[Milsurplus] Milsurplus Digest, Vol 93, Issue 35
Fred Chapman
chapmanf at comcast.net
Thu Jan 26 09:57:01 EST 2012
----- Original Message -----
From: milsurplus-request at mailman.qth.net
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thursday, 26 January, 2012 7:11:23 AM
Subject: Milsurplus Digest, Vol 93, Issue 35
Send Milsurplus mailing list submissions to
milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
milsurplus-request at mailman.qth.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
milsurplus-owner at mailman.qth.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Milsurplus digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Anti-Backlash Gears (J. Forster)
2. Re: Anti-Backlash Gears (KD7JYK DM09)
3. Re: Anti-Backlash Gears (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
4. Re: Anti-Backlash Gear swarf (Mike Hanz)
5. Re: Anti-Backlash Gears (David Stinson)
6. Re: Anti-Backlash Gears (J. Forster)
7. Re: Anti-Backlash Gears (Mike Hanz)
8. Re: [ARC5] Anti-Backlash Gear swarf (J. Forster)
9. Re: [ARC5] Anti-Backlash Gear swarf (Mike Hanz)
10. GRC-109 Owners: (David Stinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 09:24:21 -0800 (PST)
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gears
To: "Mike Hanz" <aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org>
Cc: ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <64244.12.6.201.2.1327512261.squirrel at popaccts.quikus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Hi Mike,
I agree that using a teflon lube might be a good idea,
Frankly, I suspect the split gear lubing was done in repair depots, and is
not factory original.
Of course, Teflon lubes were not available in WW II.
John
=============
> On 1/25/2012 10:36 AM, J. Forster wrote:
>> In my experience, anti-backlash gears should not be lubed at all. The
>> tooth area is OK with a little light grease, but the area between the
>> gears should be chean and dry.
>>
>> What does the manual say?
>
> The manual is most likely silent on it, John. The main reason I like to
> put a thin coat of light Teflon grease on such mating surfaces is
> precisely because of your other suggestion - putting it on the gear
> teeth alone is a good idea but it doesn't stay there - it eventually
> works down into the (originally clean) gap between the gears and
> eventually gums up the process because it brings with it dirt and brass
> swarf from wear. A thin film retards that migration because it has to
> push against an already established barrier. YMMV, but I've seen the
> same technique used for larger, higher speed assemblies driven by
> servos, so it made sense to me. Probably overkill for the construction
> and very low rpm application that we use in tuning, but what are we
> about if not Principle Number 8 - enthusiastic, overly-excessive
> attention to infinitesimal detail whose effect will probably never be
> noticeable in our own lifetimes? :-) I'd buy the no lubricant
> whatsoever approach, but those gears are not usually precision cut with
> hobs, so mis-match between engaged teeth does generate brass dust over
> time. Frankly, a more compelling reason to dismantle and clean is
> arguably to lube the sleeve bearings for the tuning shafts...they bind
> up more rapidly than the split gears, IIRC.
>
> But in the final analysis, doing nothing at all is probably an option,
> too...until Principle Number 8 raises its ugly head...heh, heh...
>
> 73,
> Mike
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:42:18 -0800
From: "KD7JYK DM09" <kd7jyk at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gears
To: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>, <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <01ea01ccdb9a$681b06f0$59a1f604 at mainframe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
: How do you address this problem in your sets?
It's been some twenty-five years since I've worked on these gears, but, I
would carefully take them apart, clean all the pieces, then re-assemble with
a light smearing of white lithium grease. I never had a problem with them
after that, but some of the rigs have been baking in the attic for a couple
of decades, so no telling what I'll find in another ten or twenty years.
Kurt
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:28:26 -0500 (EST)
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gears
To: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org, arc5 at mailman.qth.net,
milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <8CEA9BF680C55DB-1FE8-35D5B at webmail-m020.sysops.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Swarf? Is that a word like kerf and sprew?
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Hanz <aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org>
To: ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>; milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wed, Jan 25, 2012 8:21 am
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gears
On 1/25/2012 10:36 AM, J. Forster wrote:
In my experience, anti-backlash gears should not be lubed at all. The
tooth area is OK with a little light grease, but the area between the
gears should be chean and dry.
What does the manual say?
The manual is most likely silent on it, John. The main reason I like to
ut a thin coat of light Teflon grease on such mating surfaces is
recisely because of your other suggestion - putting it on the gear
eeth alone is a good idea but it doesn't stay there - it eventually
orks down into the (originally clean) gap between the gears and
ventually gums up the process because it brings with it dirt and brass
warf from wear. A thin film retards that migration because it has to
ush against an already established barrier. YMMV, but I've seen the
ame technique used for larger, higher speed assemblies driven by
ervos, so it made sense to me. Probably overkill for the construction
nd very low rpm application that we use in tuning, but what are we
bout if not Principle Number 8 - enthusiastic, overly-excessive
ttention to infinitesimal detail whose effect will probably never be
oticeable in our own lifetimes? :-) I'd buy the no lubricant
hatsoever approach, but those gears are not usually precision cut with
obs, so mis-match between engaged teeth does generate brass dust over
ime. Frankly, a more compelling reason to dismantle and clean is
rguably to lube the sleeve bearings for the tuning shafts...they bind
p more rapidly than the split gears, IIRC.
But in the final analysis, doing nothing at all is probably an option,
oo...until Principle Number 8 raises its ugly head...heh, heh...
73,
ike
______________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:45:36 -0500
From: Mike Hanz <aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gear swarf
To: jcoward5452 at aol.com
Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <4F207800.3010907 at aafradio.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 1/25/2012 4:28 PM, jcoward5452 at aol.com wrote:
> Swarf? Is that a word like kerf and sprew?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/swarf has a fairly decent
definition, Jay. It's an old English term for the dust and curlings
from machining operations - I just used it in the sense of tiny pieces
of brass worn off of stamped sheet metal gears over long periods of
time. There's probably a more descriptive term, but since I just
finished making a pile of brass swarf on the lathe, it seemed like the
right usage...:-(
73,
Mike KC4TOS
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:07:14 -0600
From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gears
To: "ARC-5 List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>, <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <C1924765F33F49258AF33C0A95B5A2D3 at DaddyPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Thanks for the many good suggestions on this.
Personally, I'm lazy. I do the
mineral-spirits-followed-with-oil route first.
I put a paper towel under the work to catch
any run-off because, if I'm the one doing it,
the mineral spirits will crawl up against gravity
and jump a 3-inch gap
in order to stain the front panel just to spite me.
In the past, I've followed with a light turbine oil,
but don't really know if this is acceptable;
seemed to work in the short term, anyway.
I also once tried to streach and "re-tension"
the loading spring.... *SPROINGGGG!"
Never did find it.... took me forever to find
another spring that would work, too.
I'd like to try a better oil.
Mike: what instrument oil do you recommend?
There seem to be several brands, including one
by Caig De-ox-It. Prefer one that doesn't have
gold or platinum (and their price) as an ingredient :-D.
73 Dave S.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:11:16 -0800 (PST)
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gears
To: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
Cc: ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID:
<2651.12.6.201.177.1327533076.squirrel at popaccts.quikus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
David,
I've been using Starrett instrument oil for decades w/ any issues. It'd
designed to wipe their guages and other things and now comes in a squirt
bottle.
FWIW,
-John
================
> Thanks for the many good suggestions on this.
> Personally, I'm lazy. I do the
> mineral-spirits-followed-with-oil route first.
> I put a paper towel under the work to catch
> any run-off because, if I'm the one doing it,
> the mineral spirits will crawl up against gravity
> and jump a 3-inch gap
> in order to stain the front panel just to spite me.
>
> In the past, I've followed with a light turbine oil,
> but don't really know if this is acceptable;
> seemed to work in the short term, anyway.
> I also once tried to streach and "re-tension"
> the loading spring.... *SPROINGGGG!"
> Never did find it.... took me forever to find
> another spring that would work, too.
>
> I'd like to try a better oil.
> Mike: what instrument oil do you recommend?
> There seem to be several brands, including one
> by Caig De-ox-It. Prefer one that doesn't have
> gold or platinum (and their price) as an ingredient :-D.
>
> 73 Dave S.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:29:59 -0500
From: Mike Hanz <aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gears
To: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
Cc: ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <4F209077.7070103 at aafradio.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 1/25/2012 6:07 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> Mike: what instrument oil do you recommend?
> There seem to be several brands, including one
> by Caig De-ox-It. Prefer one that doesn't have
> gold or platinum (and their price) as an ingredient :-D.
Like John, I frequently use Starrett tool and instrument oil (catalog
number 1620) for things like this, though there are other good
substitutes.
http://littlemachineshop.com/products/product_view.php?ProductID=1825
has it for $7.50. A synthetic is better considering oxidation and
gumming, but then they're more expensive. A synthetic turbine oil will
have all the right attributes if you can find it in a thin enough
weight. Another decent substitute is synthetic ATF, if you can find it
in 5W or less.
- Mike
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:39:50 -0800 (PST)
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Anti-Backlash Gear swarf
To: "Richard Schumann" <richardschumann at comcast.net>
Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID:
<2946.12.6.201.177.1327541990.squirrel at popaccts.quikus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Actually, I used the Starrett oil on an antique grandfather clock in about
1988. It's still running... when I remember to wind up the weights.
-John
==============
> Anybody mentioned clock oil? I suppose it's like instrument oil.
>
> It comes in a neat clear plastic squeeze tube with a looooong tip like a
> needle to get in those hard to reach places.
>
> I didn't even know it existed until I needed to lubricate an old mantle
> clock. I guess the stuff doesn't evaporate like normal oils. Got some
> off Ebay.
>
> Anyhoo, just my 2 cents worth.
>
> Richard kn7sfz
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Hanz
> To: jcoward5452 at aol.com
> Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net ; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARC5] [Milsurplus] Anti-Backlash Gear swarf
>
>
> On 1/25/2012 4:28 PM, jcoward5452 at aol.com wrote:
> > Swarf? Is that a word like kerf and sprew?
>
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/swarf has a fairly decent
> definition, Jay. It's an old English term for the dust and curlings
> from machining operations - I just used it in the sense of tiny pieces
> of brass worn off of stamped sheet metal gears over long periods of
> time. There's probably a more descriptive term, but since I just
> finished making a pile of brass swarf on the lathe, it seemed like the
> right usage...:-(
>
> 73,
> Mike KC4TOS
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 21:32:55 -0500
From: Mike Hanz <aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Anti-Backlash Gear swarf
Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <4F20BB57.1010601 at aafradio.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 1/25/2012 8:20 PM, Richard Schumann wrote:
> Anybody mentioned clock oil? I suppose it's like instrument oil.
> It comes in a neat clear plastic squeeze tube with a looooong tip like a needle to get in those hard to reach places.
> I didn't even know it existed until I needed to lubricate an old mantle clock. I guess the stuff doesn't evaporate like normal oils. Got some off Ebay.
Some of the horologists I know suggest that "clock oil" has changed over
the years, from the sperm oil used for a couple of centuries, to jojoba
oil, which apparently turned out to be superior to sperm oil, and
finally basically light ATF without any of the additives required for
friction clutches. Of course, the clock oil distributors don't like you
know that their cost for rebottling it into those little bottles is
quite low. Anyway, that's the conspiracy theory that I hear. I've used
the Starret in clocks and it seems to have worked fine, at least for the
old clock or two I've had around the house. I haven't tried synthetic
ATF, but I suspect a drop in each of the bearings wouldn't hurt either.
I don't do watches - a jeweled bearing may require something different.
Nye Lubricants seems to have the market covered for that branch in
instrument oil - there are several versions listed on Amazon under a
"nye lubricant clock watch oil" search. T'ain't cheap, though.
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 06:11:24 -0600
From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: [Milsurplus] GRC-109 Owners:
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>, <boatanchors at theporch.com>
Message-ID: <BA8567BC528045A1BBCF9EE63391B2E6 at DaddyPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Re: The power supplies Fair Radio sells
for the GRC-109.
I have one here- with the B+ cooled-down a bit-
I use to power SCR-288 and other projects.
Works excellent and I recommend it.
I need to get a few more of the 5-pin plugs
that connect the transmitter power, but I have
no idea what to call them :-D. My junk box
ran-out after two.
"5-pin connector" on Google or Ebay returns
a forest of audio DIN plugs, of course.
Can anyone give me a name for this plug?
TNX DE Dave AB5S
------------------------------
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
End of Milsurplus Digest, Vol 93, Issue 35
******************************************
More information about the Milsurplus
mailing list