A subcontractor passivated 301 stainless steel parts using AMSQQP35
[canceled, affil. link] 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 sulfate test, since typically, the copper sulfate 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
finishing.com is made possible by ... this text gets replaced with bannerText
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: