Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:36 pm
Caswell refers to this as real "silver plating".
Cognoscenti?
Cognoscenti?
I've never used the plating kits for anything larger than say... a trumpet receiver or F horn crook. I would think the battery-powered 'pen platers' to be a heck of a lot less trouble that doing all the rubbing... especially on large areas.the elephant wrote:Yeah, but this stuff might be a decent poor man's (read: many public school band programs) solution for old silver sousaphones with large patches of bare brass.
Would a kit that uses electric current do a better job, anyone have a clue about this? The ones I've seen pictures of, run a mild current through the application brush and the object. It seems to me they weren't a whole lot more expensive, and might be as practical for things like tubas, mouthpieces, etc.TubaTinker wrote:Modern silver plating is crap, anyway! There are several 'kits' out there that can be used to do spot silvering. They work but don't expect the new surface to be very durable. Even commercial re-plating is a far cry from the stuff that was done a few years back.
Wade, you know as well as I do, that if you're going to do a large area, it had better be buffed to a near mirror-shine (plating takes on the finish of the base metal). Clean and degrease (acetone should work okay as a degreaser). I'd think you'd go nuts using the little Caswell brush plater on anything much larger than a square inch--but there's a way around that too.the elephant wrote:Chuck, that was very helpful information! Thanks! Should I use a pen-type kit for large areas on a tuba? Buff and degrease first? Give us a procedure to copy to our hard drives!
You da man!!!!
We all have access to it. It's called "brake cleaner" and sells for several bucks for a spray can at any auto parts store. Use in a well-ventilated area (and I mean it!).the elephant wrote:trichloroethylene
Yeah, there's nothing like TF for dissolving grease and blowing it away from instrumentation. I used it for cleaning camera shutters and apertures and nothing since works nearly as well.Chuck(G) wrote:A pretty good over-the-counter degreaser is plain old lacquer thinner. Sometimes I miss not being able to get my hands on Freon TF anymore...
Yup. The Gunk brand is 90% tricloroethane. Some of the brands are now advertized as "non-chlorinated", but the cheaper brands are still the good stuff.the elephant wrote:Brake cleaner? Really?
Rick, I beg to differ. Here's a list of all Gunk product MSDS information. Both the M720 and the M749 (50 gal. only size) are mostly Tetrachloroehylene (C2Cl4), otherwise known as dry-cleaning fluid or Perc (for Perchlorethene, another name).Rick Denney wrote:Yup. The Gunk brand is 90% tricloroethane. Some of the brands are now advertized as "non-chlorinated", but the cheaper brands are still the good stuff.the elephant wrote:Brake cleaner? Really?
Well, I stand corrected. No chemist me--but I had been perusing the MSDS for Gunk brake cleaner recently for another reason and misremembered the chemical name. I never did well in chemistry, especially the organic kind.Chuck(G) wrote:Rick, I beg to differ. Here's a list of all Gunk product MSDS information. Both the M720 and the M749 (50 gal. only size) are mostly Tetrachloroehylene (C2Cl4), otherwise known as dry-cleaning fluid or Perc (for Perchlorethene, another name).
On the other hand, Trichloroethylene (C2HCl3) or TCE or Trike is being actively phased out of most consumer products because it's a potent carcinogen. Because of groundwater contamination, OSHA is very critical of its use and most manufacturers just don't want to fool with it.
From a molecular standpoint, not close at all. CCl4 is a model molecule, with four chlorine atoms forming a cute tetrahedron with a carbon atom at the center. This renders it perfectly nonpolar, which also makes it a very good solvent.Rick Denney wrote:Rick "wondering how close this is to carbon tetrachloride, another nasty-but-effective degreaser" Denney