We have a fabrication workshop, and often need to remove rust on steel plates before they can be shipped.
We have recently used a Rust converter and we feel it is an environmentally better option.
But there are a few Quality Inspectors who object to the use of Rust convertor and approve only the Sandblast process.
We need Advice on pros and cons of both processes.
And, if rust conversion is a better, what points so we keep before the Quality inspectors, to prove it.
Thanks
Sanjay
If it's light surface rust, I think the converter would be the best since it neutralizes the rust and also acts like a primer on the steel. We used it (Marhyde) on air conditioner coil tubes when we'd install them in the local sewage plant because it would extend the life of the copper by double the untreated coils service life. If it's some serious rust though, you can't beat sandblasting it off but then you have to primer it almost immediately. I guess the points for the converter on lighter rust would be the fact that it will neutralize it and prime the steel in one step, thus negating the extra cost and man hours of having to handle it multiple times for sandblasting and then priming.
Depending on the steel and what it will be used for
One of the problems with rust converter is if there is still mill scale on the steel ,eventualy the mill scale comes loose and so does the top coated paints.
Tom
Forum
