There is a positive “sea change” of growing optimism in the product surface finishing industry. At the recent SUR/FIN conference, rather than the attitude “alas, there’s a whale sitting on me, I’m stuck under water, what can I do?” we heard, “oh!, there’s a whale sitting on me, so I’m going to push it off; then I’ll swim to my production goal.”
SUR/FIN is not an aquatic competition, it’s a conference and trade show sponsored by the National Association of Surface Finishers (NASF). At this year’s conference in Cleveland, BFK Solutions experienced the program as participants, presenters, and hosts of an exhibitor booth.
Chronic manufacturing problems, such as supply chain performance and regulatory constraints, persist. (1). However, problems are being perceived as challenges to be overcome, not as an unalterable state of affairs.
Instead of looking at surface prep – what we call critical cleaning – as an incomprehensible mystery, manufacturers are looking to understand the principles of surface prep and to apply them in a rational, practical manner. This interest in surface prep applies not only to gaining a competitive edge in traditional surface finishing and manufacturing but also to pushing the boundaries of opportunity in such areas as 3D printing and cold spray (2).
Revisit the basics
To advance manufacturing efficiency, surface finishers are revisiting cleaning basics. They want to understand ultrasonic cleaning, rather than to treat it as a commodity item. . People asked about basics, both at out our talk on the effect of ultrasonic parameters on light metals (3), and in informal discussions at our booth. For example, they wanted to understand why you need to run the ultrasonic tank for awhile prior to starting production runs. The reason, by the way, is to degas the system. If there are dissolved gases in the cleaning chemistry, when you turn on the ultrasonic system, you get “cushy” “bubbles that don’t implode well. That means cleaning will not be optimally effective.
Explore the variables
Manufacturers seem more interested in understanding why the ultrasonic system works, in testing the variables. They want to understand the role of temperature and frequency and cleaning agent chemistry. We ourselves continue to challenge long-held assumptions by testing variables. We presented initial results at SUR/FIN; and, as they say, studies are ongoing.
3D printing opens up a world of possibilities in product design and function. However, the complex designs made possible with 3D printing can also make cleaning a more difficult task (4). Based on attendee interest, a number of metal finishers may be looking at additive manufacturing as a near-term goal.
Change and Environmental Challenges
Environmental issues, notably hexavalent chromium, have dominated the metal finishing industry. Sometimes to the extent that coping with compliance can seem like an end in itself, overshadowing production of quality product.
In his keynote address (5), Duane Drobnich, Supervisor and Technical Specialist for fasteners at the Ford Motor Company, discussed the positive aspects of environmental challenges. Drobnich called on manufacturers to be proactive rather than reactive, asserting that environmental legislation provides an “opportunity to embrace change and incorporate improvements in technology in a timely manner. Consider it an opportunity and not a hindrance.”
In the surface finishing industry, much of the environmental pressures have centered about reducing or eliminating the use of hexavalent chromium. Eric Eichinger reported on results of a twenty-five effort by a collaboration of aerospace companies to eliminate Cr+6 (6). While significant progress has been made in eliminating some uses of Cr+6 , Eichinger notes that substitutes, for example Nickel, have come under regulatory scrutiny and that aerospace still commonly uses hexavalent chromium. We look forward to Eric’s next update, maybe sooner than 25 years from now!
Evolution
SUR/FIN, and NASF are evolving. Surface finishing has grown to encompass plating and anodizing, and a lot more. Engineered coatings, thermal spray, nano-coatings, and other technologies are finding their way into conference discussions and into the exhibit hall. Coatings are stronger, there are more varieties, and there is a better understanding of what it takes to produce high quality coating on products.
Déjà vu all over again
Many of the recent developments in surface finishing remind us of the period in the late 1980s and early 1990s when CFC-113 and 1,1,1-trichlorethane, workhorse solvents in precision and critical cleaning applications, were phased out due to the effect of CFCs on the stratospheric ozone layer. It sparked a flurry of activity to come up with replacement solvents that also led to the development of alternative processes. Many of these processes proved to be more effective than those they replaced.
Today, we are seeing another flurry of activity, sparked partially by increasing restrictions on VOCs and by the impending phaseout of HCFC-225 (7-8).
Keep swimming!
Thankfully, at SUR/FIN14, we heard less of some comments. Examples include:
“I don’t need to clean, my customer does it.”
“I don’t need to clean, I just passivate.”
“Cleaning is always a problem.” (with no further comment)
It’s not that we have stopped complaining about cleaning problems and about regulatory constraints. What would we do for fun if we stopped complaining about cleaning and regulations? Instead, we’re seeing willingness to look at problems rationally, to tackle those problems one by one, to actually (gasp!) change processes, and to swim forward.
References
- B. Kanegsberg and E. Kanegsberg, “On the Surface: Confessions of a Mature Booth Babe,” Metal Finishing Magazine, July 2013.
- E. Malison, “Cold Spray for Additive Manufacturing or 3D Printing,” SUR/FIN 2014, Session 14, June 11, 2014.
- B. Kanegsberg and E. Kanegsberg, “Is Ultrasonics Cleaning the Answer for Light Metals Finishing?,” SUR/FIN 2014, Session 1, June 9, 2014.
- B. Kanegsberg and E. Kanegsberg, “Cleaning “Gotchas” in Additive Manufacturing,” SUR/FIN 2014, Session 14, June 11, 2014.
- D. Drobnich, “Go Further With Fastener Finishes,” SUR/FIN 2014, Keynote, June 11, 2014.
- E. Eichinger, “The 25 year Chrome Replacement Journey: Are we There Yet?,” SUR/FIN 2014, Session 3, June 10, 2014.
- “EPA Changes Direction—Again,” Clean Source, January 2014.
- “VOC Exempt Substitute for HCFC-225?,” Clean Source, March 2014.
