×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Salt Spray Test & SS

Salt Spray Test & SS

Salt Spray Test & SS

(OP)
We recently conducted some salt spray tests and are coming back with some data we find confusing. 5 stainless steel fasteners were sent to be tested by a well respected labratory in PA and 2 seperate tests were conducted on 5 samples of each of the 5 parts. We already had the material certs on the parts from the factory. They were a 1/4 Flatwasher, 1/4 X 3 Truss Phillips Machine Screw, 10 X 3/4 Flat phillips Sheet Metal Screw, 1/4 X 1 Hex Bolt, and a 1/4 Nylon Lock Nuts. All of these parts were purchased as 18-8 but had material specifications that fell within the 304 stainless steel requirements, except the washer which checked to 303.  The first test, which all passed, was to ASTM-B117-97. We then asked the lab to run the parts continously until they showed rust. This test was performed to AMS QQ-P-35. The test was halted at our request at 500 hours. The bolt, nut and flatwasher showed no attack at 500 hours. However, the machine screw only went 24 hours till light red rust appeared and the sheet metal screw went 72 hours. I believe this could be due to the crevices of the phillips drive, which allowed a buildup of agents that successfully attacked the chromium oxide barrier. Or it might be due to the cold heading process for manufacturing screws, which is notorius for leaving microscopic fractures, allowing pitting. Are either of these two theories legitimate?

Confused?

RE: Salt Spray Test & SS

Yes, they both may contribute.  Were the parts from different suppliers, with different manufacturing processes?  What about post-forming treatments?  Pickling, passivation, etc?

Regards,

Cory

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

RE: Salt Spray Test & SS

(OP)
Thanks for responding Corypad. Yes the bolts, machine and sheet metal screws were made by one manufacturer (different plants), and the nuts and washers were from two others. The manufacturer of the first three and the nuts were passivated to ASTM A-967 and the washers were passivated to the old QQP-35C spec.

RE: Salt Spray Test & SS

I would investigate variations in the forming (machining?) and passivation processes.

RE: Salt Spray Test & SS

Threads which are roll formed would have a big advantage over cut threads. Sulfur level would have a big effect. If crevices are present, they are not good, but I would bet on one of the first two I cited.

RE: Salt Spray Test & SS

(OP)
All four 304 parts measured below the .03% sulphur specification requirement, with the 303 washer falling below the .15% sulphur. The bolt, which went the full 500 hours, had the highest level of sulphur, though it fell within the requirements.

All threaded parts were roll thread and cold headed.

Thank you for the new angles to check.   

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources