Meredith,

I have the thin liquid variety.  For a short term at least it will bead up
in the cross joint like oil.  It also seems to lubricate well as an almost
imperceptible film once a good coating has been applied so you could maybe
even wipe most of it off.  My can mentions a 2 hour cure time.  On house and
car door hinges it seems to just vanish but no squeaks come back for months.
I tried some in a cuckoo clock music box about 2 years ago and haven't
opened it back up.  I was worried about getting very much in there not
knowing how the solvents would react to the other parts as the lubrication
dispersed so I just used a toothpick to insert a minamal amount.
Randy

----- Original Message ----- 
From: 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 2:01 AM
Subject: Digest from 10/31/2005 00:00:40


>
> .------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
> | Message 1                                                           |
> '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
> Subject: Re: Crossed rod hinges/suspensions...with two bolts extended from
a square rod.
> From:    meredith lamb 
> Date:    Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:08:39 -0700
>
> ------=_Part_19234_26607948.1130782119730
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> Excellent reference Chris! The website you gave below, does lead to
> another URL, which delves into quite afew potentially interesting topics
> that
> might be applicable to oil/lubrication, suspensions and even various
"booms=
> "
> (pendulum shafts materials) that initially draw some curiosity. The URL:
> http://www.horology.com/hip-hsin.html
> (Horological science newsletter) especially lists quite afew on their
index
> that stand out, like, "rolamite suspension", "roller suspension", "crossed
> spring pivot suspension", "crossed suspension" and many other etc., let
> alone lubrication/oil. Once again....one has to join their society/club,
an=
> d
> pay additional for what limited yearly information the newsletter people
> there do have available. Will have to "chew" on whether the >$120 fees
> would be worthwhile (?), which I likely won't do, as I think we have the
> "general idea" already. On the other hand....the overall (free) web has
> zero there on the crossed rod/wire suspensions.
>
> The main oil/lubrication subject...at least via looking on web search
> engines,
> has really no (thus far) individual sites that come out and honestly exert
> their (best) opinions on all the various oils that are available (which
> their is
> quite afew around). I suppose its kind of a way of avoiding lawsuits from
> other oil brand makers, who may be slighted. For the moment, the only
> brand that "kind of" gets more positive leaning recommendations is the
> French oil: "La Perle".
>
> Take care, Meredith
>
>
> On 10/30/05, ChrisAtUpw@.......  wrote:
> >
> > In a message dated 31/10/05, paleoartifact@......... writes:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > Thanks for the reference....however, its a totally "closed" site; there
i=
> s
> > no
> > free online access to their past articles that could be of interest
(whic=
> h
> >
> > they list) from old bulletins...which you can't buy either....oh well,
th=
> e
> >
> > web search engines will have to do. Its kind of a museum, school, and
> > relatively hefty fee orientated org, mainly for specific clocks, or
clock
> > or watch courses.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Meredith,
> >
> > Check out http://www.ubr.com/clocks/nawcc/hsc/hsn.html
> >
> > I was thinking more in terms of advertised / recommended oil brands.
They
> > are fairly fussy.
> >
>
> ------=_Part_19234_26607948.1130782119730
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Hi Chris,

> 

> Excellent reference Chris!  The website you gave below, does lead
to r>
> another URL, which delves into quite afew potentially interesting topics
th=
> at

> might be applicable to oil/lubrication, suspensions and even various
"=
> booms"

> (pendulum shafts materials) that initially draw some curiosity.  The
U=
> RL:

> http://www.horology.com/h=
> ip-hsin.html

> (Horological science newsletter) especially lists quite afew on their
index=
> 

> that stand out, like, "rolamite suspension", "roller
suspens=
> ion", "crossed

> spring pivot suspension", "crossed suspension" and many
othe=
> r etc., let

> alone lubrication/oil.  Once again....one has to join their
society/cl=
> ub, and

> pay additional for what limited yearly information the newsletter
people >
> there do have available.  Will have to "chew" on whether
the=
>  >$120 fees

> would be worthwhile (?), which I likely won't do, as I think we have
the >
> "general idea" already.  On the other hand....the overall
(f=
> ree) web has

> zero there on the crossed rod/wire suspensions.

> 

> The main oil/lubrication subject...at least via looking on web search
engin=
> es,

> has really no (thus far) individual sites that come out and honestly
exert<=
> br>
> their (best) opinions on all the various oils that are available (which
the=
> ir is

> quite afew around).  I suppose its kind of a way of avoiding lawsuits
=
> from

> other oil brand makers, who may be slighted.  For the moment, the
only=
> 

> brand that "kind of" gets more positive leaning recommendations
i=
> s the

> French oil: "La Perle".

> 

> Take care, Meredith

>  

On 10/30/05,  il_sendername">ChrisAtUpw@.......=
>  <ChrisAtUpw@.......>
w=
> rote:
> 
 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> al,helvetica">In a message dated
31/10/0=
> 5,  return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
> paleoartifact@......... writes:
> 

> 
 : 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;
padding-le=
> ft: 5px;">Hi Chris,
> 

> 
Thanks for the reference....however, its a totally "closed"
s=
> ite; there is no
> 
free online access to their past articles that could be of interest
(wh=
> ich
> 
they list) from old bulletins...which you can't buy either....oh well,
=
> the
> 
web search engines will have to do.  Its kind of a museum,
school,=
>  and
> 
relatively hefty fee orientated org, mainly for specific clocks, or
clo=
> ck
> 
or watch courses.   
> 

> 
Hi Meredith,
> 

> 
       Check out  r.com/clocks/nawcc/hsc/hsn.html" target=3D"_blank" onclick=3D"return
top.js=
>
..OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.ubr.com/clocks/nawcc/hsc/hsn.ht=
> ml=20
> 

> 
       I was thinking more in terms of
ad=
> vertised / recommended oil brands. They are fairly fussy.
> 

>
> 


>
> ------=_Part_19234_26607948.1130782119730--
>
>
> .------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
> | Message 2                                                           |
> '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
> Subject: Re: Crossed rod hinges/suspensions...with two bolts extended from
a square rod.
> From:    meredith lamb 
> Date:    Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:44:51 -0700
>
> ------=_Part_22067_497498.1130802291807
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Hi Charles,
>
> I dug up acouple ~30 year old 1/4" diameter carbide end mills with enough
> shank
> exposure to test such today. I don't have a long carbide "cross rod", so,
I
> used
> the same stainless steel cross rod/boom/mass as in other tests.
>
> The carbide is uncoated; i.e., it doesn't have some of the exotic surface
> materials
> as some of todays cabide milling/lathe bits have today. I sanded it abit
in
> the
> drill press chuck with 600 grit sandpaper to hopefully dispose of whatever
> grime
> it may have had. Their was no nicks, gouges, or other material
> disfigurations I
> could see on the round shanks. They had somewhat of a enhanced shine
> afterward in sunlight, and a centered reflective light "line" indoors. The
> surface
> felt fairly smooth; but not as smooth as most steels I've tried.
>
> I oscillated it "dry", with no oil. It was a disaster compared to other
> common
> steels, or, stainless steels; as it quit after only 1 hour and 29 minutes.
=
> I
> could
> tell early on, it wasn't going to oscillate very long.
>
> Being as it is, and without disturbing the cross rod, I added a drop of
oil
> lubrication to each of the two joints/hinges, to test the oscillation time
> with
> such. Here, it quit oscillating after 1 hour and 39 minutes. Its not much
o=
> f
> a
> time difference, but it seems more friction free with oil. Of course for
> other
> materials, one can do with or without oil as they wish.
>
> Obviously uncoated carbide isn't a utopia material for this application;
> which I
> think most of the carbide sold today is probably with the same "rough"
> initial surface, and any applied coating wouldn't seem to enhance this
use.
> The results were rather similiar, where I tried acouple balll bearings to
> rest
> on flat uncoated carbide milling bits; it didn't work there very well
> either. I
> suppose it can be lapped finer; but I don't think the time, effort and
> expense
> is really worth the effort, when other material is much easier to
> prepare/use.
>
> I will also try (all 3) rods of stainless steel rods sometime with and
> without
> oil, to see what happens with that material. We'll find out how that goes.
>
> Take care, Meredith
>
> On 10/30/05, Charles R. Patton  wrote:
> >
> > My thought is that you either use the carbide sources we discussed
> > earlier or go to any good hardware store and buy some stainless steel
> > bolts. No corrosion on either, and therefor no need for oil.
> > Regards,
> > Charles Patton
> >
> >
>
> ------=_Part_22067_497498.1130802291807
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Hi Charles,

> 

> I dug up acouple ~30 year old 1/4" diameter carbide end mills with
eno=
> ugh shank

> exposure to test such today.  I don't have a long carbide "cross
=
> rod", so, I used

> the same stainless steel cross rod/boom/mass as in other tests.

> 

> The carbide is uncoated; i.e., it doesn't have some of the exotic surface
m=
> aterials

> as some of todays cabide milling/lathe bits have today.  I sanded it
a=
> bit in the

> drill press chuck with 600 grit sandpaper to hopefully dispose of whatever
=
> grime

> it may have had.  Their was no nicks, gouges, or other material
disfig=
> urations I

> could see on the round shanks.  They had somewhat of a enhanced
shine<=
> br>
> afterward in sunlight, and a centered reflective light "line"
ind=
> oors.  The surface

> felt fairly smooth; but not as smooth as most steels I've tried.

> 

> I oscillated it "dry", with no oil.  It was a disaster
compa=
> red to other common

> steels, or, stainless steels; as it quit after only 1 hour and 29
minutes.&=
> nbsp; I could

> tell early on, it wasn't going to oscillate very long.

> 

> Being as it is, and without disturbing the cross rod, I added a drop of
oil=
> 

> lubrication to each of the two joints/hinges, to test the oscillation time
=
> with

> such.  Here, it quit oscillating after 1 hour and 39 minutes. 
It=
> s not much of a

> time difference, but it seems more friction free with oil.  Of course
=
> for other

> materials, one can do with or without oil as they wish.

> 

> Obviously uncoated carbide isn't a utopia material for this application;
wh=
> ich I

> think most of the carbide sold today is probably with the same
"rough&=
> quot;

> initial surface, and any applied coating wouldn't seem to enhance this
use.=
>  

> The results were rather similiar, where I tried acouple balll bearings to
r=
> est

> on flat uncoated carbide milling bits; it didn't work there very well
eithe=
> r.  I

> suppose it can be lapped finer; but I don't think the time, effort and
expe=
> nse

> is really worth the effort, when other material is much easier to
prepare/u=
> se.

> 

> I will also try (all 3) rods of stainless steel rods sometime with and
with=
> out

> oil, to see what happens with that material.  We'll find out how that
=
> goes.

> 

> Take care, Meredith    

On
10/=
> 30/05, Charles R. Patton < ailto:charles.r.patton@........">charles.r.patton@........>
wrote: span>
 204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> My thought is that you either use the carbide sources we
discussed
earli=
> er or go to any good hardware store and buy some stainless
steel
bolts.&=
> nbsp; No corrosion on either, and therefor no need for
oil.
Regards=
> ,
Charles Patton
> 



>
> ------=_Part_22067_497498.1130802291807--
>
>
> .------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
> | Message 3                                                           |
> '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
> Subject: Re: Digest from 10/30/2005 01:01:23
> From:    "Randy" 
> Date:    Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:46:12 -0600
>
> Merideth,
>
> I have been using a light teflon lubricant called Break Free for various
> tasks over the last couple years.  I find it far superior to the 3 in1 in
> most instances.  It is less temperature sensitive, attracts less dust and
> lubricates for a much longer period for a given use.
>
> Randy
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: 
> To: 
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:00 AM
> Subject: Digest from 10/30/2005 01:01:23
>
>
> >
> > .------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
> > | Message 1                                                           |
> > '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
> > Subject: Crossed rod hinges/suspensions...with two bolts extended from a
> square rod.
> > From:    meredith lamb 
> > Date:    Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:20:58 -0700
> >
> > ------=_Part_12425_28312261.1130696458196
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> > Content-Disposition: inline
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Yesterday, I tried the simplest hinge (the two outer rod
support/contacts)
> > configuration
>
>
> .------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
> | Message 4                                                           |
> '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
> Subject: Re: Galitzin-type seismometer
> From:    John Popelish 
> Date:    Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:21:14 -0500
>
> Rick Groleau wrote:
>  > John Popelish wrote:
>  >> Rick Groleau wrote:
>   >>>For anyone who's interested, I've just put together a page of my
> system,
> (snip)
> >>> http://users.rcn.com/rgroleau/seismo/index.html
> (snip)
> >> Mechanically, the design looks very nice.  Electronically, it is
> >> pretty primitive and simple upgrades could improve it significantly.
> >>
> >> The coil is unshielded, and the amplifier has no filter function
> >> included to reject either 60 cycle hum or other mechanical noise that
> >> isn't part of the seismic signal.  Still it does pretty well with what
> >> it's got.
> >>
> >> Are you interested in changing anything at this point?
> >
> > Thanks for the comments, John. And yes, I wouldn't mind replacing the
> > amplifier with something more up-to-date, and with connecting the system
> > to my computer (which may be difficult, since I use a Mac). Any
suggestions?
>
> I am fascinated with the germanium amplifier and how it might be
> simply upgraded.  Are you interested in replacing a few components to
> get more gain and less noise from it before you replace it?  It is a
> museum piece.
>
> If so, I would like to know what the collector voltage is with respect
> to ground for each stage.  I suspect that the choice of bias resistors
> is not at all optimum to get the full capability out of these old
> transistors.
>
> The cheapest digitizer I know of to get something into your computer
> would be one of the DATAQ units available on this page:
> http://www.dataq.com/products/startkit/index.htm
>
> One of these could be hooked up between your present amplifier and the
> MAC.
>
>
> .------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
> | Message 5                                                           |
> '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
> Subject: Re: Galitzin-type seismometer
> From:    ChrisAtUpw@.......
> Date:    Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:29:45 EST
>
>
> --part1_1d8.49171fd9.30982d19_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> In a message dated 01/11/05, jpopelish@........ writes:
>
> > The cheapest digitizer I know of to get something into your computer
> > would be one of the DATAQ units available on this page:
> > http://www.dataq.com/products/startkit/index.htm
> >
> > One of these could be hooked up between your present amplifier and the
> >
>
> Hi Rick,
>
>        Do check it out, but I think that Dataq are exclusively Windows /
IBM
> PC type, not MAC. You need a 12 bit ADC minimum, in my experience.
>
>        Regards,
>
>        Chris Chapman
>
> --part1_1d8.49171fd9.30982d19_boundary
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> In a
message=20=
> dated 01/11/05, jpopelish@........ writes:
> 

