I've never heard anybody call them "DuPont" connectors outside of Chinese e-commerce and electronics websites. (e.g. "dupont line") Usually I've heard them referred to as 0.1" headers or header pins instead.
I've always heard them called DuPont connectors. Might be a hobbyist vs. professional thing; I use them in hobby projects, so am probably exposed to the questionable vendors more than a professional would be. I was looking for crimping tools relatively recently and was surprised to find that reputable vendors don't call them DuPont connectors, even in passing. As far as I can tell, they have no name that everyone would recognize and that lets manufacturers steer clear of naming other companies, despite being so ubiquitous.
(I suppose this is a common problem with connectors. Someone could tell me "it's a Molex connector", and I'd know what they mean -- the one that supplies power to pre-SATA hard drives -- but of course Molex makes thousands of different connectors, so it's really a terrible name for that one specifically.)
As someone who came into electronics in a pretty indirect manner (started designing software for electronics testing, hard to be good at it without at least a decent understanding of how it works), connecter names/terminology/nomenclature proved to be one of the most annoying parts. I ended up doing a lot of reverse engineering to understand how things worked, and I hope that when a prospective EE is going through their ABET accredited program that they have some class that breaks it all down for them, but I had no such luck so just sort of brute forced my way into learning all connector types I encountered.
For anyone who wants to know - turns out, there a surprisingly limited number of types of connectors that are commonly used in most electronics today. You can go to any decent electronics supply outfit (mouser, digikey and many others) and in the space of a few hours familiarize yourself with most of what you need to know just by clicking through the connectors category and sorting by number of parts in stock.
> I hope that when a prospective EE is going through their ABET accredited program that they have some class that breaks it all down for them
That wasn't the case in the 2000s when I got my ECE degree (more-or-less EE, but with many course choices replaced by CS curriculum), from a state university in the US. EE is a very broad field, lots of grads won't need to know names of connectors for instance.
Molex is also a misnomer in the same way. The original is the amp/te mate-n-lock and the comparable connector introduced later is the molex 8981. There is also an incompatible molex connector with a straight side which might explain the naming.
I agree, although I've never heard them referred to as DuPont connectors ever, regardless of context - this is a completely new name to me. I've always seen these referred to as 0.1" pin headers or just pcb pin headers. When I buy them from electronics stores here in Australia I see them listed as 0.1" pin connectors.
Yes. I've never heard them called "DuPont connectors". Search Alibaba and the term will lead you to 2.54mm crimp terminals, though.
"Header connectors" are usually board-mount pins.[1]
Within that range there are lots of options. Molex is noted for kinds that have board-mounted pins with a base and locking ramp, and mates with a shrouded wire connector that takes push-in crimp pins. Those won't plug in backwards, always a good feature, and are hard to vibrate loose or bend by pulling on the wire. They still cost only about a quarter, even from DigiKey.
The PCB end is usually referred to as a male/female pin header. However, the wire connector that consists of a plastic housing and a bunch of little female crimp tabs seems to often be called a DuPont connector.
Great observation and makes total sense, although IMHO it does not conflict with the point made in the article. It could well be the first adopters of these in China had indeed known them by the DuPont name due to the reasons explained in the article, then inadvertently participated in its spread.
On a side point, I call these "Taobao-ism" or "Aliexpress-ism". It may sound backwards, but the "cargo cult" days of practical EE ("shanzhai") have clearly shown a strong influence on the vast majority of EE colloquial corpus widely in use even to this day.
For non-Mandarin speakers out there:
"buckle", "latch" <---> "扣" (= attach / snap in place)
"weld", "solder" <---> "焊" (= join by molten metal)
Same here, I've never heard the phrase "DuPont connector" until this article (I would also call them 0.1" pin headers). But I thought it still had a nice exploration of the history of that terminology and the connector in general.
Definitely a case of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The pin works well for motherboard headers in several ways. It's compact, robust and straightforward. Even if someone doesn't get the orientation right of, say, a 2x5 USB Header Block, they still understand that like size means like size and you push the black part down on the shiny golden pins.
My recollection is that these were called Molex connectors in the 1980s. Are DuPont connectors different in some way, or were the names used somewhat interchangeably?
There is a certain subculture where "a molex connector" is the pre-SATA computer disk power connector, but Molex makes a million connectors and the Molex catalog is an inch thick so it never made much sense to me. Another reason it doesn't make sense is that Amphenol and others make compatible 2-piece connectors.
If you want to sound like an informed person, don't use "molex connector" that way.
I don't think it makes you sound uninformed... Most places you go into for PC components will know exactly what a "molex connector" is in relation to PC hardware. When building a PC, knowledge of Molex brand connectors isn't all that relevant.
It's like asking for a Kleenex instead of a tissue. Or back in the day, when you needed to make a copy of something, using the Xerox machine was quite a common term, even though Xerox made more than one machine, and most machines probably weren't made by Xerox.
>It's like asking for a Kleenex instead of a tissue.
that'd be the case if Kleenex made hundreds of variations, and the variations had no cross-compatibility with one another.
People that want a 'molex connector' want, usually, an AMP style press-lock 4 pin connector... unless they don't -- they're looking for a molex MiniFit extension to reach their GPU... unless they don't -- they want a vintage Molex asymmetric 4 pin for an old legacy device.
'Molex' is more ambiguous, imo, than you give it credit for.
I did a lot of embedded/industrial stuff since the early 80's. There are a dozen connector families that will plug into an unshrouded hearer, 0.1" on center with 25mil square posts.
Every industry/company tends to refer to whatever common type they are using by the company name.
I’m from the same generation, so if you say “Amphenol connector” without further qualification then I’ll assume you’re referring to a 25-pair microribbon.
Unless the context is printers, in which case you obviously mean a 36-pin Centronics.
I accept your point, but I don't think you will look particularly informed if you ask for a "pre-SATA computer disk power connector", and the other person says "oh, a Molex connector?", and you say "yes but I don't know which one".
Ironically, it wasn't even Molex product originally, but AMP (now known as TE Connectivity). 350211-1 header and 1-480424-0 plug. (but as others makes compatible clones, "pre-SATA disk power connector" is probably fine)
Long ago, if you mentioned "Molex" to someone like a TV repairman, they'd be thinking of larger pins and housings, around 0.2 inch spacing. Naturally, Molex now covers a phenomenally wide range of offerings, but searching Google Image for "molex connector" brings back some fairly consistent connector types for the first page of hits.
It could be a case where a brand name carries a historical association that isn't accurate any more.
Different connectors. Molex connectors and the Molex company are still around. Not ruling out that you've heard them called the wrong thing, there's a bewildering array of connectors.
Yeah, from my professional experience, "Molex connector" is normally used as a quick way to refer to a specific connector in your project that's made by Molex (assuming you're also using other connectors not made by them).
I wouldn't normally associate it with a particular connector, although I understand it's a pretty commonly used that way in the PC community.
Interestingly enough, 'du pont' would basically translate to "from the bridge". And these do connect (bridge) two sources. Sometimes history works backwards?
Somewhat related question: what is your favorite way to mount PCBs vertically and connect them? IDC ribbon cable seems popular, but there should be a simpler way? Simple pin headers are somewhat ok, but proper alignment is sometimes difficult (getting pin 1 into socket 1, and not pin 2 into socket 1).
Edit: I mean vertical mounting (stacking), so the boards are not under an angle.
I don't hate the style of pin headers they're using. Probably considered laughably low density by modern standards, but for industrial stuff they're robust. Never had issue with alignment, but they are not keyed, so it could happen I guess.
For low-density, old school edge connectors with a key cut are nice. That way, the connector is part of the board itself. Sometimes called "Sullins" connectors.
TL;DR: Berg made connectors like these. Berg was bought by DuPont who put their branding on things. Around this time in the early 90's, clones started showing up and enthusiasts assigned the "DuPont" to apparently differentiate between these new clones and the previous, officially made, "Berg" connectors.
Appreciated. It is probably just me, but I find the article itself (which I read in full) relatively hard to follow. So is the other related article [1].
I think it's because the author was trying to fit all the nuances in, which is a problem I suffer from myself when I write.
No worries. I too found the article a little bit on the hard to read side. I can't say why specifically, but there seemed to be a lot of details that didn't really add to the story. Perhaps that's the "nuance" you were referring to.
They're also quite unreliable compared to solid core wire. I've had a few confusing debugging sessions where one of these wires ended up being the reason the circuit didn't work - either no connection or a sporadic one.
Yep, and that's pretty much my point. People often use these connectors for breadboarding circuits. So many different vendors sell "DuPont" connectors of varying qualities. To save myself from any trouble with these connectors, I simply don't use them and opt for 22 gauge solid core wire directly.
Ben Eater has a good video on the way he creates breadboard circuits, though his organization is a bit extreme for when you're prototyping. But in either case, you can use solid core wire directly and save yourself a lot of trouble.
I have definitely had issues with circuits due to a solderless-breadboard (like shown in that video) connector failing. They seem to have just as finite a lifetime as other wire-connectors I've used (but I haven't used knock-off DuPont connectors).
Investing the money in a proper crimp tool helps a LOT with these fiddly little buggers. I've got a nice set of interchangeable crimp dies that go with one of two different sized crimpers, ( Its from the same ODM/manufacturer as this tool set https://www.altronics.com.au/p/t2177-crimptool-ratchet-multi..., I just collected my own set from several different stores because I wanted a different set of crimp dies) and while I can crimp right down to these sorts of small connectors... the moment I have any problems or it doesn't crimp right first time I'll put down my big crimp tool, and swap over to the little crimp tool I have thats specific for these darn things, pretty sure its this one, https://www.altronics.com.au/p/t1537-crimptool-telephone-ter..., I've had it so long I've forgotten which model it is.
While having good tools helps, they are still a PITA, just no longer a RPITA.
Just get the 63811-1000 and be done with it. This will suffice for 99% of open-barrel long-crimp terminals you'll ever encounter. (For short-crimp stuff like JST PH, look at the Iwiss 2820M.)
hmm, i thought you were implying that i was using pliers to crimp them, instead of actual crimpers. (which would've made you a jerk, which is why i didn't elaborate much further.)
instead it looks like you call them "crimping pliers" instead of "crimpers" (or perhaps "crimping tool") like most american english speakers. fair enough.
looking very quickly at some youtube videos, i appear to have something similar to the cheap ratcheting chinese crimpers, not the (apparently) popular and non-ratcheting japanese crimpers.
i'll pick up the different tool and see how it goes. ...i've still got hundreds yet to go, so it'll have plenty of time to pay for itself.
You have to be careful not to damage the square part when crimping. Some have a little tab that give a guide how far you can push it in to the tool without damaging it.
