Summary for pfos-free surface tension reducer Discussion
PFOS-free surface tension reducer options for chromic anodize and chrome plating were the focus of this thread, with the original question asking for a replacement because suppliers and searches had come up empty. Ted Mooney noted that, for now, users should try the “Boeing approved surfactants” and pay attention to the slightly different acid concentrations required when a surfactant is used. He also suggested urea as a possible thing to look into, though without claiming it as a proven substitute. In a later reply, Ted listed several products to investigate, including Fumetrol 21 LF, Fumetrol 21, Ankor Wetting Agent FF, Udique Wetting Agent PF2, Cancel ST-45, FS-600, FS-750, and SurTec 870 S / 870 S K4. The thread also notes that chrome plating’s low efficiency creates heavy hydrogen bubbling, which is why mist suppressants and wetting agents matter.
Quickstart:
Chrome plating is a process of very low (10-25%) efficiency ⇦ huh?. It thus generates a lot of hydrogen bubbles which tend to convey the toxic chromic acid out into the surrounding area in champagne fashion. One tool for fighting this is surface tension reducers, but they have traditionally been formulated from PFOS, a very troublesome “forever” plastic.
These days people are trying to design and employ surface tension reducers which are robust enough to resist the highly aggressive chromic acid, but PFOS-free.
Read on, join in …
Fumetrol 140 vs. Fumetrol 21
Q. Hello,
I work at a processing plant as the chemist and my company is in the process of adding a few new tanks, one of which is a chromic acid anodizing tank. I have been tasked with writing the solution analysis and control procedures which include controlling the surface tension of the tank. I am currently a chemistry student and have not really dealt too much with surface tension. I was looking for some advice on which tensiometer we should look into buying, as well as the fume suppressant. Has anyone had any success with Fumetrol 21LF? It is a newer product that may still be waiting to get reviewed by Boeing. If not we were going to go with Fumetrol 140. Any help or suggestions on these products, how to test surface tension, tank control, etc would be great.
Kyle Wheatley
Plating shop Chemist – Baltimore, Maryland, USA
January 3, 2012
A. The Tensiometer is the most respected way to measure surface tension. But do not overlook the lesser expense “stalagmometer” – more difficult to use but much easier for beginners. When using the stalagmometer, set out the distilled water and the chromic sample the night before and let both come to the same temperature before you start counting drops the next morning. For the time being use the Boeing approved surfactants and note the slightly different acid concentrations specified when you use a surfactant.
Robert H Probert
Robert H Probert Technical Services
Garner, North Carolina
A. Update: The Danish Ministry of the Environment authorized a study in 2011 concluding that Fumetrol 21 achieves the same results as Fumetrol 140 for hard chrome plating. I’d expect similar results for chromic acid anodizing. See “Substitution of PFOS for use in non- decorative hard chrome plating”, currently available at
www2.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2011/06/978-87-92779-10-6.pdf
Regards,
Ted Mooney, P.E.
Striving to live Aloha
finishing.com – Pine Beach, New Jersey
Need quick confidential answers? $25
Need project assistance? $100/hr.
Multiple threads merged: please forgive chronology errors and repetition 🙂
(this entry appended to this thread by editor in lieu of spawning a duplicative thread)
Q. I apologize if this subject has been covered already; I didn’t find one searching the Q & A.
I need to find a PFOS-free surface tension reducer for chromic anodize. So far all my suppliers and searches have come up empty.
 | Does anyone out there know of one? I know Finishing.com doesn’t like it when individual products or companies are mentioned. Thanks in advance
Ed. note: If anyone finds one, it’s no problem to mention it. (but it’s true that in the general case we prefer generic answers because offering free commercial benefit leads to quickly breaking links, “comment spam” and, worst of all, non-Aloha behavior 🙂 Q. I’m not sure why no one is answering except for fear of breaking the “Generic Whenever Possible” request of Finishing.com. It’s understandable so if you read this and know of a product then please contact me privately. Thanks
Hi Tim. We’ve already encouraged a public answer. It’s probably that other readers are in the same position as you and your suppliers & searches, i.e., not having a good answer :-( Regards,
|
A. Did you try urea?
Blake Kneedler
Feather Hollow Eng. – Stockton, California
Q. Blake,
I have not tried urea but can you be more specific?
| | Ted, If I get a lead I will post it. Or maybe a supplier will post it.
Regards,
|
A. Tim,
PFOS is already banned in Minnesota and there are options commercially available to buy, they are listed as fume suppressants. One supplier is in Wisconsin. I have about 3 or more on a list but due to the rules I can’t post them. 2% urea can help due to the hydrotropic aspects of urea but may not be as effective as one of the patented varieties on the market. Good luck! I haven’t been to Pompano or Tampa for a long time, I trust all is well with you.
Blake Kneedler
Feather Hollow Eng. – Stockton, California
| | A. Hi Blake. By all means offer supplier names as long as we don’t get into advocacy. That’s when the people not advocated take offense and a race to the bottom starts, as readers can see If they search for the ‘spitting war’ topics previously mentioned 🙂 Regards,
|
A. Some possible options to look into:
Fumetrol 21 LF (Atotech)
Fumetrol 21 (Atotech)
Ankor Wetting Agent FF (Enthone)
Udique Wetting Agent PF2 (Enthone)
Cancel ST-45 (PRI)
FS-600 (PRI)
FS-750 (PRI)
870 S (SurTec)
870 S K4 (SurTec)
Blake Kneedler
Feather Hollow Eng. – Stockton, California
Ed. note: Thanks Blake!
Q. Hi
Can anyone tell me the advantages of Fumetrol 21LF over Fumetrol 21, apart from the obvious low foaming?
If the low foaming is the only advantage, in what ways does it effect the emissions to justify almost double the cost of the regular Fumetrol 21? Any facts/figures that can be offered would be appreciated.
Thanks
Dan Winspear
Tech Support – Sparwood, BC, Canada
November 6, 2013
A. Hi Dan,
I can’t offer the facts/figures that you’d prefer, just the general observation that thick foam blankets stick to the parts, and especially to the plastisol-coated racks, and seem to significantly increase dragout and consequent treatment cost.
Luck & Regards,
Ted Mooney, P.E.
Striving to live Aloha
finishing.com – Pine Beach, New Jersey
Need quick confidential answers? $25
Need project assistance? $100/hr.
Q. Anyone have a viable replacement for Fumetrol 140 Mist Suppressant?
Carl Walden
– Warner Robins, Georgia, USA
February 25, 2015
Ed. note: Hi Carl. We appended your inquiry to a previous thread on the subject which offers a lot of replies.
Thanks For all of the responses!
Carl Walden [returning]
– Warner Robins, Georgia