David, There is a great deal of mixed information and opinion on Chrome 6 conversion coatings, and many people seem to agree that they are not compliant. I think the real issue here is a result of the interpretation of the words 'mechanically separable' in the RoHS Directive. Many seem to consider that abrasion is a form of mechanical separation that could remove as little as the surface layer alone. The Trimite advice is based on it not being mechanically separable from the base material, and hence not being a significant proprotion of the total mass. The answer depends on your interpretation. We have our own chemical and metallurgical laboratory and some very experienced people who work in it, and have conducted our own analysis on treated parts and concur that it is in fact non-compliant. As a result of this, we are not relying on the Trimite document. It seems reasonable that if the consensus was that it is compliant, then there would not be applications in place for exemptions, nor would there be a great deal of work going on researching Cr6-free alternatives.
Best regards Neil R. Barker CEng MIET FSEE MIEEE Manager Quality Engineering e2v technologies (uk) ltd 106 Waterhouse Lane Chelmsford Essex CM1 2QU UK Tel: (+44) 1245 453616 Fax: (+44) 1245 453571 Mob: (+44) 7801 723735 P Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: David Want [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 04 April 2007 12:57 To: Barker, Neil Cc: [email protected] Subject: Alochrom 1200 and RoHS All, > If your objective here is to find an alternative to Alocrom 1200 for RoHS > compliance purposes, you might like to consider SurTec 650. We have found > that it compares very favourably. > Look at > http://www.surtec.com/!PIB/6%20Konversionsschichten/Englisch/650E.pdf. > This is a Chrome 3 based passivation finish that seems to perform just as > well as Alocrom 1200 from a corrosion protection perspective. > Best regards > Neil R. Barker CEng MIET FSEE MIEEE Interesting comment on Alochrom 1200 and thanks for the alternative process. I have a note here from Trimite in the UK (Sheet P/WRGN-1/1 Dec 2004) that says that Alochrom 1200 (amongst others) will comply with the RoHS directive, and goes on to give the reasons. Is there any other information that contradicts this? Regards -- David Want RF Insight Ltd 47 Percival Road * Rugby * Warwickshire * CV22 5JU 01788 541790 Registered in England no. 2601631 at 106-108 Park Road CV21 2QX Sent by E2V TECHNOLOGIES PLC or a member of the E2V group of companies. A company registered in England and Wales. Company number: 04439718. Registered address: 106 Waterhouse Lane, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 2QU, UK. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
