At 04:51 11/14/96 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi Guys,
>
>Looks like many of us have been snookered. Thank goodness the "Fact Police"
>are on the case.
>
>Not long ago this post by Bill, W7TI (ex-W7LZP) wrt@eskimo.com appeared:
>
>"If I may offer a suggestion which is well known to the boating crowd:
>Wherever you do your shopping, take a small magnet with you. Really good
>quality stainless steel is non-magnetic. Any SS that is magnetic is poor
>quality and will not last nearly as long. There's lots of the bad stuff
>around, so it pays to be cautious."
>
>Ok! I know beans about stainless steel, but I do know all steel is made from
>iron. So, any steel that is non-magnetic would indeed be some wonderous
>stuff. I immediately went to my silverware drawer where loads of knives,
>forks, spoons etc. have resided for years after having been abused in
>dishwashers and everywhere else immaginable. Not one of these pieces rusted.
>All (or almost all) allowed magnets to be attracted to them.
>
>I did say almost all. To my surprise, a fork from an Oneida Ltd. serving set
>with the identical pattern as the rest of the set showed no magnetic
>attractivity at all even though it was marked "stainless!" However, it was
>badly scratched and that leads me to believe that while it is stainless- it
>is not steel like the rest of its mates.
>
>Now, this point lead me to research steel making in the Encarta95 CD ROM,
>looking under the heading of Science and Technology, Iron and Steel
Manufacture.
>There I found this section on Stainless Steel that I have excerpted for your
>information:
>
>Stainless Steels
>Stainless steels contain chromium, nickel, and other alloying elements that
>keep them bright and rust resistant in spite of moisture or the action of
>corrosive acids and gases. Some stainless steels are very hard; some have
>unusual strength and will retain that strength for long periods at extremely
>high and low temperatures. Because of their shining surfaces architects
>often use them for decorative purposes. Stainless steels are used for the
>pipes and tanks of petroleum refineries and chemical plants, for jet planes,
>and for space capsules. Surgical instruments and equipment are made from
>these steels, and they are also used to patch or replace broken bones
>because the steels can withstand the action of body fluids. In kitchens and
>in plants where food is prepared, handling equipment is often made of
>stainless steel because it does not taint the food and can be easily cleaned.
>
>
>"Iron and Steel Manufacture," Microsoft (R) Encarta. Copyright (c) 1994
>Microsoft Corporation. Copyright (c) 1994 Funk & Wagnall's Corporation.
>
>Nowhere does it say anything about any steel being NON-MAGNETIC! There are
>lots of metals that do not "rust." Check the coins in your pocket for
>example and ask any kid who's tried to lift them out of a sewer with a
>magnet on a string that- it only works on the "steel" pennies made during
WWII.
>
>So, after extensive reading about everything I never wanted to know about
>iron and steel making- (really fascinating stuff) I realized that the
>manufacture of stainless steel is not a coating process or surface treatment
>and that, depending on the addition of various other metals you can end up
>with stainless of all grades of hardness and strength.
>
>What's more, there is no way under the sun (or sea) anyone with a pocket
>magnet can determine the "quality" of stainless steel products- marine or
>otherwise.
>What you can tell instantly however is that if the magnet doesn't "stick,"
>then while the metal may not "rust" it is most likely not a ferrous (steel)
>product and quite likely, not as strong as a steel product. I do know there
>are non-ferrous metals that have strengths far greater than any steel- but
>it's not likely any of us would be able to afford using them- if we could
>ever find a source.
>
>I did not intend this piece to be a "flame" to Bill, W7TI, but if it seems
>so let me take this opportunity to appologize after the fact. However,
>unless we constantly question the sources of the information we get here on
>the reflector it is sometimes difficult or outright impossible to tell fact
>from opinion (testimony) and myth- my statements included.
>
>If I've done my job as an undercover operative for the "Fact Police" I
>should get a promotion. Next, I'd like to investigate- "If applying Noalox
>to the outer surfaces of the aluminum tubing makes the tubing slippery
>enough to improve the gain factor of any beam by 2-dbi while doing nothing
>for the F/B ratio." (Perhaps only the stuff with the copper particles
>imbedded in it does that.) Is it really the "RF Grease" we've been reading
>about in all those April issues of QST? Will it really keep pigeons off the
>beams? And while I'm at it, I'd like to find out how to remove Noalox stains
>from my clothing.
>
>Well, it's back to the books for me.
>
>73 All,
>
>Roger, K2JAS
After going thru the _painful_ chore of reading this, I can only come to the
conclusion that Roger is jerking our chains. Huh, right? Please tell me
that this is a joke!
Sorry to include all of the copy but it is so ridiculous throughout.
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: K7LXC@contesting.com
Sponsored by Akorn Access, Inc & KM9P
|