| |
46018
What is most accurate "referee" method
for composition analysis of aluminum alloys? [UAE]
July 31, 2007
Dear All,
I am looking for an authentic statement or any references which can
be utilised when there will be any dispute among any analytical
findings of the elemental contents of any alloy. As we know, there
are several analytical procedures used in metal analysis - which
method has higher level of confidence? In other words which method
can be used as a referee test? Will it be wrong to say WET ANALYTICAL
method?
I would appreciate if anybody can give some answers to it or any
authentic references.
Thank you,
Srimay Basu
Extrusion Specialist [Marketing]. - Dubai, UAE
August 14, 2007
The specifications to which the aluminum alloy is ordered should
refer to acceptable analytical methods. For example, ASTM B209 for
wrought aluminum alloys mentions ASTM E34 (includes a wide variety of
wet chemistry methods & spectroscopy) and E1251 (emission
spectroscopy in argon). E34 & E1251 each list measurable
composition ranges for various alloying elements. Choice of
analytical method will depend upon alloy.
The E34 methods are generally more accurate within given alloy
concentration ranges. The E1251 method can quickly measure the
various elements from a single sample and can generally detect lower
concentrations of most alloying elements. However, the precision is
poorer (e.g., fewer significant digits). E1251 can analyze 4 elements
(Ca, P, Na, Sr) not in E34. However, E1251 cannot measure high
concentrations of Si,* which is important in many cast alloys. Wet
chemistry is better for average alloy composition since it uses
dissolved samples. The emission methods are less accurate on
heterogeneous alloys (especially castings) since conducted using
solid samples; special splat quenched samples or multiple analyses
can compensate.
For each specification, measurable elemental ranges, analytical
procedures and referenced specifications can be viewed at
http://www.astm.org/
ASTM E34-94(2002), 'Standard Test Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Aluminum and Aluminum-Base Alloys.' 35 pages.
ASTM E1251-07, 'Standard Test Method for Analysis of Aluminum and
Aluminum Alloys by Atomic Emission Spectrometry.' 10 pages.
ASTM E1251-94(1999), 'Standard Test Method for Optical Emission
Spectrometric Analysis of Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys by the Argon
Atmosphere, Point-to-Plane, Unipolar Self-Initiating Capacitor
Discharge,' 11 pages, may be better than the newer E1251
specification for some alloys,
particularly if analysis for Ag, Cd, or Sb is required, or for cast
alloys of higher Si.*
The emission spectroscopy methods E227 & E607 are also commonly
used, but generally ASTM E1251-94 (conducted in argon) is better than
E607 (in nitrogen) is better than E227 (in air).
|
Ken Vlach
- Goleta, California
|
|
August 14, 2007
Dear Mr. Ken Vlach,
Thank you so much for your answer. Perhaps Wet Chemistry method would
be ideal as a referee test.
Thank you once again.
Best regards,
Basu
Srimay Basu
- Dubai, U A E
August 15, 2007
You're welcome.
As ASTM E34 involves separate analysis of each metal, it's rather
slow and costly. First use a fast, multi-element analysis technique
to identify elements possibly out-of-spec. This could be an emission
spectroscopy method mentioned above or EDS (Energy Dispersive
Spectroscopy) within an SEM (scanning electron microscope).
Ken Vlach
- Goleta, California
August 17, 2007
Thanks. A great help.
Regards,
Basu
Srimay Basu
- Dubai, U A E


 |
|