Re: WD-40 on a rusty chain?

Pat wrote:
1. steel can most definitely be porous. and as far as the subject of chains are concerned, surface roughness can retain significant foreign material, or in this case, oil.

2. steel can most definitely absorb different materials in solidus. solubility of hydrogen in steel, even at room temperature, is phenomenal. but again, you're simply seeking to wriggle out from under your own mis-statement, not be factually correct.

Please explain how "steel can most definitely be porous"

steel can be porous - that means holes in it. sintered applications are the classic, but cheapo castings are another.


and "steel can most definitely absorb different materials in solidus (sic)".

as far as the definitive statement is concerned, solid solutions are very common. not really any different to liquid solutions except that mixing takes a lot longer. carburized or nitrided components depend on this phenomenon.

as far as the jobstian fudging is concerned however, he's alluding to surface adsorption. adsorption is a different matter entirely, and means a molecular layer sticks to a substrate, regardless of whether it's source has been removed or not.



And this time, use references

i could, but i really can't be bothered. use google for adsorption, porosity and sintering, and solid solutions. these are all very common scientific terms.



instead of your tone of righteous indignation simply because you don't like Jobst.

it's not whether i like him, it's the fact that he's a bullshitter.

example: "Solvent will dissolve the binder for this mixture and allow gravity removed it in the manner described."

oil has no "binder". it has viscosity, but that's not the same thing. it has surface tension, but that's not the same thing. what he means is that bulk application of a liquid can free the surface tension holding a grit particle in place, and that the lower viscosity can speed its migration. but scientifically, bulk oil can do exactly the same thing, only a little slower. crap about "grit suspended in oil" is utter fabrication because oil can't/won't do that unless you're discussing very short time frames.



I find it hard to believe that even if steel can absorb hydrogen, that it would be at all applicable to this discussion.

its possible relevance to chain lubrication is the use of cleaning agents. if the agent evolves hydrogen, through some misapplication, it can be a factor in the longevity of a chain. i'm not saying it does happen, but since jobst insists in writing in definitive terms, example: "Solvent /will/ dissolve the binder" [my emphasis], his definition is incorrect.

for the record, hydrogen /probably/ is not a factor, but it's wrong to make a definitive like: "Steel is not porous and at temperatures below its melting point, does not absorb other materials" for exactly the reasons i stated.


.