ASTM A967 FREE DOWNLOAD

This specification makes no recommendations regarding the suitability of any grade, treatment, or acceptance criteria for any particular application or class of applications. Rest in peace, Ken. Especially in the fastener industry I have seen it is difficult to source a specific product according to a specific type within these standards. Chemical passivation has as its major goal to provide a layer of protection over the base metal. What requirement or standard is he auditing you against, since clearly it is not A? December 19, A. June 11—13, Chicago, IL.

Uploader: Vujind
Date Added: 5 March 2017
File Size: 66.87 Mb
Operating Systems: Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X
Downloads: 58298
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

I replied that the parameters are in compliance with standard A but he’s telling that we don’t have objective a9677 to support the validation since A defines minimum requirements that could be insufficient to my process. What requirement or standard is he auditing you against, since clearly it is not A?

QQ-PB contained six nitric astm a967 bath Types.

ASTM A967 vs. AMS 2700? Which is the right passivation spec?

A discussion started in but continuing through Q. The ASTM has established certain criterion to achieve consistent product quality in the metal finishing industry. Since you’re considering an AMS spec, I assume you have aerospace customers. The tests the ASTM document considers valid are the following: AMS exempts C from testing.

This is actually an oversight of A that will be corrected astm a967 the next revision. Hello, While carrying out passivation tests we came across the following apparent contrast.

  DOJUTSU EYES WALLPAPER

ASTM A967 Passivation Standard

The approach involves several steps. We design our astmm parts, and do our own passivation in house, and astm a967 prefer the testing requirements of ASTM A They supply exact and stringent standards finishing companies rely on to provide the best products possible.

My customer wants to put A on his print for standard passivation, but my plater astm a967 me that he passivates to A December 19, A. A renumbers those to 1 through 4 there is no such thing as A Type 6 or 7 while restores the missing four for a total of eight Types.

Free iron denotes iron present on the surface of the parts, including but not limited to iron contamination, iron-tool marks, residual-iron salts from pickling solutions, iron dust, atmospheric exposure, iron deposits in welds, embedded iron, and iron oxide.

ASTM F86 [link by ed. AeroDef April 30 – May 1 Gain access to the technologies and people in aerospace and defense manufacturing. Always specify exactly what you want– e. A has a lot of excellent recommendations on general astm a967 etc.

John Wilt [returning] – Cambridge, Massachusetts. This specification covers several different types of chemical passivation treatments for a9967 steel parts. Which is the right astm a967 spec?

The standards that collectively make up astm a967 ASTM A passivation specification ensure that nitric and citric stainless steel passivation is performed properly and with quality results. I assume that A was developed running several extreme conditions but I’ve been looking for that information and couldn’t find anything about it. By adhering to the specifications provided them, ProPlate is capable of guaranteeing each product they produce will be astm a967 those that follow.

  ASHAPURA MATA NADOL WALLPAPER

He passed away May 14, These tests include the following practices:.

ASTM A vs. AMS vs. ASTM F86? Which is the right passivation spec?

In simple terms, he’s saying that given 2 SS surfaces which have different concentrations of free iron, the astm a967 reaction will take longer in the surface with more free iron. Also, how common is it for a purchaser of a good to specify a specific passivation type astm a967 a standard rather than reference the entire standard and leave the type selection up to the manufacturer?

There are other in-house specifications for some companies. June 11—13, Chicago, IL. Jan, Both standards are based heavily on the old QQ-P Especially in the fastener industry I have seen it is difficult to source a specific product according to a specific type within these standards. Is there any clear direction or is it optional?