If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Old gold solder joints
I recently came across some 40 year old gold chain that had been in a box for many years. The problem is all of the soldered joints have become very weak. The joints look good but the slightest force will open them up. What could have caused this and is there a straightforward repair without resoldering each link? David |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Old gold solder joints
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 00:44:18 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry "David"
wrote: I recently came across some 40 year old gold chain that had been in a box for many years. The problem is all of the soldered joints have become very weak. The joints look good but the slightest force will open them up. What could have caused this and is there a straightforward repair without resoldering each link? David one would not ordinarily expect age to degrade solder joints. So my first question would be to wonder whether you are absolutely certain the joints are in fact actually soldered? Some machine made chains can have seams tight enough to appear soldered, when in fact the metal is just sort of smeared over the joint without any actual solder... There are a few things that might degrade a solder joint, but this is not generally something like time spent in a box. Soaking in bleach, for example, could weaken or even destroy some kinds of solder, especailly white gold solders. Some acid baths might do it too, though usually what would degrade the solder would also have a negative effect on the gold too. As to repair, I'd guess it's not worth repairing. If these actually are solder joints that have degraded so they now don't hold, you'd have to reflow the solder to fix it. Not much different from fully resoldering them. Some chain might be made with solder cored wire, which is sometimes able to be soldered by simply furnace treating the whole chain. But it's not so simple if you don't have the jigs and setup needed to do it, or you risk having the links solder themselves to each other, rather than just closing the links shut. I'd suggest your first step would be to find an experienced goldsmith to carefully examine the chain and try to tell you just what you've got. Few solid gold chains of any quality would have this sort of problem, or unsoldered links. So you need to figure out first, whether your impression that the links are really soldered but just failing, or whether they're just not soldered, and if the latter, whether this is a quality chain worth bothering with, or whether perhaps it's just gold filled or something like that. And if it really is quality karat gold chain, and all the links were at one time soldered, and the solder joints are now failing, I'd suggest sending the chain to be refined, taking the money, and being happy with that or using it to buy new chain... just my two or three cents... Peter |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Old gold solder joints
"Peter W.. Rowe," wrote in message ... On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 00:44:18 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry "David" wrote: I recently came across some 40 year old gold chain that had been in a box for many years. The problem is all of the soldered joints have become very weak. The joints look good but the slightest force will open them up. What could have caused this and is there a straightforward repair without resoldering each link? David one would not ordinarily expect age to degrade solder joints. So my first question would be to wonder whether you are absolutely certain the joints are in fact actually soldered? Some machine made chains can have seams tight enough to appear soldered, when in fact the metal is just sort of smeared over the joint without any actual solder... There are a few things that might degrade a solder joint, but this is not generally something like time spent in a box. Soaking in bleach, for example, could weaken or even destroy some kinds of solder, especailly white gold solders. Some acid baths might do it too, though usually what would degrade the solder would also have a negative effect on the gold too. (part sniped) Peter I little more information: The links are in fact soldered and the chain was stored in a plastic bag. The stamp on the clasp is 14K so I assume that is the grade of the entire piece.There was also a similar chain of the same vintage that was not in a bag and the joints on it are fine. Could the environment in the plastic bag have caused some form of reaction that affected only the solder and not the rest of the link? The gold was not especially tarnished. David |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Old gold solder joints
When David put fingers to keys it was 10/7/06 1:50 AM...
... I little more information: The links are in fact soldered and the chain was stored in a plastic bag. The stamp on the clasp is 14K so I assume that is the grade of the entire piece.There was also a similar chain of the same vintage that was not in a bag and the joints on it are fine. Could the environment in the plastic bag have caused some form of reaction that affected only the solder and not the rest of the link? The gold was not especially tarnished. It's starting to sound like the chain was known as trouble back when it was put _in_ the bag. How worn is it? I've seen chains whose links were worn paper-thin at the ends by years of constant wear. The wear is usually worst near a relatively rigid part (clasp, plaque). Could this be part of the problem? - CW |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Old gold solder joints
David wrote:
"Peter W.. Rowe," wrote in message ... On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 00:44:18 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry "David" wrote: I recently came across some 40 year old gold chain that had been in a box for many years. The problem is all of the soldered joints have become very weak. The joints look good but the slightest force will open them up. What could have caused this and is there a straightforward repair without resoldering each link? David one would not ordinarily expect age to degrade solder joints. So my first question would be to wonder whether you are absolutely certain the joints are in fact actually soldered? Some machine made chains can have seams tight enough to appear soldered, when in fact the metal is just sort of smeared over the joint without any actual solder... There are a few things that might degrade a solder joint, but this is not generally something like time spent in a box. Soaking in bleach, for example, could weaken or even destroy some kinds of solder, especailly white gold solders. Some acid baths might do it too, though usually what would degrade the solder would also have a negative effect on the gold too. (part sniped) Peter I little more information: The links are in fact soldered and the chain was stored in a plastic bag. The stamp on the clasp is 14K so I assume that is the grade of the entire piece.There was also a similar chain of the same vintage that was not in a bag and the joints on it are fine. Could the environment in the plastic bag have caused some form of reaction that affected only the solder and not the rest of the link? The gold was not especially tarnished. David Just because the clasp is stamped /marked 14k really doesnt mean anything without other supporting marks say from a maker or shop or assay office.. It sounds more like a fake than anything else its most likely to be gold plated base metal lead/tin soldered.. all you can do is get the gold tested to find out if it really is gold at all. any competent goldsmitn will have the gold testing kits. a shop in a mall is unlikely to know how to test your material. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Old gold solder joints
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 22:50:11 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry "David"
wrote: little more information: The links are in fact soldered and the chain was stored in a plastic bag. The stamp on the clasp is 14K so I assume that is the grade of the entire piece.There was also a similar chain of the same vintage that was not in a bag and the joints on it are fine. Could the environment in the plastic bag have caused some form of reaction that affected only the solder and not the rest of the link? The gold was not especially tarnished. Simple storage over time in a plastic bag will not have degraded the chain or the solder joints. It might, in some situations, accelerate the rate of tarnishing for a silver chain, but that's not the case here. So discount the part about the bag. Likely, the chain with trouble also had the same situation originally. Time won't have made it worse, but won't have made it better either, of course. In order for time in the bag to have degraded the chain, it would have had to have been stored in the bag along with something fairly corrosive that could etch the solder joints. There ARE things that could do this, of course. But it's not likely, and in most cases, the whole chain would show at the least, some bad tarnishing, corrosion products of some sort (like green patina in spots) or you'd see residue of whatever had been in the bag with the chain. You've not mentioned anything like that, so I doubt that's the case. Just because the clasp is marked 14K is not a guarantee that the rest of the chain is also 14K, especially with spring ring clasps, which are usually attached with an unsoldered jump ring attachment, and are easily changed and replaced. If the stamp is on a part soldered to the chain, it may be more likely a mark part of the original chain. But be aware that very often, those folks selling fakes, will take the time to place a nice prominant 14K mark on their gold plated wares. I doubt this is the situation here, but it's still possible. A mark on only the clasp is not always to be trusted, though it's useful info. My guess is that this chain never had good solder joints, even if the links look soldered, and were in fact supposed to be soldered. Modern chain making machines now usually use lasers to weld or solder the joints, and these are usually remarkably reliable. Before the lasers, the machines used an electrical resistance soldering method to heat the joints, and while this normally worked very well, occasionally one would have a machine adjusted a little wrong, or with dirty contacts, or some such, which might be producing faulty solder joints on what was supposed to be soldered chain. These can look normal enough, but amount to what we'd call a "cold joint", where even though the solder appears to flow, one side of the joint isn't hot enough for the solder to properly adhere and bond, or although solder flows and bonds, not enough of it does so, producing too small a joint area for strength.. When that sort of thing happens, the chain that results can look fine, but it will behave as you describe, with apparently soldered joints having no strength. Chains that do this have a habit of ending up in some jewelers scrap box, since once customers have had the chain break and need repair a couple times for no real reason, the chains end up being scrapped. The other thing that can happen with chains, including modern ones, is that in wear, if the chain is yanked and pulled too much, the solder seams can become stressed. Often a goldsmith will see this when a customer brings in a chain for repair, and it's found that even though one can repair the actual break, the chain is going to continue to break again, since the whole chain has been overly stressed, and many links have solder joints that have cracked and almost failed. With some types of chain, this can happen without causing very obvious visual distortion or stretching of the chain. But again, when it becomes obvious to a customer or a jeweler that the chain is not going to be servicable, it often ends up in the scrap pile. Perhaps that is why you found a chain sitting around in a decades old plastic bag... The other point to make is back to your original posting, asking whether there is an easy fix. The answer is no. There isn't. If the links are heavy enough to allow being individually soldered again, one could do that. But that's going to be a good deal of work. Most ordinary commercially made chains wouldn't be worth the trouble. But this is difficult for any of us via a newsgroup, and without good images of the chain, to really evaluate. Take the chain to a competent goldsmith. Perhaps there is something you, and we, have missed, that makes the problem solvable, such as perhaps the problem is only in a limited small section of the chain, which could be simply removed, for example. In the group, we're all really only guessing. Someone with the chain in hand and a good loupe to examine the links will have a better idea of what's going on. Peter |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Tidbits"
What a pity that Benjamin Mark has left us! It would appear that many of
your other contributors have gone elswhere, now that he has taken offence at somebody's criticism. I think that everybody has lost out. What do you think, Peter? G.H.Ireland (Igor) -- _ _________________________________________ / \._._ |_ _ _ /' Orpheus Internet Services \_/| |_)| |(/_|_|_ / 'Internet for Everyone' _______ | ___________./ http://www.orpheusinternet.co.uk |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Tidbits"
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:27:50 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry Mr G H Ireland
wrote: What a pity that Benjamin Mark has left us! It would appear that many of your other contributors have gone elswhere, now that he has taken offence at somebody's criticism. I think that everybody has lost out. What do you think, Peter? I'd tend to agree. Mr. Mark's choice to take offence at what seemed to me a relatively minor technical criticism seemed puzzling to me, and disproportionate, but then it wasn't aimed at me. I thought the underlying concept to the criticism valid enough, but the wording unkind, which is unfortunate, and Mr. Mark chose to make an issue of it. That's his choice, and as I noted at the time, the group is the poorer for it. But it's not something I had control over then, nor do now. I don't own the group, nor make the rules. I just try to administer the rules as written in the charter to the best of my ability, which may indeed be flawed now and then. Once I allow a post, rightly or wrongly, though, it's pretty much a done deal, and can't be undone. So if someone wishes to make an issue of a post, that's their choice, not mine, and aside from trying to modify future awareness of issues that might come up, not much I can do about it. I regret that the problem came up at all, but don't feel deep guilt for allowing the original critical post, since at the time it simply didn't seem as objectionable as Mr. Mark apparently felt it was. Perhaps at some point in the future, Mr. Mark may choose to come back. I hope so. And if, perhaps, he chooses to make the slight change in the coding of his web site's home page that was the real point of the criticism, then those people going there with a slower connection, will be the happier for it. His choice, on both counts. As to the other contributors, they come and go with the seasons, with how busy the industry and people's lives are, and all the rest. Mr. Mark was a very long time contributor. Much of the rest of the group's traffic has been less regular, and will likely come back as people see fit, and as newcomers find the group and post questions that inspire responses. Many of the regular readers have not abandoned the group, I think. They're just not so often the ones to start a thread. So when someone comes along with something interesting to discuss, the group will likely spring to more active life again. Don't be too quick to write the group's obituary. And as your post seems to illustrate, when the group goes empty long enough, someone usually finds something to say to try and break the silence... With that said, it's also fair to point out that the Internet is evolving, with the web becoming a richer and richer environment, and usenet being somewhat less important with each passing year. It maintains a unique place on the net, but many users simply haven't even discovered it, and with the advent and popularity of other places, like myriad blogs, or myspace pages or YouTube self published videos, and the like, where people can easily post things for the public to read and see, the unique role of usenet has become somewhat diluted. And in our field, the Ganoksin web site's Orchid list continues to grow, both because being linked to a web site means anyone using a search engine for jewelry discussions finds it instantly, and because it's grown to be the heavyweight on the block, also tending to preferentially draw people. So the role of r.c.j., once just about the only decent place to discuss jewelry issues on the net, has evolved into a smaller quieter back room for folks who just don't have the time or energy to wade through the volumes of material on Orchid, but who don't yet wish to just disconnect totally. And that's OK with me, frankly. I'd be upset if the needs of the metals/jewelry community were not being met by any site, but that's not the case. This group will survive and remain if people want it to, and in whatever form they wish it to take. If the desire for this forum and need for this forum disappears totally, then so will the people who make it the discussion group it is, and that will be that. Will we have lost something if that happens? Perhaps. or perhaps not. That opinion is also for each user to decide. I enjoy the group, and moderating it is a privilege as well as a chore sometimes. But if it dies, it's not like I'm going to get all depressed and angry at the tragedy or anything... The net has changed enormously in the last couple decades, and even more every day. This group is just one tiny part of it, and somewhat less able to change in part because unless readers as a whole ask me to change the group or it's rules, I don't really feel free to do so. I'll do, of course, whatever a consensus of users of the group wish, but so far few have suggested any changes. And as happens so often, now I'm starting to ramble... cheers Peter Rowe moderator rec.crafts.jewelry |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Tidbits"
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:27:45 GMT, Mr G H Ireland
wrote: What a pity that Benjamin Mark has left us! It would appear that many of your other contributors have gone elswhere, now that he has taken offence at somebody's criticism. I think that everybody has lost out. What do you think, Peter? If you meant this to go personally to Peter, he missed. I think we just don't have things to talk about from time to time. It's happened before, back when Tidbits was being posted. -- Marilee J. Layman http://mjlayman.livejournal.com/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Tidbits"
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 17:27:16 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry "Marilee J. Layman"
wrote: If you meant this to go personally to Peter, he missed. I didn't miss. The message was sent as a newsgroup posting, not an email to me. In those cases, unless the question CLEARLY is only personal, I have to consider it a comment to me within the public forum, so I post it. I think we just don't have things to talk about from time to time. It's happened before, back when Tidbits was being posted. right. And the fact that you saw, and responded to the thread nicely illustrates my point that people haven't actually gone away, but are just waiting for someone to come up with something they wish to discuss. Peter |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Making 2-tone ring | NMarshall | Jewelry | 4 | June 9th 06 03:52 PM |
Soldering plated parts - advice for a beginner | [email protected] | Jewelry | 7 | March 13th 06 04:29 PM |
Will Silver solder work with 9ct gold? | Des Bromilow | Jewelry | 5 | December 18th 05 05:09 PM |
Gold refining in a nutshell. | bigmoe | Jewelry | 5 | October 17th 05 04:12 PM |
black hills gold jewelry | [email protected] | Jewelry | 0 | September 24th 04 02:22 AM |