Who’s to Blame, Part II
The question “Who’s to Blame” (www.pfonline.com/articles/clinics/0704cl_pwd1.html) in the July 2004 issue of Products Finishing is one that we could relate to as we had a similar problem.
Q. The question “Who’s to Blame” (www.pfonline.com/articles/clinics/0704cl_pwd1.html) in the July 2004 issue of Products Finishing is one that we could relate to as we had a similar problem. We are metal fabricators and have a basic knowledge of plating and powder coating that is required for inspection purposes. At the time neither the plater nor the powder coater would accept responsibility for the defects, obviously they pointed fingers at each other. I contacted our regional powder coatings representative, who supplies the powder to our vendor. They promptly sent one of the defective parts to the lab where it was evaluated. The results were given to both the plater and the powder coater and since that time the defects have not re-occurred. Neither vendors will discuss any changes that they may have made but I believe that the involvement of the powder representatives provided a forceful catalyst in resolving the situation. Please continue the excellent work in your column. R. H.
A. I am glad to hear that you were able to resolve the problem so efficiently. Sometimes the powder coating supplier will not cooperate with you, the final customer, as they are selling their product to your subcontractor and often want to protect their customer’s interest (the powder coater). I am happy to hear that this situation did not happen to you.
For more than 50 years, fluidized beds have been used to coat parts with powder coatings. In this article, two industry experts tackle some common questions about the fluidized bed process…
Considerations when deciding whether or not a robot is the right choice for your facility...
Question: What methods are available for removing cured powder coatings, and what are the pros and cons of these methods?