ASTM A967-05 PDF

1 Nov ASTM A – Designation: A – 05 Standard Speci?cation for Chemical Passivation Treatment. 1 Sep Designation: A — 05€* This specification is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee A01 Provided by IMS under license with ASTM. Advanced Plating Technologies, a Milwaukee, Wisconsin company, is an industry leading provider of passivation of stainless steel to ASTM A, AMS

Author: Dicage Yozshutaur
Country: Algeria
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Spiritual
Published (Last): 1 August 2004
Pages: 200
PDF File Size: 4.3 Mb
ePub File Size: 3.73 Mb
ISBN: 872-5-82241-216-6
Downloads: 55926
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Zuhn

This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use.

Link to Active This link will always route to the current Active version of the standard. Have the plater do so, xstm then certify to multiple standards.

It’s not possible to diagnose a finishing problem or the hazards of an a9670-5 via these pages. These ASTM-approved tests may include: Which is the right passivation spec? Regards, Ted Mooney, P.

ASTM A967 Passivation Standard

I replied that the parameters are in compliance with standard A but he’s telling that we don’t have objective evidence to support the validation since A defines minimum requirements that could be insufficient to my process. These ASTM-approved tests may include:.

AMS [link by ed. March 7, A. Since you’re considering an AMS spec, I assume you have aerospace customers.

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

As far as the stainless steel passivation process itself, you’re pretty much always going to work your way back to A96705 Stainless steel passivation performed to the ASTM A standards meets these standards by passing tests that confirm its effectiveness, particularly as it pertains to removing free iron from the cold-worked surfaces. 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.


Thank you for your hard work which the finishing world continues to benefit from. Ray, Thank you for answering. A discussion astmm in but continuing through Q. What is standard to you may not be standard to them.

All information presented is for general reference and does not represent a professional opinion nor the policy of an author’s employer. To me this means volume percent of pure nitric acid, resulting in significantly stronger passivation solutions than AMS Lee Kremer Stellar Solutions, Inc.

Is your business surgical implants, or are you with a passivation shop, or what?

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

One of the differences is in the definition of ‘a lot’ for testing purposes. We design our own parts, and do our own passivation in house, and hence prefer the testing requirements of ASTM 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.

Stainless Steel Passivation and More Able Electropolishing provides metal passivation services that meet the ASTM A standards, as well as other finishing treatments that improve the corrosion resistance of stainless steel and various other alloys. This auditor you are dealing with, what organization is he with? In simple terms, he’s saying that given 2 SS surfaces which have different concentrations of free iron, the chemical reaction will take longer in the surface with more free iron.

Is there any clear direction or is it optional? Is one better than another for medical devices? ASTM A renumbered those to nitric 1 through 4, while AMS brought back the ones that had been removed and has types 1 through 8.

ASTM A Passivation Standards | Passivated Stainless Steel Parts

These tests include the following practices:. This is actually an oversight of A that will be corrected in the next revision. ASTM A [link by ed. Determining the suitability of A for your specific parts is up to you, or requirements set by your customer. Jan, Both standards are based heavily on the old QQ-P Able Electropolishing provides metal passivation services that meet the ASTM A standards, as well as other finishing treatments that improve the corrosion resistance of stainless steel and various other alloys.


Method 1 is subdivided into 8 Types corresponding to the types in old QQ-P while Method 2 is not subdivided. QQ-PB contained six nitric acid bath Types. AMS exempts C from testing.

Chemical passivation removes free iron and other surface contaminants from stainless steel parts, improving corrosion resistance. Ray Kremer Stellar Solutions, Inc. Ken Vlach – Goleta, California. Always specify exactly what you want– e. We appended your question to a thread which should clearly answer it for you: He passed away May 14, In the ASTM A and the nitric acid concentrations mentioned must be percentage by a967-0 of a reagent of 67 wt.

The two standards are essentially equivalent. If so, how could I support that statement? July 6, A. April 12, A. Electropolishing and Passivation Standards.

It includes several q967-05 tests, with acceptance criteria, for confirmation of effectiveness of such treatments for stainless steel parts. It makes no recommendations regarding the suitability of any grade, treatment, or acceptance criteria for any particular application or class of applications. Especially in the fastener industry I have seen it is difficult to source a specific product according to a specific type within these standards.