From pernic@hale.yerkes.uchicago.edu Wed Feb 14 11:59:25 1996 Return-Path:Received: from hale.yerkes.uchicago.edu by belmont.astro.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01722; Wed, 14 Feb 96 11:59:14 CST Received: (pernic@localhost) by hale.yerkes.uchicago.edu (8.6.12/8.6.4) id MAA17078 for jdotson@belmont.astro.nwu.edu; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 12:05:11 -0600 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 12:05:11 -0600 From: Bob Pernic Message-Id: <199602141805.MAA17078@hale.yerkes.uchicago.edu> To: jdotson@belmont.astro.nwu.edu Subject: Re: meeting with jeff Content-Length: 1297 X-Lines: 18 Status: RO Jessie,You may want to pass this on to Jeff; I don't think you will get a reply from Indium couporation on gland diamensions. Here is what I know works; The indium gland and "o" ring gland are not compatable. I think the best way to handle it is to have two oring glands next to each other so that one can use either ( or both ). The standard gland Jeff knows how to do so that is not a problem. The other is not either, but is quite different. The female half of the gland looks exactly like that of the ordinary kind. The male part is not flat but purtrudes into the groove.It should have only enough clearance so that it can be easily assembled, ie a couple thousands on the sides and zero clearance on the bottom. For the indium itself, one lays a wire in the corner of the groove, letting it overlape alittle. When one tightens the many bolts with beleville washers ( to provide a constant pressure ) the indium flows everywhere up the side clearances seals. Actually the indium wets the aluminum. It is extremeely important that "jack" screws be provided to facilitate disassembly. Gland size in not at all important. It's that flowing action that's wanted. I've made glands typically about 0.1 deep and 0.1 wide. But they surely could be smaller. Now you know everything I do, Tootle-Do