Printable View
Not quite a metalworking topic, but I'm sure there's some opinions here.
I'm buying a new a 4WD and given the state of my trade in, it wasn't a surprise that the salesperson 'offered' (tried to shaft me with a) a dealer fitted electronic rust prevention system. I've always been skeptical and to be honest, I'm surprised that these 'systems' can still be sold legally in Australia. Where's the ACCC? Maybe I'm wrong? maybe they actually work? Opinions? Evidence?
- Mick
It might have a chance at working, if you kept your car immersed in water at all times...but if you kept your car in water, you could just use sacrificial anodes anyway!
That's what puzzles me - where's the return circuit?
Shhhhhhh....questions eat into profits.
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/case...ration-dba-rec
The high tech coupling pads allow electrons to flow into the car... Damn, I am not very good at this...Quote:
Originally Posted by WelderMick
I did a couple of subjects on corrosion science at uni, and even though I am fairly well versed in the subject I still find some people cannot be convinced that its all a load of rubbish.
What make of car is it? Wouldn't happen to be already made of galvanised steel...?
Here's what RACQ says
Here's what the corrosion doctors website says about it.Quote:
RACQ has not seen the results of any properly conducted, scientifically valid tests that support the effectiveness of such devices and therefore can provide no further information.
http://corrosion-doctors.org/Car/car...ronic-rust.htm
You really have to wonder about these sort of products, (another one which can be added to your car to improve fuel consumption comes to mind), if they work and do such wonderful things for you - wouldn't the manufacturers of the vehicles have put them on in the first place.
Car manufacturing is a highly competitive business in which any edge/improvement translates into sales which equals profits - if it works, how come it isn't standard equipment?
Yep I agree. The standard conspiratorial answer to the fuel saving gadgets is the car manufacturers are in cahoots with oil companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob38S
But if they really did work these so called fuel saving products would not be sold by two bit businesses but have been bought out years ago by oil companies or car manufacturers.
The same goes for other products.
As these products push extra electrons around the car, the biggest point of failure they have is that the car owner simply forgets to empty out the catch can full of used electrons (usually located in the boot) every year or so.
When the catch can is too full, the electrons have nowhere to go, so they simply back up and stop the device working.
Owners should remember that this is a recurring maintenance need, and maybe make it a habit to empty out the catch can every time they top-up the headlight fluid or buy new brake dust.
I've heard that the used electrons are really good for lemon trees!
Aha, now it becomes so clear, perhaps the electron emptying should become part of the scheduled servicing procedure. :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Splinter
Perhaps you could also explain the negative ions which have had me baffled for years. :B
:D
Negative ions are more complex, but they have some interesting side effects; for example, it's negative ions that are responsible for causing creases in many fabrics - cotton is an example; as the negative ions build up in the fabric, the material starts to clump together, at first at a microscopic scale, then, as they build up the clumping starts to become visible as creases in the fabric.
The application of heat causes the negative ions to disperse back through the fabric, but to do it fairly quickly and at reasonably low temperatures there also needs to be a conductive metal surface bridging the creased regions.
This application of a heated metal surface became (incorrectly, I might add) known to be a process of putting ions back into the fabric, the assumption being that 'negative ions' meant that the fabric was lacking in ions, and running the heated metal pad over the fabric was simply forcing loose surface ions back into the fabric. This became known as 'ironing', after a common mispronunciation of ion-ing.
I really need to buy an iron off you now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Splinter
Not really an answer to your query but some years ago I was admiring a fellas new 80 series landcruiser which he had proudly fitted the electronic rust protection device to ($1200 extra) and a chemical rust treatment, I had to ask do you plan to do a lot of beach work and are you keeping the car forever? he answered no i dont go on the beach and i change my cars every two years. Still cant figure out why he spent the extra cash! I suppose though at by the end of the two years his car wasn't rusty
Ive also heard weewee is good for lemon trees... is there a connection?Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Splinter
It's good that you asked this as yes, there actually is a connection; weewee one of the ways that the body gets rid of extra electrons that are stripped off the various foods and drinks consumed.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockettgpw
I expect we've all heard of electrolytes, especially in relation to sports drinks - well, an electrolyte is just a carrying medium for electrons ('electrolyte' simply indicates that it is a substance with an ability to carry a large quantity of electrons in solution - batteries are filled with electrolytes, too) - these electrolyte drinks are designed to supply a surplus of both positive and negative ions so that the body can rebalance itself.
If there's a lack of negative ions (caused by lots of 'fast twitch' muscle activity - things that rely on speed and reaction times) then the body will replace its negative ion stocks from the sports drink, and if there's a lack of positive ions (caused by the use of slow twitch muscle fibre for strength based activities) the body will pull out the positive ions it requires.
