On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:38:12 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Walter Maxwell wrote:
. . .
However, some moron claimed in QST that steel wool was just as good as
ferrite for making choke baluns, but I've forgotten who the lunkhead
at the League was who believed him, and allowed stupid idea to be
published.

I complained to the League editors, who unbelieveably said 'Prove It'.
So I bought some steel wool and made two back to back baluns with it
and made measurements of common mode currents. The measurements proved
that the steel wool had absolutely no choking effect.

I reported the results of the measurements to the editors at the
League, but I can't remember whether they did anything about refuting
the original incorrect material. Perhaps your memory is better than
mine on this issue.

Walt, W2DU

The results of your measurements were published in "Hints & Kinks" in
September 1993 QST. According to the editorial comment accompanying it,
you were prompted to make the measurements by Tom Rauch, W8JI, who had
done some measurements which indicated that the steel wool balun was
ineffective. The Hints & Kinks editor at the time, who had accepted both
the original contribution by Curt Wilson, W0KKQ and yours, was Dave
Newkirk, WJ1Z. Anyone interested in learning more about it should read
the Hints & Kinks submissions and note Dave's added editiorial comments.


One legitimate use for steel wool was what we used it for as kids.

When the cops cited us with a repair order for a too loud exhaust
system on our hot rods, we would stuff steel wool up the pipe and
secure it with a rusty nail in cross-drilled holes.

We would then find a handy cop and ask him to sign off that we had
fixed the problem. He would usually ask us to rev up the engine and
we would hope like hell that the steel wool didn't come flying out at
the wrong time. I think most cops were on to this but they played
along.

Wes Stewart wrote:

One legitimate use for steel wool was what we used it for as kids.

When the cops cited us with a repair order for a too loud exhaust
system on our hot rods, we would stuff steel wool up the pipe and
secure it with a rusty nail in cross-drilled holes.

We would then find a handy cop and ask him to sign off that we had
fixed the problem. He would usually ask us to rev up the engine and
we would hope like hell that the steel wool didn't come flying out at
the wrong time. I think most cops were on to this but they played
along.

Here's a ham-radio related use. I've got a bunch of it stuffed into the
ends of the buried PVC pipes carrying my feedlines into the back yard,
in an attempt to keep the rodents from using it as a highway. Seems to
be working so far. . .

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 18:52:14 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

[snip]

Here's a ham-radio related use. I've got a bunch of it stuffed into the
ends of the buried PVC pipes carrying my feedlines into the back yard,
in an attempt to keep the rodents from using it as a highway. Seems to
be working so far. . .

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Down here in the desert the pack rats would just say, "Thank you very
much, do you have any more?"

When my wife's office at Hughes had a problem with rodents coming
through an A/C receptacle in an exterior wall the plant maintenance
guys used either copper or bronze wool. Seems to poison them.

My problem isn't rodents in the house, it's scorpions. Killed two of
the things just last night. I'm remodeling a bathroom, where most of
them show up. I told my wife I think I'll install some UV lighting so
I can see them easier. (They fluoresce under UV.)

Thanks, Roy, I had forgetten where the stuff was published.

Walt

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:38:12 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Walter Maxwell wrote:
. . .
However, some moron claimed in QST that steel wool was just as good as
ferrite for making choke baluns, but I've forgotten who the lunkhead
at the League was who believed him, and allowed stupid idea to be
published.

I complained to the League editors, who unbelieveably said 'Prove It'.
So I bought some steel wool and made two back to back baluns with it
and made measurements of common mode currents. The measurements proved
that the steel wool had absolutely no choking effect.

I reported the results of the measurements to the editors at the
League, but I can't remember whether they did anything about refuting
the original incorrect material. Perhaps your memory is better than
mine on this issue.

Walt, W2DU

The results of your measurements were published in "Hints & Kinks" in
September 1993 QST. According to the editorial comment accompanying it,
you were prompted to make the measurements by Tom Rauch, W8JI, who had
done some measurements which indicated that the steel wool balun was
ineffective. The Hints & Kinks editor at the time, who had accepted both
the original contribution by Curt Wilson, W0KKQ and yours, was Dave
Newkirk, WJ1Z. Anyone interested in learning more about it should read
the Hints & Kinks submissions and note Dave's added editiorial comments.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Walt I went back through some old note books, according to my records I sent
the letter to the editor in 1977. I know Roy says 93, but I have e-mails
from that period and knew it had to be earlier.

Does that match your recollection?

"Walter Maxwell" wrote in message
...
Thanks, Roy, I had forgetten where the stuff was published.

Walt

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:38:12 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Walter Maxwell wrote:
. . .
However, some moron claimed in QST that steel wool was just as good as
ferrite for making choke baluns, but I've forgotten who the lunkhead
at the League was who believed him, and allowed stupid idea to be
published.

I complained to the League editors, who unbelieveably said 'Prove It'.
So I bought some steel wool and made two back to back baluns with it
and made measurements of common mode currents. The measurements proved
that the steel wool had absolutely no choking effect.

I reported the results of the measurements to the editors at the
League, but I can't remember whether they did anything about refuting
the original incorrect material. Perhaps your memory is better than
mine on this issue.

