data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/609bf/609bf7ec06bf67551c64cf7db86c75e1b2429ebb" alt="ted_yosem"
Curated with aloha by
Ted Mooney, P.E. RET
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26e2f/26e2f7d702dd7be41aa0820ea5caf290b7b90d67" alt="finishing.com -- The Home Page of the Finishing Industry"
The authoritative public forum
for Metal Finishing 1989-2025
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5f77c/5f77ca5bdcdc1dd640bc1c826f3906846739a5b0" alt="mfhotline"
-----
Stainless steel corrosion resistance-drinking water
2007
I am an Engineer for a manufacturer of drinking water filtration systems. We currently use 316 SST pressure vessels. I would like to look at using 304 SST as an alternative. I would also like to increase corrosion resistance. I have been researching electropolishing as a possible surface treatment. Since the application involves drinking water there is chlorine present. Are there more suitable surface treatment?
I would also like to inquire about trade shows for the finishing industry. Can anybody give insight?
Thanks.
Product Designer - Sparks, Nevada, USA
2007
John,
I believe 316 SST is more corrosion resistant than 304 SST, especially around chlorides due to the molybdenum in 316 SST. The NASF is presenting SUR/FIN, a major technical/trade show for the surface finishing industry in Cleveland, August,2007.
Regards,
- Erie, Pennsylvania, USA
2007
John,
In many circumstances, (state of the art) electropolished 304 has a better corrosion resistance than passivated 316.
If your systems operate at ambient temperature, 304 + ep could be an excellent alternative for your 316 constructions.
- Brugge, Belgium
Q, A, or Comment on THIS thread -or- Start a NEW Thread