2.54mm connector pin crimper review
Posted by mikey
|
2.54mm connector pin crimper review September 01, 2011 12:17PM |
I don't know if anybody has reviewed any crimpers yet, but since I couldn't find anything about them, I thought this would be a good idea.
The standard header for the Arduino and RAMPS is the 2.54mm (.100") pitch header system. These are readily available as pins, and can be purchased for connectors with a little homework. I recently purchased sets of 4-pin and 3-pin crimpable pin connectors for use on the RAMPS V1.2. While having the proper connectors is good, not having a crimper that works effectively is bad. I have used needle nose pliers in a pinch, but B-style crimpers for these pins are the proper method to ensure an effective crimp that is unlikely to fail.
I have a Sargent crimper I use for Tyco econoseal crimping in automotive connections for cars and motorcycles, as well as in my work doing automation controls, but it was too large for the significantly smaller 2.54mm header pins. It would leave the insulation crimps undone, and would only properly reverse the conductor tabs part of the time. The rest of the time it would bend it in the wrong direction, requiring more work with the needle nose. The worst part about this is that the opening in the header connector body doesn't have enough space to allow for much error in the crimped end dimensions, and I wasted at least 1 for every 5 with it either failing to due dimensional tolerances, or simply breaking off. If more than 1 pin was already in the body and, due to a jammed pin, required removal for a new body, it stood as much chance to come out as be damaged on removal. This would be bad.
The solution? I did some research and found the proper sized crimper. I bought the MultiComp HT-225D from Newark. First off, it was only $26, which had me concerned, but on another electronics forum, the reviewer swore by it, so I figured since I have about $500 in the machine, $26 for a crimper was the least of my worries and worth checking out. It was delivered yesterday, and the difference in the quality by having the correct crimper is ASTOUNDING. I get a nice, clean crimp, all tabs bend correctly, fits right into the connector body easily, and doesn't damage the wire body behind the crimp, which was causing failures.
You can see how clean the crimp is, and how the insulation tab crimp is almost exactly the same size as the conductor tab crimp, nice and square, which lends itself to a clean insertion into the connector body. Based on my satisfaction with the quality and affordability of the device,I will also be buying replacement jaws for the unit, because they do suffer from wear over time, and I'd be less then thrilled to find the unit was no longer offered when I needed new jaws.
Bottom line: Well worth the $26 to have a proper crimp on connector pins. Highly recommended.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/2011 12:48PM by mikey.
The standard header for the Arduino and RAMPS is the 2.54mm (.100") pitch header system. These are readily available as pins, and can be purchased for connectors with a little homework. I recently purchased sets of 4-pin and 3-pin crimpable pin connectors for use on the RAMPS V1.2. While having the proper connectors is good, not having a crimper that works effectively is bad. I have used needle nose pliers in a pinch, but B-style crimpers for these pins are the proper method to ensure an effective crimp that is unlikely to fail.
I have a Sargent crimper I use for Tyco econoseal crimping in automotive connections for cars and motorcycles, as well as in my work doing automation controls, but it was too large for the significantly smaller 2.54mm header pins. It would leave the insulation crimps undone, and would only properly reverse the conductor tabs part of the time. The rest of the time it would bend it in the wrong direction, requiring more work with the needle nose. The worst part about this is that the opening in the header connector body doesn't have enough space to allow for much error in the crimped end dimensions, and I wasted at least 1 for every 5 with it either failing to due dimensional tolerances, or simply breaking off. If more than 1 pin was already in the body and, due to a jammed pin, required removal for a new body, it stood as much chance to come out as be damaged on removal. This would be bad.
The solution? I did some research and found the proper sized crimper. I bought the MultiComp HT-225D from Newark. First off, it was only $26, which had me concerned, but on another electronics forum, the reviewer swore by it, so I figured since I have about $500 in the machine, $26 for a crimper was the least of my worries and worth checking out. It was delivered yesterday, and the difference in the quality by having the correct crimper is ASTOUNDING. I get a nice, clean crimp, all tabs bend correctly, fits right into the connector body easily, and doesn't damage the wire body behind the crimp, which was causing failures.
You can see how clean the crimp is, and how the insulation tab crimp is almost exactly the same size as the conductor tab crimp, nice and square, which lends itself to a clean insertion into the connector body. Based on my satisfaction with the quality and affordability of the device,I will also be buying replacement jaws for the unit, because they do suffer from wear over time, and I'd be less then thrilled to find the unit was no longer offered when I needed new jaws.
Bottom line: Well worth the $26 to have a proper crimp on connector pins. Highly recommended.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/2011 12:48PM by mikey.
|
Re: 2.54mm connector pin crimper review September 02, 2011 04:12AM |
First crimp, THEN solder! 
Bob Morrison
Wörth am Rhein, Germany
"Luke, use the source!"
BLOG - PHOTOS - Thingiverse
Bob Morrison
Wörth am Rhein, Germany
"Luke, use the source!"
BLOG - PHOTOS - Thingiverse
|
Re: 2.54mm connector pin crimper review September 03, 2011 06:27AM |
Quote
you are still required to bend the pins for almost all insertions to be locked securely.
... or simply cut that crimp latches off. I've done this for a few hundred pins now and they insert just nicely.
The industry prefers crimping because it's faster (given the appropriate tool) and can be automated better, not because it's more reliable.
Sorry for talking up so harsh here.
| Generation 7 Electronics | Teacup Firmware | RepRap DIY |
|
Re: 2.54mm connector pin crimper review September 03, 2011 02:56PM |
Traumflug Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you are still required to bend the pins for almost
> all insertions to be locked securely.
>
> ... or simply cut that crimp latches off. I've
> done this for a few hundred pins now and they
> insert just nicely.
>
> The industry prefers crimping because it's faster
> (given the appropriate tool) and can be automated
> better, not because it's more reliable.
>
> Sorry for talking up so harsh here.
Not harsh. Everybody has their own opinion on the subject. I've been a working electrical engineer for the last 20 years, and I've seen more than my fair share of solder joints fail right along with crimp joints, numbering into the thousands. One automotive factory I worked in will not allow a soldered joint due to the fact that a cold solder joint is subject to failure at a higher rate than crimped joints under identical circumstances (with associated 6Ʃ data to affirm the decision), and the ability to train a technician to properly solder a joint and be able to correctly ascrertain the resultant quality is much more difficult than training the same technician to operate a crimper correctly and achieve the same quality standards.
In fact, NASA allows crimping of wiring terminals [workmanship.nasa.gov], and has a manual to cover all aspects of it. The DOE nuclear design guideleines do not allow any soldered connections to be used for wiring of DCS systems, which is what controls the entire facility. If NASA can send a man to space in something with crimped connectors, every single manufacturing facility I've worked in can use crimped connectors, the nuclear power industry uses crimped connectors, and the 747 I fly in to go to jobsites can use crimped connectors, I think I can trust it to run a home build plastics printer just fine.
-------------------------------------------------------
> you are still required to bend the pins for almost
> all insertions to be locked securely.
>
> ... or simply cut that crimp latches off. I've
> done this for a few hundred pins now and they
> insert just nicely.
>
> The industry prefers crimping because it's faster
> (given the appropriate tool) and can be automated
> better, not because it's more reliable.
>
> Sorry for talking up so harsh here.
Not harsh. Everybody has their own opinion on the subject. I've been a working electrical engineer for the last 20 years, and I've seen more than my fair share of solder joints fail right along with crimp joints, numbering into the thousands. One automotive factory I worked in will not allow a soldered joint due to the fact that a cold solder joint is subject to failure at a higher rate than crimped joints under identical circumstances (with associated 6Ʃ data to affirm the decision), and the ability to train a technician to properly solder a joint and be able to correctly ascrertain the resultant quality is much more difficult than training the same technician to operate a crimper correctly and achieve the same quality standards.
In fact, NASA allows crimping of wiring terminals [workmanship.nasa.gov], and has a manual to cover all aspects of it. The DOE nuclear design guideleines do not allow any soldered connections to be used for wiring of DCS systems, which is what controls the entire facility. If NASA can send a man to space in something with crimped connectors, every single manufacturing facility I've worked in can use crimped connectors, the nuclear power industry uses crimped connectors, and the 747 I fly in to go to jobsites can use crimped connectors, I think I can trust it to run a home build plastics printer just fine.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.