TECHNET Archives

September 2016

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Blair Hogg <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Blair Hogg <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 2 Sep 2016 10:38:22 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
Hi Dave,

We specify Mil 5541 on our drawing, but not B117 specifically, although it is included by reference. We don't have salt spray capabilities in house, and the cost of testing the parts might exceed the cost to remanufacture.

Thanks,
Blair

On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 09:53:12 -0500, David Hillman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Hi Blair - Did the original coating have a salt fog requirement per ASTM
>B117? If so, you could subject the questionable brackets to a salt fog test
>as an assessment of quality.
>
>Dave Hillman
>Rockwell Collins
>[log in to unmask]
>
>On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Blair Hogg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Technetters! Getting ready for the long weekend (at least here in the
>> US)?
>>
>> I'm looking for some advice on chromate coatings. We produce a phone for
>> mining applications, which uses a battery held in by a bracket. The bracket
>> is chromate coated.
>>
>> The most recent batch of brackets sent out to the coating house came back
>> with a cloudy appearance to the coating. Apparently something hiccupped in
>> their process. The process can't be repeated, so we either scrap the parts
>> and make new ones, or use them as is. Problem is, I don't know if the
>> cloudy appearance will affect the corrosion protection properties. Any
>> chromate experts out there that can offer any advice on this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Blair
>>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2