Published by the
American Electroplaters Society,
Publication and Editorial Office 3040
Diversey Ave., Chicago
VOL. XVI MAY, 1929 No. 5
Detroit Convention Items of Interest
The
national convention of the American Electroplaters Society occurs at Detroit
on July 8, 9, 10, and 11th. We want you to make your plans
now, so that nothing
can interfere with your presence at Detroit on those four days. It is a
very central point and easy for everyone to reach. Railroad facilities include
M. C., N. Y. C., Pennsylvania, Big Four, Wabash, and P. M. so that
through service
is provided from most large points.
However, our suggestion is that
you get out the family flivver, or Pierce Arrow, as the case may be, tell
your
boss you will be back in two weeks,
and bring along
your family with the idea of attending the convention, and then going
north to inspect the playground of America, northern Michigan, returning
down
through Wisconsin, or through Canada, depending upon your destination.
Wide concrete
roads stretch in every direction from Detroit, and monitoring is a joy.
From
the east, you can skirt the southern edge of the Great Lakes through Cleveland
and Toledo, or you can cross at Buffalo, and pass along the
northern side through
Canada. From the South, the Dixie Highway runs straight up from Cincinnati.
From the West, there are two excellent routes from Chicago.
We are going
to try to make your stay, both for you and your family, as pleasant as
possible. The headquarters will be the Statler Hotel,
which
is large,
but also popular, so we would suggest that- you write the hotel for
reservations as early as possible. Other hotels in the immediate
vicinity include
the Book-Cadillac,
Tuller, and Detroit-Leland.
Our tentative program of entertainment
starts on Monday with a theater party for the ladies at the Fisher Theater.
This is certainly the
most unique movie
house in its decorations and effects in the country and is considered
by many even handsomer than Roxy’s in New York. We hope to
be able to take you backstage, and as a result anticipate a flood
of requests from the male contingent,
but as there is an educational session that evening for them, they
are not invited. The theater is located right in the center of the
new Fisher Building,
by all
means the handsomest office building in the world, and a glance at
the foyer is worth the whole trip.
On Tuesday the men are busy with
educational sessions all day, but
we plan a pleasant trip for the ladies around Belle Isle, culminating
with
lunch
at the
Yacht Club. Belle Isle is located right in the mouth of the Detroit
River as it passes out of Lake St. Clair, and is entirely a city
park, with
natural wooded
areas, winding lagoons and channels, and altogether picturesque.
We know you will be delighted with both it and the Yacht Club which
is
situated
on it.
Wednesday comes the first frolic
for everyone. The men have a session in the morning. However, we suggest
that the women folk, including
the kids,
do not
wait for them, but go on to Bois Blanc, leaving them to follow
in the afternoon. There are two morning boats on which your tickets
will be
good. The men
leave at 1:30, and if the ladies are foolish enough to prefer to
dance with their
own husbands, instead of someone else, on the way down, they can
wait for them.
Bois Blanc is an island in Canadian
waters about 12 hours down-stream from Detroit. It is beautiful and there
is plenty to do.
In addition
to the
planned entertainment
such as the baseball game, etc., there is bathing, tennis, a fair
golf course, dancing all afternoon, and the most wonderfully equipped
playground
for the
kiddies that you have ever seen. There is only one drawback and
that is that they never
get a chance at any of the quantities of high swings, because they
can never get their mothers out of them. You will have a good time,
and your
families
will be missing a bet if they do not spend the entire day at the
island, even if you
cannot. We are providing one meal which you can eat whenever hungry
throughout the day, without waiting for any specified time. The
boats bring you
back to Detroit about 8 o’clock.
Thursday we leave open for
the ladies to recuperate from their unwonted exercise of the previous
day; let the beauty parlors get in their
work in preparation
for the banquet at night, or go shopping as they please.
After the
business session in the morning, the men spend the afternoon visiting plants.
We are only sorry we cannot take all of you everywhere,
due to lack
of time, as we have remarkable plating installations in this territory,
but we are
going to give you as broad a choice as possible, and allow each
individual to pick the ones he prefers to see. In order to arrange transportation
properly, we are asking you to make your choice at time of registration.
Thursday
night we wind it up with the banquet, which we are trying
to make a humdinger.
We want you, and we know that if
you will show this to your boss at home, we will have you, so please
don’t cross us up, by not showing it to her.
— Convention Com.
SOME FACTS ABOUT CHROMIUM PLATING
By Jacob Hay, C. M. Hall Lamp Company,
Detroit, Mich.
One year ago today, or
about that time, I presented to this Branch and the Society at large, a paper
on Chromium Plating. At that time, I presented
the facts as
I knew them, but as time goes on we progress and for this reason
I give you my experience with chromium plating according to modern standards
and
present day
production methods.
We platers must prepare ourselves
to meet any emergencies that may present themselves daily. Will we be ready
to meet the
call when
the emergency
arises? One cannot
depend on outside help as outside help usually knows very little
of our problems. Such help always means delay, and the results
are seldom
satisfactory.
We
are oftentimes called upon to produce 24 hours a day and must be
prepared to assume
the responsibility as our own. So, with this in mind, I am going
to tell you what I know about chromium plating, but in order to
do this
I must
first go into
the matter of polishing and buffing.
Chromium plating brought about
a radical change in polishing and buffing. In other words, we had to learn
to polish and buff all over
again,
as metal polished
and buffed for nickel finish only will not do for chromium. In
nickel plating scratches may be buffed out to produce a fairly good finish,
but with chromium
not only ?re defects in the metal magnified, but behold the scratches
buffed out in the nickel all come back again.
The buffing and polishing
composition is a very important factor - in preparing the metal for chromium
plating. The following tripoli
composition I have
found very satisfactory for buffing brass and also zinc die castings:
66%
of pure rose colored trioline,
17% of double pressed stearic acid,
17,%
of good tallow.
Cleaning is another very
important factor. For this reason after the metal has been cut down with
tripoli on
the automatic ‘buffing
machines or otherwise and all buffing machine work and stamping have
been completed, the finished parts
should then be cleaned in- a washing machine to remove all tripoli
and ‘grease
left on the surface of the metal by the preceding operations; The
metal parts should then be brass colored with a lime composition.
Here, too, it is very
important to have-a lime with a binder that will easily dissolve
in the electric cleaner.
Any cleaner that will not oxidize
brass or zinc die castings can be used, but remember there are some very
poor cleaners on the market,
and it
is up to the
plater to find the best cleaner adapted to his class of work.
The
electric cleaner should be operated at a temperature of about 200 degrees
Fahrenheit with a voltage from six to twelve. Cleaning
time
one and one-quarter
minutes. On large production it would be well to have the following
rinse method: cleaner, water rinse, cyanide dip, water rinse, acid
dip consisting
of 20% hydrofluoric
acid, then water rinse. This method is very satisfactory for brass
and die castings.
For plating brass parts, I recommend
the following nickel solution:
32 oz. nickel sulphate,
4 oz. nickel
chloride,
4 oz. boric
acid,
2 oz. sodium
sulphate.
This type of solution when first
made up will have a pH of about 5.4. I would then add enough sodium perborate
to bring the pH to
5.9. This
solution
gives
the best results at a temperature of 120 degrees Fahrenheit, and
30 amperes per square foot. Running time 13 minutes. We then have
a deposit
of three
ten-thousandths
of: an inch. This amount of nickel is very essential for a good
substantial chromium plate.
For die castings (nickel before
chromium plate) I recommend the following solution:
10 oz. single nickel salt,
2 oz. ammonia chloride,
3 oz. boric acid,
24 oz. sodium sulphate anhydrous,
Water, 1 gallon.
P. H. from 5.9 to 6.1. Temperature
for this bath should be 80 degrees Fahrenheit. Nickel plating zinc die castings
in this solution is
very satisfactory,
and one will not have any nickel peeling in connection with the
later chromium deposit,
and the finish will also stand up very satisfactorily under all
atmospheric conditions.
Parts nickel plated should then
be nickel colored with lime composition of a high quality. This lime should
have a composition made
with
a binder of
stearic
acid only, as it is very poor policy to use a strong cleaner in
attempting to dissolve insoluble greases. If you do use a strong cleaner,
you
may find that
you have to increase the voltage of the chromium tank two volts
more than: if you use mild cleaners only.
The following method can be used
for cleaning nickel before chromium plating: electric cleaner at six volts,
temperature 180 degrees Fahrenheit,
cold
water rinse, acid dip consisting of hydrochloric acid. Keep at
4 degrees Beaume; 2
water rinses afterwards, then ready for chromium plating.
Now gentlemen,
you have heard the methods of procedure to prepare metals for chromium plating.
The next step will be to prepare the
chromium
solution. I bolt
the lead anodes to the positive copper buss bars. Add enough water
in the tank to fill a little more than half full. I then hang old
hooks on the
negative bars
and heat the water to 150 degrees Fahrenheit. Then start the generator
set. I bring the voltage to seven or eight volts and add enough
chromic acid to
bring
the solution to 32 degrees Beaume. -This done, I add enough water
to fill the tank. The Beaume of the solution will then be about
22 degrees
at a
temperature of 112 degrees.Fahrenheit. I then take parts to be
chromium plated and hang
them
in the solution. If the parts show a brown discoloration, I add
sulphuric acid until I get a very good bright chromium plate. Right at this
point, we analyze
the solution for sulphuric acid. The best acid concentration for
our work is two-tenths of one per cent. We proceed as follows:
For the analysis
take a 10 cc. sample of the plating solution, measured accurately out of
a burette.
Procedure—Dilute this sample to
about 200 cc. and add 10 cc. of concentrated HCl and 15 cc. Glacial
Acetic Acid. Bring to a boil and while boiling
slowly add 5 cc. of 10% BaC12 solution. Continue boiling for five to ten minutes
and
let stand in a warm place for 3 to 4 hours. Filter, wash thoroughly
with hot water and then wash at least five times with a boiling hot lo HCl
solution.
Wash free from acid with hot water, ignite in a platinum crucible
and in an inclined
position, and weigh the barium sulphate. The barium sulphate should
be heated only to a dull red heat. In no case should it be heated over the
blast-lamp.
The calculation is as follows:
g. BaSO4 X factor for the substance X 13.352—ounces substance
per gallon of plating solution.
Log.—13.352 is 1.12556.
Example.—10 cc. of
plating solution after being treated as above yielded 0.9807 grams BaSO4.
It is desired to know how much H2SO.
66° Beaume is in the solution.
0.9804 X 0.45087 X 13.352 = 5.9021
ounces H2SO4 66°
Beaume per gallon of plating solution.
For the analysis take a 10 cc. sample
of the plating solution, measured accurately out of a burette.
Procedure.—Dilute this sample to
about 100 cc., heat to boiling and add 1 cc. of concentrated hydrochloric
acid, and, then add a boiling
hot 10% solution of Barium Chloride, drop by drop with constant stirring.
When
the precipitation is complete, 1-2 cc. more of the reagent are
added and the precipitate is allowed to settle on the water-bath.
This takes
place quickly
if the two solutions are hot. After the precipitate has settled
it can be filtered immediately. If only small amounts of sulphuric acid
are
present, it is best
to let the solution stand twelve hours before filtering. The clear,
supernatant liquid is poured through a filter and the residue in
the beaker is covered
with 50-100 cc. of boiling water, and after allowing the precipitate
to settle
for
a few minutes, the clear liquid is poured off. The decantation
is repeated four times, after which the precipitate is transferred to
the filter
and washed with
boiling water until 3 cc. of the filtrate will no longer show a
test for barium on the addition of a drop of dilute sulphuric acid. The
precipitate is dried
somewhat, then ignited in a platinum crucible and weighed as barium
sulphate.
The precipitate should be heated
only to a dull red heat. In no case should it be heated over the blast-lamp.
Purification.—Where
very accurate results are desired, it is necessary to test the purity
of the precipitate as follows: After weighing,
the precipitate is covered with 2-3 cc. of distilled water and two drops of
double-normal hydrochloric
acid are added. The crucible is then covered with a watch-glass and
its contents digested for 15 minutes upon the water bath. The solution is then
decanted
through a small filter. This extraction with dilute hydrochloric
acid is repeated from
three to five times, after which the barium sulphate in the crucible
is dried, the filter added and ignited wet in the inclined crucible, which
is afterwards
weighed.
For the highest degree of accuracy,
the precipitate of barium sulphate after it has been ignited, should be fused
in a platinum crucible
with four times
its weight of sodium carbonate; the melt extracted with water and
the barium carbonate
residue washed with sodium carbonate solution. After acidifying
the filtrate with hydrochloric acid and boiling off the carbon dioxide,
the sulphuric
acid is precipitated as previously described.
PREPARATION OF THE SOLUTIONS: Standard N/10 Potassium Dichromate. This
solution must be made with the utmost care and accuracy, for upon it depends
the accuracy of
the results
obtained.
For convenience, the use of ”Fixanal” is recommended.
If, however, this is not available, the solution may be made by
accurately weighing out
4.9035 gr. of potassium dichromate and making this up to one liter.
N/10
Mohr’s Salt. It is not necessary that the normality
of this solution be exact, so long as it is accurately known. Weigh
out approximately
40 gr. of the highest grade Mohr’s Salt (FeSO4)(NH)4)2SO2 ·
6H2O.
Introduce the Mohr’s Salt into one liter volumetric flask; add 100
cc. of 1-3 H2SO4 and
sufficient water to dissolve all the Mohr’s Salt. After the
Mohr’s
Salt is dissolved, dilute to the mark.
The Mohr’s Salt does
not keep a uniform strength over a -very Long period of time, and
should be re-standardized at least once each day.
The
standardization is as follows:
Introduce 25 cc. of the Standard N/10 Potassium Dichromate Solution
into a 400 cc. beaker and dilute to 200 cc. with 10%: H:2SO,. Titrate
this
potassium dichromate
solution with the Mohr’s salt solution.
25 cc. Mohr’s Salt Used.
Mohr’s Salt Factor.
NOTE: The
factor thus obtained is the factor to be used in the calculation given, but
it is as will be noticed,
ten times the
true normality
of the Mohr’s
Salt Solution.
DETERMINATION: Measure out accurately 10 cc. of the plating solution into one liter
volumetric flask by means of a burette and dilute to the mark with
distilled water.
By means of a burette introduce 25 cc. of this solution into a
400 cc. beaker, dilute
to 200 cc. with a 10% solution of H2SO4.
Titrate with N/10 Mohr’s Salt.
CALCULATIONS: The calculations of the results are as follows:
cc. N/10 Mohr’s Salt X Mohr’s Salt Factor X 1.7805 ounces Chromic
Acid per gallon.
Log. 1.7805 is 0.25054.
PREPARATION
OF THE SOLUTION: Standard N/10 Potassium Dichromate. This
solution must be made with the utmost care and accuracy, for upon it depends
the accuracy
of
the results
obtained.
For convenience the use of ”Fixanal” is recommended.
If, however, this cannot be obtained; the solution may be made
by accurately weighing out
4.9035 gr. of potassium dichromate and making this up to one liter.
Potassium
Iodide Solution 10%. The potassium iodide used should be ”free
from Iodate.” It is recommended that this solution be prepared
in small quantities as needed, as follows:
Dissolve approximately
10 gr. of potassium iodide in 90 cc. of distilled
water.
Starch Indicator. Mix 1 g. potato
starch into a thin paste with cool distilled water, and pour into 200 :cc.
of boiling water with continuous
stirring.
Let boil for a few minutes and then let stand quietly for several
hours. Pour off
the clear supernatant fluid and preserve in tightly stoppered bottles
with the addition of a few drops of chloroform.
Hydrochloric Acid
4N. Dilute 350 cc. of C. P. Hydrochloric acid (35-36% sp.g. 1.18) to one
liter with distilled water.
Sodium Thiosulphate. (Na2S2O3 · 5H2O). N/10.
Dissolve 25 gr. Of the highest grade crystallized sodium thiosulphate in
distilled- water
that has previously
been
boiled and cooled, and dilute to the mark.
STANDARDIZATION: In order to obtain accurate results, the directions as to quantities
and time must be followed to the letter. Introduce from a burette
into each
of two glasses,
stoppered, 25 cc. Erlenmeyer flasks, 25 cc. of the N/10 potassium
dichromate standard solution. Add 10 cc. of the 10% potassium iodide
solution,
using a pipette or graduated cylinder and 65 cc. of distilled water.
Shake
well by twirling the
flask and add 20 cc. of approximately 4N hydrochloric acid. Insert
the stopper immediately, shake thoroughly by twirling and titrate
at once
as follows:
Add the sodium thiosulphate solution
until the color of the iodine is almost gone. Wash the stopper and the sides
of the flask with
a small
stream of
distilled water, and add five drops of the starch indicator. Then
add additional sodium
thiosulphate solution carefully (until a drop destroys the last
trace of blue color. This end point is very sharp).
25 cc. sodium thiosulphate solution sodium thiosulphate factor.
NOTE: The
factor thus obtained is the factor to be used’ in the calculations
given, but it is, as will be noticed, ten times the true normality
of the sodium thiosulphate.
NOTE 2: The
best flask to use for the purpose, is an Erlenmeyer flask
with a deep gutter, which is especially made’ for iodine determinations. ‘If
this is not available, however, any glass stoppered flask may be
used.
DETERMINATION: Measure out accurately 10 cc. of the plating solution into a one
liter volumetric flask by means of a burette and dilute to the
mark with
distilled water.
By means of a burette introduce 25 cc. Of this solution into each
of the two 250
cc. volumetric
flasks as described in the ”Standardization” of the
sodium thiosulphate solution. Add 10 cc. of the 10% potassium iodide
solution,
using a pipette
or graduated cylinder and 65 cc. of distilled water. Shake well
by twirling the
flask and add 20 cc. of approximately 4N hydrochloric acid. Insert
the stopper immediately, shake thoroughly by twirling and titrate
at once as follows:
Add the sodium thiosulphate solution
until the color of the iodine
is almost gone. Wash the stopper and the sides of the flask with
a small
stream of
distilled water, and add five drops of the starch indicator. Then
add additional sodium
thiosulphate solution carefully until a drop destroys the last
trace of blue color. This end point is very sharp.
CALCULATIONS:
The calculation of the result is as follows:
cc N/10 Sodium Thiosulphate X Sodium
Thiosulphate Factor X 1.75.
Ounces Chromic
Acid per gallon of plating Solution.
Log. 1.7805 is 0.25054.
In controlling the chrome plating
bath, it is also necessary to determine the percentage of CrO3,
so that in bringing the solution up to strength after it
has been in service, the same ratio between the CrO3 and
H2 SO, can
be restored. In plating tanks equipped with lead anodes, which
is the case
at our plant
of the C. M. Hall Lamp Company, very little chromium dichromate
is formed and since
about 99% of the solids in the bath is chromic acid, its approximate
concentration is most readily obtained by means of a hydrometer
and a density table such
as the one attached. For instance, if you want a solution of 22
Beaume density, you need 42 oz. of chromic acid per gallon. For
practical
purposes the result
will prove sufficiently accurate.
The data necessary for control of
chrome plating bath then involves only the specific gravity of
the solution and the percentage of sulphate
calculated
as
H2SO4 If sulphate was not lost by dragout
spraying it would only be necessary to replace the CrO3,
but since these losses cannot be prevented,
additional
H2SO4 must be added to keep the ratio constant.
In
dealing with chemicals of 100% purity, a very satisfactory practical
ratio of CrO3 to H2SO4 is 100
to 1 by weight. In other words, for every 250 grams
of CrO3 per liter of solution, there should be present
2.5 grams of H2SO4 in order
to insure satisfactory plating. Although .20 or .02 per cent is
a good standard. When making up the solutions the purity of the
CrO3 should
be known so that
allowance can be made for this reason: the regular 99% CrO3 containing
less than .05 sulphate,
and pure concentrated H2SO4 should be used.
You
will appreciate that the ratio of 100:1 is only a typical example,
and cannot be utilized in all cases, because of the different classes
of work
and the conditions
of plating. I suggest therefore that the bath be analyzed when
it is producing perfect results, and whatever ratio between the CrO3 and
H2 SO4 is found
by the above method to use as a standard.
Table No. 1 Chromium
Plating
This
table pertains to quality plating, as on Radiator Shells, Fixtures,
etc., and automobile lamps.
Conditions: Heavy Solution 22 Be. Temp 45 to Gr. Centigrade Current Density 1
Amp. Sq. In. Efficiency 15%.
Plating Time, min.
Thickness, inches
Coverage per lb. of
Metal, sq. ft.
Weight of Metal Deposited,
oz./sq.ft.
1
.0000042
6600
.00235
2
.0000084
3300
.0047
3
.0000126
2200
.00705
4
.0000168
1650
.0094
5
.0000210
1320
.01175
6
.0000252
1100
.01410
7
.0000294
942
.01645
8
.0000336
842
.01880
9
.0000378
732
.02115
10
.0000420
660
.02350
15
.0000630
440
.03525
20
.0000840
330
.04700
30
.0001260
220
.07050
45
.0001890
146
.10575
60
.0002500
110
.14100
June
15, 1928.
Table No. 2
Density of Chromic Acid Solutions as a Function of the CrO3 Content
Density,
40° F – 15° C
g/L
CrO3
oz./gal.
Content
Density,
40° F – 15° C
g/L
CrO3
oz./gal.
Content
1.01
15
2.0
1.18
257
34.4
1.02
29
3.9
1.19
272
36.4
1.03
43
5.8
1.20
288
38.6
1.04
57
7.6
1.21
301
40.3
1.05
71
9.5
1.22
316
42.3
1.06
85
11.4
1.23
330
44.2
1.07
100
13.4
1.24
345
46.2
1.08
114
15.3
1.25
360
48.2
1.09
129
17.3
1.26
375
50.2
1.10
143
19.1
1.27
390
52.2
1.11
157
21.0
1.28
406
54.5
1.12
171
22.9
1.29
422
56.5
1.13
185
34.8
1.30
438
58.7
1.14
200
26.8
1.31
453
60.7
1.15
215
28.8
1.32
468
62.7
1.16
229
30.6
1.33
484
64.8
1.17
243
32.6
1.34
500
67.0
Referring to this table, I might
state that we proceed as follows in adding chromic acid to our solutions
to bring up Beaume —For
instance, if the solution is 20 Beaume and it should be 22 Beaume,
22—20=2. 2X.l7, which is the
factor,=.34. .34X26D which is the number of gallons = 92.4 lbs. of
chromic acid.
Table No. 3
Strength of Solutions
% vs. Lbs. per Gal.
Lbs. Solute per gal.
of solution
Sp.g (60°) X % X 0.832823
= % solute in solution
= Lbs. per gal. / (
Sp.g. X 0.0832823)
Log. 0.0832823 8.92055
Oz. solute per gal.
of solution
= Spg. - (60° ) X o 1.3325
= % solute in solution
= Ozs. per
gal. / (Sp.g. X 1.3325
Log. 1.3325 0.12467
Table
No. 4
A to B
B to A
A
B
Factor
Log
Factor
Log
H2SO4
SO4
0.97945
9.99098
1.0212
0.00912
H2SO4
SO3
0.81632
9.91186
1.2564
0.09914
H2SO4
H2SO4 66°
1.0731
0.03063
0.9319
9.96937
BaSO4
H2SO4
0.42016
9.62342
—
—
BaSO4
H2SO4 66°
0.45087
9.65405
—
—
BSO4
SO4
0.41153
9.61440
—
—
BaSO4
SO3
0.34299
9.53528
—
—
Factors showing the relation
between any two of the above given formulae may be obtained by obvious calculations
from the factors already
given.
The Molecular Weights used are:
H2SO4 98.08 Log—99158
SO4 96.064 Log—98256
SO3 80.064 Log—90344
H2SO 66° 105.25 Log—02221
These Are Factors for Sulphuric
Acid
Gentlemen, when I think about chromium plating of the past four years,
and the experiences I have had; I cannot help but quote our very
dear friend and member,
Past Editor Mr. Richard Hedley, which reads as follows:
Chromium Jingles
Oh, listen you
platers and you shall hear
All chromium plating problems made clear,
Just exactly how it is done
What you must do and what you must shun,
Take my advice and sidestep all woe
For I’ll tell you all that there is to know,
Lots of chrome formulas come to your sight
Choose any one for they’re all of them right,
They all have been successfully tried,
The main thing is chromium trioxide.
Use chromic acid and water sufficient
Of both and each to make it efficient
Add some chrome sulphate so much and no more
Or a wee drop of H2SO4
It ain’t your chromium education
The trick is in the manipulation.
Keep the solution at 115 in the shade
Or just about 45 centigrade.
This chromium stuff has awful bad breath
So ventilate good or you’ll sure choke to death.
Use 200 amps. for each square foot of cathodes
And use steel, iron, or lead for the anodes.
Just one thing about chrome plating
Won’t make you sigh
Just wipe off the work and put it in dry
Use conductors and racks that are heavy and strong
Have everything right and nothing wrong,
Observe these instructions and all will go well
For you sure must admit they’re simple as H – l.
There is more truth
in this than we realize, so I will proceed to explain all the facts that
Mr. Richard Hedley brought out in his
thought. First,
take a solution,
for instance of the following formula:
Water 1 gal
Chromic Acid 25 to 50 oz.
Chromate of Iron Fine Powder 1 to 2 oz.
Chromic Sulphate 1/2 to 1 oz.
Then, here is another formula:
Water
1 gal.
Chromic Acid 48 oz.
Iron Chromate 1/2 oz.
Sulphuric Acid 60° Beaume 1/2 oz.
Then here is one more which I believe
is one of the latest of its kind:
Chromic Acid 48 oz.
Iron Chromate 12 oz.
Chromium Carbonate 4 oz.
Water 1 gal.
Gentlemen, if you should
make up a solution of these formulae and one of you would get results and
another
would make up the same solution
and get
no results,
what is wrong? The answer to this question is very simple—as
chromic acid and sulphuric acid are the only ingredients that really
count in a chromium
solution,
it is very easy to see why would one get good results and the other
would not. Let me explain them: In the first formula the iron chromate
is absolutely useless,
and the only reason you get a chromium deposit is because of the
high sulphuric acid content, and the high voltage you have to use
to reduce the ions and at
the same time deposit chromium. In other words, the excess of sulphuric
acid will take up iron chromate, and only then can you get a good
chromium deposit.
This is one of the reasons why Oscar Servis found that by adding
iron chromate he ruined his solution. Had Mr. Servis increased
his sulphuric acid content,
he undoubtedly would have obtained a very good deposit. On the
other hand, he removed the iron chromate by filtering his solution,
which
solution then
operated
satisfactorily.
By the way, I might state that Mr.
Servis recovered all but 2 oz. of all the iron chromate that he added from
50 oz.
The third formula is more simple
than the two first ones. The only reason you could get a deposit, if any,
would be that the chromic
acid the party
used was
high in sulphate, and the chromium carbonate and the iron chromate
settled to the bottom. The only thing that was really active
in the solution
was chromic
acid and H2SO4.
Should any of your gentlemen
doubt this, get a copy of Mr. Richard Schneidwind’s
paper on the study of patents on Electrodeposition of chromium,
and you will find a very good explanation there. So, that is the
very
reason why all of
them are right, according to Mr. Richard Hedley. Accordingly, only
chromic acid of
the highest quality, and if possible, free from sulphuric acid,
should be purchased, as then and only then can you get consistent
results
in production.
I have found that by using chromic
acid almost free from sulphuric,
and making daily additions of chromic acid, we keep our sulphuric
acid content
.02 per
cent over a period of two weeks, with only 50 cc. of sulphuric
acid added. The number
of pieces plated were approximately 72,000 per day, so you can
easily see it is not in your chromium education, but in the manipulation.
The temperature
is
very important. Ventilation is also a very important thing, from
the standpoint of health of the operator. By having good ventilation
none
of our operators
were affected and lost no working time on account of chromium sores
or fumes, and
the loss of chromium by the exhaust is very small.
In regard to anodes that should be used in chromium solutions —Dr.
O. P. Watts of the University of Wisconsin in his paper to the
American
Electro Platers
Society in Detroit, on December 14, 1927, leaves no doubt that
the lead anode is the proper anode to use. Some others recommend
steel and lead
anodes. I,
for my part, believe that steel anodes will be the only ones active,
and the lead
anode will be inactive due to the fact that the lead anode will
become covered with the lead peroxide, and as electric current
follows the line of
least resistance,
we might as well leave the lead anodes out if steel anodes are used.
Lead
anodes can easily be cleaned in cleaner with reversed current in a solution
of:
Caustic soda
Sodium cyanide Soda ash
Another good way to clean the scale
off lead anodes is to take and try the anodes and then run them through a
rolling machine.
The scale
will crack off, and can be removed with a steel wire brush very easily.
Gentlemen, in order to explain my
theory about lead anodes, I will give you two different chemical analyses
of solutions as I found
them, so
let us call
them
No. 1 and No. 2. Here is what we found:
No. 1
No. 2
Chromic acid
43.5 oz.
35.00 oz.
Chromic oxide
1.91
.87
Sulphuric acid
1.84
.68
Iron chromate
2.64
.00
Copper
2.00
1.00
Zinc
1.00
.50
Beaume at 84°F
30°
24°
Usually at 31 degrees Beaume, solution
No. 1 should have 56 oz. of chromic acid, and the actual amount of chromic
was
only 43 oz., so
if you use
steel anodes
you not only have to use high sulphate content and high voltage,
but you cannot even get a correct Beaume reading. Solution No.
2, as you
notice,
was almost
perfect, except that the sulphate content was a little high, and
I believe the sulphuric acid content had to be kept that high on
account
of the
copper and
zinc present in the solution. Both of these solutions were operated
for a period of six months. No. 1 had steel anodes, and No. 2,
had lead anodes.
On the other hand, I will give you
two analyses of two solutions with lead anodes, only to prove that by having
any other ingredients
than
chromic
acid and sulphuric
acid in the solution, you will invite trouble.
Chemical analyses of
the solutions showed the following:
No. 1
No.
2
Chromic Acid as CrO3
388.
g/2
396.
g/1
Chromic Acid as Cr6
202
206
Sulphate
as SO4
4.43
8.76
Trivalent
Chromium as Cr3
5.03
5.76
Iron
as Fe3
4.28
6.35
Copper
as Cu
—
5.21
Zinc
as Zn
—
4.63
Nickel
as Ni
—
—
This again would prove that the
sulphate content was kept high in bath No. 2, on account of metals that did
not belong there. The difference
in voltage
we
had to use was also large, as No. 1 bath would give a very good
deposit at 5 volts, whereas No. 2 would require 8 and 9, for the plating
of
the same
parts.
This would then prove if one has to go above 7 volts, the chrome
solution would not be normal, and the H2SO4 would
be too high. On the other
hand, if one has
to use high voltage and the amperage is low then one would not
have enough H2SO4, or else the anodes are
insulated with lead peroxide and it might
be poor contact
of the anodes.
It is well to watch the ammeter
at all times as it plays a very important part in chromium plating. The ammeter
is as
important in chromium
plating as in operating
a brass solution. For instance, if you have a tank load of which
you know from experience, would require 3000 amperes, and then
all at once
it drops
to 2000
amperes, what would it prove ? It would prove that either the anodes
are not active or the sulphate content in the chromium solution
is off, providing
of
course, that temperature and other conditions are correct.
Cleaning
material before chromium plating has its problems, and I believe it is mostly
on account of the chromium solution that the
operator
carries back
into the cleaners from the plating hooks. That is one reason why
I believe plating hooks should be washed very carefully in rinse,
and
by spray,
before using them
again, as the chromic acid carried into cleaners forms sodium chromate
and finally destroys all the alkaline in the cleaner and the life
of the cleaner
is very
short.
Racks for chrome plating will always
be a problem for each industry to work out, as that is really one of your
most important problems,
for
good chromium
plating.
All material should be
plated under spring tension, so you can see if we observe instructions all
will go well,
for you surely must
admit they’re simple.
By Jacob Hay,
C. M. Hall Lamp Company,
Detroit, Mich.
