ALTERNATIVE FOR TANK CHROMIUM USING (BRUSH) PLATING

JohnLangan
SIFCO Selective Plating
Division of SIFCO Industries
5708 Schaaf Road
Cleveland, Ohio 44131

ABSTRACT
The deposit properties of hard chromium provide several advantages in many
industrial applications, however, there is one significant disadvantage associated
with hard chromium plating. Hard chromium plating is an environmental concern of
such magnitude that the need to seek out and consider alternative deposits is
justified.
It is a tall order to fill for an alternative deposit to provide all the performance
characteristics of hard chromium. The intention of this writer is to evaluate
properties of some brush plated deposits and propose them for consideration as
possible alternatives to hard chromium plating.
To provide support as to why the proposed brush plated deposits should be
considered as alternatives to hard chromium, advantages and disadvantages of the
hard chromium bath plating process and the brush plating process will be
discussed.
-
BACKGROUND HARD CHROMIUM
Hard chromium for many years has enjoyed a reputation as being an
electroplated deposit having many special properties serving several purposes.
Deposit properties such as extremely hard deposits, low coefficient of friction,
excellent wear resistance, corrosion resistance and oil retaining capabilities all have
given hard chromium plating recognition in a multitude of applications. Industrial
applications have steadily increased for several decades.
The commercial process of chromium plating was largely through the efforts
of Fink and Eldrige back in 1923 and 1924’. The historical value in itself gives the
user of hard chromium plating confidence for the chromium plating process is well
known and accepted. Hard chromium plating is well tried and true and has proven
itself for many years.
A common purpose of hard chromium plating is to rebuild or salvage worn
parts. Examples such as rolls, roll journals, moulding dies, internal combustion
engine cylinders, crankshaft journals and heavy duty shafts for presses or turbines
are typical areas where hard chromium is deposited and its unique properties are
utilized.

1137
 AESF Annual Technical Conference
SUWF~N ~
TBZE

Junes 2 2 2 C - Z 5 # 1S-S
Atlanta, Georgia

The American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers Society, lnc. (AESF)is an international,individual-
membership, professional, technical and educational society for the advancement of electroplating
and surface finishing. AESF fosters this advancement through a broad research program and
comprehensive educational programs, which benefit its members and all persons involved in this
widely diversified industry, as well as govemment agencies and the general public. AESF dissemi-
nates technical and practical information through its monthly joumal, Plating and Surface finishing,
and through reports and other publications, meetings, symposia and conferences. Membership in
AESF is open to all surface finishing professionalsas well as to those who provide services,supplies,
equipment, and support to the industry.
According to the guidelines established by AESF's Meetings and Symposia Committee, all authors of
papers to be presented at SUWFIN@have been requested to avoid commercialism of any kind, which
includes references to company names (except in the title page of the paper), proprietary processes
or equipment.
Statements of fact or opinion in these papers are those of the contributors, and the AESF assumes
no responsibility for them.
All acknowledgments and references in the papers are the responsibility of the authors.

Published by the
American Electroplaters and Sutface FinishersSociieiy, Inc.
12644 Research Parkway Orlando, FL 32826-3298
Telephone: 407128143441 Fax: 407D81-6446

Copyright 1992 by American Electroplatersand Surface Finishers Society, Inc. All rights resewed. Printed in the United States of
America. This publication may not be reproduced,stored in a retrieval systam,o-r part, in any form or by any
means! electronic, mechanical.-hp ' e without the prior written permission of AESF, 12644 Research

Parkway, Orlando, FL 328283298.

