|
|
Historical Articles
April, 1952 issue of Plating
Conservation of Nickel in the Plating
of Chemical Process Equipment
A. Kenneth Graham
Graham, Crowley & Associates, Inc., Jenkintown, PA
IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, steel equipment
with a protective electrodeposited nickel coating has been used to an increasing
extent in the chemical industry in lieu of all-nickel or nickel-clad equipment.
Electrodeposited coatings for this purpose must meet specifications for minimum
thickness or minimum porosity or both. There will be a minimum thickness required
to pass the porosity test. For the more severe chemical applications, an added
thickness of coating is necessary to provide the required service life, and
this additional thickness depends upon the rate of corrosion of nickel in the
specific environment. Because the coating thickness required by the porosity
test is dependent -upon a large number of factors, it is important as a means
of conserving nickel that such conditions be established that the test can be
passed with the minimum coating thickness. In view of the current critical shortage
of nickel, a brief discussion of the factors that influence the minimum coating
thickness might prove of value.
STEEL QUALITY
The quality of the steel is a factor of first importance. Steel can be classified
with respect to its cleanliness, i. e., the amount and distribution of such
inclusions as slag and oxide. Oxide produced during hot rolling is embedded
in the surface of the steel and varies greatly in amount depending upon the
care exercised in controlling the oxidation and in scale removal during rolling
and subsequent pickling. Unfortunately, the consumer-has no control over these
factors, and with the current shortage of steel, one must usually accept steel
from whatever sources are available.
PRECLEANING CYCLE
To compensate for the lack of cleanliness and to render the steel surface more
uniform and satisfactory as a basis for a plated coating for chemical uses,
it is common practice to sand-blast the steel to remove surface defects and
inclusions. The subsequent cleaning and acid pickling are designed to remove
soil and further remove oxide inclusions, as well as embedded sand or grit particles.
The first requirement of a good precleaning
cycle for plating is that the coating have good adhesion. The data in Table
I illustrate variations in the adhesion of nickel applied to a sand-blasted
steel surface that has been subjected to several different precleaning cycles.
The adhesion was tested by a pealing test after nickel plating to thicknesses
of 4.5 and 6 mils, the heavier nickel coating giving the more severe test. It
may be seen that the adhesion is very sensitive to the method of precleaning.
Data are given in Table TI showing the effect of precleaning cycles 1 and 4
on the behavior of nickel of different thicknesses in the hot-water-corrosion
test. It may be seen in the third column that a 3-mil (76-µ) nickel coating
was sufficient to pass successfully the corrosion test* when applied over a
good sand-blasted surface following the good precleaning cycle 4. With precleaning
cycle 1, however, the 3-mil (76-µ) coating was not sufficiently thick
to pass the test. On the other hand, a poorly sand-blasted surface from which
the oxide had been incompletely removed required a nickel coating 4.5 mil (114
µ) thick in order to pass the test.
*Three-hour immersion
in air-agitated tap water at 185 ± 5° F.
Table
I. Effect of Cleaning Cycle on Adhesion of Coating |
|
Adhesion*
of Nickel at Nickel Thickness of |
Cleaning
Cycle |
4.5
mil |
6.0
mil |
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 |
Very Good
Very Good
No Good
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Good |
No Good
Excellent
|
*By
pealing testthe greater nickel thickness gives the more severe test. |
Table
II. Coating Thickness Required to Pass Corrosion Test |
|
|
Hot
Corrosion Test* Rating |
Nickel
Thickness, mils |
Cleaning
Cycle |
Good Sand Blasting
&
Oxide Removal |
Poor Sand Blasting
&
Incomplete Oxide Removal |
1.5
3.0
3.0
4.5
4.5 |
4
1
4
1
4 |
Failure
Borderline
Perfect
--
-- |
Bad Failure
Failure
Slight Failure
Perfect
Perfect |
*Temperature
185 ± 5° F, time 3 hours, air-agitation |
IRON STRIKE
An undercoat of electrodeposited iron has been shown to reduce the porosity
of the nickel coating(1), and Thon(2) has demonstrated that a very thin preliminary
iron deposit would reduce the permeability of electrodeposited nickel foil.
It was considered impractical to deposit a heavy iron coating prior to nickel
plating of the chemical equipment specifically involved at the time this matter
was under consideration. An attempt was made, however, to determine the value
of a thin strike coating of iron (0.005.05 mil; 0.131.3 µ) under nickel
deposits 3.0.0 mils (7102 µ) in thickness as a means of improving the
hot-water corrosion-test rating. The data presented in Table III indicate that
nothing is gained by the use of these thin iron undercoats.