REPORT OF CONFERENCE ELECTROPLATING
RESEARCHES OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS
April 6, 1929
During the past few
years conferences have been held at the Bureau of Standards to discuss
the progress of the researches on electroplating
and appropriate
subjects for future research by the Bureau Staff and the Research
Associates of the American
Electroplaters’ Society. This year, at the invitation of
the Newark Branch and the Research Committee of the Electroplaters’ Society
the conference was held in Newark on April 6th, from 9 A. M. to
5 P. M. O. J. Sizelove of the Newark Branch presided at the morning
session, and R. J. O’Connor, chairman of the Research Committee
at the afternoon session. About 250 persons attended the meetings,
at which the following
subjects were presented and discussed.
1. Spotting Out.—W.
P. Barrows, Research Associate of the American Electroplaters’ Society,
presented a summary of his investigation of spotting out. The detailed
results of this study are now in press, as a Research paper of the Bureau of
Standards,
which will appear about June
1. As copies of this paper will
be distributed by the Electroplaters’ Society to all of its members, and to all subscribers
to the Research Fund, it will not be necessary to give the details
in this report. The study showed that there are two distinct types of spots
on finished or plated
metals such as builders’ hardware.
The ”crystal spots” consist
of radiating black crystals which form only on metals that have a
copper sulphide (”oxidized”)
finish and are lacquered. These spots are caused or accelerated by
the presence of
even
small amounts of sulphur, which may come from adjacent sulphur, rubber,
paper or cardboard. The most effective remedies are (a) the use of
lacquers found
to retard such spotting, (b) the application of a thin grease film,
and (c) the
use of wax paper for wrapping.
The ”stain spots” occur
chiefly on cast metals, pores in which absorb substances from the
cleaning or plating solutions. On subsequent exposure
to
a moist atmosphere, such compounds take up water and spread over
the metal surface, causing stains of variable color and shape. The most effective
remedies were
found to be (a) allowing the plated articles to ”spot out” by
exposure to a moist atmosphere before they are given a final finishing;
and (b) the
application of a lacquer that has been found to prevent the absorption
of moisture by the
substance in the pores. Early tests showed that for this purpose
the phenol-condensation lacquers are superior to the ordinary nitrocellulose
lacquers. Recent tests
on 24 commercial lacquers show that some of the latter type are also
very efficient in preventing stain spotting.
In the discussion of
this report it was pointed out that this investigation
has shown for the first time the very important relation between
the lacquer coating
and these two types of spots.
2. Chromium Plating.—A
summary of the researches of the Bureau on chromium plating was presented
by W. Blum, chief of
the Electrochemistry Section.
(a) The first study was on the application
of chromium to the intaglio
printing plates at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. This process
is now used
successfully on the plates for printing most of the paper currency
and postage stamps.
(b) A general survey of the chromium plating solutions and operating
conditions was made a few years ago by H. E. Haring and W. P. Barrows
and published
as Bureau of Standards Technologic Paper 346, a copy of which may
be obtained by sending
15 cents to the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C.
Over 5,000 copies of this paper have been sold.
(c) In co-operation with the U. S. Public Health Service, a study
was made of the Health Hazards in Chromium Plating. The conclusion
from
this study
and from
the literature was that the principal injurious effect of chromic
acid spray is upon the nasal tissues, and that no systemic poisoning
occurs.
As very
low concentrations of chromic acid in the air cause injury to the
nasal tissues, good ventilation is essential. This is preferably
secured
by drawing air
transversely
across the surface of the tanks and into narrow slots, at a velocity
of 1,500 to 2,0)0 feet per minute. The formation of ”chrome sores” or ulcers
on the skin can be prevented by the use of rubber gloves, or by occasional applications
of vaseline. If such sores form, a reducing agent such as hypo, or the sulphide
solutions used in ”oxidizing” metals, should be applied. Details of this investigation were published in Reprint No. 1245
of Public Health Reports, by J. J. Bloomfield and W. Blum. A copy
of this
paper may
be obtained on request addressed to the Bureau of Standards.
(d) A survey of the mechanical applications of chromium plating was
made and published in a paper by W. Blum in Mechanical Engineering
for December,
1928.
This study showed that chromium is very valuable for increasing the
life of gages and dies, but is not entirely successful in cutting
tools.
(e) At the request of the Federal Specifications Board, a specification
for chromium plated plumbing fixtures was prepared. This specification
has been
adopted but
not yet promulgated. It is based on information available regarding
present accepted practice, and not on any actual study of the service
of chromium
plated fixtures.
It may therefore require revision in the light of experience and
research. It provides that brass fixtures shall be plated either
with (a) 0.0)02
inch of chromium,
or (b) 0.0002 inch of nickel plus 0.00002 inch of chromium.
(f) In a research in progress by H. R. Moore of the Bureau of Standards
upon the constitution of chromium plating baths, it has been found
that solutions
of pure chromic acid have a maximum conductivity when the concentration
of chromic acid is about 5 M, i.e., 500 g/L or 67 oz/gal of CrO3.
Further studies
are in
progress upon the effect of trivalent chromium upon the conductivity
and other properties of chromic acid solutions.
(g) H. L. Farber, Research Associate of the American Electroplaters’ Society,
presented a progress report of a study of throwing power in chromium
plating. As the effects of trivalent chromium and iron are still to be
studied, the
following conclusions must be considered as tentative.
To obtain satisfactory
bright deposits of chromium upon irregularly shaped articles, it is necessary
to consider the following factors:
(1)
The current distribution should be made as uniform as possible, as it is
usually difficult to produce bright deposits if the ratio
of the
maximum
to the
minimum current density is greater than 3 :1, or in some cases
2:1. Much of the industrial success in the last few years has come from
the exercise
of ingenuity
in securing a nearly uniform current density on the articles to
be plated. In general this may be accomplished by one or more of the
following methods.
Have the anodes close to and parallel
with the cathode surfaces. Thus an anode may be inserted inside of a tube
or a reflector,
or
projecting
portions
of the
anode may extend into depressions on the cathode.
Have the anodes
and cathodes as far apart as practicable, e.g., from 12 to 18 inches apart.
So suspend the articles on the racks
that conducting portions of the latter are close to those portions of the
cathodes that tend
to have
excessive
current densities.
Shield projecting portions of the
cathode with non-conducting plates or rods, e.g., of glass.
(2) The conditions should be selected
which will produce bright deposits at the minimum and maximum current densities
existing
on the cathodes.
In general the
plating range for bright deposits is wider at high temperatures
and current densities than at low.
It is also wider on brass and copper than on steel or nickel. Bright
deposits are usually obtained on brass when the cathode efficiencies
are between
S and 20 per cent, and on steel between 8 and 18 per cent.
(3) The
conditions for best throwing power should be selected, i.e., the bright deposits
should be as nearly uniform in thickness as possible
over
the whole
surface. Throwing power is defined as the ”improvement in per
cent, of the metal ratio above the primary current ratio.” As
in chromium plating the metal ratio is always less uniform than the
primary current ratio, all the
numerical results are negative. A value from 0 to –25 per cent
is a good throwing power, one below—100 per cent is a poor
throwing power.
Measurements were made in a glass-lined
throwing power box, with a primary ratio of 2:1. It was found that the polarization
and the
conductivity
have practically
no effect on the throwing power. The latter is determined almost
entirely by the relation between the cathode efficiency and the
current
density.
Suppose that, with a 2:1 ratio, the cathode efficiencies are 16
and 8
per cent respectively.
Then the metal ratio is 4:l and the throwing power is –100
per cent. If under other conditions the cathode efficiencies are
respectively 15 and 10 per
cent, the metal ratio is 3:1 and the throwing power is—50 per
cent. In general those conditions should be selected under which
the cathode efficiencies
are most nearly uniform.
The separate effects of the principal
factors are as follows:
(1) A higher content
of chromic acid increases the conductivity, but decreases the throwing power.
(2) A decrease in the relative sulphate content, so that the ratio
of CrO3/SO4 is about 200:1, increases throwing
power. (With-a 100:1 ratio,
recommended
in Tech. Paper 346, the average cathode efficiency is higher, but
the actual cathode
efficiencies are less uniform than with a 200:1 ratio.)
(3) Neither boric acid nor sodium dichromate produces any appreciable
improvement in throwing power.
(4) An increase in temperature at the same current density decreases
throwing power.
(5) An increase in current density at the same temperature increases
throwing power.
(6) The maximum throwing power with bright deposits is obtained
at a high temperature and high current density.
(7) Very good throwing power is obtained in a solution containing
250 g/L (33 oz/gal) of CrO3 and 1.25 g/L (0.16 oz/gal)
of H2SO4,
at a temperature
of 55° C.
(131° F.) and an average current density of about 30 amp/dm2 (280
amp/sq. ft.). This will usually require over 8 volts. If therefore
only 6 volts is available
it may be preferable to use a stronger (and hence better conducting)
solution, e.g., one with 400 g/L (53 oz/gal) of CrO3 and
2 g/L (0.27 oz/gal) of H2SO4,
at a temperature of 35° C. (104° F.) and an average current
density of about 6 amp/dm2 (56 amp/sq. ft.), although
the throwing power and plating range
will not be so favorable as under the preceding conditions.
The
presentation of this paper was aided by charts and tables, which
will be included in the printed report of the completed investigation.
In the discussion of chromium plating numerous questions were
asked and details were considered. No significant contradictions
of any
of the
above conclusions
were reported, but many subjects for additional study were pointed
out.
3. Analysis of Cyanide Solutions.—M. R. Thompson of the
Bureau of Standards reported that after many trials very nearly pure
sodium and potassium
cyanide have been prepared for research purposes. Analyses of these materials
indicate
that the ”Leibig” titration with silver nitrate is accurate.
The end point is made more sensitive by the addition of potassium
iodide. With
this modification the results are not appreciably affected by any
of the constituents likely to be present in sodium or potassium cyanide
or in silver plating solutions.
The method is therefore reliable for determining the free cyanide
in silver baths.
It is planned to extend this work to include other cyanide plating
solutions, such as of copper, zinc, brass, cadmium and gold.
In the
discussion of this paper it was pointed out that in brass
plating solutions, carbonates interfere with the silver nitrate
titration for
free cyanide. If the
carbonate is precipitated with barium nitrate and the barium carbonate
is filtered out, accurate results can be obtained by the silver
nitrate titration
in the
presence of iodide.
4. Measurement of pH in Nickel
Plating Solutions.—For
the past several years, many electroplaters have used colorimetric
methods for the
measurement of the pH (or acidity) of nickel plating baths, and have thereby
obtained much
more uniform deposits. About two years ago another method known as ”quinhydrone
electrode” was applied for this purpose and has been used in
a few plants. About a year ago it was pointed out that the results
obtained by these two
methods are not consistent. In order to determine the relation of
such discrepancies to the composition of the nickel baths, a joint
investigation was arranged.
Forty
nickel solutions were prepared from purified materials by N. Bekkedahl
at the Bureau of Standards. Each contained in addition to nickel
sulphate, one or
more of the common constituents or impurities of nickel baths. They
therefore represented
all types of nickel plating solutions. These were distributed to
different laboratories and measurements were made on them by the
following persons:
1. K Pitschner—American Chain Co.
2. (a) H. C. Parker—Leeds & Northrup
Co. (b) C. C. Coons—Leeds & Northrup
Co.
3. F. R. McCrumb—LaMotte Chemical Products Co.
4. A. K. Graham—University
of Pennsylvania.
5. (a) E. W. Skelton—University
of Toronto.
(b) C. J. Colomho—University
o{ Toronto. (c) J. T. Burt-Gerrans—University of Toronto.
6.
N. Bekkedahl—Bureau of Standards.
The results were assembled and discussed
by the above persons prior to April 6th. There was substantial agreement
regarding the facts
obtained and the
principal conclusions, but no specific recommendations were agreed
upon.
It is hoped
that at the convention of the American Electroplaters’ Society
in Detroit in July, some definite recommendations may be presented.
The results may be
briefly
summarized as follows:
(a) The hydrogen electrode is the
primary basis of all pH measurements. As the equipment required is somewhat
expensive
and involved, and
as errors are produced
by impurities such as copper and lead that may be present in commercial
nickel
solutions, the hydrogen electrode is not suitable for works control.
Whenever reliable values can be obtained with the hydrogen electrode,
the results
represent the true pH.
(b) The-results with the quinhydrone method are about 0.05 pH above
those with the hydrogen electrode. The equipment is more intricate
and expensive
than that
for colorimetric measurements. The results can be quickly obtained,
and are free from any personal estimate of color.
(c) The colorimetric readings are in all cases considerably higher
than the hydrogen electrode values. This is because of the well-known
effects
of high
salt concentrations
upon the color of indicators. As most colorimetric pH measurements
in other industries are made in dilute solutions, the salt errors
in such
measurements
are usually
negligible. Nickel plating solutions are relatively concentrated
and hence produce larger salt effects.
(d) In general the salt error increases with the total concentration
of salts present. Most nickel plating solutions are from 1.0 N
to 2.0 N in
total salt
content (i.e., they contain roughly from 20 to 40 oz/gal of nickel
sulphate and other salts). Such variations in total salt content
do not change
the salt error
of the indicator by more than about 0.1 pH from the average value.
(e) Most of the constituents of nickel baths have no large specific
effect on the salt error. Fluorides and citrates somewhat reduce
the magnitude
of the divergence.
(f) Solutions containing much iron change rapidly in pH, and are
difficult to measure by any methods. The results, while less reliable
than with
iron absent,
indicate that the deviation between the quinhydrone and colorimetric
methods is about the same as in other solutions.
(g) The magnitude of the deviation varies with the colorimetric
method used, and the basis of its standardization.
(h) Increasing the temperature of nickel solutions decreases the
pH of the solution, as measured by any reliable method. The decrease
in
pH
is greater
with solutions
containing ammonium salts. In addition to the actual change in
pH at high temperatures, the colorimetric method may be affected
by
the change
produced
by heat upon the
color of the indicator and of the nickel solution. Therefore all
pH measurements of nickel baths should be made at ordinary temperature,
even though the
baths may be operated at elevated temperatures.
(i) The average deviation of the colorimetric results from the
hydrogen electrode is about 0.5 pH, although with different solutions
or different
indicators,
the deviation may range from 0.3 to 0.6 pH.
No formal recommendations
were made to the conference. It was generally agreed by those engaged in
the study that if feasible all pH measurements
in nickel
plating should be based upon and expressed in terms of the hydrogen
electrode values. In this way the results of investigators or operators
who use
different methods of measuring pH will be on the same basis, and
confusion will be
avoided. Among the methods that were discussed for accomplishing
this end were the following:
(a) The use of the quinhydrone electrode,
which involves a negligible correction.
(b) The use of present colorimetric standards and methods and the
application by each operator of a deduction of 0.5 pH as an average
deviation.
(c) The use of present colorimetric standards with a specific deduction
that has been actually determined for that method and type of solution.
(d) The use of colorimetric standards especially calibrated for
nickel plating, the values on the labels of which have been corrected
by
some fixed amount,
e. g., 0.5 pH.
By any one of these procedures,
measurements can be made as reproducibility as at present; and the corrected
values will agree
with the true
pH within 0.1 or
in a few cases 0.2 pH.
In the discussion of this subject
procedure (c) was especially favored. All of these possibilities will be
considered in
a small conference
to be held
prior
to the Electroplaters’ Convention, and to the detailed publication
of the results and conclusions.
5. Addition Agents in Copper
Electrotyping Solutions.—R. O. Hull, Research
Associate of the International Association of Electrotypers. In solutions
containing 250 g/L (33 oz/gal) of copper sulphate, 75 g/L (10 oz/gal) of sulphuric
acid
and 1 g/L (0.13 oz/gal) of phenol (carbonic acid), added as phenolsulphonic
acid, at 40°C (104°F) and with good agitation, current densities as
high as 30 amp/dm2 (280 amp/sq. ft.) may be used. The deposits are smoother
and
harder
than those from solutions with no addition agent. This solution is
now being tried on a commercial scale in several electrotyping plants.
6. Iron
Deposition.—C. T. Thomas, U. S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
In solutions containing about 300 g/L (40 oz/gal) of ferrous chloride
and 355 g/L (45 oz/gal) of calcium chloride, thick smooth deposits of iron
can be produced
at a temperature of 90°C (196°F) and a current density of
7 amp/dm2 (65 amp/sq. ft.). The free hydrochloric acid in the solution
is from 0.01 to
0.02
N. The cathodes are moved mechanically. The anodes of rolled Armco
iron are suspended in porous alundum pots, to prevent particles of
anode slime from
reaching the
cathodes and causing rough deposits. The deposited iron has a tensile
strength of about 400 kg/cm: (5600 Ib/sq. in.) and an elongation
of about 20 per cent.
7. Future Plans.—The discussion of future
plans emphasized the need for more information regarding the protective
value of electroplated
coatings against corrosion, as a basis for specifications of quality. It was
pointed out that
the various tests and specifications for zinc and cadmium coatings
are not adequate. It was also stated that although chromium plating has been
widely
applied in
the automobile and other industries, the present methods and specifications
do not yield entirely satisfactory products. It was predicted that
unless an improvement
in the quality of chromium plating is made, the public will be disappointed
in its performance, and other finishes will be substituted.
It was
then suggested that in any study of the protective value of electroplated
coatings, the Electroplaters’ Society and the
Bureau of Standards should co-operate closely with committees of
the American Society for Testing Materials
and similar organizations. The hope and belief was also expressed
that the automobile industry as well as other metal industries will
gladly contribute
to the support
of such an investigation.
At a subsequent meeting of the Executive
Committee and the Research Committee of the American Electroplaters’ Society,
it was decided to have their two Research Associates undertake a
comprehensive study
of ”Protection Against
Corrosion by Means of Electroplated Finishes.” Such a study
will probably require about three years. The first subject to be
investigated will be the
protective value of chromium plating. As soon as possible the plans
for this study will
be prepared and discussed with interested firms and organizations.
CHROMIUM
PROBLEMS
Oscar E. Servis, Past President
and Librarian Chicago Branch and Past President and Secretary-Treasurer A.
E. S. Read at Milwaukee Annual Meet, April 6, 1929
In successful plating of chromium
there are many serious problems to consider. Many of these are overlooked
by the authors. In all
of the
technical papers
which have been published in the past, it seems to be their one
idea to write something
very scientific, and simply give the results of their experiments,
without including any of their minute details of these experiments.
This is perfectly
all right
for the well-informed chemist, but seldom offers much help to his
less informed brother in the Electroplating Industry, who may not
have,
and probably does
not have, sufficient knowledge to read between the lines and’ get
as much data as would the better informed chemist.
One of the main
problems in chromium plating is the proper use of
the SO4 Ion. Many formulas printed call for a given
amount of chrome sulphate,
but they
do not specify which chrome sulphate should be used. There are
at least three of
these sulphates. One of which is not soluble in water, and appears
in a
powdered form. This should never be used. The other is dark green
crystals and is
soluble in hot solution, but contains considerable impurities.
The proper sulphate
to use that is sold and is satisfactory is in dark green flat scales,
much resembling
shellac in form, but differs in color. This salt is readily soluble
in water to a complete solution. In purchasing this the ”flake” should
be specified.
Again, other writers mention sulphuric
acid as being the proper form
in which to introduce the sulphate Ion into the chromium plating
bath, but
seldom
do we see a formula that informs the plater as to whether the SO4 Ion
should be added by liquid measure or by weight.
Since sulphuric acid
has a specific gravity of 1.84, it follows that
if we try to add the SO4 ion by measuring It in gradually
instead of weighing
same,
we
will have an excess of SO4 because a fluid measure of
1 oz. of sulphuric acid equals 1.84 oz., there in an excess of
.84 more than required.
You will gather from the above remarks
that it behooves the plater
to find out the value of his measuring apparatus, and in terms
of SO4 become
familiar
before
he starts to add sulphate in his bath, and in this way avoid excess,
for here is a place where one cannot trust to guesswork in the
slightest degree.
I might
mention the early failures in chromium plating were principally
due to the injudicious use of adding sulphates to the bath.
We note a
standard typical formula composed as follows:
Chromic Acid Cr. O3 ..............
32 oz.
Sulphuric Acid Cr.2 SO4 ........... 5 oz.
Water .......................................... 1 gal.
This calls for 32 oz. CrO3 avoirdupois
weight, and unless otherwise specified, we assume the sulphuric acid content
to be the same. Yet,
here is where
the average plater makes his mistake. The Cr. O3 is
a solid or dry measure, and
the H2 SO4 is a liquid measure, and while
he weighs the one, he invariably measures the other. Right here
is the rub. Adding .5 oz. of H2 SO4 in
volume is equivalent to .92 oz. of sulphuric acid by weight. This,
as we
know, is above the required
quantity necessary for successful performance of the bath, and
this excess
of
SO4 Ion is the detrimental factor. The following table
will readily explain the difference in form and weight
Oz. by Volume
H2 SO4
Oz. by Weight
1
=
1.84
2
=
3.68
3
=
5.52
4
=
7.36
5
=
9.20
6
=
11.04
7
=
12.88
8
=
14.72
9
=
16.56
And so on.
Unfortunately, there seems to be
no simple method of analysis. Probably the most comprehensive data is contained
in the Technologic paper No.
346 by Harring & Barrows.
Here will be found a description for complete analysis of chromium’ plating
baths.
While the presence of a small amount
of the SO4 Ion
is necessary, yet I wish to emphasize the fact that an excess of
the SO4 Ion
is a detriment,
and under
certain conditions results in brittleness of deposit peeling or
raising. To overcome this excess of sulphate, we must resort to
the addition
of certain chemicals
which have the property of removing the excess SO4 Ion
without bringing into the solution some other Ion which is not
wanted, such a chemical
would
be
Barium Carbonate, or better yet, Barium Chromate. Either of these
react with the sulphate
Ion and form Barium Sulphate, which is a white insoluble powder,
and in case of Barium Carbonate gives off Carbonic Acid gas. While
the
Barium Chromate
gives an equivalent amount of CrO3 acid and Barium Sulphate same
as where carbonate
is used, in any event it is only necessary to filter off the Barium
Sulphate. Approximately two parts of Barium Carbonate will remove
one part of the
SO4 Ion. In other words, for every ounce of SO4 two
ounces of Barium Carbonate should
be used.
Another problem which the Chromium
plater will encounter is the Tri-valent Chromium. As Dr. Lukens pointed out ”Trivalent
chromium’’ (other
than Sulphate) which term has been the means of clearing up much
of the mystery pertaining
to the maintenance of the chromium plating baths. This Tri-valent
Chromium is the result of the action of the hydrogen gas liberated
at the cathode, causing
a reduction of the six valient Chrome to the Tri-valent Chrome. According
to the theory the oxygen set free at the anode should oxidize this
Tri-valent
Chrome
back to the hexavalent Chrome, but in practice does not take place
only partially. When this Tri-valent Chrome is present in the bath
in excess, it results in
higher resistance in the bath, and as a consequence it will require
a higher voltage
to cause a given current to flow through the solution. This would
not be so bad if it did not also decrease the throwing power. There
seems to be no satisfactory
chemical method of disposing of this Tri-valent chemical in the simple
matter. Dr. Lukens pointed out that if a small porous cup is suspended
in the bath,
and
within the cup is placed a small lead cathode and the current be
passed through the bath from the regular anode through the solution
in the cup, the Tri-valent
Chromium will be oxidized. While the presence of porous cup prevents
the hydrogen from reducing any Chromic acid except that portion which
is within the cup,
and in this way the effects of the Tri-valent Chromium will be overcome
providing the current passed for a sufficient length of time.
You
may gather from this that it is well to have the cup handy when
the bath is not used for plating purposes and suspend the cup as
described, as any
excess use of this will do little or no harm.
Maintenance of Bath Since all of the metal deposited must come from the Cr. O3 it
follows that additions of this metal from time to time is necessary. There
is, however,
another factor
or problem which must be taken into consideration . That is what
is known as the dragout. It has been pointed out by Blume and others
that
this
dragout and
spray in terms of Cr. O3 is approximately equal to the
Cr. O3 used
in supplying metal to the article plated. This means then that
supposing 1 oz. of Cr. O3 has been deposited on a given
area that the loss by dragout would also be oz. In
the case of dragout you would also lose an equivalent amount of
time SO4 Ion. Now, then, in replenishing the metal content
of the bath, it
would
be necessary
to replace two ozs. of Cr. O3 to reimburse the solution
for both metal and dragout, but since half of the Cr. O3 added
was dragout, then the
corresponding quantity
of the SO4 should be added.
Possibly a simple method
of maintaining of solution would be from a stock solution which
would contain twice the amount of Cr. O3 given
in the
above typical formula.
While only the same amount of the sulphate Ion is given in the
typical formula, providing, of course, that there is not already
an excess
of the SO4 Ion.
In that event this excess only Cr. O3 is needed, and
this is one way
to overcome excess sulphate in Chromium Baths. The percentage
of H2SO4 necessary
for
successful
Chromium deposition is from one-half to 1 per cent of the Chromic
Acid used.
PAPER AND DISCUSSION ON “BRIGHT
PLATING ON SMALL LEAD PARTS”
By Mr. Joseph Underwood, Read at
Philadelphia Branch on April 5, 1929*
MR. JOSEPH UNDERWOOD My
talk will not be very long. I’ve got some samples
here you can pass around and look over.
The plating of copper to bring it from the tank with a brilliant
lustre is not difficult nor is there anything secret about
it as it has been
done for
years
and by many old-time platers and although I am somewhat of
an amateur at it I will try to give to you an idea of how it
is
done. Any
of the formula
for copper
plating solutions can be used, but the amount of chemicals
should be cut to one-half as this solution is operated hot
and builds
up rapidly
in carbonates
and although
I believe they are beneficial in this type of solution, too
high a concentration gives too much resistance in the bath
and makes
it difficult
to control.
We prefer to build the solution in the following manner:
1 Gallon
Water 3 oz. Sodium Cyanide
1/4 oz. Rochelle Salts
Heat to about 110 degrees F., then
add copper cyanide until a light copper deposit is obtained, then heat to
160 degrees F., and
add
the brightener,
made as follows:
Lead Acetate—4 oz.
Caustic Soda—4 oz.
Water—1 qt.
Lead in
any form can be used in place of the lead acetate. Add one pint of brightener
and the solution is ready to use.
The Rochelle
Salts are added for throwing power and to keep the anodes clean.
At the temperature of 160 degrees
F. the work must be cleaned before plating, but the solution is much easier
to control at the lower
temperature. To
use as a combination cleaning and plating bath the solution must
be worked at
or near
the boiling point and although the lustre is more brilliant at
the high temperature the solution is made more difficult to control,
but if lustre
is the main
object as with us, the extra trouble is well worth while. *Quaker
City Reminder.
I will outline the operation on
the samples as they are finished by us.
They are first racked from 48 to
98 pieces to a rack, the part to be bright faced down to the bottom of the
tank. This is done so as
to
clean more
readily and
to prevent the inert materials in the tank from settling on the
surface. The tanks are equipped with automatic agitators, volt meter, amp
meter and a double
throw switch, one side direct to the line and the other to a rheostat.
The rack of work is placed three racks to a rod, one rod to each
tank. They are
then plated
for three minutes, direct on the line at a current pressure of
8
volts to remove the lubrication, which is an emulsion of Palm Oil
and soap.
When the
cathode
is perfectly clean and completely covered with copper then the
rod is agitated for two or three minutes at 8 volts. The switch is then
thrown
over to
the rheostat side and the voltage cut to two or three volts and
allowed to run
for two or
three minutes, or until clear and bright; then it is taken out,
rinsed in cold water and placed in the nickel tank. The free cyanide in
this type of
solution
is very difficult to control by analysis and we have never been
able to keep any free cyanide in the solution when working at the high
temperature, although
at the lower temperature it can be readily determined, but by observation
it is very easy to control as an excess of Sodium Cyanide causes
the cathode
to
burn around the edges and the center has practically no deposit,
while an excess of brightener causes a gray lead tone to the work
and is
overcome by adding small
quantities of copper cyanide. While an excess of copper will cause
the deposit
to be rough and dull and is overcome by adding cyanide in small
amounts, say, two or four ounces at a time, until the deposit comes bright
once more. If too
much brightener is added, then the solution must be reduced and
rebuilt
by using copper cyanide and sodium cyanide.
Although our work is only
antimonial lead and tin, other types of work can be plated in this
type of solution, such as novelties, cheap
jewelry,
etc.,
and
the saving in buffing and coloring operations is considerable.
I have plated die castings and after eighteen months’ exposure
in the air, although protected from the rain and snow, they showed
no signs of breaking down; outside
of being
dull, they were as good as the day they were plated.
Nickel Plating The nickel solution when first made
up was as follows:
Single Nickel Salts—16
oz.
Epsom Salts—16 oz.
Ammonium Chloride—2
oz.
Boric Acid—2 oz.
Cadmium Chloride as a brightener.
We found that this type
of solution for our work was too soft and as we wished to stiffen the parts
we gradually
built
the solution
up until
now
it stands
according to an analysis made two days ago—
Nickel Sulphate—32
oz.
Magnesium Sulphate—26 oz.
Ammonium Chloride—2 1-10 oz.
P. H.—6.1.
and
we are obtaining very good results, but we also have one tank kept as the
original formula calls for to do certain parts such as
a skirt
flange that has
to be bent under the lip of the bottle. I have plated work in this
solution from five minutes to an hour and the lustre was just as
bright at the
end of the hour
as it was at the end of five minutes, but care must be taken not
to add too
much cadmium chloride, as it will cause dark smuts and seems to
cut the throwing power
of the solution, and we find that to overcome too much brightener,
Magnesium Sulphate and Nickel Salts must be added. We make our
own brightener by
dissolving Cadmium sticks in Hydrochloric Acid and add 50 cc to
every 100 gallons of
solution as needed. These nickel solutions are controlled by analysis,
made once a week.
All parts are brass plated before
gold plating. The brass solution is run at a temperature of 110 degrees F.,
and is made in
the following
way:
Four ounces of Sodium Cyanide to
each gallon of water; add copper cyanide until a light copper plates out,
then add 1/2 ounce zinc
cyanide, then
two quarts of
ammonia for every 100 gallons of solution, and a green brass deposit
is obtained. Then the few drops of brightener made from 4 ounces
powdered white arsenic,
four ounces caustic soda, dissolved in one quart hot water is then
added.
Care must be taken not to add too much as grayish tones will result
and it is almost impossible to overcome in this type of solution.
A small
amount of caustic
soda from 1-16 oz. is added about once a week to help keep the
anodes clean.
The parts are plated in this solution
for two or three minutes, rinsed and flashed in the gold solution, which
is made as follows:
Six ounces Sodium Cyanide, 4 ounce
Gold Cyanide; temperature of 170 to 180 degrees F. for about 45 seconds,
or according to the amount
of deposit
needed.
The parts
are continually agitated while in the gold solution. They are
then rinsed in a water tank lined with sheet zinc, which is scraped
every three or
four days
to obtain the gold which deposits on the zinc in the form of
a black powder. They are next rinsed in running water and dried in a centrifugal
dryer.
The information contained in this site is provided for your review and convenience. It is not intended to provide legal advice with respect to any federal, state, or local regulation.
You should consult with legal counsel and appropriate authorities before interpreting any regulations or undertaking any specific course of action.
Please note that many of the regulatory discussions on STERC refer to federal regulations. In many cases, states or local governments have promulgated relevant rules and standards
that are different and/or more stringent than the federal regulations. Therefore, to assure full compliance, you should investigate and comply with all applicable federal, state and local regulations.
The information contained in this site is provided for your review and convenience. It is not intended to provide legal advice with respect to any federal, state, or local regulation.
You should consult with legal counsel and appropriate authorities before interpreting any regulations or undertaking any specific course of action.
Please note that many of the regulatory discussions on STERC refer to federal regulations. In many cases, states or local governments have promulgated relevant rules and standards
that are different and/or more stringent than the federal regulations. Therefore, to assure full compliance, you should investigate and comply with all applicable federal, state and local regulations.