Mr. Rogers: "Look for the Helpers. You will always find people who are helping."
As an Amazon Associate & eBay Partner: we earn from qualifying purchases

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

-----

301 SS Passivated incorrectly

A subcontractor passivated 301 stainless steel parts using AMSQQP35 [canceled] Type VIII instead of Type VI or VII. The parts showed rust in the bend radius, indicating ineffective cleaning and passivation, where I would expect it. 1. I've always have had an issue with the copper sulphate ⇦ on eBay or Amazon [affil links] test, since typically, the copper sulphate solution is only applied to a small spot, likely a "flat" surface, and least likely to be an area with smeared iron. 2. Most importantly, I haven't a readily available published resource. Is there likely to be metallurgical attack of the 301 from Type VIII time-temperature-chemistry?

Douglas Hahn
process engineer - Saint Charles, ILLINOIS
September 8, 2010

(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: