[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Odessa
- To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
- Subject: Re: Odessa
- From: Martin Horejsi <martinh@isu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 06:29:53 -0700 (MST)
- In-Reply-To: <2270@ticetboo.demon.co.uk>
- Old-X-Envelope-To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
- Resent-Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 08:34:19 -0500 (EST)
- Resent-From: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"o81l5D.A.awE.tX7F1"@mu.pair.com>
- Resent-Sender: meteorite-list-request@meteoritecentral.com
Phil kindly wrote:
>I've had several people tell me that WD40 has caused problems with their
>meteorites, resulting in an increase in corrosion. Others have said they have
>had no difficulties. There doesn't seem to be any particular pattern, so it
>could be that some batches of WD40 aren't as pure as others. It may be
>best to
>avoid using this chemical if at all possible.
I have also had mixed results with the WD-40 treatment, and with another
product called LPS-1. Unfortunately, I have never set up a test situation
where I treated only one of two like-specimens to evaluate the progress
over the years. Usually, I only treat those specimens which are in rough
shape to begin with.
Over time, some treated pieces of Odessa and CD have flaked a little more
than I would expect under untreated conditions. There may be a catch-22
here. The flake, caused by oxidation in cracks may be reduced overall by
the treatment, but the treatment breaks the adhesion qualities of the
oxidation causing already damaged areas to flake off. However, whether any
additional damage occurs due to the treatment is a good question.
In the end, I do agree with Phil, avoiding chemicals, when possible, is best.
Martin
References:
- Re: Odessa
- From: Phil Bagnall <Phil@ticetboo.demon.co.uk>