next -
Get a scrap PCB that's stuffed full of all kinds of interesting SMT chips.
Take to the non-chip side with a blowtorch, bang it on the bench, and
watch the chips drop off like flies
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
There's an interesting local electronics store that's run by a nice elderly gentleman. The place is dusty, many parts are from another era, but many are quite up-to-date. Looks like he buys a lot of closeouts. Best part is his prices -- I'll go in there and grab a few dozen chips, connectors, several dozen capacitors, transistors, etc. I'd be estimating about $40-$50 at digikey-ish prices. He'll split out the high-dollar items, write up a bill for those and chuck the rest in the bag, then tell me.... $10. Hobbyist's paradise.
Cheers,
-Neil.
On Sunday 27 April 2003 20:06, Jinx wrote:
> Here's something to try next -
>
> Get a scrap PCB that's stuffed full of all kinds of interesting SMT chips.
> Take to the non-chip side with a blowtorch, bang it on the bench, and
> watch the chips drop off like flies
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
On Sunday 27 April 2003 20:06, Jinx wrote:
> Get a scrap PCB that's stuffed full of all kinds of interesting SMT chips.
> Take to the non-chip side with a blowtorch, bang it on the bench, and
> watch the chips drop off like flies
You really really really need to get out more. Or stand on your head and see life like we do in the northern hemisphere.
:-)
Cheers,
-Neil.
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
On Sunday 27 April 2003 19:27, Herbert Graf wrote:
> Way to go, it actually looks far better then MY first attempt...
> SOIC soldering isn't too bad, solder wick is generally the only additional
> tool I need over what I use for through hole soldering, and I've been
> needing it much less frequently.
>
> I find for SOIC a regular tip is usable, while a fine tip is far
> better a regular tip will do. Now of course since you've crossed this
> bridge you must go smaller! Those tiny 4 resistor resistor packs are REAL
> fun to hand solder! :) One good thing about being nearsighted as I am is
> you don't need a magnifying glass, I just hold everything close to my eyes.
> People around me always ask whether I can actually see anything that
> close... :) TTYL
The thing I really want to try next is using thinner solder. I was using .032, but can find solder less than half that diameter.
Cheers,
-Neil.
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
> On Sunday 27 April 2003 19:27, Herbert Graf wrote:
> > Way to go, it actually looks far better then MY first attempt...
> > SOIC soldering isn't too bad, solder wick is generally the only
> additional
> > tool I need over what I use for through hole soldering, and I've been
> > needing it much less frequently.
> >
> > I find for SOIC a regular tip is usable, while a fine tip is far
> > better a regular tip will do. Now of course since you've crossed this
> > bridge you must go smaller! Those tiny 4 resistor resistor
> packs are REAL
> > fun to hand solder! :) One good thing about being nearsighted as I am is
> > you don't need a magnifying glass, I just hold everything close
> to my eyes.
> > People around me always ask whether I can actually see anything that
> > close... :) TTYL
>
>
> The thing I really want to try next is using thinner solder. I was using
> .032, but can find solder less than half that diameter.
Yes thinner solder can help. The BIGGEST thing while soldering anything
surface mount is keep the amount of solder low, too much just means you have
to start over... :) TTYL
On Sunday 27 April 2003 09:12 pm, Herbert Graf wrote:
> > The thing I really want to try next is using thinner solder. I
> > was using .032, but can find solder less than half that diameter.
>
> Yes thinner solder can help. The BIGGEST thing while
> soldering anything surface mount is keep the amount of solder low,
> too much just means you have to start over... :) TTYL
However, solder that's too thin (for instance, 0.010 inches in
diameter) doesn't hold very much flux.
So you have to use separate flux for good results.
>>> The thing I really want to try next is using thinner solder. I
>>> was using .032, but can find solder less than half that diameter.
>>
>> Yes thinner solder can help. The BIGGEST thing while
>> soldering anything surface mount is keep the amount of solder low,
>> too much just means you have to start over... :) TTYL
>
> However, solder that's too thin (for instance, 0.010 inches in
> diameter) doesn't hold very much flux.
>
> So you have to use separate flux for good results.
