Prev: According to their plan, the first 2*3.5TeV collisions will be performedthe 30-th of March. I’m scared, but can not do anything, - all ways lead to catastrophe. LHC/CERN.
Next: According to their plan, the first 2*3.5TeV collisions will be performed the 30-th of March. I�m scared, but can not do anything, - all ways lead to catastrophe. LHC/CERN.
From: WangoTango on 18 Mar 2010 17:50
In article <hnfl2r$m6l$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
pawihte(a)fake.invalid says...
> What common substance would be acceptable as a lubricant for
> consumer grade volume control pots? It's no good recommending a
> branded product to me as I live in a place where such products
> are unlikely to be available. Thanks.
>
>
>
I don't know if this has been mentioned in the thread or not, but how
about CAIG Labs Deoxit FaderLube?

www.caig.com

From: George Herold on 19 Mar 2010 01:19
On Mar 14, 4:06 am, "Phil Allison" <phi...(a)tpg.com.au> wrote:
> "pawihte"
>
>
>
>
>
> > Phil Allison wrote:
> >> "pawihte"
>
> >>> What common substance would be acceptable as a lubricant for consumer
> >>> grade volume control pots?
>
> >> ** Pots do not need lubricating.
>
> >> How about you post a question properly for once ?
>
> >> What is the actual problem with the pots ??
>
> > This is not about a problem with a particular pot. Many inexpensive carbon
> > pots develop intermittent contacts and scratchy sounds in audio. This
> > happens both with pots fitted in a product by a manufacturer and with pots
> > bought from a shop. Some become defective within a couple of months of
> > regular use, especially in a dusty environment and/or if they have dc
> > current passing through them. Replacing them with better quality pots is
> > not always an option. Flushing with a solvent usually makes them OK again
> > for a while, but this also takes out the lubricant and makes the track
> > wear out more quickly.
>
> ** Totally mangled nonsense -  the track of a carbon ( or other) pot has no
> lubricant applied during manufacture.
>
> Any lubricant that resided on the track would prevent operation -  cos
> lubricants are insulators.
>
> Rapidly evaporating solvents are rarely any use for fixing  noisy pots while
> slow evaporating ones that leave a thin oil residue are very good at the
> job.
>
> Also, rotary pots do not get " dust " inside them.
>
> What actually causes all the trouble is a when a mix of fine carbon
> particles from the track and grease from the shaft bearing accumulate on the
> fingers of the two wipers and render them partially non conducting.  Also,
> the metal to metal wiper contacts suffer from surface contamination by the
> moisture and sulphides in the air -  a thin oily film helps prevent any
> recurrence of this.  The oil must be thin that rotating the pot displaces
> all of it from the contact areas.
>
> A mix of oil and petroleum solvent has a very low surface tension so easily
> travels by capillary action to cover all the insides of a pot.
>
> There is a very famous product that fits the bill exactly ......  W
> something ......
>
> One uses only a small amount ( a few drops) and then rotates the pot many
> times to help it do the trick  - repeating the process only if necessary.
> If the pot is still noisy -  replacement is the only option.
>
> BTW
>
>  Some 100mm fader pots I looked at a week back did not respond to the above
> treatment  -  when opened up I found the finger contacts on the slider were
> worn completely away  !!!
>
> ....  Phil- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Thanks Phil, I always wondered what was going on. I sometimes just
exercise a noisy pot. (Turn it back and forth several times.)

George H.
From: George Herold on 19 Mar 2010 01:21
On Mar 14, 5:49 am, "Phil Allison" <phi...(a)tpg.com.au> wrote:
> "pawihte"
>
> >> ** Totally mangled nonsense -  the track of a carbon ( or other) pot has
> >> no lubricant applied during manufacture.
>
> > Maybe not within your experience, but some manufacturers certainly do
> > apply lubricants on the track.
>
> **  Bollocks.
>
> >> Any lubricant that resided on the track would prevent operation -  cos
> >> lubricants are insulators.
>
> > That's why I had to ask about suitable substances. Some of them were still
> > working flawlessly with "grease" on the tracks when I opened them. In most
> > cases, the lubricant had been pushed into a ridge right beside the wiper
> > path.
>
> ** Then there is  NONE  lubricating the conducting surfaces  !!!!
>
>     You earlier claim is 100% bogus.
>
> >> Also, rotary pots do not get " dust " inside them.
>
> > They most certainly do.
>
> ** Utter bollocks.
>
> >> If the pot is still noisy -  replacement is the only option.
>
> > As I said at the beginning, it is sometimes difficult to get a replacement
> > of the same type.
>
> ** Your problem.
>
> > I've come across such wear effects too, but that's not what I was talking
> > about. What I did mention was that they wear more rapidly without
> > lubricant.
>
> ** There can be NONE on the conducting surfaces.
>
>    Your thinking is totally irrational.
>
>    And you're an arrogant pig.
>
> .....  Phil

Perhaps a stupid question; What about conducting greases? I have some
silver filled grease.

George H.
From: Phil Allison on 19 Mar 2010 01:24

"George Herold"

Perhaps a stupid question;

** Certainly is that.

What about conducting greases?


** What about them ?


I have some silver filled grease.


** Wanna totally ruin a pot ?




...... Phil


From: John O'Flaherty on 19 Mar 2010 14:12
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:36:30 +1100, John G <greentest(a)ozemail.com.au>
wrote:

>On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:33:27 +0530, "pawihte" <pawihte(a)fake.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>Tim Wescott wrote:
>>> pawihte wrote:
>>>> pawihte wrote:
>>>>> What common substance would be acceptable as a lubricant for
>>>>> consumer grade volume control pots? It's no good recommending
>>>>> a
>>>>> branded product to me as I live in a place where such
>>>>> products
>>>>> are unlikely to be available. Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to those who posted helpful replies. It's been a long
>>>> time
>>>> since I had to bother with noisy pots. When I did such things
>>>> regularly, contact cleaners were just things I read about in
>>>> foreign magazines. I think they're available in local shops
>>>> now.
>>>> Anyway, the stuff I found inside pots were accumulated dust,
>>>> lint
>>>> and unidentified fuzz and grit that were sometimes so thick
>>>> that
>>>> I'd still prefer to open up the pot, wash it with a solvent
>>>> and
>>>> then apply the lubricant manually.
>>>
>>> Back when I kit-built my radio control gear, the pots got
>>> lubricated
>>> with petroleum jelly (Vaseline, to violate your "no brand name"
>>> rule).
>>>
>>> Don't blame me if you find a brand of pot that gets dissolved
>>> by it,
>>> though.
>>
>>Vaseline is so common that I'll count it as generic. Thanks for
>>the info.
>>
>I accept you did not want a brand name but some products have a very
>limited range of suppliers.
>Servisol was a good contact and pot cleaner years ago but I have been
>away from that area for too long to know if it still around.
>
>Of course steel wool is still a very common POT cleaner.

An appropriate grade of strainer, to remove the seeds, works best.
--
John
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: According to their plan, the first 2*3.5TeV collisions will be performedthe 30-th of March. I’m scared, but can not do anything, - all ways lead to catastrophe. LHC/CERN.
Next: According to their plan, the first 2*3.5TeV collisions will be performed the 30-th of March. I�m scared, but can not do anything, - all ways lead to catastrophe. LHC/CERN.