Author Topic: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds  (Read 48678 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7307
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #725 on: January 05, 2019, 10:09:11 am »
That didn't proved anything to me.
If the smoking, fuseless transformer looks like it's safe to you, well, you're free to think whatever you like. But don't expect that most people will think the same.

And as i said, you cannot guarantee the safety of a transformer that was smoking it's enamel. A fuse would have blown before that happens.
So, why not to include a fuse, when it's very cheap, everyone else uses it, and would improve the safety of the device? Nobody designs mains connected equipment without a mains fuse, because when shit goes wrong with mains, it goes really wrong. Too much power there. Would you remove the fuse just because your found some certification that won't require one? I wouldn't expect a simple 40 watts soldering iron to be fused, because, well, there's no much space to even put a fuse in there, and it has just a heating element inside, and that's it. Neither would i leave it connected and go away for any significant amount of time. But a soldering station? Is there even another fuseless soldering station out there?

Maybe to weller this falls under the ridiculous reasoning of "this may cost $1 per unit, but in 1,000,000 units, that's $1,000,000 we could save". But then, why not just charge $1 more, and be done with it?

Maybe it's a design issue or manufacturing error? But then, it's crazy if they don't fix it, as they could get sued. At least go the "xbox way", and provide an external safety.

And even more important: if they have a good reason for the fuse to not be there, just share that information with the electronics community!!
Luckily we can test whether a fuse would have blown before that happens. We just need some funds to do so. What are you willing to contribute to the testing funds? Maybe $50?
 

Offline drussell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1049
  • Country: ca
  • Hardcore Geek
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #726 on: January 05, 2019, 10:10:06 am »
I'm curious as to whether people here would be as outraged if it were a standard $6 120-volt wall-wart that was connected to 240 volts instead of a soldering station?

If I stick 240 volts at 50 Hz across pretty much any device intended for 120 volts 60 Hz, I would expect fireworks unless something is specifically designed for a wider voltage range.  :)
 

Offline drussell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1049
  • Country: ca
  • Hardcore Geek
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #727 on: January 05, 2019, 10:15:38 am »
The ultimate combination of severe user error, electrical naivety and distressingly cheap design:



 :palm:
 
The following users thanked this post: Andrew McNamara

Offline Electro Detective

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2041
  • Country: au
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #728 on: January 05, 2019, 10:19:03 am »
With regard to the car analogy ... drivers and passengers walk away generally alive

Quote from timelessbeing:

analogy fail

A) There are probably hundreds of thousands of accidents per day

REPLY: There are 'probably' many accidents related to car design issues, either not addressed ($ $ $-RECALL-$ $ $) or swept under the doormat
and or just payed out when necessary, to nagging victims via 'no win-no fee' attorneys   



B) You can't control other bad drivers. You CAN control what you plug your iron into.

REPLY: You can't control what others plug their iron or your borrowed iron into,
best to have a properly rated fuse in the sucker = less thinking about who's plugging what into where,
and just get on with the soldering thing..
 

C) From what I can tell, Dave walked away alive. In fact his life wasn't in danger.

REPLY: His lab was in danger of going up in smoke (and not in an Option B: Cheech and Chong fashion) if he left it unattended, as he's not imprisoned there afaik.

and his wallet was in danger too, on a Fire Brigade call out fee, lab mop up, gear replacement, paint job, a carton of Glen 20,
and slab of beer and pizzas for mates rocking up to assist...

 
The following users thanked this post: SeanB

Offline thm_w

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1194
  • Country: ca
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #729 on: January 05, 2019, 10:21:56 am »
I can't even imagine how much fun some of you guys were having trying to impugn all the old-school manufacturers back-in-the-day when we had current-production things like live chassis TVs and radios that were perfectly cromulent design choices at the time....   :)

No one is talking about an old-school manufacture or design, we are talking about a modern product which was recently designed.

