One aspect of the recent thread about maintenance and replacement
of extension cables on crank-up towers surprises me a bit. Almost
everyone seems to advocate lubrication of the cables.
Perhaps I am dreaming, for I recall that not too long ago on this
very reflector several fellows expressed the view that lubricating
aircraft-type cable was a big no-no in outdoor applications.
The thinking seemed to be that lubricants promote the collection
of dust and dirt within the working strands of the cable, thus
fostering friction within the complex system of interactions
among the strands, and thereby accelerating wear and failure.
The commentators suggested also that many lubricants deteriorate
in outdoor situations in a way that might gum up the smooth
working of aircraft-type cables which depend, by their design
and nature, upon proper distribution of stresses among the strands
as the cable flexes.
The conclusion seemed to be, for stainless cable in particular,
that dry cable lasts longest.
Steve, K7LXC, has suggested a special class of lubricant that,
perhaps, obviates all of these concerns. Steve, may I invite you to
enlighten us about what distinguishes this lubricant from others
that someone might be inclined, to his detriment, to try?
I am not a user of crank-up towers, and the only knowledge I have on
the cable-lubrication issue comes from what I read on this list.
As I say, I may be dreaming. But I wonder whether it might be
appropriate to revisit this topic, so that someone is not misled
into applying a lubricant that will do much more harm than good.
73 de Bob, K0KR
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search
|