Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Penetrox/Noalox vs. Anti-seize compound

To: TowerTalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] Penetrox/Noalox vs. Anti-seize compound
From: "Gavin J. Roberts" <robertsmg@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 19:49:07 -0400 (EDT)
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Hello, all:


I spent a good part of this last weekend assembling a Mosley 4 element beam 
from new.  Mosley supplies a small quantity of Penetrox with the antenna and 
encourages its liberal application during assembly.  I exhausted the limited 
amount supplied and wanted to finish putting things together, so I headed for 
the local hardware store which carried an anti-seize compound called Permatex.  
As far as I know, this compound does not contain any particles to promote 
conductivity between the joints, but rather is more of a petroleum jelly based 
lubricant.  Realizing this fact after finishing assembly, I ordered some 
additional Penetrox this morning from DX Engineering (they carry both Penetrox 
as well as Permatex).  When I asked their technical support staff whether it 
would be wise to re-do the" Permatex-ed" joints with Penetrox before raising 
the beam, he seemed to feel that it would not be worth the trouble to 
substitute a more conductive material for the less conductive one.  His r
 easoning was that enough bare aluminum-to-aluminum surface area would remain 
that the use of the Permatex was very unlikely to negatively effect antenna 
performance.  Anyone have an opinion on this?  Should I re-do the joints in 
question while the antenna is still on the ground?  Or would this be a needless 
exercise at this point?


Thanks and 73 de


Gavin W9YE
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>