-- The Home Page of the Finishing Industry
A website for Serious Education, promoting Aloha,
& the most FUN smiley you can have in metal finishing

on this site
current topics
topic 2604

Passivation Standards

adv.   stellar solutions banner


I'm trying to understand the development of standards in the area of passivating stainless steel.

I'm been told that QQ-P-35 [link is to free spec at Defense Logistics Agency,] has been cancelled and is being replaced by ASTM A967 [link by ed. to spec at TechStreet] -96. Also, Mil-F-14072 [link by ed. to spec at TechStreet], E300 directly calls up ASTM A380 [link is to the practice at TechStreet] . I have then been told that A 380 and A 967-96 might merge, so perhaps another standard will be created?

Can anyone kindly verify / counterclaim my understandings?

Thanks alot,


Bob Elliot
- Orland Park, Illinois, USA


Bob, We have doing a lot of Passivating, Over the last couple of years, Some of the changes that have happen is that

1. QQ-P-35 was cancelled then for some reason ( probably confusion) AMS picked up the same spec Lists it as AMS QQ-P-35

2. ASTM A967 [link by ed. to spec at TechStreet] spec is still in effect as been in the last couple of years and it is soon to be revised just to confuse things even more -- chris

Chris Snyder
plater - Charlotte, North Carolina


Bob, be careful with the type of work you're doing for QQ-P-35 The spec has been supeceeded by ASTM 967 or AMSQQP35. If you are performing military and aerospace work you have to use the AMS specification which is identical to the original QQ-P-35. Only the controlling publisher has changed to SAE. The ASTM 967 was written to take the place of QQ-P-35, but has lost some of its power with the release of the SAE AMS spec. I haven't heard any gossip on the formation of a new spec (ASTM)

Tim Martin
plating shop - Springfield, Massachusetts


Bob ASTM A967-96 Is the replacement for QQ-P-35C if your process conforms to QQ-P-35C it might be that your process is conforms to the new standard .The new ASTM A967-96 Is not focused in the process solution but in the process results and requirements which are similar to the previous standards. Yours,

yehuda blau
Yehuda Blau
YB Plating Engineering and Quality - Haifa Israel


Where can I get QQ-P-35 (Type 11.) and Mil-A-8625 [link is to free spec at Defense Logistics Agency,] (Type I, Class II )? I want to know the meaning/content of these two spec.

I'm located in China, but I need to make some components with this U.S. Spec.

Appreciate your response.


James Wang
Shanghai, P.R.China


Does the new ASTM A967-96 spec use the same "types" and "classes" as the QQ-P-35?

T. Garber


I'm confused with letter #2604, for to do a passivation treatment a stainless steel, should you use specification # MIL-F-14072-E300 or use AMS QQ-P-35.

Hugo Gonzalez
- Houston, Texas

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.