>
> 0.015 or 0.017 is marginal.
I keep two sizes of solder around here. The .031" (.8mm) is for most
purposes (like all thru-hole work), and .020" for fine. Anything that
requires finer solder than that also requires a different technique than a
soldering iron in one hand and wire solder in the other.
*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com
>> Get a scrap PCB that's stuffed full of all kinds of interesting SMT
>> chips. Take to the non-chip side with a blowtorch, bang it on the
>> bench, and watch the chips drop off like flies
> You really really really need to get out more
I agree. But 2 out of 3 psychologists can't ;-)
Although I use the blowtorch method just for stripping parts a couple
of technician friends do actually use it in repair work. It takes a little
practice to remove a 100 pin QFP without cooking the chip or PCB
but it really can be done
>>> Get a scrap PCB that's stuffed full of all kinds of interesting SMT
>>> chips. Take to the non-chip side with a blowtorch, bang it on the
>>> bench, and watch the chips drop off like flies
>
>> You really really really need to get out more
>
> I agree. But 2 out of 3 psychologists can't ;-)
>
> Although I use the blowtorch method just for stripping parts a couple
> of technician friends do actually use it in repair work. It takes a little
> practice to remove a 100 pin QFP without cooking the chip or PCB
> but it really can be done
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
> ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
>
--------------------------------------------------
Marc Nicholas Geekythings Inc. C/416.543.4896
UNIX, Database, Security and Networking Consulting
Possibly, but I don't got one (it died) to try that out
The technician friends use the little butane pencil torches, which
must concentrate the heat in a small area in a short time. I know
that one of the things they do is to put revised OTPs or chipsets
in telcom equipment. With quite a number of boards to do they
get plenty of practice
On Tuesday 29 April 2003 19:26, Jinx scribbled:
> >> Get a scrap PCB that's stuffed full of all kinds of interesting SMT
> >> chips. Take to the non-chip side with a blowtorch, bang it on the
> >> bench, and watch the chips drop off like flies
> >
> > You really really really need to get out more
>
> I agree. But 2 out of 3 psychologists can't ;-)
>
> Although I use the blowtorch method just for stripping parts a couple
> of technician friends do actually use it in repair work. It takes a little
> practice to remove a 100 pin QFP without cooking the chip or PCB
> but it really can be done
It's actually a great idea, but having a vague image of you from your website a long time ago, I have a fuzzy image in my mind of you with a wide ear-to-ear grin, a PCB in one hand, and a flamethrower in the other. :-)
Unfortunately, I don't have any old SMT boards laying around, so it was off to the store of me.
> I have a fuzzy image in my mind of you with a wide ear-to-ear grin,
> a PCB in one hand, and a flamethrower in the other. :-)
Maniacal cackling. Don't forget the maniacal cackling. And nothing
says "bug off" like a flame-thrower
About time we had a rogues gallery of list members. I know what
probably 1/2 dozen members look like. It's not very common for
people to put their mugshot on a webpage. Why is that ? Cameras
are very accessible nowadays. I had the cojones (credit card details
gets you a look at those) to put mine up, how about some others
do likewise ?
>About time we had a rogues gallery of list members. I know what
>probably 1/2 dozen members look like. It's not very common for
>people to put their mugshot on a webpage. Why is that ?
Probably people who use their full real names are a bit more reticent to
put additional details out there for possible abuse.
>>About time we had a rogues gallery of list members. I know what
>>probably 1/2 dozen members look like. It's not very common for
>>people to put their mugshot on a webpage. Why is that ?
>Probably people who use their full real names are a bit more reticent to
>put additional details out there for possible abuse.
Speaking only for myself, I think you have the "abuse" part backwards.
I spare you all a look at my mug out of respect.
You folks are way too nice to be subjected to such an image. Better
that I keep my photo to myself and be thought a handsome fool than to
show you that I'm really just an ugly one. 8^)
> Probably people who use their full real names are a bit more
> reticent to put additional details out there for possible abuse.
I've no strong feelings either way wrt to photos, but my name is
part of my domain and I wouldn't say it's created any problems.
Unless I had a good reason to (eg for sales) I wouldn't put a
physical address on a page. But only because it's unnecessary,
not because I want to avoid anything. A PO Box for would be
OK but even that gives the impression of trying to stay unseen
or elusive. Maybe that's just me - I would try not to deal with
anyone who has just a PO Box address
Jinx wrote:
> ...Unless I had a good reason to (eg for sales) I
> wouldn't put a physical address on a page...
Hi Jinx,
it's cool. Put your exact GPS location on your Web
page in real time. (PICs should be involved, of course).
They say few centimeters accuracy could be achieved.
Imagine your home in 3D on the Web page and little
Jinx coming to kitchen or to solder PICs or elsewhere.
In real time. Famous Harry Potter in other words.
(We just finished both Harry Potters with my kid)
Though I have a partially-interpretable image of me on my website (somewhere), you certainly won't get me to sign up for a PIC gallery. Only out of courtesy to the other members. :-)
Cheers,
-Neil.
On Tuesday 29 April 2003 22:03, Jinx scribbled: {Quote hidden}
> > I have a fuzzy image in my mind of you with a wide ear-to-ear grin,
> > a PCB in one hand, and a flamethrower in the other. :-)
>
> Maniacal cackling. Don't forget the maniacal cackling. And nothing
> says "bug off" like a flame-thrower
>
> About time we had a rogues gallery of list members. I know what
> probably 1/2 dozen members look like. It's not very common for
> people to put their mugshot on a webpage. Why is that ? Cameras
> are very accessible nowadays. I had the cojones (credit card details
> gets you a look at those) to put mine up, how about some others
> do likewise ?
Safety and complexity has dictated that I keep my home address to myself. Since I've had 7 addresses in the past 4 years, I've had one point of contact -- my mailbox. And after the having the 3rd vehicle stolen, all my formal/official docs have my mailbox addr as well.
Cheers,
-Neil.
On Tuesday 29 April 2003 22:53, Jinx scribbled: {Quote hidden}
> > Probably people who use their full real names are a bit more
> > reticent to put additional details out there for possible abuse.
>
> I've no strong feelings either way wrt to photos, but my name is
> part of my domain and I wouldn't say it's created any problems.
> Unless I had a good reason to (eg for sales) I wouldn't put a
> physical address on a page. But only because it's unnecessary,
> not because I want to avoid anything. A PO Box for would be
> OK but even that gives the impression of trying to stay unseen
> or elusive. Maybe that's just me - I would try not to deal with
> anyone who has just a PO Box address
On Tuesday 29 April 2003 03:59, Alan B. Pearce scribbled:
> >The thing I really want to try next is using thinner
> >solder. I was using .032, but can find solder less
> >than half that diameter.
>
> You will find that using the correct diameter solder is the biggest step to
> making neat looking hand soldered SMD joints. Go for it, it is great fun.
Did this today, using .022 solder (silver) instead of the regular .032 rosin stuff I normally use. Made a major improvement! This SOIC stuff is looking very very promising.
At 03:53 PM 4/30/03 +1200, Jinx wrote:
> > Probably people who use their full real names are a bit more
> > reticent to put additional details out there for possible abuse.
>
>I've no strong feelings either way wrt to photos, but my name is
>part of my domain and I wouldn't say it's created any problems.
>Unless I had a good reason to (eg for sales) I wouldn't put a
>physical address on a page. But only because it's unnecessary,
>not because I want to avoid anything. A PO Box for would be
>OK but even that gives the impression of trying to stay unseen
>or elusive. Maybe that's just me - I would try not to deal with
>anyone who has just a PO Box address
I'll go one further: I won't purchase from a website where the owner hides
their identify. If I don't see a real human's name and an address, I
*won't* give them my credit card number.
There are some sites selling some neat stuff. But if I can't find a
contact name, mailing address, phone number, etc on the site, they don't
get my business.
Celebrating 19 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2003)
.-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-
`-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-'
Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address.
This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited
commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.
Picdude wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 April 2003 03:59, Alan B. Pearce scribbled:
>>> The thing I really want to try next is using thinner
>>> solder. I was using .032, but can find solder less
>>> than half that diameter.
>>
>> You will find that using the correct diameter solder is the biggest
>> step to making neat looking hand soldered SMD joints. Go for it, it
>> is great fun.
>
>
> Did this today, using .022 solder (silver) instead of the regular
> .032 rosin stuff I normally use. Made a major improvement! This
> SOIC stuff is looking very very promising.
>
> Cheers,
> -Neil.
Can you post the (0.022) solder part/number or code, manufacturer?
Radio Shack. It's called "Silver Bearing Solder .... .022". It still is a rosin-flux solder. Comes in a small roll for $4 IIRC. I'll check the number as soon as I can get my butt off this seat.
Cheers,
-Neil.
On Thursday 01 May 2003 11:51, Wagner Lipnharski scribbled:
>
> Can you post the (0.022) solder part/number or code, manufacturer?
The silver stuff (usually 2% silver, 63% tin) is highly recommented for all SM stuff - it has a
lower melting point and doesn't leech out the silver from the pads of chip R's and C's.
I also find it produces much brighter joints for general soldering, and use it for almost all
soldering.
On Thu, 1 May 2003 12:09:39 -0500, you wrote:
>Radio Shack. It's called "Silver Bearing Solder .... .022". It still is a
>rosin-flux solder. Comes in a small roll for $4 IIRC. I'll check the number
>as soon as I can get my butt off this seat.
>
>Cheers,
>-Neil.
>
>
>
>On Thursday 01 May 2003 11:51, Wagner Lipnharski scribbled:
>>
>> Can you post the (0.022) solder part/number or code, manufacturer?
>
> The silver stuff (usually 2% silver, 63% tin) is highly recommented for all
SM stuff - it has a
lower melting point and doesn't leech out the silver from the pads of chip
R's and C's.
I also find it produces much brighter joints for general soldering, and
use it for almost all
soldering.
On Thu, 1 May 2003 12:09:39 -0500, you wrote:
>Radio Shack. It's called "Silver Bearing Solder .... .022". It still
is a
>rosin-flux solder. Comes in a small roll for $4 IIRC. I'll check the
number {Quote hidden}
>as soon as I can get my butt off this seat.
>
>Cheers,
>-Neil.
>
>
>
>On Thursday 01 May 2003 11:51, Wagner Lipnharski scribbled:
>>
>> Can you post the (0.022) solder part/number or code, manufacturer?
On Thursday 01 May 2003 11:23, Dwayne Reid scribbled:
> I'll go one further: I won't purchase from a website where the owner hides
> their identify. If I don't see a real human's name and an address, I
> *won't* give them my credit card number.
>
> There are some sites selling some neat stuff. But if I can't find a
> contact name, mailing address, phone number, etc on the site, they don't
> get my business.
>
> dwayne
I don't buy either unless there's a phone number, but many businesses won't put the owner's name on there, especially larger companies. Look at companies like Amazon.com, Digikey, etc. You won't get a human's name on those, but people are reachable.
On Thursday 01 May 2003 12:09, Picdude scribbled:
> Radio Shack. It's called "Silver Bearing Solder .... .022". It still is
> a rosin-flux solder. Comes in a small roll for $4 IIRC. I'll check the
> number as soon as I can get my butt off this seat.
>
> Cheers,
> -Neil.
>
> On Thursday 01 May 2003 11:51, Wagner Lipnharski scribbled:
> > Can you post the (0.022) solder part/number or code, manufacturer?
> On Tuesday 29 April 2003 03:59, Alan B. Pearce scribbled:
>>> The thing I really want to try next is using thinner
>>> solder. I was using .032, but can find solder less
>>> than half that diameter.
>>
>> You will find that using the correct diameter solder is the biggest step to
>> making neat looking hand soldered SMD joints. Go for it, it is great fun.
>
>
> Did this today, using .022 solder (silver) instead of the regular .032 rosin
> stuff I normally use. Made a major improvement! This SOIC stuff is looking
> very very promising.
>
> Cheers,
> -Neil.
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
> piclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu
>
>
--------------------------------------------------
Marc Nicholas Geekythings Inc. C/416.543.4896
UNIX, Database, Security and Networking Consulting
CLEAR.NET.NZ> wrote:
