Author Topic: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds  (Read 87009 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Wolfgang

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1577
  • Country: de
  • Its great if it finally works !
    • Electronic Projects for Fun
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #550 on: January 02, 2019, 08:56:26 pm »
The discussion here is running along the "are safety belts really neccessary ?" lines. Fuses prevent major damages even if such events are (hopefully, I dont know where else Weller has cut corners) rare. Not everything that is (barely) legel and increases profit (by a ridiculous amount) is smart in the end.
It really isn't. I don't think people here will make the mistake thinking that slapping on a safety device will automatically make things safer. Note that I'm not defending Weller not using a fuse. I'm simply trying to view the matter from different sides, looking at the actual facts we have. Dave wasn't afraid to admit the problem in the video was user error. That leaves the question how much of a problem not having a fuse really is if you don't grossly overload the device. A decision I don't understand could very well be an opportunity to learn about something I hadn't considered before, but someone else did figure out. I've seen more than one teardown which shows something which seems a terrible idea, but actually turns out to work remarkably well. Are there reasons this design may be reasonable, like transformers inherently limiting the current or different transformer designs being used between the US and EU model? Are there other things we may be overlooking? If there's a negative impact, can we quantify it? Or is this really penny pinching of the kind we all hate? Some people seem really keen on getting out the pitchforks and don't seem to mind fabricating provocative stories to justify their outrage and that's what I object to. I don't feel the fundamentalist approach and piling on is very appealing, and alternatively hope to tap into the considerable knowledge of the population here to maybe learn a thing or two.

... in other words, you try to practice tolerance and understanding for the unworthy. I do not see *one* honest reason (greed excluded) for not using a primary side protection device like a fuse or a thermofuse. Its so simple - even if failures and injuries are rare, you still have a good point eliminating them. If profit comes first - bad choice, especially for a "premium" product. All the desparate reasearch for a good reason why Weller (they are still working on their response ...) did this is academic and a bit futile, no ?  :)

Discussion about safety belts have subsided after a few years, IIRC. Common sense will prevail in the end (I am an optimist)  :)
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 09:52:21 pm by Wolfgang »
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #551 on: January 02, 2019, 09:49:38 pm »
Dave, this is the third time you've repeated yourself. I've attempted to answer you twice already, so I'll let you scroll back. But really, the only ones who can answer that are Weller.

Because people keep asking over and over again why people are making a big deal over this. And they keep coming back with the argument that it's 240V into a 120V tranny so it deserved to fail etc.

Right, so you post without reading. The fuse justification you keep repeating is that Weller puts them in their higher end stations. Explain.

A Cadillac comes with lane keep cameras. A Chevy Spark does not.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9773
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #552 on: January 02, 2019, 09:56:21 pm »
... in other words, you try to practice tolerance and understanding for the unworthy. I do not see *one* honest reason (greed excluded) for a primary side protection device like a fuse or a thermofuse. Its so simple - even if failures and injuries are rare, you still have a good point eliminating them. If profit comes first - bad choice, especially for a "premium" product. All the desparate reasearch for a good reason why Weller (they are still working on their response ...) did this is academic and a bit futile, no ?  :)

Discussion about safety belts have subsided after a few years, IIRC. Common sense will prevail in the end (I am an optimist)  :)
I'm merely willing to accept that I may not have the full picture, and won't join a witch hunt as a consequence. Again, I've seen too many solutions which seem terrible at first glance, but which turn out to be fine. A recent example would be the plastic car ramps discussed in the TEA thread. Both my gut and experience tell me that's a terrible idea, yet the company has sold them for two decades or more. That must mean they're fine, even though I would have agreed with anyone crucifying the manufacturer if they were first introduced today.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #553 on: January 02, 2019, 09:56:42 pm »
Had DJ tried to run the unit from a 120 volt ugly square wave inverter, some aviation 400hz thingie or a dimmer buzz adapter to control the temperature

 :wtf: Oh yah , I hate it when I can't use my iron on a long haul flight. A dimmer buzz adapter??

Why does everyone try to keep coming up with the most obscure use cases? Most people plug their iron in at their bench and there it lives. End of story.

I have exactly two 240V outlets in my house. One for the stove, and one for the dryer, and they're pretty difficult to mix up.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #554 on: January 02, 2019, 10:06:11 pm »
Dave, this is the third time you've repeated yourself.

Wow, that is pretty ironic!
We have also read your opinions multiple times, but many of us clearly don't agree with it - just as you don't agree with ours.
There was no back and forth discussion. I'm talking about just spewing an opinion over and over without explaining it, or listening to/addressing the responses.

they will likely see a measurable hit on sales targets.
wishful thinking
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #555 on: January 02, 2019, 10:08:53 pm »
even if failures and injuries are rare, you still have a good point eliminating them.

So we should protect against each kind of failure, no matter how rare, even 1/1,000,000? That would be quite a task.
Please do some reading about cost-benefit analysis.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #556 on: January 02, 2019, 10:29:03 pm »
the discussion here, which isn't as black and white as some people would make it seem in their enthusiasm to pile on. Kleinstein's remark on how a thermal fuse may be more appropriate than a primary fuse is a good example of how things are probably a bit more nuanced than "no primary fuse = bad".

 :rant: No no no. This is the internet. We exploit irrational fears to set up an extreme knee-jerk reaction, draw lines, set up a scapegoat to crucify, and we all jump on the tribe bandwagon. We paint mushy dissenters as the enemy and burn them, thus reinforcing our previously held beliefs. No prisoners. No compromise!  That's how progress works :P
 

Online Wolfgang

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1577
  • Country: de
  • Its great if it finally works !
    • Electronic Projects for Fun
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #557 on: January 02, 2019, 10:31:37 pm »
Thanks for the tip, but I was working for years in the insurance industry. Cost/benefit/probability considerations were daily business.
The failure rate of electrical equipment has been improved *despite* the fact that the chance of suffering an electrical accident was quite low in the last years (before Chinese crap took over). Still, the laws and regulations have been strengthened a lot, and for a good cause. The *cost* of a failure can easily exceed millions (fire, causalties, injuries, ...) while the cost to prevent something like that can be really small (Weller case). So, as you write, a 1:1 Million chance can be a good reason to act. I am quite sure that the chance of a Weller blowing up is one or two orders of magnitude higher than 1:1E6.
 
The following users thanked this post: TheDane

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6415
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #558 on: January 02, 2019, 10:33:03 pm »
The problem with cost-benefit analyses is that they tend to underestimate the very real costs of non-safety and overestimate the benefits of cutting corners, for various reasons which would only make us angry.

As a recent poll showed that Weller is the most commonly used brand here in this forum, maybe they'll change their minds.

even if failures and injuries are rare, you still have a good point eliminating them.

So we should protect against each kind of failure, no matter how rare, even 1/1,000,000? That would be quite a task.
Please do some reading about cost-benefit analysis.
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Online Wolfgang

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1577
  • Country: de
  • Its great if it finally works !
    • Electronic Projects for Fun
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #559 on: January 02, 2019, 10:36:07 pm »
the discussion here, which isn't as black and white as some people would make it seem in their enthusiasm to pile on. Kleinstein's remark on how a thermal fuse may be more appropriate than a primary fuse is a good example of how things are probably a bit more nuanced than "no primary fuse = bad".

 :rant: No no no. This is the internet. We exploit irrational fears to set up an extreme knee-jerk reaction, draw lines, set up a scapegoat to crucify, and we all jump on the tribe bandwagon. We paint mushy dissenters as the enemy and burn them, thus reinforcing our previously held beliefs. No prisoners. No compromise!  That's how progress works :P

YES !!! All people that cut corners on safety that cost just a penny should rot in *HELL*.  >:D
 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Detective

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #560 on: January 02, 2019, 10:38:16 pm »
I totally understand why some people are so paranoid, it's usually those who has already been burned in the past :-)
I think think different people handle trauma in different ways. Most people employ "flight" and do everything they can to avoid future confrontations, and possibly blame others for their misfortune.

Others try to learn what happened and why, analyze it rationally, and then try to change their approach. It's like learning to swim.

I've gotten the 120V handshake several times, and I have a better understanding of it as a result. I don't cower from outlets or go install GFCIs on everything.
 

Online Wolfgang

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1577
  • Country: de
  • Its great if it finally works !
    • Electronic Projects for Fun
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #561 on: January 02, 2019, 10:42:43 pm »
I totally understand why some people are so paranoid, it's usually those who has already been burned in the past :-)
I think think different people handle trauma in different ways. Most people employ "flight" and do everything they can to avoid future confrontations, and possibly blame others for their misfortune.

Others try to learn what happened and why, analyze it rationally, and then try to change their approach. It's like learning to swim.

I've gotten the 120V handshake several times, and I have a better understanding of it as a result. I don't cower from outlets or go install GFCIs on everything.

One of this forums members got the slogan "Safety measures hinder evolution". Come on, just be a part of it !
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #562 on: January 02, 2019, 10:45:03 pm »
The *cost* of a failure can easily exceed millions (fire, causalties, injuries, ...) ... the chance of a Weller blowing up is one or two orders of magnitude higher than 1:1E6.... people that cut corners on safety

Pure conjecture.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 32801
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #563 on: January 02, 2019, 10:47:47 pm »
FWIW I don't agree DJ should cop the rap of 'user error' on a unit made by a company that flogs it's wares to a 120 volt @ 60 hz nation that also has a 240 volt supply.

DJ plugged it in and the unit smoked because the manufacturer FAILED to deploy a cheap fusing device to prevent an input voltage mishap,
and no real obvious appropriate caution labeling   

I'll still happily cop the user error tag.
But I do think that the use of a universal IEC socket without a mains fuse is begging for trouble in today's global economy. And the voltage label is on the bottom, not the back where the plug is.
If it had a fixed mains cable and 120V plug (like Hakko do) then they could get away with it. But even in this case, Hakko have a fuse.
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w, Kean

Online Wolfgang

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1577
  • Country: de
  • Its great if it finally works !
    • Electronic Projects for Fun
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #564 on: January 02, 2019, 10:53:54 pm »
FWIW I don't agree DJ should cop the rap of 'user error' on a unit made by a company that flogs it's wares to a 120 volt @ 60 hz nation that also has a 240 volt supply.

DJ plugged it in and the unit smoked because the manufacturer FAILED to deploy a cheap fusing device to prevent an input voltage mishap,
and no real obvious appropriate caution labeling   

I'll still happily cop the user error tag.
But I do think that the use of a universal IEC socket without a mains fuse is begging for trouble in today's global economy. And the voltage label is on the bottom, not the back where the plug is.
If it had a fixed mains cable and 120V plug (like Hakko do) then they could get away with it. But even in this case, Hakko have a fuse.

The car industry in the old times claimed that safety belts and crash energy reduction zones where not neccessary because it was always the fault of the driver.
The turning point was that even a faulty driver should be given a chance to survive.
Shit happens - just make sure that there is a safe way to fail.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 32801
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #565 on: January 02, 2019, 10:58:22 pm »
Dave, this is the third time you've repeated yourself. I've attempted to answer you twice already, so I'll let you scroll back. But really, the only ones who can answer that are Weller.

Because people keep asking over and over again why people are making a big deal over this. And they keep coming back with the argument that it's 240V into a 120V tranny so it deserved to fail etc.

Right, so you post without reading. The fuse justification you keep repeating is that Weller puts them in their higher end stations. Explain.

I don't read every post in this thread, if you have made a point somewhere and I didn't respond then either post it again or provide a direct link.

The explanation does NOT need to come from us, it needs to come from Weller. They are the ones that seemingly hold contradictory opinion on whether and why a mains primary fuse is needed, when it is industry standard practice to do so.
Quite frankly if any engineer at all the companies I've worked at proposed leaving out a mains primary fuse (for insert reason), they'd get shouted out or given the arse.
In fact it would be borderline against official professional liability training at companies I've worked at. i.e. the engineer makes a deliberate willful decision to remove a safety device against industry standard practice, that puts the personal liability on to them (and those that approve it). Sure, you can justify it and have the data to back up the decision, but the amount of work to do that is a lot, it's just silly, add the fuse and be done with it.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kean, Wolfgang, TheDane, fsr

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9773
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #566 on: January 02, 2019, 11:00:19 pm »
The car industry in the old times claimed that safety belts and crash energy reduction zones where not neccessary because it was always the fault of the driver.
The turning point was that even a faulty driver should be given a chance to survive.
Shit happens - just make sure that there is a safe way to fail.
You seem to insist on making the comparison to safety belts. Can you demonstrate that the actual impact of omitting the safety feature is similar in both cases? Or is it more like not fitting traction control?
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #567 on: January 02, 2019, 11:02:50 pm »
And the voltage label is on the bottom, not the back where the plug is.
Yeah, this is dumb.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mr. Scram

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #568 on: January 02, 2019, 11:07:42 pm »
The car industry in the old times claimed that safety belts and crash energy reduction zones where not neccessary because it was always the fault of the driver.
That is suspiciously ignorant reasoning. Collisions often involve two vehicles. Usually, one party is at fault. Can you cite an example?

The turning point was that even a faulty driver should be given a chance to survive.
I think the death toll was turning point. You are making shit up.
 

Online Wolfgang

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1577
  • Country: de
  • Its great if it finally works !
    • Electronic Projects for Fun
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #569 on: January 02, 2019, 11:11:58 pm »
The car industry in the old times claimed that safety belts and crash energy reduction zones where not neccessary because it was always the fault of the driver.
The turning point was that even a faulty driver should be given a chance to survive.
Shit happens - just make sure that there is a safe way to fail.
You seem to insist on making the comparison to safety belts. Can you demonstrate that the actual impact of omitting the safety feature is similar in both cases? Or is it more like not fitting traction control?
Safety belts are just a trivial example. They saved a lot of lives before traction control was invented. IMHO, you are completely missing the point. As Dave has pointed out above, it is incredibly silly to do something that Weller did, for what reason *ever*.  In all the academic discussion, I found only *one* explicable reason to leave out the fuse : greed. Very human, but still silly. Or have I missed some incredibly smart theory that a fuse would do more harm than good ?  >:D
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 11:13:37 pm by Wolfgang »
 

Online Wolfgang

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1577
  • Country: de
  • Its great if it finally works !
    • Electronic Projects for Fun
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #570 on: January 02, 2019, 11:16:47 pm »
Still the wrong logic. Also the guilty should survive. You may read about the discussions regarding car safety between the manufacturers of cars and the US administration. The state inforced better protection (crash tests, ...) and the car industry tried to cut cost as much as they could.
 

Offline Electro Detective

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2676
  • Country: au
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #571 on: January 02, 2019, 11:20:30 pm »
 ;D   ROFL at witch hunt accusations, Cadillac lane keep cameras, plastic versus metal car ramps, 'user error' stone throwing, scapegoat crucifixions, bandwagon jumping, safety belts,
keeping tabs and nagging the OP for repeating themselves over a 20+ page span...  ;D

----------------

If companies like Behringer that make affordable gear can fit IEC sockets with labelled 120/240v flippable idiot-proof fuse holders (I'll have to drum up a picture asap),
EDIT: picture posted 
Weller should have been on that wagon over 20 years ago.
 
I'm assuming DJ may have a 240 to 120 volt stepdown box or Variac kicking in the lab,

which would have come in handy -IF- Weller made some effort to label the unit
and or supply an incompatible IEC female to 120 volt plug cable,

or better still fit a ---FUSE--- in the thing too,

so all he had to do was 'DOH...!'  :-[    fork out a couple of bucks for a new fuse,

plug the recovered unit into the stepdown or variac, and continue on  :clap:


WORST CASE SCENARIO  :scared:  Had it been left unattended and caught fire in a business complex, or in a stacked shoe/dog box apartment tower,
let's talk about the price of lives and property versus the price of a fuse and thermal cutout. 


The only 'user error' here was failing to suspect the possibility of penny pinching that's wormed it's way into a reputable brand,

or 'Weller Error' in the design of these particular units,

hey **it happens, we understand > just FIX IT

and clue up the PR department in correct damage control procedures for now and next time,

so all can be well (er) again,

and the issue blows away...   :phew:


« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 12:08:55 am by Electro Detective »
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9773
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #572 on: January 02, 2019, 11:24:21 pm »
Safety belts are just a trivial example. They saved a lot of lives before traction control was invented. IMHO, you are completely missing the point. As Dave has pointed out above, it is incredibly silly to do something that Weller did, for what reason *ever*.  In all the academic discussion, I found only *one* explicable reason to leave out the fuse : greed. Very human, but still silly. Or have I missed some incredibly smart theory that a fuse would do more harm than good ?  >:D
Something so incredibly silly should be incredibly easy to demonstrate or prove with numbers. We haven't exactly seen that, which is all that's asked for. If it's not that easy to demonstrate anything, maybe the difference isn't as big as is claimed.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 11:28:41 pm by Mr. Scram »
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9773
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #573 on: January 02, 2019, 11:27:03 pm »
;D   ROFL at witch hunt accusations, Cadillac lane keep cameras, plastic versus metal car ramps, 'user error' stone throwing, scapegoat crucifixions, bandwagon jumping, safety belts,
keeping tabs and nagging the OP for repeating themselves over a 20+ page span...  ;D

----------------

If companies like Behringer that make affordable gear can fit IEC sockets with labelled 120/240v flippable idiot-proof fuse holders (I'll have to drum up a picture asap),
Weller should have been on that wagon over 20 years ago.
 
I'm assuming DJ may have a 240 to 120 volt stepdown box or Variac kicking in the lab,

which would have come in handy -IF- Weller made some effort to label the unit
and or supply an incompatible IEC female to 120 volt plug cable,

or better still fit a ---FUSE--- in the thing too,

so all he had to do was 'DOH...!'  :-[    fork out a couple of bucks for a new fuse,

plug the recovered unit into the stepdown or variac, and continue on  :clap:


WORST CASE SCENARIO  :scared:  Had it been left unattended and caught fire in a business complex, or in a stacked shoe/dog box apartment tower,
let's talk about the price of lives and property versus the price of a fuse and thermal cutout. 


The only 'user error' here was failing to suspect the possibility of penny pinching that's wormed it's way into a reputable brand,

or 'Weller Error' in the design of these particular units,

hey **it happens, we understand > just FIX IT

and clue up the PR department in correct damage control procedures for now and next time,

so all can be well (er) again,

and the issue blows away...   :phew:
There's a lot of these posts with a lot of noise and fairly far fetched scenarios, but they're ultimately just reiterations of the same position on the matter. You want Weller to fix it. We got it. We're discussing how reasonable that demand actually is.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 909
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #574 on: January 02, 2019, 11:27:37 pm »
if you have made a point somewhere and I didn't respond then either post it again
Three times? Kinda rude.

industry standard practice

OK they went against the status quo.   :-//

that puts the personal liability on to them
and what has the liability been so far? (when using them as intended)

I still feel like I can put this device on my bench and use it without worry. This video proves nothing.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf