Pace ADS200 soldering station

[SteveyG]

I for one am not at all interested in soldering "tests" on copper chunks. I have a 300W soldering gun for chassis work.
What would be illuminating is to test performance on 16-layer PCBs with small components connected to large planes. A board could be designed for this type of test.

I've just received a couple of test PCBs which will hopefully test exactly this. Not 16 layers, but 4 with many of the SMT pads tied through with thermal vias. It's likely to be a tough test for any soldering station.

The PCB I had assembled by PCBWay was clearly hand soldered, looked terrible and was of similar construction.

[tooki]

Not a perfect test but it's not like it was deliberately fixed against Pace.

Nobody said it was fixed.

The point, again, is this: When an uncontrolled variable is easily capable of masking the variable you’re trying to measure, I think that makes the test invalid.

[SteveyG]

I actually repeated this test about 10x off camera. Feeding in from the top just caused results like the first clip, where the solder balls on top and doesn't ever flow properly onto the coin. The purpose of feeding underneath was to try to get some solder between the tip and coin to improve the thermal transfer. The camera angle doesn't show it because it's almost overhead, but I'm still feeding into the tinned area of the tip.

The main point though is that the readout is showing 10 to 15 degrees LOWER than the setpoint, yet it's not putting more power into the heater to bring it back up to temperature! 


When I get the UniSolder board up and running, hopefully this will show if it's a firmware issue or not.

[tooki]

I for one am not at all interested in soldering "tests" on copper chunks. I have a 300W soldering gun for chassis work.
What would be illuminating is to test performance on 16-layer PCBs with small components connected to large planes. A board could be designed for this type of test.

I've just received a couple of test PCBs which will hopefully test exactly this. Not 16 layers, but 4 with many of the SMT pads tied through with thermal vias. It's likely to be a tough test for any soldering station.

The PCB I had assembled by PCBWay was clearly hand soldered, looked terrible and was of similar construction.

I look forward to seeing the result!

Btw, which Ersa station were you planning to test? It’s a shame that Ersa is so obtuse about giving review units, so their products never end up in the comparisons, even though they’re a major player in Europe. (Dave said they would only do so if given editorial veto power, so he rightly told them to pound sand.)

(I have the i-Con nano at home, and it’s been a great tool. Clearly not as powerful as the JBC at work, but just as good in everyday soldering. The tips don’t oxidize nearly as badly as JBC. And the i-Con series has configurable heating profiles — aggressive (lots of overshoot), medium (a bit of overshoot), and gentle (no overshoot) — so you can choose how much performance to give up in exchange for adhering to tight temperature maxima.)

[SteveyG]

I for one am not at all interested in soldering "tests" on copper chunks. I have a 300W soldering gun for chassis work.
What would be illuminating is to test performance on 16-layer PCBs with small components connected to large planes. A board could be designed for this type of test.

I've just received a couple of test PCBs which will hopefully test exactly this. Not 16 layers, but 4 with many of the SMT pads tied through with thermal vias. It's likely to be a tough test for any soldering station.

The PCB I had assembled by PCBWay was clearly hand soldered, looked terrible and was of similar construction.

I look forward to seeing the result!

Btw, which Ersa station were you planning to test? It’s a shame that Ersa is so obtuse about giving review units, so their products never end up in the comparisons, even though they’re a major player in Europe. (Dave said they would only do so if given editorial veto power, so he rightly told them to pound sand.)

(I have the i-Con nano at home, and it’s been a great tool. Clearly not as powerful as the JBC at work, but just as good in everyday soldering. The tips don’t oxidize nearly as badly as JBC. And the i-Con series has configurable heating profiles — aggressive (lots of overshoot), medium (a bit of overshoot), and gentle (no overshoot) — so you can choose how much performance to give up in exchange for adhering to tight temperature maxima.)

I was planning to get the i-Con 2V (0IC2200V), however I don't know much about the Ersa range, so I'm not sure if this is the best one to test. If you have a better suggestion, please let me know as I've not bought it yet. I still have an old RDS80 at the office, but I think it's quite outdated by today's standards.

[tooki]

I for one am not at all interested in soldering "tests" on copper chunks. I have a 300W soldering gun for chassis work.
What would be illuminating is to test performance on 16-layer PCBs with small components connected to large planes. A board could be designed for this type of test.

I've just received a couple of test PCBs which will hopefully test exactly this. Not 16 layers, but 4 with many of the SMT pads tied through with thermal vias. It's likely to be a tough test for any soldering station.

The PCB I had assembled by PCBWay was clearly hand soldered, looked terrible and was of similar construction.

I look forward to seeing the result!

Btw, which Ersa station were you planning to test? It’s a shame that Ersa is so obtuse about giving review units, so their products never end up in the comparisons, even though they’re a major player in Europe. (Dave said they would only do so if given editorial veto power, so he rightly told them to pound sand.)

(I have the i-Con nano at home, and it’s been a great tool. Clearly not as powerful as the JBC at work, but just as good in everyday soldering. The tips don’t oxidize nearly as badly as JBC. And the i-Con series has configurable heating profiles — aggressive (lots of overshoot), medium (a bit of overshoot), and gentle (no overshoot) — so you can choose how much performance to give up in exchange for adhering to tight temperature maxima.)

I was planning to get the i-Con 2V (0IC2200V), however I don't know much about the Ersa range, so I'm not sure if this is the best one to test. If you have a better suggestion, please let me know as I've not bought it yet. I still have an old RDS80 at the office, but I think it's quite outdated by today's standards.

The RDS80 is indeed very outdated. I think it’s maybe comparable to a Hakko FX-888, but I’ve never used either of those so it’s just a guesstimate.

The only members of the i-Con family with reduced power (68W nominal/80W peak) are the pico and nano, so I wouldn’t recommend that. The 2V (120W nom/150W peak) is great if you want two channels and don’t need integrated air. If you want to keep open the possibility of the air or vacuum attachments later, get a Vario 2 (200W peak). If you just need one flexible channel, then get the 1V (80W nom/150W peak). (The current i-Con 1 without V works only with the standard handle, while the 1V and 2V work with the tweezers, etc and with air and vacuum with an external pump module.)

Ersa’s specification of power ratings continues to be an unbridled mess, with some places showing peak power, others nominal, some per channel, some total… All of the i-Con series except the nano/pico are 150W peak per channel on the standard 150W i-Tool handle. The nominal rating seems to be for the station in total. (That info is what I cobbled together over the years from studying their datasheets, catalogs, website, etc. But it’s so convoluted that I make no guarantees. For example, the Vario stations originally all had air and vacuum pumps in them, but now they also make versions with one or the other or neither…)

There exists the i-Tool HP handle that’s a 250W handle for high-mass joints; it works only with the Vario stations, and I guess maybe it’s limited to 200W on the Vario 2, and only gets 250W on the Vario 4 (500W peak).


If you just want the absolute basic full-power 150W standard iron for the comparison, just get an i-Con 1 (0IC1100A).

[Shock]

I actually repeated this test about 10x off camera.
...
The main point though is that the readout is showing 10 to 15 degrees LOWER than the setpoint, yet it's not putting more power into the heater to bring it back up to temperature! 

As I mentioned near set temp it regulates. It's a variable temp station. Did you try to turn up the set temp? The amber led shows when it's heating. I can't reproduce your test as you used UK 2p coins. As far as I'm aware those coins are either copper plated steel or bronze.

I'm not sure why you couldn't solder to the coins properly but not all stations heat in a linear fashion. Take a look at "performance-comparison_1209.pdf" if you can find it online. The Metcal MX5000 JBC tested was running near 385C at idle.

Ersa probably wanted to put their station up against the Pace because they knew their profile would run hotter. In JBCs performance test the Ersa Icon looked almost like it was in complete thermal runaway.

Again... you need to profile all the stations and tips to see tip temp, thermal shock to see recovery and if any overshoot. There is no guarantee it's a level playing field.

[SteveyG]

As I mentioned near set temp it regulates. It's a variable temp station. Did you try to turn up the set temp? The amber led shows when it's heating. I can't reproduce your test as you used UK 2p coins. As far as I'm aware those coins are either copper plated steel or bronze.

I'll take a look at the link, but I'm not sure I understand. If it's unable to regulate the temperature to the setpoint it seems like the design is flawed, it's a basic requirement to have zero error surely? For 25 seconds, the tip temperature readout is -15°C compared to the setpoint.

[2N3055]

How about creating test specimens from aluminium substrate PCB ? That could be made to be exact thermal load, detailed data is available. And very repeatable

Also I don't know what Shock meant, but he has made me think:

If all stations didn't heat the tip accurately to set point temp, that is calibration failure. It is a separate problem.

Thermal performance should be performed with all tips measured with external thermometer and manually adjusted so they all show the same external temp.
And then tested for thermal recovery, possibly by using most aggressive flux on mechanically cleaned surface.

If there is difference in initial temperature, there might be large differences with flux activation, and most of the time will be spent for flux to do their job. Flux activation is not linear with temperature for many fluxes..

So calibration errors must be noted and calibrated out, before testing thermal recovery and regulation. 

In real life we all take temperatures indicated as an rough indicative value. And if flux feels sluggish, you ramp up temp few degrees, or if it seems to be burning you set it down.
After few days, you make a mental note, "for this solder and flux on this station good value is 310°C" and you remember that. Your soldering iron might be 30°C off from exact temp but it doesn't matter. You have good temp because it solders well at current setting. If you solder for years, you will be able to  tune it in after dozen of joints on any new soldering iron someone puts on your desk.....

[SteveyG]

I was certainly thinking of an aluminium PCB, especially now they're offered by JLCPCB so cost effectively.

Amongst a few other test PCBs, I have a 4 layer FR4 board all layers tied together with vias with a window exposed in the solder mask where you put the soldering iron tip.
There's place for a few temperature sensors some distance away from the pad which will show the temperature rise of the PCB as a function of time with it logged with the Magic DAQ. However the idea is untested and the temp sensors may be too far away or the vias may not be effective enough or there may be far too much thermal mass so it'll be somewhat of an experiment in itself. My thermal camera can't do video sadly.

This will only test the stations ability to put heat into the PCB though. The gradient is likely to be the only usable output from this.

[Hydrawerk]

I was planning to get the i-Con 2V (0IC2200V), however I don't know much about the Ersa range, so I'm not sure if this is the best one to test. If you have a better suggestion, please let me know as I've not bought it yet. I still have an old RDS80 at the office, but I think it's quite outdated by today's standards.

Does ERSA have induction heating??
I think they do not have any cartridge type soldering tips like those made by JBC, PACE, HAKKO...
https://www.kurtzersa.com/electronics-production-equipment/soldering-tools-accessories/soldering-desoldering-stations.html
https://www.kurtzersa.com/electronics-production-equipment/soldering-tools-accessories/soldering-desoldering-tips/soldering-tip-series-102.html

Weller has cartridge type tips, but they are not well known I think.
https://weller-tools.com/nocompromise/

[Shock]

Here is a capture of the JBC chart I took a while back.

If you look at the whole document I think it's a Metcal STTC036 (357C) tip not a STTC136 (412C) tip. I think even JBC were fooled. I cannot see the STTC136 self regulating 75C under set temp and idling that low under no load. That would be worse than the Pace if it was the case (imagine that).

Refer to the original document it's enlightening, I don't take any testing as 100% accurate but a lot of JBCs testing makes sense. Especially the overshooting and showing no their tips don't take 2 seconds to heat up like they advertise.

[SteveyG]

Does ERSA have induction heating??
I think they do not have any cartridge type soldering tips like those made by JBC, PACE, HAKKO...

It seems it's fairly representative of "old" technology, the blurb says:

" The i-TOOL „Silver Bullet“ heating element represents the most significant heating element
design accomplishment in Ersa’s over 90-year-history. "

But no mention of anything fancy, or why the heating element is supposed to be any good. If there's a better suggestion, let me know, since it's a fair amount to drop on a tool which will likely only be used for testing...

[tooki]

I was planning to get the i-Con 2V (0IC2200V), however I don't know much about the Ersa range, so I'm not sure if this is the best one to test. If you have a better suggestion, please let me know as I've not bought it yet. I still have an old RDS80 at the office, but I think it's quite outdated by today's standards.

Does ERSA have induction heating??
I think they do not have any cartridge type soldering tips like those made by JBC, PACE, HAKKO...

They’re precision “traditional” irons. The heaters fit very snugly, which is why their performance is closer to a cartridge heater than to a traditional one.

[tooki]

Does ERSA have induction heating??
I think they do not have any cartridge type soldering tips like those made by JBC, PACE, HAKKO...

It seems it's fairly representative of "old" technology, the blurb says:

" The i-TOOL „Silver Bullet“ heating element represents the most significant heating element
design accomplishment in Ersa’s over 90-year-history. "

But no mention of anything fancy, or why the heating element is supposed to be any good. If there's a better suggestion, let me know, since it's a fair amount to drop on a tool which will likely only be used for testing...

I would say it’s a very atypical representative of old technology. In use, it could easily pass for a cartridge heater system if you didn’t know it wasn’t. It wouldn’t be class-leading, but you wouldn’t think “oh, this is an old school iron”.

And that’s based off my real-world experience using the weak version of it at home, and JBC at work.

[SteveyG]

I would say it’s a very atypical representative of old technology. In use, it could easily pass for a cartridge heater system if you didn’t know it wasn’t. It wouldn’t be class-leading, but you wouldn’t think “oh, this is an old school iron”.

And that’s based off my real-world experience using the weak version of it at home, and JBC at work.

That's all I need to know, thanks 

The tips are great value so I should be able to get a decent selection

[tooki]

I would say it’s a very atypical representative of old technology. In use, it could easily pass for a cartridge heater system if you didn’t know it wasn’t. It wouldn’t be class-leading, but you wouldn’t think “oh, this is an old school iron”.

And that’s based off my real-world experience using the weak version of it at home, and JBC at work.

That's all I need to know, thanks 

The tips are great value so I should be able to get a decent selection

Yes, they are!

Just be sure to get extra collets (“tip holders” I think they call them) so you have one per tip, since getting those off and on is not easy. (Easy enough to do it when you wear out a tip, but much too hard to do for everyday tip swaps).

I love the PowerWell (drag soldering hoof) and PLCC blade tips, beside the regular chisels. They come with a 1.6mm chisel, I also have a 2.4mm and 3.2mm chisel.

[thm_w]

Here is a capture of the JBC chart I took a while back.

If you look at the whole document I think it's a Metcal STTC036 (357C) tip not a STTC136 (412C) tip. I think even JBC were fooled. I cannot see the STTC136 self regulating 75C under set temp and idling that low under no load. That would be worse than the Pace if it was the case (imagine that).

I posted the full document here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/metcal-gt120-soldering-system-with-heater-cartridge/msg3587103/#msg3587103

The max rated tip temperatures are:
STTC-5 = 302 C
STTC-0 = 357 C
STTC-1 = 412 C

So I don't believe that can be a STTC-0, otherwise it would be 388 C, 31 C above the maximum rated tip temp.
and 388 C is not 75C under set temp, its 24C under the max temperature, which might be reasonable. I'm sure there is at least a few C of headroom in there? Then maybe a few more C for loss across their thermocouple attachment. Note they don't state a temperature setting anywhere, so you can't compare accuracy between stations/tips.