> 
 LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">The cheapest digitizer I
kn=
> ow of to get something into your computer=20
> 
would be one of the DATAQ units available on this page:
> 
http://www.dataq.com/products/startkit/index.htm
> 

> 
One of these could be hooked up between your present amplifier and
the=20
> 
MAC.
> 

> 
Hi Rick,
> 

> 
       Do check it out, but I think that
D=
> ataq are exclusively Windows / IBM PC type, not MAC. You need a 12 bit ADC
m=
> inimum, in my experience.
> 

> 
       Regards,
> 

> 
       Chris Chapman
>
> --part1_1d8.49171fd9.30982d19_boundary--
>
>
> .------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
> | Message 6                                                           |
> '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
> Subject: Re: Digest from 10/30/2005 01:01:23
> From:    meredith lamb 
> Date:    Mon, 31 Oct 2005 23:24:03 -0700
>
> ------=_Part_23852_24910899.1130826243739
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Hi Randy,
>
> Thanks for the reference Randy. Am not sure at all, whether such would
> work with crossed rod hinges/suspensions.
>
> Do you have the green liquid variety, or the spray variety; and if so, can
> it
> "bead up" like between two metal rods similar to "regular oils", or, does
> it flow away? I get the impression it is meant for just very thin film
> applications.
>
> Their web site states it is partially water soluable...which kind of makes
> me wonder, it it would more or less evaporate, and leave a concentration
> that might hinder a crossed rod suspension. "Think" it might also have
> a paraffin like substance therein. Have really no opinion or real
> knowledge on synthetic oils; other than what I've read where; some
> holological (clock/time users) people, seem to kind of lean away from
> any synthetic oils....but, at the same time...others like some of them.
>
> Take care, Meredith Lamb
>
> On 10/31/05, Randy  wrote:
> >
> > Meredith,
> >
> > I have been using a light teflon lubricant called Break Free for various
> > tasks over the last couple years. I find it far superior to the 3 in1 in
> > most instances. It is less temperature sensitive, attracts less dust and
> > lubricates for a much longer period for a given use.
> >
> > Randy
> >
> >
>
> ------=_Part_23852_24910899.1130826243739
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Hi Randy,

> 

> Thanks for the reference Randy.  Am not sure at all, whether such
woul=
> d

> work with crossed rod hinges/suspensions.

> 

> Do you have the green liquid variety, or the spray variety; and if so, can
=
> it

> "bead up" like between two metal rods similar to "regular
oi=
> ls", or, does

> it flow away?  I get the impression it is meant for just very thin
fil=
> m

> applications.

> 

> Their web site states it is partially water soluable...which kind of
makes<=
> br>
> me wonder, it it would more or less evaporate, and leave a
concentration >
> that might hinder a crossed rod suspension.  "Think" it
migh=
> t also have

> a paraffin like substance therein.  Have really no opinion or
real

> knowledge on synthetic oils; other than what I've read where; some

> holological (clock/time users) people, seem to kind of lean away from

> any synthetic oils....but, at the same time...others like some of
them.

> 

> Take care, Meredith Lamb

On
10/31/0=
> 5, Randy < .midco.net">rpratt@.............> wrote:
 gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin:
0p=
> t 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> Meredith,

I have been using a light teflon lubricant called Break
Fr=
> ee for various
tasks over the last couple years.  I find it
fa=
> r superior to the 3 in1 in
most instances.  It is less
tempera=
> ture sensitive, attracts less dust and
> 
lubricates for a much longer period for a given
use.

Randy
 r>


>
> ------=_Part_23852_24910899.1130826243739--
>
>
> __________________________________________________________
>
> Public Seismic Network Mailing List (PSN-L)
>
> To leave this list email PSN-L-DIGEST-REQUEST@.............. with
> the body of the message (first line only): unsubscribe
> See http://www.seismicnet.com/maillist.html for more information.
>
__________________________________________________________

Public Seismic Network Mailing List (PSN-L)