For those who want a deeper dive into this subject read the book “Rust: The Longest War" by Jonathan Waldman.
https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Rust/Jonathan-Waldman...
The Global Cost of Corrosion
51–60 of 251 posts
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stainless steel is not 'rust proof' it is mostly rust retardant, it has a chromium coating that reduces oxidization but does not stop it completely. The more chromium, the better the rust resistant properties. https://www.pennstainless.com/resources/product-information/... Is pretty good stuff and https://www.cralloys.com/alloys/17-chrome/ is possibly better still. If you want (much) better rust resistance than that…
I was not familiar with these grades, very interesting reading and finding out about them. The most common grades of stainless I have encountered in the marine industry is either 316 (best) or 304 (budget, requires regular cleaning to keep rust free). Both have issues with crevice corrosion and are also very expensive compared to zinc-plated equivalents (which I would never use on a boat since they will effectively d…
I worked for a sailmaker in the Netherlands who also did rigging. You really get to appreciate the difference if you see saltwater exposed rigging after a year or two from slightly different steel formulations, one still pristine, the other looking as though someone is pulling a bad joke on your with rust colored paint. Also: maintenance made all the difference, people that would immediately fix a small issue were often able to arrest it without further damage. But ignore it for a while and one thing leads to another.
edit: as to your point regarding crevice corrosion: yes, that is very nasty indeed, especially because a visual inspection will typically turn up nothing out of the order, all it takes is a bit of trapped moisture and some time.
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Volvo is owned by a Chinese parent company, but their operations are still based in the same places as before. Using the definition implied by your comment, they were previously and “American” car manufacturer as they were sold to geeley by ford. Edit: absurd typo, it is owned by a Chinese company.
> Volvo is not owned by a Chinese parent company, but their operations are still based in the same places as before. You are welcome to use your own definition of the word 'owned' but I'll just stick to the dictionary one. > Using the definition implied by your comment, they were previously and “American” car manufacturer as they were sold to geeley by ford. https://www.industryweek.com/finance/software-systems/artic…
I highly suspect, based on facts about Volvo and the structure of that sentence, that they didn't mean to write "not owned", but rather "now owned."
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I got the impression Volvo was able to do this for fairly small production runs, whereas the Japanese figured out how to consistently do it in large volumes.
That may well be so, Japanese cars had an absolutely terrible reputation for being rustbuckets in the 70's so they had to do something about it. Given the number of them that were manufactured the fact that they are so rare today is as far as I know uniquely due to the rust problem.
Mazdas are still rustbuckets today.
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#55This is why I get scared when I see articles about people developing plastic eating bacteria. Sure it is great for reducing waste but it’s a dangerous game to be playing for sure.
Those microbes require very specific conditions: precise pH and osmolarity, high temperature (50-70˚C), long contact times, feedstock that's been literally pulverized, etc. These probably aren't going to occur anywhere outside of a bioreactor, so our action figures are likely safe...for now!
> feedstock that's been literally pulverized, etc.
Even if hypothetical rogue bacteria can't dissolve plastic parts to goo or cause structural damage, or there's still potential harm in the form of surface changes. Discoloration, flaking, etc.
Imagine a product nobody wants to buy because it looks damaged, or a medical device that can't be as easily/thoroughly sterilized anymore.
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#56This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by…
Toyota has had a serious problem with truck frames rusting.
https://www.autoblog.com/2016/11/14/toyota-3-billion-settlem...
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Volvo is not owned by a Chinese parent company, but their operations are still based in the same places as before. You are welcome to use your own definition of the word 'owned' but I'll just stick to the dictionary one. > Using the definition implied by your comment, they were previously and “American” car manufacturer as they were sold to geeley by ford. https://www.industryweek.com/finance/software-systems/artic…
I highly suspect, based on facts about Volvo and the structure of that sentence, that they didn't mean to write "not owned", but rather "now owned."
Ah, that could be, thank you for pointing that out. That would make a lot more sense. But then I still don't understand the comment. Volvo is now Chinese, whether you like it or not is another matter.
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are modern Volvos still better than average for corrosion resistance?
Somewhere in the late 90's early 2000's car manufacturers switched paint processes, typically to a water based paint. That's the point in time where you could see the most clearly which manufacturers had their house in order in terms of weld cleaning, seam coating, basic material procurement and surface protection. Some of them failed horribly, which led to some brands (for instance: Mercedes) having an undisclosed h…
So everybody smartened up and now things are much better, to the point that there hardly are cars made that have serious rust issues.
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Somewhere in the late 90's early 2000's car manufacturers switched paint processes, typically to a water based paint. That's the point in time where you could see the most clearly which manufacturers had their house in order in terms of weld cleaning, seam coating, basic material procurement and surface protection. Some of them failed horribly, which led to some brands (for instance: Mercedes) having an undisclosed h…
So everybody smartened up and now things are much better, to the point that there hardly are cars made that have serious rust issues. I find this entertaining. Come to upstate NY, USA where we liberally salt our roads in the winter. Definitely not "everybody" smartened up as it's still very common to find vehicles here that after 10 years should be declared unsafe to operate due to rust-through of critical structural…
Interesting, any particular brands or is that across the board?
Here we liberally salt our roads as well in winter and in the past cars would not last a decade before falling apart. Now you really have to look to figure out which cars are new, 10 or 20 years old. Rust is - as far as I can see - a solved problem. Not many US cars on the road here though.
Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I highly suspect, based on facts about Volvo and the structure of that sentence, that they didn't mean to write "not owned", but rather "now owned."
Ah, that could be, thank you for pointing that out. That would make a lot more sense. But then I still don't understand the comment. Volvo is now Chinese, whether you like it or not is another matter.
Would you say that Arm is a Japanese company?