-- The Home Page of the Finishing Industry
A website for Serious Education, promoting Aloha,
& the most FUN smiley you can have in metal finishing.
    no popups, no spam
on this site
current topics
topic 15001

GM9540P / GMW14872 Mass Loss Target Ranges for Coupons

adv.   auto technology banner

A discussion started in 2002 but continuing through 2017 . . .


Q. I am just curious if anyone has a complete table of target mass loss data for GM9540P besides the end of test ranges outlined in the specification. It seems to me to be a bit confusing as how to calculate backwards the appropriate mass loss for the coupons from just using the end of test mass loss ranges. If anyone has any info or their interpretation, it would be greatly appreciated!


Paul T. Collins
testing institute - Sterling Heights, Michigan


A. Paul -

The mass loss coupons should be removed every 8 cycles. Take the end of test target number (depending upon the duration of the test and coupon thickness)and calculate the percentage of the test completed. Multiply that amount times the end-of-test number. For example, if you are running method D, 80 cycles with 1/8" coupons, at 40 cycles the mass loss should be 3478 - 3778, which is 50% of the end-of-test numbers.

Cynthia L. Meade
- Sylvania, Ohio, USA


Q. Cynthia,

First of all, I'd like to thank you for the response, it has been a real egg hunt trying to find an answer to my problem. Actually I have already calculated the mass coupon loss as you suggested, it was the only way that I could see to do it, but I just had some major concerns with this method. One thing is, when you calculated the range instead of a single number, you get a percentage reduction in the spread of the range, as you can see. This seems very incorrect.

I would assume that no matter what the duration is, the overlapping durations should still be approximately the same, e.g. 1 phase is still 1 phase, or 8 cycles is 8 cycles, or 16, and so on. If you calculate out the range all the way up to the 10% completion (1 phase, 8 cycles), using your example, you get a range of 695.7 -- 755.7 mg with a spread of 60 mg. Compare this to Test Duration A with a range of 965 -- 1375 mg with a spread of 410 mg, quite a big difference. And that 410 mg seems to be a typo in the specification because it does not follow the patterns of the rest of the coupon thicknesses. It should be at least 400 mg anyhow.

A great example of where this problem is so evident, is when we had a customer that wanted to start with a test duration of C - 40 cycles, and wanted to possibly extend the duration to D -- 80 cycles depending what his samples looked like at the end of C. Now how do you figure out what the mass coupon loss should be? They pretty much should be the same for the overlapping durations, but I cannot find any evidence supporting this with the way the specification is written. And try to get a hold of someone at GM to clarify anything with any of their specifications, I do not even know where to start. It's a major pain!

At least I can say this: if it was a Ford specification, I could call Ford Laboratories and get someone to look up the information. I have had great success with Ford Laboratories in the past, they were always able to straighten out discrepancies in their specifications. GM needs to be a little more accountable in this way.

Well, thanks for the feedback, if you or anyone else has anything further, please, I beg you, let me know!


Paul T. Collins [returning]
testing institute - Sterling Heights, Michigan

Readers may be interested in Auto Technology's "Proficiency Testing" program for GMW14872


August 16, 2009

A. Hello Paul,

First of all, I do not work for GM and I have never read GM9540P. But I have a copy of GMW14872 "Cyclic Corrosion Laboratory Test", which is the replacement of GM9540P, first published in November 2006.

I don't think the big difference you mentioned is a typo.

You are probably right that the coupon mass loss from every 8 cycles, no matter they are from the first 8 cycles, or the last 8 cycles, should be approximately the same. And the deviations of the mass loss from each 8 cycle could be small and close. However, you have to add up the deviations of mass loss from each 8 cycle to the end of test to get the wide range of targeted mass loss. The final targeted mass loss ranges represent the accepted deviations of coupon mass loss over the total test cycles. e.g.: your test chamber has a constant overexposure condition that results in 50 mg more than the targeted mean mass loss for each and every 8 cycle. At the end of the 80 cycles, your final coupon mass loss could be 50 mg x 10 = 500 mg more than the targeted mean mass loss.


Peter Zhang
commercial truck manufacturing company - Portland, Oregon

April 4, 2017 -- this entry appended to this thread by editor in lieu of spawning a duplicative thread

Q. I have been conducting a pre-test of the GMW14872. I have ran the chamber for 5 cycles, with two coupons, and have an average weight loss of 0.6435 grams, which averages out to 0.1287 per cycle, to meet the goal weight loss of an Exterior component, Exposure D. For function I am going to need to have at the minimum of 0.1309 ((7.23g-0.29g)/(48cycles+5cycles)) - data from Table A1 on page 10.

Any idea on what to do next, thanks

Paul Wermers
Test Engineer - Spivlliell, Iowa, USA
  ^- Privately contact this inquirer -^

This public forum has 60,000 threads. If you have a question in mind which seems off topic to this thread, you might prefer to Search the Site

ADD a Comment to THIS thread START a NEW threadView CURRENT TOPICS

Disclaimer: It's not possible to diagnose a finishing problem or the hazards of an operation via these pages. All information presented is for general reference and does not represent a professional opinion nor the policy of an author's employer. The internet is largely anonymous & unvetted; some names may be fictitious and some recommendations may be deliberately harmful.

  If you need a product/service, please check these Directories:

JobshopsCapital Equip. & Install'nChemicals & Consumables Consult'g, Train'g, SoftwareEnvironmental ComplianceTesting Svcs. & Devices

©1995-2018, Inc., Pine Beach, NJ   -   About   -  Privacy Policy
How Google uses data when you visit this site.