Date:         Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:59:13 -0500
Reply-To:     David Beierl <dbeierl@ATTGLOBAL.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Beierl <dbeierl@ATTGLOBAL.NET>
Subject:      Re: Any experience with electronic rust prevention?
Comments: To: CMathis227@AOL.COM
In-Reply-To:  <8f.600bfed.27a1e12b@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 03:06 PM 1/25/2001, Chuck Mathis wrote:
>These sound like an automotive version of the cathodic protection systems
>used on petroleum pielines and the US Coast Guard's 110' patrol boats.

There's a big difference here -- pipelines and ships both operate submerged
in an electrolytic medium, either seawater or dirt.  Cathodic protection,
whether with sacrificial anodes or impressed-current systems, makes little
sense without this.

Aside from that, for an idea of the complexity of this field check out
<http://www.nacecorrosionnetwork.com/HyperNews/get/forums/cathodes.html> or
do a google search on "cathodic protection."  The Nacecorrosionnetwork
stuff is mostly industrial, but there is also a short thread talking about
the automotive systems, including 2-3 people saying they were happy or knew
of one or more individuals who were happy -- and one fellow who had this to
say:

>I reviewed a report on a similar system a few years ago. The company was
>looking for "experts" to provide endorsements. However, the information
>provided was very limited, and I had more questions than endorsements. For
>example, they didn't want an assessment on the viability of the system,
>they already "knew it worked". They had test reports from labs saying it
>passes certain tests; but the tests were very carefully crafted by the
>manufacturer. Needless to say, they didn't send the additional information
>I requested, and they didn't get my endorsement.

david

David Beierl - Providence, RI
  http://pws.prserv.net/synergy/Vanagon/
'84 Westy "Dutiful Passage"
'85 GL "Poor Relation"