Quote
I suppose, in here, there will probably now be a lobby for imbedded smoke-detectors on all new transformer-operated devices to cut the current to the supply in the case of a failure, unlike those old-fangled, transformer-based, death-trap wall-warts... 

We've established that proper transformer based wall-warts have an embedded thermal fuse. Maybe not all.
Most of the smoke detectors that show up on google have a fuse or similar. I did see one CO detector below that appears to have no input fuse, date is 2003.

https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/news/teardown-tuesday-leeo-wifi-smart-alert-carbon-monoxide-smoke-alarm/
https://fccid.io/SAK9000165/Internal-Photos/Internal-Photos-509186
https://photos.vec.com/Blog/2011-10/Carbon-Monoxide-Detector/ (no fuse)

Quote
You know, instead we must all now use those ultra-safe, super-reliable chinese SMPS thingies that everything seems to come with.    :palm:

"But they have a fusible resistor in them!"

Fusible resistor, indeed....   :palm:

Yes cheap crap SMPSs are also a hazard and are dangerous, if they are not certified. No one is arguing this.

A fusible resistor may be enough to pass certifications if they are using a proper part: https://www.powerelectronics.com/passive-components/fail-safe-wirewound-resistors-robust-applications
But to me it doesn't seem as good as a fuse, when they just quote "Fusing time within 60 seconds at 25 times of rated power" without much more info. http://www.yageo.com/NewPortal/yageodocoutput?fileName=/pdf/throughhole/Yageo_LR_FKN_2013.pdf

And yet, a fusible resistor is still better than nothing, Weller is using nothing.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7307
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #730 on: January 05, 2019, 10:34:20 am »
Quote from timelessbeing:

analogy fail

A) There are probably hundreds of thousands of accidents per day

REPLY: There are 'probably' many accidents related to car design issues, either not addressed ($ $ $-RECALL-$ $ $) or swept under the doormat
and or just payed out when necessary, to nagging victims via 'no win-no fee' attorneys   



B) You can't control other bad drivers. You CAN control what you plug your iron into.

REPLY: You can't control what others plug their iron or your borrowed iron into,
best to have a properly rated fuse in the sucker = less thinking about who's plugging what into where,
and just get on with the soldering thing..
 

C) From what I can tell, Dave walked away alive. In fact his life wasn't in danger.

REPLY: His lab was in danger of going up in smoke (and not in an Option B: Cheech and Chong fashion) if he left it unattended, as he's not imprisoned there afaik.

and his wallet was in danger too, on a Fire Brigade call out fee, lab mop up, gear replacement, paint job, a carton of Glen 20,
and slab of beer and pizzas for mates rocking up to assist...
We'll test whether the lab was in danger and try to assess the amount of smoke produced. We just need some funds for buying a few stations to test. $50?
 

Offline drussell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1049
  • Country: ca
  • Hardcore Geek
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #731 on: January 05, 2019, 10:39:53 am »
Oops...  I forgot to include bigclive's appropriate response to the 120->240V mishap video above:



Classic Clive...  :)
 
The following users thanked this post: SeanB

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 780
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #732 on: January 05, 2019, 10:40:13 am »
REPLY: There are 'probably' many accidents related to car design issues, either not addressed ($ $ $-RECALL-$ $ $) or swept under the doormat
and or just payed out when necessary, to nagging victims via 'no win-no fee' attorneys 
Is there a point here?


best to have a properly rated fuse in the sucker = less thinking about who's plugging what into where ...
 His lab was in danger of going up in smoke ...and his wallet was in danger too
I see. Well If you are person with a habbit of plugging things into random places, then YOU better buy devices with fuses.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 780
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #733 on: January 05, 2019, 10:43:20 am »
IMHO, The tests should comprise the following:

- Line voltage transients (some standardized procedure. I dont know what the US rules ask for)
If it's UL listed, hasn't it already been tested for this?

- permanent overvoltage (as happened to Dave)
Why do we have to do this again? Dave conducted this test. And it failed, exactly as it should have.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 780
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #734 on: January 05, 2019, 10:45:51 am »
you cannot guarantee the safety of a transformer that was smoking it's enamel.
Why not?
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7307
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #735 on: January 05, 2019, 10:53:25 am »
If it's UL listed, hasn't it already been tested for this?

Why do we have to do this again? Dave conducted this test. And it failed, exactly as it should have.
I'd like to test gross overvoltage to see how the unit fails when not unplugged. A second test can show whether a fuse would actually save it without harm. Either case would be user error, but it'd put an end to that part of the discussion.

Whether the unit is safe without fuse under normal conditions is a bit harder to assess.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2019, 10:55:25 am by Mr. Scram »
 

Offline coppercone2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3089
  • Country: us
  • 💎
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #736 on: January 05, 2019, 10:57:37 am »
you cannot guarantee the safety of a transformer that was smoking it's enamel.
Why not?

its like making sure the nuts you ate won't come to the surface of a turd i don't know how to explain how this is a engineering stupidity in any other words, its a boiling expanding mass of plastic thats on the threshold of fire held back by nasty chemical fume blanket that prevents a burn.

how don't you see this/
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7307
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #737 on: January 05, 2019, 11:06:12 am »
its like making sure the nuts you ate won't come to the surface of a turd i don't know how to explain how this is a engineering stupidity in any other words, its a boiling expanding mass of plastic thats on the threshold of fire held back by nasty chemical fume blanket that prevents a burn.

how don't you see this/
Without being facetious, I honestly can't tell what you're trying to say here.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 780
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #738 on: January 05, 2019, 11:07:22 am »
how don't you see this/
Precisely because I did not see it.
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 780
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #739 on: January 05, 2019, 11:13:37 am »
how the unit fails when not unplugged.
Ah yes that's the $100 question.
 

Offline coppercone2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3089
  • Country: us
  • 💎
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #740 on: January 05, 2019, 11:18:21 am »
its like making sure the nuts you ate won't come to the surface of a turd i don't know how to explain how this is a engineering stupidity in any other words, its a boiling expanding mass of plastic thats on the threshold of fire held back by nasty chemical fume blanket that prevents a burn.

how don't you see this/
Without being facetious, I honestly can't tell what you're trying to say here.

your fire safety goes from a fool proof piece of copper wire in a glass tube to a complex chemical reaction that will god willing turn into plastic smoke and not fire. you know that stuff is still flammable right, its just more difficult to ignite the idea being it cools down rapidly enough to barely prevent it from igniting.

its like making wood gas instead of burning wood. its real close already.

at best you can call it fire resistant. wheras a fuse is fire proof

also if the formula is a bit off it can go completely haywire and turn into a complete flamethrower, compared to a fuse, you can't really screw up a copper fuse.

improper mixing, failure to add additives, separation during manufacturing, etc.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2019, 11:22:06 am by coppercone2 »
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 780
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #741 on: January 05, 2019, 11:50:36 am »
improper mixing, failure to add additives, separation during manufacturing, etc.
Friday the 13th, 15km/h wind due north, crescent moon, pluto in alignment ...
 

Online Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9055
  • Country: au
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #742 on: January 05, 2019, 12:43:40 pm »
If it's UL listed, hasn't it already been tested for this?

Why do we have to do this again? Dave conducted this test. And it failed, exactly as it should have.
I'd like to test gross overvoltage to see how the unit fails when not unplugged.
Fair enough.  Not your typical scenario, but it is a question from our curiosity.

Quote
A second test can show whether a fuse would actually save it without harm.
Absolutely.

Quote
Either case would be user error, but it'd put an end to that part of the discussion.
I would share that same hope - but I fear it would be in vain.  Logic is not followed by everyone and some just like to be ornery.

Quote
Whether the unit is safe without fuse under normal conditions is a bit harder to assess.
Yes, it will be much harder, but despite this difficulty, it is what this discussion should be about (IMHO) - especially in respect to the expectations from Weller.


... but one can only dream.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7307
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #743 on: January 05, 2019, 01:04:24 pm »
Fair enough.  Not your typical scenario, but it is a question from our curiosity.

Absolutely.

I would share that same hope - but I fear it would be in vain.  Logic is not followed by everyone and some just like to be ornery.

Yes, it will be much harder, but despite this difficulty, it is what this discussion should be about (IMHO) - especially in respect to the expectations from Weller.


... but one can only dream.
If you have ideas about testing the latter, they'd be more than welcome.
 

Online Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9055
  • Country: au
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #744 on: January 05, 2019, 01:21:39 pm »
All I can think of is to take any recorded events, recreate the circumstances and subject the target device to those conditions and note what happens.

The sort of events I mean are those that are experienced in a nominal environment.  (A 120V device plugged into a 240V supply is not one of those - for the armchair warriors still champing at that bit.)

To do this properly, you would need an objectively compiled set of observations - and I do not have such a database.

Hypothetical situations need to be avoided - since there will be an infinite number of them and much debate can be spent on conditions that may occur once in every 10,000 years (I might be tempted to call that "ignorable").  Besides, hypotheticals come from our imagination and the real world has a habit of throwing up situations we didn't think about.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2019, 01:25:52 pm by Brumby »
 

Offline Electro Detective

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2041
  • Country: au
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #745 on: January 05, 2019, 01:42:05 pm »

'They' may be pumping the two corptrolls with 'fiery' emails to get this fuseless fiasco wrapped up and gone by YESTERDAY,

package the offensive as a one time 'user error' by DJ,

handball him a replacement 240v station and spare tips 

and as a last resort offer a sellers Amazon gig if it gets to real hardball


It's a cheap way out to continue flogging fuseless 120v stations to US/Canada markets,
and assume they don't cop a 240v zap, plugging it in to 240v outlets by mistake via 120/240 converter lead,
or a house wiring or street transformer snafu

and crossed corporate fingers and legs that none make it to Australia again, and land on an electronics jedi bench 

or a rogue boxload float over to Cashies...  :scared:



 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7307
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #746 on: January 05, 2019, 01:44:00 pm »

'They' may be pumping the two corptrolls with 'fiery' emails to get this fuseless fiasco wrapped up and gone by YESTERDAY,

package the offensive as a one time 'user error' by DJ,

handball him a replacement 240v station and spare tips 

and as a last resort offer a sellers Amazon gig if it gets to real hardball


It's a cheap way out to continue flogging fuseless 120v stations to US/Canada markets,
and assume they don't cop a 240v zap, plugging it in to 240v outlets by mistake via 120/240 converter lead,
or a house wiring or street transformer snafu

and crossed corporate fingers and legs that none make it to Australia again, and land on an electronics jedi bench 

or a rogue boxload float over to Cashies...  :scared:



How much do you contribute to the testing funds? How about $50 too?
 

Offline timelessbeing

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 780
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #747 on: January 05, 2019, 02:08:40 pm »
'They' may be pumping the two corptrolls with 'fiery' emails ... and land on an electronics jedi bench or a rogue boxload float over to Cashies... 

 

... But, little did they know that he's a actually a double-agent, and the whole fuse debacle was a clever ploy to take the heat off of Miniware, makers of the TS1000, following the recent negative review on EEVBLOG. Meanwhile, Ersa CEO apologizes after independent labs discover that they have been falsifying power factor figures...

:popcorn:
 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Detective

Offline Electro Detective

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2041
  • Country: au
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #748 on: January 05, 2019, 02:14:13 pm »
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7307
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: EEVblog #1160 - Weller Responds
« Reply #749 on: January 05, 2019, 02:33:00 pm »

Not only is that a terrible saying used to justify all kinds of wild assumptions, Dave's video literally showed smoke and no fire.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf