People helping each other -- No AI, no cost, no reg'n, no damn popups
(As an Amazon Associate & eBay Partner we earn from qualifying purchases)

finishing.com -- The Home Page of the Finishing Industry

Thread 406/11

MIL-A-8625 Type III the same as AMS 2469

2006

We recently had a job hard anodized and certified to MIL-A-8625 / MIL-PRF-8625 [⇦ this spec on DLA] Type III. After the fact, we realized the call-out was for AMS2469. We have been told these are the same. If my cert only gives the mil spec, how can I show/support the equivalent AMS2469 spec to the inspector coming to approve these parts (besides my anodizer providing the info)?

Jeff Barrett

publicly reply to Jeff Barrett

Unless the two specs were word for word identical, compliance with one would neither insure compliance with the other nor rule it out. So there is probably no reason you can't certify your anodizing as being compatible with both if you wish.

But the same goes for your anodizer. So if are claiming compliance with AMS2469 on the strength of a cert. from your anodizer asserting compliance with MIL-A-8625, I don't think that will work; I think you'd need to get your anodizer to claim AMS2469 compliance.

Ted Mooney, P.E.
Striving to live Aloha
finishing.com - Pine Beach, New Jersey
2006
publicly reply to Ted Mooney

Taber Abrasion Tester
taber_abrader

on eBay or

Amazon

(affil links)

The basic requirements are nearly identical. AMS2469 allows slightly more variation in coating thickness. So MIL-A-8625F Type III is more restrictive. A salt spray corrosion test may be specified for AMS2469. MIL-A-8625F Type III has no such requirement. The Taber Abrasion test requirements are the same for both specifications. Unless a salt spray test was called out on the drawing or PO, I say MIL-A-8625F Type III meets or exceeds AMS2469.

Chris Jurey, Past-President IHAA
Luke Engineering & Mfg. Co. Inc.

Wadsworth, Ohio

2006
publicly reply to Chris Jurey

AMENDMENT 1 to MIL-A-8625F added "Type III coatings shall be tested for corrosion resistance only when it is specified that the coating is sealed."

For improved corrosion resistance (but reduced abrasion resistance), sealing of Type III coating can be specified by contract or purchase order. See Paragraph 3.8.2 of MIL-A-8625F.

Ken Vlach [deceased]
- Goleta, California

Finishing.com honored Ken for his countless carefully researched responses. He passed away May 14, 2015.
Rest in peace, Ken. Thank you for your hard work which the finishing world, and we at finishing.com, continue to benefit from.
2006
publicly reply to Ken Vlach

(No "dead threads" here! If this page isn't currently on the Hotline your Q, A, or Comment will restore it)

Q, A, or Comment on THIS thread -or- Start a NEW Thread

Disclaimer: It's not possible to fully 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 might be harmful.

If you are seeking a product or service related to metal finishing, please check these Directories: