|
|
|
![]() |
Letter 23047
|
|
Asif Nurie |
![]() |
I have used electrophoretic paint in the past and found that the thickness of the cathodic electrodeposit could be controlled by either the temperature or the voltage. Changing the bath chemistry is not a wise way to proceed because you are altering an established system and unless you know exactly what you are doing, you will cause a lot of future problems. The deposition thickness is related to the bath temperature, so by reducing this and keeping all other properties constant you will reduce the thickness. The systems I have worked on are quiet sensitive to temperature, so only modest changes will alter the thickness. Alternatively, reduce the voltage; this will also reduce the thickness. I do not know what you mean by operating at 140 V although the "standard is 250-300 V", so perhaps you can elucidate. Finally, if these two changes do not reduce the thickness to your needs, you have to reduce the processing time. Assuming your system is similar to the one I have used, there is no point in reducing the current because this automatically reduces to a very low value as the deposit thickens.
|
|
Trevor Crichton |
Dear Asif ,
Thx for ur valuable suggestions. I m running the ultrafiltration unit and also using DI water of < 5 microsiemens conductivity. pH is in the supplier's range(5.10-6.10).but still I'm not able to reduce the thickness. I'm working with the latest CED technology . Our system is a latest one. We have four ways to reduce the thickness in CED system and which I have described in my previous query and I have tried all except reduction in dipping time. I can't go for this option. I hope that you will further give ur valuable suggestions to me.
Thanking you.
Dear Trevor,
Thx for ur valuable suggestions. Yes I am using the same system what u r using there. I am using the latest CED system which is used everywhere in this world. So assume that its the same as u have. Yes its true that standard voltage requirement is 230-250 volts but I'm operating at 160 V bcoz I thought it will help me in reducing the thickness. It's also true that my trial can damage our system and can create future problems but I love to do trial bcoz without trial we can not come to a conclusion.
As far as temperature is concerned our standard is 28-30 Degree Celsius and I have reduced it to 27 from 30 but still the thickness is coming high and I am surprised that at lower voltage(140 V),low NVM(9.41 %) and low conductivity(960 ms) , I am getting high thickness(26-32 microns). Let me reduce the temperature to 25 Deg C and then see what happens. Thx again for ur suggestion.
Regards,
Manish C ![]()
- New Delhi, India
If you are unable to control the thickness, the problem may lie elsewhere. You need to check if the voltage displayed is the same as the voltage applied on the component.
|
Gurvin Singh |
![]() |
Dear friend,
In my opinion may the conductivity of ED bath is too low. Because I have the opposite problems from you. Since I want to raise the thickness (now is about 20 micron) but the only difference parameter was conductivity of ED Bath whereas too high in mine.
The data parameter from my process are :
1.NV 14.67%
2.Coating voltage is 140 V (range 80 to 160 V)
3.pH is 6.25 (range from 5.9 to 6.3)
4.Conductivity is about 1545 micro Siemens/cm. (standard is 1100 to
1400).
5.Ratio F1 to F2 is 1:10
I also used the latest technology of ED Paint, which is Acrylic CED-Lead Free
Henry S ![]()
- Jakarta, Indonesia
Hello sirs I humbly feel that it's really a great time to interact
with you wizards. in our CED process , we r encountering a major
paint problem poor E'coat deposition(dipping process) defect in the
sill outer panel of the car body because of " rust " in the
non-coverage area of coating . this is not occurring in the sill
outer panels we use which are provided with wax holes.
I'm really baffled whether the problem is with the process parameter
settings or the mechanical alignment or settings .
the process parameters settings we use in our CED process are :
%NVM = 18.7
pH = 5.94
CONDUCTIVITY = 1827 uS
P/B RATIO = 0.16-0.25
BATH TEMPERATURE = 30.7
APPLIED VOLTAGE = INLET POINT = 0 V
OUTLET VOLTAGE = 100 V
MAIN BUS = 235 V
CURRENT = INLET = 0/350 amps
MAIN = 950 amps
when we change the inlet voltage , paint defect" hash marks" start
appearing in the car bodies . we r planning to increase the %NVM or
the inlet voltage , WILL IT SOLVE THE PROBLEM !!!!!!
generously give me ur valuable suggestions .
looking forward with great regards ,
C Nanda K ![]()
- Chennai, India
Dear Mr.Manish,
I understand your problem.
You want to control the outer DFT without disturbing any line
condition.
In this case you can cover the anode cells simply with the PVC pipe
of good quality (Quality in the sense of Good Chemical
Resistance).
After doing this definitely you will get reduction of 6 to 8 µ
DFT.
Your throw power will not affect after doing this (Kindly check up
with the paint supplier).
regards,
Amar Koppa
paints - Pune
Dear Manish,
One other way of reducing the DFT of your EDP is in choosing mineral
fillers with a very fine particle size, good dispersion properties
and good flow properties. It often happens that due to cost reasons,
producers change the mineral filler included in the original
formulation to a cheaper grade locally available. In this case, many
properties of the EDP - including the DFT - are getting worse.
Especially the dispersion behavior of the fillers affect the DFT very
much. If the filler is not dispersed properly, you will find
agglomerates that are actually much larger than the original particle
size of the filler. Also the flow properties are affected negatively
by a bad dispersion.
There are only very few mineral fillers that are working properly in
EDP systems, one I know is called Sillitin.
Best Regards
Christian
Christian Plein
- Neuburg, Germany
June 29, 2008
Dear Manish,
I feel sorry to say that the CED you are using have very low rupture
limit.Generally rupture limit of CED is more the equal to 350 volt.
No body can help you just change the paint supplier.
Alam Farrukh
- Lahore Pakistan
|
December 10, 2008 Dear Kuldeep Yadav
March 9, 2009 Dear Manish T. Srinivasan
April 9, 2009 u did not wrote abt no. of anode cells and type of anode cells. how ever reduce the number of anodes. or cover the membrane from bottom side. DINESH MAURYA
|
|
|

Save
This Page (why?) - Home - ©1995-2009 finishing.com