A couple of points, first your use of the term "eutectic bonds" is incorrect
Agreed! My sloppy writing.
No it is that lead and silver just do not form a strong ductile alloy and copper and silver do.
Weeeeeelllll… This is true provided that the joint is not heated
much beyond the melting point of the solder. Any further and it does
form a new nasty alloy that is brittle.
Tony Konrath
If I was a newbie, reading some of the facts / explanations /
opinions / misconceptions here I know I’d be confused / bewildered /
dismayed / put off. All I’d want to do is make better jewelry. In
the everyday world of someone trying to learn the craft it ultimately
doesn’t matter very much about microscopic mysticisms. I’d want
results, not theoretical treatises. But then I’m just a mechanic. I
work with what I observe.
Whether one is using a torch or a laser, if one’s joints
break…improve them. Same goes for stone breakage. Does it matter
how one business compares to another’s claims? Or does it matter
only if your stone/solder breakage is causing you a problem? Frankly,
being in business for profit, I let the profit be my guide. Not per
job profit but overall customer satisfaction which leads to long
term profit. That’s what I’m here for, my customer. If that means I
order a couple extra problematic stones or I pop for a laser…so be
it. My customer pays me, not my competitor.
My statement should not be construed as an excuse for mediocrity.
Far from it. But keep in mind YOUR goal. Do you want to gain your
competitors’ approval or do you wish to make a living from the actual
people you serve? If your work lives up to your audience’s
expectations I think you’ll do OK (if you have the right audience).
Play your own game. Make your own mistakes, earn your own triumphs.
The rest is just benchracing.
Keep in mind that Brepohl wrote originally in German. The English edition was translated by Charles Lewton-Brain, who speaks American Jeweler's English. So of course it reads as "solder", but he's using 'solder' in the goldsmithing sense.
I purchased russian translation of Brepohl in 1975. Could not get the
real book, had to settle for xerox copy, but I am familiar with
Brepohl text in several languages. Semantics aside. Words are not
important. What 's important, is the meaning the words represent.
Let’s call it technique 1 and technique 2. In one case we have
capillary action, in another case we do not. In one case a tiny
amount of solder is used, and in another many times more. Call it
whatever you want, but the differences are huge.
Let’s assume that the study referred to, actually meant soldering.
The description of “soldered joint” which study provides is a typical
cold soldered joint. Do you think that in order to undertake a study
like this, a minimal soldering experience is required? The study talks
about solder been a filler. Usage of solder as a filler will never
produce true soldered joint.
At the risk of been accused of “plugging” my DVD again, but one
picture is better than a thousand word. There is a part, where top
plate is soldered to walls. This joint is been carved almost to
nonexistence later on, and it has to carry structural loads. Even a
slightest imperfection in a joint like this, and the whole thing
falls apart. If you want to convince me that laser is better, or at
least as good as soldering, try to make the ring shown on my DVD
with laser.
Leonid Surpin
Leonid is simply wrong and what he's actually trying to do is justify a prejudice against lasers
Whether I am wrong, or not has not been proven yet.
The study that was provided, has been invalided and nobody yet
submitted any factual argument that I am wrong, except saying that I
am. That is fine and everybody is entitled to their opinion, but how
about some facts.
But you right about one thing. I am prejudiced against lasers, as I
am prejudiced against casting when it used indiscriminately, as I am
prejudiced against each and every attempt to say, directly or
indirectly, to a beginning goldsmith
“you do not need to know that, we have lasers for it”, or “this is
going to take too long to hand fabricate, why not just cast it”,
and etc…
Goldsmithing is an art form, it is not an industrial process. In
industrial processes all that is cared for is the number of widgets
per hour, and as long as widgets will survive until warranty
expires, the quality is deemed good. Lasers really shine in that
environment.
In my experience, I have known people spending 3 times more to
repair their jewellery, than replacement with similar item, because
they developed emotional attachment. It is only possible if every
item of jewellery has something unique about it.
We can observe car business and see what in store for us. Used to
people loved their cars. Kept them forever. Repaired them, cared for
them, gave them names, even wrote songs about them. Than came
Japanese way of making cars, and the result - most people do not even
buy cars anymore, just lease them for couple of years and when
ashtray is filled, just get a new one.
if you park your car on public parking lot, you cannot even find
your car. Everything looks the same. Meanwhile, the companies which
provide employment to hundreds of thousand, filling for bankruptcy.
When we are looking at a car business, we are looking at our future.
And the more we try to replace skills with industrial gadgets, the
closer we get to it. Am I prejudiced against it, you bet I am.
Leonid Surpin
No it is that lead and silver just do not form a strong ductile
alloy and copper and silver do.
Weeeeeelllll.... This is true provided that the joint is not heated much beyond the melting point of the solder. Any further and it does form a new nasty alloy that is brittle.
No if the lead is molten then it alloys with some silver. Looking at
the phase diagrams for silver-lead and silver-tin I would say
tin-lead solder can probably dissolve 3-4% silver with no problem at
the melting point of the soft solder.
James Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts
It used to be stated that soldering did not involve a metallurgical
bond but was rather a mechanical bond
When was that? I thought solder bonding was known as a diffusion/alloying process since microscopes were invented.
Well certainly since the 1930’s or so in metallurgy texts that I
have it has been written as a diffusion bond but that was only in the
metallurgical circles, the lay crafts people held onto (and
obviously still hold onto) many outdated concepts.
James Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts
Nope. Sorry. We use (normally) even karats by convention, habit, and in many places, law.
This is going nowhere. I do not want discuss semantics, hallmarking
laws, and many other facets which gets introduced into this argument.
My position is very simple. Torch in skilled hands cannot be matched
by laser. So far it has not be disproved. All other issues simply
cloud the center point of the argument.
Leonid Surpin
If I take 2 round links put them side by side and solder them. It will be brazing, because there is no capillary action taking place and solder simply acts as filler.
There is capillary action taking place. You can actually see it
occurring as it’s most noticeable when the two items are close but
not touching. They’ll actually move, when the solder melts, and jump
together.
You can also see this happening when you apply the flux to the
pieces. The watery suspension causes the movement of the pieces due
to capillary action.
In the moments after the bond is made the copper and zinc in the
solder flow into the matrix of the sterling or gold’s grain
structure, (or the silver into the copper in the case of hard
soldering copper) as you can see from the microphotographs.
The usual reason why joints fail is that the solder is used as a
filler and this secondary diffusion takes place in very small areas
near the surface of the units leaving a brittle alloy between them.
It’s this alloy that breaks leaving lumps of Cu/Zn depleted solder
(it’s moved into the crystal structure of the silver) fused to the
surface of the silver.
Tony Konrath F.G.A.
My position is very simple. Torch in skilled hands cannot be matched by laser. So far it has not be disproved. All other issues simply cloud the center point of the argument.
My point Leonid is the same except I believe from 34 years experience
soldering and 5 years laser welding that the laser joint when done
right is stronger. I have produced articles with micro photographs
supporting my position. Whether or not you agree is irrelevant. I
would like to see articles showing experimentally that soldering is
better than laser welding preferably with photo’s, just as you
requested. I haven’t found any. Till then it is just sophistry,
arguing a point to show your ability to argue.
Gary
Well certainly since the 1930's or so in metallurgy texts that I have it has been written as a diffusion bond but that was only in the metallurgical circles, the lay crafts people held onto (and obviously still hold onto) many outdated concepts.
That’s further back than my experience. In the early sixties I went
to a “solder engineering” seminar. It was taught then.
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
Torch in skilled hands cannot be matched by laser. So far it has not be disproved.
Since we seen to be doing science here, rather than art or
craftsmanship, the way the argument goes is this.
You make an hypothesis - “A torch in skilled hands cannot be
matched”
One example of a better connection or an equal connection by laser
disproves your hypothesis and it goes no further.
If you and others consistently hunt for better connections and find
none then you advance your hypothesis to a theory.
So the question is - “Has anybody done an equal or superior
connection using a laser?”
Just one refutes your argument.
Tony Konrath
My position is very simple. Torch in skilled hands cannot be matched by laser. So far it has not be disproved. All other issues simply cloud the center point of the argument.
Any more than you position has been proven, by simply endless
repetition of opinion.
Both methods have quite variable results, that depend on the skill
of the craftsman to maximize.
Both have applications they excel at, and others that they do not.
You have made your choice, and staked out the hill to fight on. You
are welcome to your opinion, and your hill, but it will not stop the
advance of laser welding, as technology and knowledge advance the
field. After 35 your s using a torch, and 7 now with access to the
laser, I feel that in order to offer the best results for my
customer, I could not do without access to both tools.
I’ve been following this discussion for a bit here, unfortunately
there are definitions that are being used improperly to dictate what
is what…Here are some factoids to ponder.
Capillary action is present in both brazing and soldering. This
is purely a function of fitment and that the filler alloy be in a
molten (liquid) state. Capillary action is not a defining action that
determines soldering or brazing. It is purely a physical property of
a fluid moving along two closely, or not so closely, mated surfaces
and the surface tension that is created. It is the surface tension of
the liquid that causes the surface portion of that liquid to be
attracted to another surface. This is the definition of capillary
action, and why it works the way it does.
Brazing is what we are actually doing when we are soldering due
to the temperatures we are working with, this is by definition see
below
Brazing vs. Soldering - from a technical point of view is
strictly a function of the melting temperature of the alloy used to
join the two metal pieces. Brazing is dealing with filler alloys that
become liquid above 450* F, where soldering, on the other hand, uses
a filler alloy that becomes liquid below 450*F.
3.a.) Glancing at the Wiki…soldering is also described as using a
filler metal having a relatively low melting point…in our case,
do the solders used in the jewelry biz have a relatively low
melting point? Some could argue this point…after all, they melt
before our precious metals do…well, most of the time
anyway…This is possibly the reason why they are called hard
solders.
4.a) In both Soldering and Brazing, the metals to be joined should
never become molten, it is the filler alloy in its liquid state and
its interaction with the surfaces that form the bond, that bond can
be physical or integrated into the metal surface.
4.b) With welding, the metals to be joined become liquid and pool
together, solidifying into a new solid.
4.c) Introducing a filler alloy while welding, OR the exact same
metal, to the pool of liquid metal simply increases the size, mass,
and in almost all cases, a structural element to the weld. Keep in
mind, not all welding processes uses filler materials.
Now we must talk semantics about all of this.
We make adornment; does it have to withstand tensile sheer above 50K
psi? No. It simply must withstand the abuse of the wearer. Is it
practical to weld everything we do? No. Some materials like silver
are extremely difficult to weld. Stainless and titanium are ideal
materials to weld. On the flip side, titanium is almost impossible to
solder or braze, and silver/gold alloys are very easily soldered
together. We all do what is practical, or what is within our reach of
resources.
Does the wearer actually give two cents how this stuff is created,
fabricated, repaired, or manipulated…I don’t think they care one
bit…they care if it looks pretty, is repaired/fabricated to
withstand daily wear, and most importantly makes them feel good about
their jewelry.
I think we are totally geeking on this subject. Personally, I am not
concerned what is happening on the atomic level of the bond. I just
care that that bond holds up over time. Will a laser help me do
things that are difficult/impossible to do by traditional
metalworking methods…absolutely. Am I less of a metal smith by using
the technology that is available to me, not in the least. We all
choose our paths in life, we all use the tools that are available to
us.
I also feel caution must be used when dictating simple things like
this. It is not James responsibility to correct, incorrect
but it is all of ours, and quite frankly that is what
this thread has become.
A welding fanatic…
P@
My position is very simple. Torch in skilled hands cannot be matched by laser. So far it has not be disproved. All other issues simply cloud the center point of the argument.
You made this assertion and several of us called you on it, then you
asked for micrographs and other documentation to support our
position. So a paper that was presented at the Santa Fe Symposium on
Jewelry Manufacturing and Technology and republished by the Platinum
Guild was provided. This paper was written by Tino Volpe who at the
time was a Metallurgist for Tiffany & Co and Dr. Richard Lanam who
was at the time Director of Product Development at. Engelhard-Clal.
Both men are metallurgist who specialize in precious metals. Your
response was to tell us why their paper was wrong. It is obvious that
you are just unable to accept that you are wrong on this. The sad
thing is that you are obviously a highly skilled goldsmith who has
much experience to share with us. But your dogged insistence that you
are always right on subjects where you are the lone supporter of an
otherwise unsupported opinion makes it difficult to take anything
you offer as valid.
Further discussion on this topic is just a waste of everyones time.
James Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts
This is going nowhere. I do not want discuss semantics, hallmarking laws, and many other facets which gets introduced into this argument.
Dang! I was genuinely wanting to hear another side to this silly,
really silly tale that the gold alloys that we use the most are the
result of ancient, convenient math dealing with ratios to the number
24. That would just be absolutely absurd, now wouldn’t it?
On one hand I can believe that the different amounts of metal other
than the gold in each alloy might be the result of wanting to achieve
certain physical properties not limited to color. And on the other,
I can also believe that an alloy most closely resembling 24K was the
first choice and when the mix didn’t produce an alloy that had good
working characteristics, a compromise in the mix was made.
My beliefs aside, I’m afraid that I’ll never know the answer now
that Leonid is withholding support for this esoteric he
mentioned in an earlier posting… such a disappointment.
Leonid, don’t trifle with our quest for exchange through
dialog on this forum. When one gets bound up in attitude it clouds
over the opportunity to share good
I truly was wanting to learn more about gold alloys.
J Collier
Metalsmith
{Admin note: This is the last posting on this thread}
Whether or not you agree is irrelevant. I would like to see articles showing experimentally that soldering is better than laser welding preferably with photo's, just as you requested. I haven't found any. Till then it is just sophistry, arguing a point to show your ability to argue.
This is a great question. With Gary’s permission I would like to
broaden it. What constitutes a good study on anything?
There is a simple answer to that - the study which designed to rule
out that results were obtained by chance, or some fluke, or due to
contamination, and etc. There are great difficulties hiding behind
this answer. Studies which designed like that are incredibly
expensive, and only done where life and death are involved, like in
drug testing. And even in these studies, sometimes years later,
mistakes are found.
So it is unrealistic to expect that such study will be done for a
subject, which may be important to goldsmith community, but really is
insignificant. So, I have to admit that I asked for something,
knowing in advance that what I am asking for, does not exist.
Quite often, a statement is made which is obvious, but simply cannot
be proven to the rigorous academic standard. I often find myself in a
position of defending such statements, so I decided to turn the
tables, so to speak.
My position is based on Brepohl, since it was my training bible, and
my personal experience. If someone has different experience, it is in
no way invalidates mine, as well as mine experience does not
invalidates theirs.
This is my last posting on this subject. I believe that everybody
expressed their opinion and further discussion simply is not going to
improve the understanding of this matter.
Leonid Surpin