Please use Scott's numbers. What I gave was a) my memory, b) of a procedure from over ten years ago and c) subject to copious discussion back then.
Joe Bender-Zanoni
Great Notch, NJ
> I thought those baking temperatures were supposed to be
\r?\n> considerably higher
\r?\n> then 300 degrees F. The ASTM guidelines say something like 400
\r?\n> degrees F
\r?\n> for up to 24 hours, depending on the tensile strength and rockwell
\r?\n> hardnessof the steel.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> It's not an issue with weaker steels like those used in bumpers and
\r?\n> a lot of
\r?\n> the other things they may be used to chroming, so it might not
\r?\n> occur to the
\r?\n> average chroming shop to do it. If they aren't familiar with the
\r?\n> process,or don't have the facilities, head elsewhere.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Scott Minneman
\r?\n> San Francisco, CA
\r?\n>
\r?\n> -----Original Message-----
\r?\n> From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org
\r?\n> [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of
\r?\n> joebz@optonline.net
\r?\n> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 11:06 AM
\r?\n> To: usgeigers
\r?\n> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
\r?\n> Subject: Re: [CR]RE: FrameSaver vs. Hydrogen Embrittlement
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> A few things need to get sorted out. The acid in the chroming
\r?\n> process can
\r?\n> do two seperate bad things- the first is not to get rinsed our or
\r?\n> neutralized in which case it corrodes the tube. The second is hydrogen
\r?\n> embrittlement.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> The acid in the tubes is a matter of thorough rinsing, which can be
\r?\n> compicated by access. Larger vent holes are probably a good idea. I
\r?\n> supposethat using a mild neutralizing solution (baking soda)
\r?\n> wouldn't hurt either.
\r?\n> So make sure the tubes are rinsed and dry before using Framesaver.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Hydrogen embrittlement results fromm diffusion of hydrogen atoms
\r?\n> into the
\r?\n> metal while in the plating solution. This leads to cracking by
\r?\n> mechanismsthat are still probably meing argued about today. While
\r?\n> there are claims
\r?\n> that some platers and plating processes do not create hydrogen
\r?\n> embrittlement, it is an ongoing problem, particularly for high
\r?\n> strengthaerospace fasteners. There is no doubt that the process
\r?\n> matters, because
\r?\n> the embrittlement problem is very erratic. The tried and true
\r?\n> solution is
\r?\n> subjecting the plated article to a baking cycle so the hydrogen
\r?\n> diffusesback out. There are arguments about how long etc. but a 12-
\r?\n> 24 hour cycle at
\r?\n> 300 degrees F is probably enough. Also the hydrogen diffuses out no
\r?\n> matterwhat, based on the time and temperature, so a year at room
\r?\n> temperature is OK
\r?\n> also. Framesaver is not going to affect the diffusion process.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> I think the biggest example of possible hydrogen embrittlement of
\r?\n> chromedframes was Schwinn Paramounts. Many of the chromed frames
\r?\n> seemed to crack. I
\r?\n> have seen cracked Fuji Newests, but not Fuji Finests (both of which
\r?\n> arechromed under the paint).
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Joe Bender-Zanoni
\r?\n> Great Notch, NJ
\r?\n>
\r?\n> ----- Original Message -----
\r?\n> From: usgeigers <geiggle@sbcglobal.net>
\r?\n> Date: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 12:17 pm
\r?\n> Subject: [CR]RE: FrameSaver vs. Hydrogen Embrittlement
\r?\n>
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > -----Original Message-----
\r?\n> > From: usgeigers <geiggle@sbcglobal.net>
\r?\n> > To: oroboyz@aol.com
\r?\n> > Sent: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 10:21:34 -0800
\r?\n> > Subject: FrameSaver vs Hydrogen Embrittlement
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > Seasons Greetings,
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > Let me introduce myself. I've had my Cinelli going on 35 yrs.
\r?\n> Finally
\r?\n> > decided to give it what it so richly deserves, the full spa
\r?\n> > treatment:
\r?\n> > First I had the frame and forks trued (just to be sure) at Shaw's
\r?\n> bike
\r?\n> > shop in Santa Clara, good guys there; they said it was out by 2mm
\r?\n> from
\r?\n> > bb to top of seat tube which is NOT uncommon (must of been that
\r?\n> spill
\r?\n> > I took back in 73'). Then off to Superior Chrome in San Jose, I
\r?\n> asked
\r?\n> > for front fork, back fork and the usual three lug treatment but
\r?\n> they
\r?\n> > dipped the entire frame instead. Hydrogen Embrittlement? Yes, I'm
\r?\n> > concerned. Thanks for your earlier replies, by the way, guys.
\r?\n> It's
\r?\n> > headed for powder coat, yes, powder coat, I feel it's a stronger
\r?\n> > product, however if there are concerns I'munaware of please, let
\r?\n> me
\r?\n> > know. After that, home for period correct decals then back for
\r?\n> clear
\r?\n> > coat then home for reassembly. I can't wait!!
\r?\n> > FrameSaver seems an obvious preventative measure. I'm wondering
\r?\n> tho if
\r?\n> > it will aid in decreasing any embrittlement potential. I spoke
\r?\n> with my
\r?\n> > friend who is the plater at Space Systems Loral in Palo Alto (an
\r?\n> aero
\r?\n> > space
\r?\n> > company) he said, the bigger concern with H/E is if any platting
\r?\n> > fluids seep into the tubes and stays there. Well, both forks have
\r?\n> > those 1mm breather holes in them so I hope the FS will displace
\r?\n> any
\r?\n> > residual fluidsthat may have been left behind. Mark at Superior
\r?\n> Chrome
\r?\n> > has done many bike frames and has never heard of any problems
\r?\n> with
\r?\n> > embrittlement on bike frames nor had any returns or complaints,
\r?\n> that's
\r?\n> > encouraging news. Anyway, all said it will be on my mind when I'm
\r?\n> > doing 60 mph down a steep one, otherwise I'm cool. Dale, thanks
\r?\n> for
\r?\n> > the heads-up, I'm new at CR.
\r?\n> >
\r?\n> > Kurt Geiger
\r?\n> > Cupertino, CA