Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Papers Meta
Q&A
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

Post History

50%
+0 −0
Q&A estimation of pogo pin resistance

I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable. I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge. The sum of 2 pins carrying constant...

posted 10mo ago by TonyStewart‭  ·  edited 10mo ago by TonyStewart‭

Answer
#7: Post edited by user avatar TonyStewart‭ · 2024-02-08T15:49:35Z (10 months ago)
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.**
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length was too inductive (10nH/cm). The pin length and solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me (<100MHz) with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.**
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a powder-coat electro-painted chassis did not require masking an area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead, I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length was too inductive (10nH/cm). The pin length and solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me (<100MHz) with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
#6: Post edited by user avatar TonyStewart‭ · 2024-02-08T15:46:43Z (10 months ago)
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.**
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length was too inductive (10nH/cm) but the pin length and solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me (<100MHz) with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.**
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length was too inductive (10nH/cm). The pin length and solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me (<100MHz) with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
#5: Post edited by user avatar TonyStewart‭ · 2024-02-08T15:45:56Z (10 months ago)
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.**
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.**
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length was too inductive (10nH/cm) but the pin length and solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me (<100MHz) with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
#4: Post edited by user avatar TonyStewart‭ · 2024-02-08T15:42:50Z (10 months ago)
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.
  • **
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.**
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
#3: Post edited by user avatar TonyStewart‭ · 2024-02-08T15:42:01Z (10 months ago)
  • **I agree that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.
  • **
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
  • **I agree with Olin that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.
  • **
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
#2: Post edited by user avatar TonyStewart‭ · 2024-02-08T15:41:18Z (10 months ago)
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
  • **I agree that unknown contact area is the biggest variable.
  • **
  • I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.
  • The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.
  • It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.
  • I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened. Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box. I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.
  • Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.
  • Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?
#1: Initial revision by user avatar TonyStewart‭ · 2024-02-08T15:39:19Z (10 months ago) 
I think the scientific way is to test and verify each contact using a 4 pin kelvin bridge.

The sum of 2 pins carrying constant current can be measured as voltage by 2 adjacent pins on pads sufficiently large.

It probably would be more than a double digit mohm range and not useful for measurements in this range due to the variation in contact force and pin vs crown style,and solder penetration with resulting contact area being a large variable.

I recall when I had to prove to UL that my method of grounding a painted chassis did not require masking the area for a PE ground lug to be fastened.  Instead I used a welded stud where the threads were capped and I predicted and verified that the contact area of 3 thread turns would be so far below the UL 100 mohm spec for a PE ground connection that it was approved by UL for my design in a VOIP PoE box I designed for Avaya(nee Lucent). This enabled my sheet metal supplier to cut more costs in the painting fabrication of the 1U rack box.  I supplied UL with the Kelvin resistance test results, and they verified and approved the design deviation.

Pogo Pins are all AU plated and much lower resistance in the barrel. But the wire-wrap length and pin-solder penetration area has been OK for RF measurements for me with 50 ohm coax directly to the pins but I would not trust it to measure milliohm trace resistance results unless a Kelvin bridge method was used.  

Is there another reason why you need to know beside wearout?