HOME FAQs BOOKS JOBS: Help Wanted Suggestions you are here: Hotline/Forum => Letter 37219
How to deal with changing ASTM Passivation Standards
We have multiple passivation standards called out on our drawings
(i.e. ASTM A967 [link is to spec at TechStreet]-01e1, ASTM A967 6.1.1.2, QQ-P-35 [link is to spec at TechStreet], etc.). I'm also aware that ASTM is updating its latest and greatest version of their Passivation Standard.
Is there a way that we can specify a generic standard number on our drawings thereby reducing our need to update our drawings every time an external standard changes ?
Thanks,
Medical Device Mfg - Beverly, Massachusetts
+++++
As a practicing chemical processor and contributing member of ASTM's Committee B08 on Metallic and Inorganic Coating, I can share with you your frustration over passivate specs coming and going. Today you treat 416 in Type IV solution and tomorrow Type IV isn't even an option!
When our committee attempted to write a specification on passivate a few years back, prior to ASTM
A967 [link is to spec at TechStreet] when ASTM
ASTM A380 [link is to spec at TechStreet] was the only option, we were told by the Committee A1 on Stainless Steel that passivation is not a coating and therefore our committee had no right to issue a standard governing it. A couple of years passed and with no changes in wording, we were able to get passed a "passivation by electropolishing" standard. So A380 still exists, A1 has their A967 and B8 has their version which includes "electro-passivation". On top of this, Committee B of AMS is in the midst of obliterating any reference to QQ-P-35 or AMS-QQ-P-35 and have their own glorious compendium standard for passivation.
Bottom line: write your own PERFORMANCE-BASED standard. Tell the processor what you need regarding performance and let the processing house use their expertise to meet you requirements! Include the need to certify the work - require humidity testing wherever appropriate.
|
Milt Stevenson, Jr. Anoplate Corp  Syracuse, New York |
|