Walt, W2DU

The results of your measurements were published in "Hints & Kinks" in
September 1993 QST. According to the editorial comment accompanying it,
you were prompted to make the measurements by Tom Rauch, W8JI, who had
done some measurements which indicated that the steel wool balun was
ineffective. The Hints & Kinks editor at the time, who had accepted both
the original contribution by Curt Wilson, W0KKQ and yours, was Dave
Newkirk, WJ1Z. Anyone interested in learning more about it should read
the Hints & Kinks submissions and note Dave's added editiorial comments.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

I still can't believe anyone took this seriously.
Steel wool must have slightly higher permeability than air, certainly no
match for ferrites.
73
H.

"Fred W4JLE" wrote in message
...
Walt I went back through some old note books, according to my records I
sent
the letter to the editor in 1977. I know Roy says 93, but I have e-mails
from that period and knew it had to be earlier.

Does that match your recollection?

"Walter Maxwell" wrote in message
...
Thanks, Roy, I had forgetten where the stuff was published.

Walt

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:38:12 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Walter Maxwell wrote:
. . .
However, some moron claimed in QST that steel wool was just as good as
ferrite for making choke baluns, but I've forgotten who the lunkhead
at the League was who believed him, and allowed stupid idea to be
published.

I complained to the League editors, who unbelieveably said 'Prove It'.
So I bought some steel wool and made two back to back baluns with it
and made measurements of common mode currents. The measurements proved
that the steel wool had absolutely no choking effect.

I reported the results of the measurements to the editors at the
League, but I can't remember whether they did anything about refuting
the original incorrect material. Perhaps your memory is better than
mine on this issue.

Walt, W2DU

The results of your measurements were published in "Hints & Kinks" in
September 1993 QST. According to the editorial comment accompanying it,
you were prompted to make the measurements by Tom Rauch, W8JI, who had
done some measurements which indicated that the steel wool balun was
ineffective. The Hints & Kinks editor at the time, who had accepted both
the original contribution by Curt Wilson, W0KKQ and yours, was Dave
Newkirk, WJ1Z. Anyone interested in learning more about it should read
the Hints & Kinks submissions and note Dave's added editiorial comments.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Walt, I just went back and checked some old notes. I show I wrote a letter
to the editor on the steel wool balun in 1977. I know Roy said 1993, but I
"Walter Maxwell" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 18:00:21 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
wrote:

You might be an old time if you can answer the following, with out diving
into your library.

Which of the following is NOT a rectifier?
a. 3B24
b. 80
c. 3C24
d. 6H6

Steel wool was once touted as a good material to make which of the
following?

a. Choke Balun
b. AF shielding
c. Linear capacitors
d. Radials for short virticals

Feel free to add your own favorite...


Good ones, Fred, 3B24 and 3C24 are not rectifiers.

However, some moron claimed in QST that steel wool was just as good as
ferrite for making choke baluns, but I've forgotten who the lunkhead
at the League was who believed him, and allowed stupid idea to be
published.

I complained to the League editors, who unbelieveably said 'Prove It'.
So I bought some steel wool and made two back to back baluns with it
and made measurements of common mode currents. The measurements proved
that the steel wool had absolutely no choking effect.

I reported the results of the measurements to the editors at the
League, but I can't remember whether they did anything about refuting
the original incorrect material. Perhaps your memory is better than
mine on this issue.

Walt, W2DU

Back around 1962, I was working on the Syncom satellite program at Hughes
Aircraft. NASA wanted us to make some satellite transponder simulators so
they could check out the ground stations. The plan was to take some of
the 'less than perfect' hardware and package it up in a metal box.
Unfortunately a lot of that stuff wasn't very stable, particularly the
varactor multipliers. To make things worse, they used TWT amplifiers
(in a separate box) followed by a 10 watt attenuator which brought the
output back down to about the same level as the drive to the TWT. We
ended up lining the boxes with steel wool along with a lot of metal
tape to seal the seams, etc., and it did seem to help (a bit).

I remember the steel-wool balun story and wondered at the time if perhaps
it was merely absorbing some of the current on the outside of the coax.

73, Bob N7XY

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 23:34:48 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote:

Walt, I just went back and checked some old notes. I show I wrote a letter
to the editor on the steel wool balun in 1977. I know Roy said 1993, but I
"Walter Maxwell" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 18:00:21 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
wrote:

You might be an old time if you can answer the following, with out diving
into your library.

Which of the following is NOT a rectifier?
a. 3B24
b. 80
c. 3C24
d. 6H6

Steel wool was once touted as a good material to make which of the
following?

a. Choke Balun
b. AF shielding
c. Linear capacitors
d. Radials for short virticals

Feel free to add your own favorite...


Good ones, Fred, 3B24 and 3C24 are not rectifiers.

However, some moron claimed in QST that steel wool was just as good as
ferrite for making choke baluns, but I've forgotten who the lunkhead
at the League was who believed him, and allowed stupid idea to be
published.

I complained to the League editors, who unbelieveably said 'Prove It'.
So I bought some steel wool and made two back to back baluns with it
and made measurements of common mode currents. The measurements proved
that the steel wool had absolutely no choking effect.

I reported the results of the measurements to the editors at the
League, but I can't remember whether they did anything about refuting
the original incorrect material. Perhaps your memory is better than
mine on this issue.

Walt, W2DU

Fred W4JLE wrote:
. . .
Feel free to add your own favorite...

How often should you clean your screen grids?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Any time a grid leak is detected

How often should you clean your screen grids?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Any time a grid leak is detected

I resist the suggestion that answer [d] is correct.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!