Cruzer4326
Thread starter
The original topic is being hijacked and distorted. A big part of why I don't like forums.Did someone say that it was?
The original topic is being hijacked and distorted. A big part of why I don't like forums.Did someone say that it was?
I can understand fully the choice of a Dielectric grease in a multiconductor plug which is subject to corrosive environments, automobiles being the most numerous and obvious. I use this on my trailer plugs but frequently need to clean it out and re-apply it because of dirt build up.Current density is one thing as well as grease migration. You want the starting current to pass through the metal terminal connection itself not some alternate path with unknown conductivity and reliability. You really never want this but at low current density with poorly designed or damaged terminals you can get away with it. You want the starting current to go through the joint as designed.
All greases and lubricants can migrate. You don’t want stray current paths.
This right here should give you a clue as to the technical accuracy of your cut-and-paste. Again for about the 20th time, if metal-to-metal contact is not being made then current will not flow. They get all up in arms about dielectric grease but it’s no different than air. Either one is an effective dielectric and will prevent current flow and both must be displaced before conduction occurs.Cons of Dielectric Grease
Although dielectric grease is beneficial, it can also be detrimental when applied incorrectly. The grease is non-conductive; thus, when used incorrectly, it can prevent current flow. If you fail to clean the conductor’s contact points after applying the dielectric grease, the current will not pass through.
Cept the corrosion is caused by battery acid in this case not so much the oxidation in the atmosphere
Did someone say that it was?
" Must be displaced .." EXACTLY . I get that . Always have . But why rely on that when there are better things out there that are actually made for that application ? If YOU want to use dielectric grease then go for it . But don't try to tell people that it's just as good because t's not .This right here should give you a clue as to the technical accuracy of your cut-and-paste. Again for about the 20th time, if metal-to-metal contact is not being made then current will not flow. They get all up in arms about dielectric grease but it’s no different than air. Either one is an effective dielectric and will prevent current flow and both must be displaced before conduction occurs.
Statements like you posted show a pretty gross and fundamental misunderstanding.
I was referencing the quote you posted about dielectric grease and electrical conduction which is fundamentally incorrect." Must be displaced .." EXACTLY . I get that . Always have . But why rely on that when there are better things out there that are actually made for that application ? If YOU want to use dielectric grease then go for it . But don't try to tell people that it's just as good because t's not .
I’m not sure what you mean in this statement. Are you saying a dedicated product isn’t relying on displacement to provide metal-to-metal contact?" Must be displaced .." EXACTLY . I get that . Always have . But why rely on that when there are better things out there that are actually made for that application ?
I can assure you there is zero anger here .I was referencing the quote you posted about dielectric grease and electrical conduction which is fundamentally incorrect.
And for a battery terminal as being discussed here the standard dielectric grease is adequate and appropriate, just as I wrote above. In fact I stated that a dedicated product would be better but not necessary.
I’m mostly taking about physics not debating a brand of dielectric compound. I’m not sure where the anger comes from here.
Penetrox A contains suspended zinc particles . Penetrox E uses copper particles . Which one depends on the application . Let me explain it this way . In a perfect world , every battery connection is smooth , clean , and has perfect mating surfaces . Zero imperfections . In the REAL world , people use all sorts of tools to clean a battery connection . We've all seen it . Wire brushes , files , even pocketknives . Looking at the two surfaces under magnification , it can be pretty gnarly . Squeezing that connection down by overtightening it can only do so much to displace the joint compound from those millions of little gouges . THIS is where the benefit of the correct joint compound comes into play . Fill the voids with something that actually increases the conductivity , or fill it with an insulator ?I’m not sure what you mean in this statement. Are you saying a dedicated product isn’t relying on displacement to provide metal-to-metal contact?
And if you can get that theoretical proper metal to metal contact then you wouldn't need anything between . I'm going to go with what myself and millions of other electrical workers have , and still use on electrical connections . And it ain't dielectric grease . But you do you and we'll just have to disagree .Yeah I gave reasons why you should not use a conductive compound. You really do not want to rely on that compound which may either migrate or dry out and shrink away from the terminals. Very few automotive applications would be appropriate for this type of material and as far as I know no automaker recommends nor uses them in assembly.
Lead posts do extrude under the clamping force of the terminal and this is the primary and correct method of making contact. Using a conductive paste to make up for a bad or damaged clamp is a complete kludge. As far as what I’d rather have, it’s a proper metal-to-metal contact as designed. But maybe that’s just me.