[SteveyG]

Out of curiosity I just measured mine. the STTC-1 series tips consistently measure 390°C and the STTC-0 tips all measure 330°C. I have no easy means to measure the temperature under dynamic load, but I think they must be using the STTC-1 tips.
Thermaltronics Blue tips all measure 320°C

I didn't have the tip thermometer before, but I've been setting the adjustable irons to 357°C

It's a shame they don't show their test set up.

[Shock]

Thanks for showing the JBC running over temp in your latest video. Shows how easily set temp, actual temp and tip affects the results.

[SteveyG]

Thanks for showing the JBC running over temp in your latest video. Shows how easily set temp, actual temp and tip affects the results.

Any thoughts on how best to show the actual tip temperature on other stations? I'm struggling to think how to reliably show the difference between systems.

I should probably start a separate thread for discussing all the different soldering stations.

[Shock]

Any thoughts on how best to show the actual tip temperature on other stations? I'm struggling to think how to reliably show the difference between systems.

I should probably start a separate thread for discussing all the different soldering stations.

Just wrote you pm with my thoughts. Yeah best not to pollute the thread more, you should probably start a thread on testing methodology.

If I was to guess how JBC did it in the charts? Probably they used a thermally conductive adhesive or weld on the top side of the tip to attach a thermocouple. By measuring the face down side after that's done you can determine the bond quality. Or results before and afterwards to gauge the effect of adding the thermocouple. Science baby, yeah!

[Hydrawerk]

Simple PACE cartridges are cheap, but the special ones are not.

Pace 1130-0503-P1 - TD-200 Standard Series Tip, .835" Blade Tip (21.2mm) $70.30
https://www.tequipment.net/Pace/1130-0503-P1/Tips/

JBC C245913 Cartridge Blade 21mm $49.50
https://www.tequipment.net/JBC/C245913/Tips/?b=y&v=144980

Even the PACE handle is more expensive.
Pace TD-200 6010-0166-P1 - TD200 Handpiece $113.68
https://www.tequipment.net/Pace/TD-200-6010-0166-P1/Soldering-Irons/

JBC T245-A - General Purpose Iron $69.30
https://www.tequipment.net/JBC/T245-A/Soldering-Irons/?search=true

OK, the basic PACE cartridges are cheaper.
Pace 1130-0035-P1 - TD-200 Standard Series Tip, Angled MiniWave Installation Tip (2.11mm)  $14.25
https://www.tequipment.net/Pace/1130-0035-P1/Tips/

JBC C245067 Cartridge Spoon 2.3mm $39.60
https://www.tequipment.net/JBC/C245067/Tips/?v=0


It is good to know that some PACE cartridges are cheap and some are not!

[Shock]

Some rework/specialty Pace tips are more expensive but lets not forget that many report JBC tips have questionable plating durability compared to other brands. Meanwhile Pace professes to deliberately plate their tips heavily. In the US if your paying around 30 to 40 dollars for a standard JBC tip (twice the price of Pace) that cost of ownership is not going to improve over time.

JBCs handpiece and station are also mostly plastic construction which I expect is far cheaper to manufacture. It does have a fancy display but JBC had some early failure problems a few years back with both stations and handpieces, so not a perfect track record there either.

There is really no guarantee it's a better choice and since it's becoming increasingly obvious that JBC's heating profile makes it overshoot, it's performance is slightly exaggerated. It's heating speed is still going to be quicker than Paces but on an even playing field it's not enough to convince me it's a better option.

[thm_w]

It is good to know that some PACE cartridges are cheap and some are not!

The blade tip is a very niche tip, probably only used for high volume BGA rework. Its not surprisingly expensive. If you want cheap tips you can find some T12 clone versions here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000028650301.html

As Shock says, the JBC handpiece is plastic injected construction and can be made cheaply. You can find clone handles with similar construction for $20: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002631157264.html However, aluminum handles, even clone ones, are more expensive. For comparison, the Metcal aluminum handle is $150.