The excess of the unneeded ion is flushed out of the body, still attached to its carrier electrons (it's easier to get ions to move when they are attached to something electrically conductive, such as electrons), and bingo, your lemon tree gets a fresh dose of those electrons that it craves! (apparently one of the better sports drinks for lemon tree purposes is one called "Brawndo - The Thirst Mutilator", but I don't think you can get it here).
Many of the sports/energy drinks get a bad rap from established health bodies for their sugar content, but this high sugar content is simply there to make it possible to drink such a highly concentrated solution of ions and electrons - otherwise you'd find that sports/energy drinks taste pretty much like weewee. (some people think that sports drinks still taste like this, but then, those people have obviously been tasting weewee to be able to make the comparison, so I don't think we should worry about their opinions!).
And incidentally, the way that ions are able to move when near a conductive media such as water is also why your clothes can sometimes come out of the washing machine all creased; you've left them in there too long, ions have settled and concentrated as the electrons have drained away in the water, and yep, you're back doing the ion-ing (or ironing if you prefer to mispronounce it!).
"I've heard that the used electrons are really good for lemon trees!"
Actually there is no connection. The problem is that weewee is not a laminar flow.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockettgpw
AHH well ... a good friend of mine who does electronic reseach and builds prototypes had a contract from a client several years ago to investigate this whole electronic rust protection thing and to produce a prototype.
Well, the upshot is ....... this Ionic rust inhibition thing, can and will work ...... but there are some crippling practical limitations .... listed as I understand them.
1. the amount of energy required to produce an effective field is quite substantial ... this has two drawbacks .... battery drain and um ... er .... "customer comfort"
2. producing an even and effective field across a large object of complex shape is ...... um ...... problematic.
3. This whole ionic principle is active on surfaces, but not in enclosed parts or between surfaces pressed together ...... so it seems to be effective on say scratches on outer surfaces but not in cavities like sill panels and door bottoms
4. these devices can produce unhelpfull electronic interfeerance.
The for arguments are very well expressed but tenuous and ignore the drawbacks.
Unfortunately many of the againts arguments are not applicable or well expressed ....... the process is not cathodic so a return path is not needed ..... the process is an ionic field.
This process can be demonatrated to work on a small piece of metal of a simple shape ....... but seems no-one has proven good results on a commercial product on a complete motor vehicle....that will withstand scientific scrutiny
Good paint, propper washing and some sort of persistent oil ( such as fish oil or lanolin) have far more consistent and proven results.
cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
AN 'ionic field' hey?
Yep similar to would be found associated with a radiating antenna or a high voltage electrode.
Seriously .... the concept does work ....it can be demonstrated on small pieces of metal with no difficulty. ....... but the practicalities simply make it ineffective in the application.
The same bloke went on to work on ionic water sterilisation ..... that most certainly does work .... but the context is entirely different.
cheers
Your mate is full of it. It doesn't work, and cannot work. IF indeed the principle you suggest worked, then we would not have ongoing issues with antenna and transmission line corrosion, which we do.Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
As for ionic sterilisation, may you are referring to deionised water, or perhaps dosing water with certain metal ions such as copper or silver. Eitherway, its got nothing to do with anti-corrosion and the principles are WAY different. If your mate is suggesting he does something magic with just electricity itself, he is a fraud.
Just because you don't understand it, does not mean it does not work.
Note that I sad "LIKE" not the same as
As I say this ionisation method of corrsion inhibition can and does work and can be proven to work on small piece of metal. The fact that it can be proven to work on this small scale is part of the hokus pokus used by some of the commercial rust prevention vendors.
Water sterilisation by electrical ionisation, most certianly does work, the equipment looks similar to salt water chlorination .... except without the salt or the chlorine ..it is a method that is gaining favour in the third world, because it can be run off solar supplies and requires no chemicals added to the water.
cheers
Thats the thing, I do understand it. I studied corrosion science at uni and I used to work in water treatment when I was an instro. So not only do I understand it from an electrical perspective, I understand the chemistry as well!Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
Like so many before you, you claim that it cant work for all the wrong reasons.
What you may have been taught at uni about corrosion or have seen in conventional water treatment. .... has given you a very narrow understanding of the matter.
What is taught and how corrosion is managed has pretty well not changed since the early 20th century.
Likewise water treatment .... particularly bulk water treatment in public water supply has not changed (from strain it, and bleach it) in many decades, even the low volume methods such as micro filtration and ozmosis have been arround for many decades .... water sterilisation by either irradiation or ionisation are fairly recent in having practical applications developed but they have been proven and they do both work.
Sterilisation by ionisation does not work like anything you will have seen in the past, the entire model and mechanism is different ...The process I know of it is not suitable for bulk water treatment and it is not a full flow process.
As for the prevention or in actual fact inhibition of corrosion by ionisation, yes it is proven to work, but its effect is limited, has issues and it does not scale well.
As I have mentioned, several of the snake oil merchants use this ability to demonstrate convincingly in small scale to sell their product.
If you want to argue against these products and not be made a fool of by the skilled snake oil merchant, the common presupositions and preconceptions need to be forgotten.
And those presupositions include what the process WILL actually do and what it WON'T ...... And there lies the difference between the limited reality and what is implied. .... the difference between what can be convincingly demonstrated and what simply does not work.
The proofs of failure are not where you are looking.
This is not a cathodic process.
To someone with conventional electrical understanding there is a lot that will not make sence ...but this is by no means a conventional electrical process.....there is a lot about conventional RF transmission that makes no conventional electrical sence, and the behahavious make less electrical sence as frequency increases....... this ionisation process is as different from conventional electricity as RF is.
cheers
So you are saying the physics that we are taught is wrong? As a science person, I can accept that some of the theory that we are taught may be wrong, but you better have some pretty solid evidence to back that up. If you have the evidence, feel free to post it. Make sure its peer reviewed though.Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
I just reread this part too. Everything about RF transmission makes sense. Sure, its pretty complicated, but its well understood and so is the science behind it. I have designed circuit boards that work at high frequencies, digital to be precise which is even more complicated than the old analogue stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
That is not what I said ..... you simply where not taught the physics that relates to this phenomina.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearo
I was not taught it because uni's are not in the process of teaching rubbish (outside of arts degree's anyway!).Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
Trust me, if this stuff worked, it would be the subject of every single lecture on corrosion, and the uni's would be working on ways to make it work. Lecturer's love talking about new stuff. However some claims from a so called 'inventor' who has had no formal education on the subject other than what he has read on google will be ridiculed as it so well deserves.
To be honest, I dont think you actually understand what an ion is, or the term 'ionic'. And I suspect you dont understand how corrosion itself works, which can easily be represented with a chemical equation its that simple. Likewise, any method of preventing corrosion can also represented with a simple chemical equation.
If your claims can be substantiated, then please feel free to provide the evidence.
Like so many acedemics, you simply do not want to understand or admit that something you don't understand, can and does work.
It can be convincingly demonstrated to work, in a small scale...... with significant limitations.
As far as any further argument... I cant be bothered .... I know that it does not work and can not work large scale ...so no further brain effort is not required.
cheers
For a start I am not an academic. Secondly, I asked you to show evidence, but you wont. Therefore we can safely assume its snake oil.Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
Just kind of a dumb observation here.
Rather than trying some over priced electronic gizmo that may or may not work, has anybody considered rust proofing?
Here we spray the undersides of vehicles with everything from a cosmoline to tar based substance to prevent rust. Some of the better systems actually spray inside the doors and rocker panels. This is normally done in humid / salt air climates and where winter road salt is used. Seems to be a lot cheaper than an electronic gizmo.
BTW - On a recent "Dirty Jobs" or "Somebody has to do it" TV show Mike Rowe showed how the hurricane flood locks at New Orleans were protected from corrosion. Basically it was a zinc bar bolted to the inside of the lock gates at several places. Even that simple technology seems to work better than an electronic gizmo. The principal is that the Zinc is higher in activity (on the periodic table) than the iron and deteriorates before the iron and steel.
Not a dumb observation at all.
On thematter of Zinc sacrificial anodes ..... there are some who have proposed this ... there are others who claim that it can not possibly work because the car and the anode is not immersed in water.
curious that both my outboards, as well having an anode right down near the prop, have large zinc bars right up high on the tilt bracket...... one would hope thay are not permently immersed.
As far as zinc anodes on cars.... yeh I would want to see actuall experimental evidence either way ..... rather that theoretical postulation.
cheers
Ok, have only just come across this topic and will stick my 2 bobs worth in. On another forum relating to British cars, I asked why cars with generators used positive earth, and one thought was it had to do with preventing corrosion by reversing the current flow. Some may believe it while others may think its all bovine excrement.
Most older British cars have positive earth, and we all know how corrosion resistant they are :o, so I think any means of electronic/electrical corrosion prevention is a waste of money, even if we have come a long way since lucas C40 generators.
Nothing beats a decent washing regime and some form of undersealing.
Cheers, Paul
...or making the car from galvanised steel...Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulyboy1960
A sacrifical anode does not need to be immersed in water to work. If there is sufficent moisture in the air from stuff like salt spray it will still work. This is a common sight on drill rigs on the ocean (except they dont often use zinc).Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman
The reason the bracket on your outboard has an anode is when the boat is at rest, the bracket is often submersed.
One way to stop corrosion is to remove oxygen from the equation. Coating a metal with something, be it tar or paint etc is one of the most effective ways of preventing corrosion. Most people get slack though, and dont maintain the coatings.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrich
Anodes are a common method of sacrificial protection, however you need an electrolyte such as water, or air that has a high moisture concentration.