Printed by AESF Press

SUWFIN'is a registered trademark of the American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers Society. Inc.
 WHY HARD CHROME?
Hard chromium deposit properties are considered to provide several
advantages. For example, chromium's hardness is often considered a deposit
property giving the advantage of wear resistance. However, the hardest deposits do
not necessarily give the greatest wear resistance. Some investigators* reported that
wear resistance was independent of hardness. For example, with 0.0008 in. or
thicker coatings, no difference was observed in deposits with a 750 to 950 Brinell
hardness. In typical applications, chromium deposits' low coefficient of friction is
largely responsible for deposit wear resistance. The low coefficient of friction of
chromium deposits is an important advantage utilized on applications such as piston
rings, internal-combustion engine cylinders, crankshafts and similar applications.
Chromium deposit modifications, either by mechanical means such as grit
blasting the basis metal, chromium deposit and grind to size or by chemical means
such as etching solution treatments, create a porous or pitted deposit. This
modified chromium deposit, known as porous chromium plate, exhibits the
advantage of oil retaining properties desir d in applications such as internal-
combustion engine cylinders and piston rings .P
Another advantage of hard chromium plating is its ability to retain hardness
after elevated temperatures. This property is particularly useful in aircraft engine
applications.
DISADVANTAGES
The use of chromium plating is an environmental concern of great magnitude.
Alternatives to chromium plating are strongly desired especially when considering it
is included in the ''four C's'' hit list (chromium, cadmium, cyanide, and chlorinated
solvents).
Environmental and workplace health hazards are disadvantages associated
with hard chromium plating. The hexavalent compounds of the chromium metal are
extremely toxic and hazardous.
Typical of hard chromium plating is large amounts of hydrogen developing at
the cathode and oxygen at the anode. As these gases escape from the bath, a mist
is formed carrying with it chromic acid. Chromic acid, if permitted to escape into the
workplace, is not only damaging to the surroundings but also constitutes a health
hazard. To assure the safety of personnel in the workplace, as well as prevent
heavy fines by OSHA and or the EPA, it is mandatory to have adequate ventilation
and scrubber systems.
Adding to environmental concerns is the method of wax masking often
associated with hard chromium plating. ,4f?er chrome plating is complete, the wax Is
stripped by methods such as hot wax dipping or using a steam autoclave. These
methods do not remove the wax entirely, therefore, residual wax left on the part is
then stripped using potentially hazardous solvents such as perchlorethylene or 1,1,1
trichloroethane. Solvents used in cleaning as well as the removed wax are
considered hazardous waste and add to disposal problems3.

1138
OPERATIONAL DISADVANTAGES
Operational difficulties or complications typical of the hard chromium bath
plating process add to its disadvantages. Cathode efficiency is low. Conventional
hard chromium baths have a cathode efficiency of 7-15%. Higher cathode
efficiencies ranging from 20-25% can be achieved with some proprietary hard
chromium baths.
Along with a low cathode efficiency, hard chromium plating has a low
deposition rate. To produce a good quality chromium deposit, a deposition rate as
low as 0.001 in. per hour is typical. Long plating times from several hours up to
days at a time are often a necessary evil creating lengthy turn-around times and
production delays.
Hard chromium bath plating's poor throwing power will add to production
delays. Poor throwing power can lead to insufficient deposit thickness when plating
tight access areas such as into shoulders or blind holes. Parts are often plated with
excessive deposit thickness to compensate for this and assure adequate material
has been deposited into tight areas. This over plate compensation leads to longer
plating times and adds to production delays.
Because the hard chromium plating bath exhibits poor throwing power, extra
consideration is needed for the design and use of plating racks and fixtures. Critical
in thick deposit applications is :he use of conforming anodes to increase local
current density in recessed areas .
The shape, as well as the accessibility of the area to be plated, can create
complications when designing auxiliary or conforming anodes. The positioning of
the anodes in relation to the cathode may be restricted due to the part's geometry.
Tight recessed areas along with tank chromium's poor throwing power is a
combination that can lead to uneven plating buildups and possibly insufficient
deposit thickness required to restore dimension.
Often with chromium plating, the entire part is immersed into the bath. For
this reason, the entire part requires masking except for the area being plated.
Masking the part by the typical wax process is time consuming in both application
as well as removal time. With the part being immersed into the bath for what can be
days at a time, there is justified concern for the part's welfare, especially when
dealing with extremely valuable parts often associated with the aircraft industry. A
leak in the masking could be catastrophic.

Another disadvantage of not only chrmiun l~th~pplating but mst bath

plating processes is the disassembly requirements. Before a part can be
h"rsed into the bath, it typically requires full disassembly of all other components
to assure their safety. Examples would be sensitive aircraft electrical components
such as generators or motors. Disassembly is yet another time consuming
requirement adding to production delays.
BRUSH PLATING
The process of brush plating should be recognized for its historical
background much like the process of hard chromium bath plating. Through the
3

1139
 innovations of Mr. George lxci back in 1938 in Paris, France, the brush plating
process was developed. The brush plating process was introduced into the United
States in the late 1950's. Since its introduction into the United States, brush plating
has continuously been improved. Improvements in equipment, techniques, variety
of applications, preparatory and plating solutions and deposit quality has led to
'

increasing acceptance in commercial and government specifications5.

Brush plating deposits can be used to serve some of the same purposes as
hard chromium plating. Brush plating deposits can provide corrosion protection,
improve wear resistance, prevent galling and salvage worn or mismachined parts.
Unfortunately, there is no one single brush plating deposit that has all the properties
of hard chromium. However, there are applications where hard chromium is
specified but the application may not necessarily need all that hard chromium has to
offer.
Consider for example a bearing journal on a shaft that has galling damage.
The standard repair procedure specifies to use hard chromium to restore the
bearing journal surface. In this general example, hard chromium may not
necessarily be the best choice of deposit. Hard chromium, having a low static
coefficient of friction, may not serve as well as a deposit such as nickel. The nickel
deposit, having a higher static coefficient of friction may actually serve better in
keeping the bearing's inner race stationary on the bearing journal.
Applications specifying hard chromium plating should be evaluated on a case
by case basis and a determination made as to whether hard chromium is being
specified because of tradition, "that's how it has always been plated", or if hard
chromium is absolutely needed for specific deposit properties that no other coating
can provide. Certain brush plating deposits have similar deposit properties of hard
chromium and if properly matched with the right type of application, can serve as
viable alternatives.
There are certain benefits that can encourage the use of brush plating when
taking into consideration some of the advantages the process of brush plating has
to offer over hard chromium bath plating.
BRUSH PLATING ADVANTAGES
Masking requirements are minimal and there is a lower risk of electrochemical
attack since parts being brush plated do not require immersion into preparatory and
plating solutions. Parts can be plated without disassembly saving many man hours.
Typically only the adjacent areas to the area being plated require masking which is
done using aluminum and vinyl tapes. After masking tapes are adequately rinsed,
they can then be discarded without the hazardous waste concerns encountered with
wax masking.
Brush plating has an advantage over bath plating with regards to plating
speed. Higher plating currents are used when brush plating as compared with bath
plating. Brush nickel, for example, is plated at an average current density of 7
amplsq in. Fast rates of deposition, (0.035 in./hr. as an average for brush nickel)
and the capability to plate at high current densities are largely due to excellent
plating solution agitation at the cathode that is provided by the "brushing" action of
the anode.
4

1140
 The direct anode-to-cathode contact, achieved when brush plating can
improve deposit distribution and reduce uneven plating buildups. The brush plating
anode can direct the plating into tight access areas such as blind holes or inside
corners and reduce the tapering effect often encountered when hard chromium bath
plating these same areas. Both plating as well as machining times are reduced with
less "overplate" needed to compensate for deposit tapering.
The volume of hazardous waste generated from brush plating is considerably
lower when compared with waste volumes generated from hard chromium plating.
This is a significant advantage when you consider today's high cost for disposal and
treatment of hazardous waste. Additional advantages of the brush plating process
are:
- Portable: The brush plating process can be brought to the part vs.
bringing the part to the tank.
- Simple: Preparatory and plating solutions do not require
adjustments in chemistry as would be the case with tank
plating.
- Accurate: Capable of plating to the exact desired thickness.
- Versatile: Allows plating parts that are too large for existing tanks.
DISADVANTAGES
Brush plating is not suitable for plating complex shapes. For example, the
entire outer cylinder of a main landing gear requiring cadmium plating would be
better suited for bath plating due to the part's complexity. Another disadvantage is
that brush plating can be labor intensive. Typically the plater only processes one
part at a time.
DEPOSIT QUALITIES
As mentioned earlier, there is not one individual brush plating deposit offering
all the deposit properties of hard chromium. There are, however, certain brush
plated deposit that do have similar properties and are useful in salvage/repair type
applications. The following will provide some qualitative and quantitative data on
certain brush plating deposits used in salvage/repair type applications.
ADHESION - Using qualitative adhesion tests listed in ASTM B-57I6, brush
plating deposits can be evaluated and compared to other coatings.
Figures 1 and 2, compressive and tensile bend tests respectively,
demonstrate the excellent adhesion and cohesion of hard (575 DPH) brush
sulfamate nickel deposits. These destructive bend tests also show that this deposit
exhibits fair ductility. For comparison, figures 3 and 4 show the results of the same
destructive bend test run on hard (900 DPH) chromium bath plated deposits. Note
in figure 3 the hard chromium under compressive bending failed both adhesively
and cohesively.
Blunt chisel tests of hard brush sulfamate nickel (figure 5) and hard
chromium, bath plated, (figure 6) show the brush sulfamate nickel deposit exhibits
better cohesive properties than the hard chrome after sharp impact.
5

1141
 FIGURE 1. Compressive bend test, hard (575 DPH) brush sulfamate nickel,
0.0044 in. thick, on low carbon steel.

FIGURE 2. Tensile bend test, hard (575 DPH) brush sulfamate nickel,
0.0043 in. thick, on low carbon steel.

1142

I)
FIGURE 3. Compressive bend test, hard (900 DPH) chromium,
0.0087 in. thick, on low carbon steel.

FIGURE 4. Tensile bend test, hard (900 DPH) chromium,

0.0087 in. thick, on low carbon steel.

1143
 FIGURE 5. Blunt chisel test, hard (575 DPH) brush
sulfamate nickel, 0.0037 in. thick, on low carbon steel.

FIGURE 6. Blunt chisel test, hard (900 DPH) chromium,

0.010 in. thick, o n low carbon steel.

8
 TENSILE BOND - Two different brush nickel deposits were deposited onto
SAE 4130 steel and tested in accordance with ASTM C 633-7g7 to quantitatively test
their tensile bond strength.
The first nickel tested was a hard (585 DPH) high speed neutral nickel. The
test results report that the samples all failed in the cement joint at an average of
11,280 psi8. The results indicate that the cohesive strength and adhesion of the
hard nickel on 4130 steel is at least 11,280 psi. It should be noted that this deposit is
ranked as having only fair adhesion per brush plating standards, yet this deposit
exhibits superior adhesion to flame spray coatings and is at least equivalent to
thermal plasma spray coatings.
The second nickel tested was soft (250 DPH) brush sulfamate nickel. Again,
the samples failed in the cement joint, this time at 10,090 psi. The test report
concludes that the adhesion of the nickel to steel, the cohesion of the nickel and the
adhesion of a second layer of nickel deposited to a first, therefore, exceeds 10,090
psig.
SHEAR LOAD - To quantitatively measure the bond stqsngth between layers
of bryFh sulfamate nickel, the ASTM Ring Shear Test Method was used. For this
study the following deposit combinations were tested:

A - Soft sulfamate nickel on soft sulfamate nickel.

B - Hard sulfamate nickel on soft sulfamate nickel.
C - Hard sulfamate nickel on hard sulfamate nickel.
The results of the test were as follows:
TEST psi STRENGTH* LOCATION OF FAILURE
A 48,700 In deposit
B 50,100 In deposit
C 49,400 Between layers
* Bond strength values are from shear load tests and should not be directly
compared to bond strength values derived from tensile tests.
TABER WEAR TEST - Abrasive wear tests were run on hard chromium bath
plating, several brush plating deposits and a few base materials for the purpose of
comparison’*. The conditions of the test were as follows:
Three hundred wear cycles using CS-17 abrasion wheels and 1000
gram load were conducted. The loss in weight was noted and the
abrasion wheels were then redressed.
The results show (see Table 1) as other testing has shown, that a high
hardness does not necessarily correlate with good abrasive wear resistance.

1145
 TABLE 1
TABER WEAR TESTS
WEIGHT LOSS (IN GRAMS)

300 600 900 1200 1500 Total Weight

cycles cvcles cvcles cvcles cvcles Loss in Grams

Bath
Hard Chrome
(900 DPH) .0011 .oooo .oooo .0007 .0006 .0024

Brush
Chrome
(584 DPH) .0012 .0006 .0004 .0002 .0002 .0026

Brush
Cobalt Tungsten
(540DPH) ,0031 .0017 .0023 .0022 .0015 .0108

SAE 4340
@ 50 Rc
(513 DPH) .0050 .0030 .0034 .00,18 ,0016 .0148

Brush
Neutral Nickel
(585 DPH) .0049 .0031 .0034 .0023 .0022 .0159

304ss
(154 DPH) .0039 .0030 .0038 .0020 .0038 .0165

SAE 4340
@34Rc
(332 DPH) .0046 .0035 .0042 .0038 .0037 .0198

Brush Nickel
(Acid) .
(179 DPH) .0048 .om2 .0048 -0047 .0044 .0229

Brush Cobalt
(441 DPH) .0107 .0048 ,0051 .0059 .0066 .0331

Low Carbon
Steel
(75 DPH) .0095 .0078 .0082 .0076 .0075 .0406

10

1146
 HEAT RESISTANCE - In certain applications, a desirable property of hard
chromium is the ability to maintain hardness after elevated temperatures.
Cobait-tungsten brush plated alloy deposits share with hard chromium this same
property. Figure 7 shows the effect of temperature on deposit hardness after two
hour heat treatments. It is interesting to note that the cobalt tungsten maintained a
higher hardness after 12OOOF than the hard chromium (540 DPH vs. 360 DPH).

900 -
800 --
PLATED)
700 -- COBALT-TUNGSTEN
(BRUSH PLATED)
--
600

o m --
P
H 400 --

04
t I
0 200 400 600 800 loo0 1200 1400 1M)o
DEGREES FAHRENHEIT

FIGURE 7. Deposit Hardness After Two Hour Bake

Other tests13 of cobalt-tungsten brush plating were conducted on deposits of

0.004 in. thick plated onto low carbon steel. The samples were heated for two hours
at 900°F, 1200OF and 1500OF in an ordinary oxidizing atmosphere. The following
results were reported:

11
 A. Visual Examination and Bend Test Results
As Plated Adhesion good.
After 900OF Adhesion good. Light oxide.
After 12OOOF Adhesion good. Scale, loose 0.001 in. thick.
After 150OOF Adhesion good. Scale, loose 0.002 in. thick.
B. Metalloqraphic Results
As Plated Scattered stress-cracks.
After 900OF Scale at surface and around cracks.
After 12OOOF Scale 0.004 in. thick on surface.
Scale around cracks.
After 15OOOF Scale and internal oxidation 0.0005 in. deep
from surface and cracks.
C. Microhardness Tests
100 qram load D.P.H. Average of
3 readinas
As Plated 493
After 9OOOF 503
After 12OOOF 493
After 150OOF 435

Current state of the art of cobalt-tungsten brush plating does not provide the
capability to produce appreciable deposit thickness. This limitation minimizes
cobalt-tungsten's usefulness with salvage/repair type applications. However, the
property of sustained hardness, after being subjected to elevated temperatures, is a
deposit quality justifying further research and development of cobalt-tungsten alloy
plating. .
Brush sulfamate nickel plating, often used for salvage applications, was also
tested14 to determine the effect heat has on deposit hardness. There are three
hardness ranges available from brush sulfamate nickel plating solutions and all three
were tested (see figure 8). The test results indicate the hard brush sulfamate nickel
deposits (400 and 575 DPH) are best if used in operating service temperatures not
exceeding 5OOOF.

12

1148
 P
-
- SULFAMATE NICKEL (575)

SULFAMATE NICKEL (400)

.-+-- SULFAMATE NICKEL (250)

I I

7
i
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 loo0
DEGREES FAHRENHEIT

FIGURE 8. Brush Sulfamate Nickel Deposit Hardness

After Four Hour Heat Treatment

SUM MARY
The brush plating process offers nineteen pure metal plating solutions and
several alloy plating solutions. The large selection of plating solutions available
provide a variety of deposit properties that can meet many application requirements.
Deposit quality, cohesion, and adhesion to the base material are equivalent or
superior to good bath plating practice.
Hard chromium plating cannot be entirely replaced using brush plating
deposits, however, hard chromium usage can be reduced by carefully evaluating the
application and determining if hard chromium is absolutely essential. If it is
determined that an alternative plating deposit (for example sulfamate nickel) can
meet the requirements of the application and the brush plating process is used to
apply the alternative deposit, then significant advantages will be gained. The most
significant advantage would be an environmental advantage through the minimiza-
tion of hard chromium use.

13

1149
 REFERENCES:
1. G.Dubpernell in F.A. Lowenheim, Ed., Modern Electroplating, 3rd Ed., Wiley,
New York, 1974, pp. 87-138.
2. W.H., Safranek., The Properties of Electrodeposited Metals and Alloys,
American Elsevier, New York, 1974, pp. 33-61.
3. John Langan, Mary Caporaso., "Brush Plating Applications Utilizing AeroNikl@
Sulfamate Nickel on Aircraft Components," SAE Technical Paper 910938,
March 1991.
4. Greg Piner, Gary Whitfield., "Production Advantages of Hard Chromium
Plating Using Close Anode to Cathode Spacing," SAE Technical Paper
870739, February 1987.
5. SlFCO Selective Plating, DALIC Process Instruction Manual, 5th Ed., 1990.
6. ASTM Standard Test Methods For Adhesion of Metalic Coatings, 6571-84.
7. ASTM Standard Test Method For Adhesion or Cohesive Strength of Flame
Sprayed Coatings, C633-79.
8. SIFCO Selective Plating, Technical Service Bulletin No. 72, "Tensile Bond Test
on Nickel Deposits, Code 2085."
9. SlFCO Selective&lating, Technical Service Bulletin No. 101, "Tensile Bond
Test on AeroNikl 250 Code 7280 Deposits."
10. ASTM Standard Test Methods for Shear Testing of Porous Metal Coatings,
F1044-87.
11. Michael Moskowitz., "Use of Sulfamate Nickel Brush Plating for Heavy Build-
Up,"AESF Technical Paper, June 1991.
12. SlFCO Selective Plating Technical Service Bulletin No. 55, "Evaluating the
Abrasive Wear Resistance of DALIC Deposits.''
13. SIFCO Selective Plating Technical Service Bulletin No. 56, "Effect of High
Temperatures on DALIC Deposits."
14. Gary W. Smith., "Advanced Selective Plating with AeroNikl@ Solutions," SAE
Technical Paper 890935, March 1989.

14

1150