Skip to main content
Topic: Really universal soldering controller (Read 817793 times) previous topic - next topic

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5175
In fact, my friends and I failed to get the correct temperature using the unmodified configuration file, and the difference between 245 and 210 is 30 degrees.
strange, my sw board has 3ch. ( 3 pens or 2 pens + tweezes), on the old board, I checked only 1 ch ( rest wasn't populated - test only ) both tools T245 and HAKKO 907 shows correct Temp at the melting solder, but they are not still tested at the same time connected to the board ( only one by one at the same ch ). When the new revision set boards come ( the last one ) I will fully test all connected tools.

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5176
Difference between my T245 and T210 is a few degrees, depending on tip type.  T245 is original JBC with original tips, the T210 is a Chinese copy.

So the profiles that Sparky designed work well.

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5177
Hello everyone. First of all want to thank Sparky and all active members for possibility to build such complex and flexible station. I have built 2 5.2C stations and one looks like working fine, but second one have some issues  - It is turns on and detect C245 soldering iron. But when I connet iron temperature on a screen rases up to 40 degrees and stops, but iron itself continue heating. I checked power: 3.3 and -0.6 is fine. I tried to compare oscillograms from both circuts and on brocken board there is nothing on 3 leg of u18 and on 2 led signal looks like saw. I'm far away from professional so have no idia what shold I check to find brocken component. Will be appretiate for any help with this. And if anyone have success with connecting jbc DR560, share please what resistors should be installed.

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5178
Difference between my T245 and T210 is a few degrees, depending on tip type.  T245 is original JBC with original tips, the T210 is a Chinese copy.

So the profiles that Sparky designed work well.
I suggest you test it with the original 210. As far as I know, the temperature of many Chinese copied 210 is tens of degrees higher than the original one. There may be some temperature that is the same as the original one. If you just bought it, the temperature is higher than the original one. If the original temperature is high, it will become the same temperature on the unisolder, because we use the original 245 and the original 210 to compare, the 210 temperature is 30 degrees lower

Using (cloned) JBC C245 and C210 handles on the same station

Reply #5179
I'm currently building my first unisolder station and am somewhat confused by how instrument identification is intended to work. Specifically, I'd like to be able to connect either a C245-style or a C210-style handle to the station depending on the soldering-task.

Initially I thought that all I'd have to do is place the appropriate pair of resistors in both of the handles to allow the station to identify them, but when starting to put things together I noticed that there's some differences in the documented pinouts for those two different kinds of handles. In particular the heater positive terminal (red wire) on C245 handles is suggested to be connected to Vout1-, whereas the documentation for C210-style handles suggests connecting that same pin it to Vout1+ instead.

Does that imply that I can't wire up a single connector that'd accept either type of handle and is able to identify the different instruments based on their resistors? Why does polarity even matter for what I thought was just a resistive heating-element?

Thanks!

Re: Using (cloned) JBC C245 and C210 handles on the same station

Reply #5180
I'm currently building my first unisolder station and am somewhat confused by how instrument identification is intended to work. Specifically, I'd like to be able to connect either a C245-style or a C210-style handle to the station depending on the soldering-task.

Initially I thought that all I'd have to do is place the appropriate pair of resistors in both of the handles to allow the station to identify them, but when starting to put things together I noticed that there's some differences in the documented pinouts for those two different kinds of handles. In particular the heater positive terminal (red wire) on C245 handles is suggested to be connected to Vout1-, whereas the documentation for C210-style handles suggests connecting that same pin it to Vout1+ instead.

Does that imply that I can't wire up a single connector that'd accept either type of handle and is able to identify the different instruments based on their resistors? Why does polarity even matter for what I thought was just a resistive heating-element?

Thanks!
Use the info from the first page and that picture published somewhere in that forum

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5181
I suggest you test it with the original 210. As far as I know, the temperature of many Chinese copied 210 is tens of degrees higher than the original one. There may be some temperature that is the same as the original one. If you just bought it, the temperature is higher than the original one. If the original temperature is high, it will become the same temperature on the unisolder, because we use the original 245 and the original 210 to compare, the 210 temperature is 30 degrees lower

The problem is in your tip parameters because on the original FW I get a very close match between T245 and T210. T210 is a bit hotter, about 4 degrees.

I think you changed the parameters on both irons in your FW because with your FW, I need a lot of adjustment on the trimmer resistor to get T245 at correct melting temp compared to the original FW, and the T210 is way off: about 35 degrees hotter than T245, which is what you describe.

Re-flashing the original FW results in perfect behavior of both irons at my original trimmer resistor setting, which closely corresponds to the 10ohm initial setting.

Unfortunately your FW will not be workable unless you change back to the original iron settings. Which FW build version did you use as a basis for your FW? I know Sparky changed the iron parameters in the latest one because he found an error in the previous versions. Could it be that you did not use the latest one?





 

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5182
Trimmer MUST be set to show as close to 10 ohms as possible, when calibrating. When it is away, the amplifier gain is not set properly.
Also, you must test the current sources. For surrent of 128 in the calibration menu, the current between SenseA/SenseB and Vout- shoud be as close to 382.8125uA. If it is off by more than 1% (ideally if shoud be within 0.1%, if the voltage reference and the resistors are the correct one with 0.1% tolerances and the current source mosfets and opamp are not fake ones), then the current sources themselves are not sunctioning propery.

Although the current sources are not that important for thermocouple measurement (maybe 1-5 degrees), they directly impact the resistive sensor measurement and along with amplifier gain setting the end result can be way off.

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5183
With the resistor I use, I end up at R: 965 in the calibration menu when fine tuning the calibration from R: 1000 with pure lead and eutectic solder on all my controller boards.

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5184
The problem is in your tip parameters because on the original FW I get a very close match between T245 and T210. T210 is a bit hotter, about 4 degrees.

I think you changed the parameters on both irons in your FW because with your FW, I need a lot of adjustment on the trimmer resistor to get T245 at correct melting temp compared to the original FW, and the T210 is way off: about 35 degrees hotter than T245, which is what you describe.

Re-flashing the original FW results in perfect behavior of both irons at my original trimmer resistor setting, which closely corresponds to the 10ohm initial setting.

Unfortunately your FW will not be workable unless you change back to the original iron settings. Which FW build version did you use as a basis for your FW? I know Sparky changed the iron parameters in the latest one because he found an error in the previous versions. Could it be that you did not use the latest one?





I used the original T210 in the original firmware, which is 30 degrees lower, so I can only modify the firmware parameters. But maybe the T210 made in China is 30 degrees higher than the original version, so your temperature is accurate in the original firmware, but by what standard, at least my friends around me got the same result as me. Use the original 210, the original firmware is 30 degrees lower. This firmware can have C1 parameter in IRON CFG under the menu, and C1 can be adjusted to get the desired effect

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5185
I used the original T210 in the original firmware, which is 30 degrees lower, so I can only modify the firmware parameters. But maybe the T210 made in China is 30 degrees higher than the original version, so your temperature is accurate in the original firmware, but by what standard, at least my friends around me got the same result as me. Use the original 210, the original firmware is 30 degrees lower. This firmware can have C1 parameter in IRON CFG under the menu, and C1 can be adjusted to get the desired effect

The issue I have with your FW is that also the (genuine JBC) T245 settings are not correct. I am not going to fiddle with parameters in the menu because I have insufficient knowledge of the actual effects. And moreover, the original settings in the FW by sparky are perfect.

Could you make available your FW with original settings, not adjusted by you and your friends please? If not possible, could you please post your uncompiled FW? I am sure we will have enough people here that will be able to compile a version with the original FW settings


Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5187
The issue I have with your FW is that also the (genuine JBC) T245 settings are not correct. I am not going to fiddle with parameters in the menu because I have insufficient knowledge of the actual effects. And moreover, the original settings in the FW by sparky are perfect.

Could you make available your FW with original settings, not adjusted by you and your friends please? If not possible, could you please post your uncompiled FW? I am sure we will have enough people here that will be able to compile a version with the original FW settings
there are already two of us :)
I don’t have this plan for the time being. If you think it’s inappropriate, just forget it. This is just a personal version.

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5188
I used the original T210 in the original firmware, which is 30 degrees lower, so I can only modify the firmware parameters. But maybe the T210 made in China is 30 degrees higher than the original version, so your temperature is accurate in the original firmware, but by what standard, at least my friends around me got the same result as me. Use the original 210, the original firmware is 30 degrees lower. This firmware can have C1 parameter in IRON CFG under the menu, and C1 can be adjusted to get the desired effect

You are either using fake tip/handle/whatever or you have a hardware/power/earth/calibration problem. As I said before my 4 C210 tips and maybe 8 C245 tips are tested on at least 7 controllers, 5 of which are not made by me. Discrepancy is less than 5 degrees celsius. The only common thing is the enclosure, the transformer, and myself testing and calibrating them, NOT using thremometer but eutectic 63/37 (183C melting point) alloy and pure lead (327.5C melting point). I explained several times already why measuring a small tips (as C210 and smaller) with thermometer is not accurate - it loads the tip. measuring with alloy with known temperature on the tip is the only "home" method with 100% accuracy. Another method is using heat-insulated thermometer, but these are pretty expensive.

I am consideting an option for temperature overload, depending on the current power of the tip, because  when the tip is thermally loaded, there will always be a difference between the measured temperature where the sensor is, and the real temperature of the tip where the solder is. The more power transferred - the larger the difference will be. Although this is highly dependant from tip-s geometry and phisical dimensions, when tuned properly it will bring us close to the real temperature of the tip. Unfortunately, this involves correcting the iron profiles again, most notably the PID coefficients in order for the regulation to remain stable.

Re: Really universal soldering controller

Reply #5189
I don’t have this plan for the time being. If you think it’s inappropriate, just forget it. This is just a personal version.

Hi Catear,  You've made a wonderful FW, which you shared in the spirit of this project, which is to say, this project should be free and public to use. So thank you a lot!

But please do not take this the wrong way, why will you not share the source code? You yourself were able to use the source code Sparky wrote to adapt it to your liking. Would it not be in the same spirit of this project to share the source code so that others can build on it again?

Or at least could you share the original Sparky parameters in the iron config?