Table
III. Effect of Iron "Strike" on
Nickel Thickness Required to Pass Corrosion Test |
Iron
Undercoat, mils |
Nickel
Deposit, mils |
Hot
Water Corrosion Test* Rating |
0
0
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.05
0.05
|
3.0
4.5
3.0
4.0
3.0
3.0
4.0 |
Failure
Perfect
Failure
Borderline
Failure
Failure
Borderline |
*Temperature
185 ± 5° F, time 3 hours, air-agitation |
Table
IV. Effect of Brushing & Application of a Second Nickel Coating on
Nickel Thickness Required to Meet Corrosion Test Requirement |
|
No.
of Rust Spots in Hot Water Corrosion Test* for |
Original
Ni Deposit, mils |
Surface
Treatment |
2nd
Ni Deposit, mils |
1
hour |
2
hours |
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0 |
--
Brush
--
Brush
--
Brush |
0
0
1.0
0
1.0
1.0 |
0
0
0
0
4
0 |
10
0
0
0
14
1 |
*Temperature
185 ± 5° F, air-agitation |
OTHER TECHNIQUES
Experience has shown that brushing the nickel surface with a rotating stainless-steel
crimped-wire brush will improve the corrosion-test rating. It is assumed that
there is sufficient burnishing or flowing of the nickel over minute capillary
openings or pores to account for this improvement. It is known that there are
pores in electrodeposited nickel, and other metal coatings, and that the porosity
is reduced as the thickness of the coating is increased. If one should brush
the surface of a nickel deposit and subsequently apply a second nickel coating,
it is logical to expect that any pores in the second coating would not necessarily
occur at the same sites as the pores in the first coating, especially if the
pore diameters were small. The data presented in Table IV not only confirm this
view, but show that it is possible to reduce the required thickness of nickel
further by the use of this technique to improve the corrosion-test rating.
DESIGN LIMITATIONS
The findings reported in this article were based on tests on flat panels on
which the metal distribution was extremely uniform. The irregularly shaped objects
met in practice are, however, more difficult to plate uniformly. The minimum
thickness must be deposited on the most inaccessible portion of the surface
in order that the object pass the corrosion test. Good engineering with proper
spacing and location of anodes with respect to the surface to be plated will
improve the metal distribution and reduce the average amount of nickel required.
However, these steps cannot be expected to correct difficulties arising out
of poor or complicated design. It has been necessary, for example, to use average
nickel thicknesses of 5-7 mils (127-178 µ) on large objects to obtain
the minimum thickness of 3 mils (76 µ) in recessed areas. Much can be
and has been done to reduce the required average thickness by modifying the
design.
PLATING PRIOR TO FORMING
Because of the limitation imposed by design on the distribution of electrodeposited
coatings, attention has been directed to the possibility of electroplating flat
sheets and then forming and fabricating the object. This is not as simple as
it first appears. Adhesion of the coating must be perfect, and even then the
properties of electrodeposited coatings are such that they may fail on severe
deformation. The most serious limitation is the possibility of mechanical damage
to the coating during forming, which can only be corrected by replating. Furthermore,
heavy plated coatings, 3 mils (76 µ) and more in thickness are particularly
limited in their forming characteristics, possibly because the structure changes
with increasing thickness. Internal stress in the electrodeposited coating becomes
an important factor and must be controlled. It does not appear likely, therefore,
that plating prior to forming will offer an easy solution to the problem of
metal distribution and conservation of nickel.
GOOD HOUSEKEEPING
Continuous electrolytic purification-of nickel plating baths is recommended
as a means of controlling the purity and quality of the deposited nickel. Even
though the current density employed in electrolytic purification is low, the
amount of nickel consumed may be considerable. It is important, therefore, that
care be exercised to prevent contamination of the plating bath with metallic
and organic impurities so that the amount of electrolytic purification may be
reduced to the minimum. The number of rejects requiring replating may also be
reduced thereby. Proper maintenance of rack insulation is important for similar
reasons. In other words, good housekeeping is a means for conservation of nickel.
ANODE SCRAP
In plating large and irregularly shaped objects, anodes of different lengths
and shapes must be used. The amount of anode scrap produced may, therefore,
be much larger than in the ordinary plating of decorative and protective coatings.
However, much has been done to reduce the amount of anode scrap by using scrap
anodes where short-length anodes are required and by using anode-saving baskets.
REFERENCES CITED
(1). A. W. Hothersall and R. A. F. Hammond, Trans. Electrochem. Soc. 73, 449
(1938).
(2). N. Thon, L. Yang and D. Kelemen, Plating 37, 749 (1950).
|
|