HARD CHROME PLATING IMPROVEMENT … CHROME PLATING IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ... edge of the tape curled up, exposing the underlying metal ... Hard Chrome Plating Improvement Implementation

HARD CHROME PLATING IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENTATION No-Mask Anodes / Fixtures Final Report

METAL FINISHING OPTIMIZATION PROJECTS

ROBINS AFB, GEORGIA

Contract F09650-00-D-0013 Order Number 5021

MACTEC Project No. R121

Submitted By

MACTEC Federal Programs, Inc. 613A Russell Parkway

Warner Robins, Georgia 31088-6031 478-923-5999

Advanced Tooling Corporation (ATC) 10507 Walter Thompson Drive

Vienna, VA 22181 703-255-2240

March 2005

Metal Finishing Optimization Projects Task 4 – Hard Chrome Plating Improvement Implementation

No-Mask Anodes / Fixtures Final Report Contract No. F09650-00-D-0013


TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. 1.0 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................ 1 2.0 PREVIOUS PLATING EQUIPMENT / TOOLING............................... 2

3.0 NO-MASK ANODE DESIGN AND FABRICATION ........................... 6 4.0 DESIGN MODIFICATIONS AFTER PROTOTYPE TESTING............ 7 5.0 PRODUCTION UNIT TESTING.......................................................... 8 6.0 TRAINING ........................................................................................ 12 7.0 COST – BENEFIT ANALYSIS ......................................................... 13 APPENDIX A INSTRUCTION MANUAL FOR HUB APPENDIX B INSTRUCTION MANUAL FOR SLEEVE

i




ii

LIST OF TABLES Table Page No. 1 Production Unit Test Data .................................................................................. 10 2 Operational Recommendations for Plating Hubs and Sleeves ........................... 11 3 Labor and Turn–Around Time Analysis for the Hub............................................ 15 4 Labor and Turn–Around Time Analysis for the Sleeve ....................................... 16 5 Labor Cost Savings Using No-Mask Tooling ...................................................... 16 6 Production Capacity Changes Using No-Mask Tooling ...................................... 17 7 Electricity Use / Cost Analysis ............................................................................ 17 8 Hazardous Waste Reduction / Disposal Cost Analysis....................................... 17

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page No. 1 Two Lever Support Sleeves Prepared for Plating with Wax Maskant................... 2 2 WR-ALC Chromium Plating Tank Containing Lever Support Sleeves.................. 3 3 Existing Set-up for Plating Hubs ........................................................................... 3 4 No-Mask Anode and Rack Used for Hubs (Prior to Assembly) ............................ 6 5 Sleeve with No-Mask Attached to Plating Rack.................................................... 7 6 Production Unit Testing for Hub No-Mask Anode................................................. 9 7 Production Unit Testing for Sleeve No-Mask Anode............................................. 9 8 Training Session for Plating Hubs ...................................................................... 12

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ATC Advanced Tooling Corporation CrO3 Chromate g / L Grams per liter ID Inside diameter in. Inch kWh Kilowatt hours Pb Lead PCE Perchloroethylene WR-ALC Warner Robins Air Logistics Center




1

METAL FINISHING OPTIMIZATION PROJECTS ROBINS AFB, GEORGIA

No-Mask Anodes / Fixtures Final Report

1.0 OVERVIEW The objective of this project is to design and fabricate no-mask anode tooling for two

selected parts that are chromium plated at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (WR-

ALC). The selected parts are the C-130 propeller hub (hub) and lever support sleeve

(sleeve). An initial site visit was conducted to observe existing electroplating

procedures and to gather data needed for designing new tooling. Prototype tooling,

including anodes and racks, were then designed / fabricated, testing was performed at

WR-ALC, and a prototype test report was prepared. Based on prototype test results,

modifications to the tooling design were made and production units were fabricated and

tested. Additional modifications to the sleeve tooling were necessary after production

unit testing to produce the required deposits. Sets of production tooling were then

fabricated and shipped to WR-ALC, where they have been successfully implemented

and have replaced all existing tooling for electroplating the hub and sleeve.

User’s manuals (Appendices A and B) were prepared for use on the shop floor and on-

site training of WR-ALC chromium plating personnel was successfully performed. As a

result, the new tooling has been fully implemented into the daily routine of the shop.

Testing of the new tooling demonstrated dramatic improvements over existing

equipment and procedures in terms of cost, plating rates, plating quality, and waste

reduction. The following benefits have been calculated:

• $909,394 annual cost savings (including labor, energy, and waste disposal);

• 42,000 pounds / year reduction in hazardous waste generation;

• 37% turn-around time reduction for the hub and 80% for the sleeve; and

• 206% increase in chromium plating production capacity.




2.0 PREVIOUS PLATING EQUIPMENT / TOOLING The plating shop processes approximately 480 lever support sleeves and 780 hubs per

year. The following procedures were previously used for preparing the sleeve and hub

for plating, plating the parts, and processing them after plating:

1. Strip existing chromium 2. NDI Inspection 3. Grinding 4. Pre-wax masking 5. Racking 6. Wax application 7. Wax trimming 8. Cleaning (pumice) 9. Anode attachment

10. Plating 11. Rinsing 12. Anode removal 13. Dewax 14. Degrease 15. Heat treat 16. Grinding 17. Inspection

Five of the above steps were necessary due to the wax masking technique employed.

These steps include: pre-wax masking, wax application, wax trimming, dewax, and

degrease. A pair of lever support sleeves, which have been masked with wax, are

shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Two Lever Support Sleeves Prepared for Plating with Wax Maskant

2




The tank setup for chromium plating the lever support sleeves is shown in Figure 2.

The rectifiers are connected to 2 inch (in.) square copper tank bus bars running the

length of the tank. The cathode bar is at the front of the tank (left side in Figure 2) and

the anode bar is located at the rear of the tank. With the previous equipment method,

aluminum racks fabricated from 2 in. square aluminum bar, permanently rested

perpendicularly on the tank copper bus bars. A similar set-up was used for plating the

hubs (Figure 3).

Figure 2: WR-ALC Chromium Plating Tank Containing Lever Support Sleeves

Figure 3: Existing Set-up for Plating Hubs

3




A vital aspect of good electroplating is the delivery of the electrical power from the

rectifier to the parts (connected to negative terminal of rectifier) and anodes (connected

to positive terminal of rectifier). If the connections are inadequate, the voltage applied

to the parts and anodes will be less than the voltage displayed on the rectifier readout.

With the original setup, described above, there are numerous connections between the

rectifier and the parts and anodes. Each connection is a potential source of voltage

loss. For example, the fixtured parts were lowered onto the aluminum racks and

secured with C-clamps (see Figure 2). If the surface of the aluminum fixture or rack

was coated with a chromic acid film (almost impossible to avoid given the location of the

rack), then the electrical connection would suffer some power loss, no matter how tightly

the C-clamp is secured. Therefore, it is very likely that with the previous set-up, the

electrical power applied to the parts was significantly less than desired. The observed

low plating rates (0.00035 in. per hour thick for the hub and 0.00015 in. per hour thick

for the sleeve) are an indicator of poor connectivity.

Anodes previously used for plating the C-130 hubs consisted of two semicircular-

mirrored lead mats. These were connected separately to the tank fixtures by lead

strips. In use, the amount of current delivered to the two anodes may have varied

considerably resulting in a non-uniform deposit.1 The mat anodes are unprotected and

can be easily bent during use, transport, or storage. Once the anodes become non-

symmetric, they will produce a non-uniform deposit. The anodes form a lead dioxide

and / or lead-chromate film on their surface during plating. The films were periodically

removed in a stripping bath. Lead-chromate is a known carcinogen and lead dioxide is

a possible carcinogen. These compounds can be easily transferred from anodes to skin

or clothing during handling. When lead anodes are damaged or they exceed their

1 The quantity of current reaching each anode is affected by various factors. For example, corrosion products may form on the connection end of a lead strip causing poor connectivity, even when tightly held by the fixture. With this scenario, chromium will deposit faster on the side with the good connection and result in an uneven deposit thickness. Another factor affecting current flow to the anode is the quality of the lead welds connecting the strips to the mats.

4




useful life (i.e., some weight loss occurs during each plating cycle), they are disposed of

as hazardous waste.

Various problems existed with the original methods used for masking and plating the

lever support sleeves resulting in a rework factor of greater than 50 percent:

• Anodes could not be centered accurately resulting in uneven plating

thickness. To compensate for inadequate rates of deposit in some areas, all

parts were plated longer than would have been necessary if the deposit was

evenly distributed. Thicker chromium deposits proportionally increase the

amount of time needed to grind the surface after plating.

• The sleeve was masked with lead (Pb) tape at the upper edge of the inside

diameter (ID). Chromium tended to “tree” on the tape. When the chromium

trees reached a length of about ½ inch, they often broke off and fell into the

90o area causing a misplate and reject of the part (rejected parts are stripped

and replated).

• Trees that did not break off had to be removed during grinding. When

removed, this sometimes resulted in chipping of the chromium deposit near

the top of the ID, causing reject of the part.

• The adhesive backing of the lead masking tape could not withstand the long

plating cycle (168 hours). The leading edge of the tape curled up, exposing

the underlying metal surface. Chromium inadvertently plated on this surface

resulting in reject of the part.

• Chromium frequently did not “throw” sufficiently onto the 90o area at the

bottom of the ID, resulting in reject of the part. As a partial solution to this

problem, the concentration of Tank 812 was increased from 250 grams per

liter (g/L) chromate (CrO3) to 385 g/L CrO3. However, this action did not

completely eliminate the problem.

• Some wax maskant was inadvertently removed from parts during plating and

contaminated the bath.

5




Similar problems existed with chromium plating the hubs, although the plating cycle was

faster and a lower percentage of rejects / rework occurred.

3.0 NO-MASK ANODE DESIGN AND FABRICATION Prototype tooling (Figures 4 and 5) was designed and fabricated and tested during

October and November 2004. No-mask anodes consist of machined PVC components

that house a lead “conforming” anode and fit over the surface of the part being plated.

By virtue of their design, the no-mask anodes isolate the electrical power within the area

where a chromium deposit is desired. Areas not being plated are shielded from the

electrical current and therefore do not require masking. The part is mounted to the

negative or cathode bar of a custom-designed rack, which includes both positive and

negative polarity bars. The lead anode is permanently connected to a copper cable,

which is attached to a positive bar on a rack during the racking process.

At the completion of prototype testing a report was prepared. That report contains the

results of each prototype test run.

Figure 4: No-Mask Anode and Rack Used for Hubs (Prior to Assembly)

6




Figure 5: Sleeve with No-Mask Attached to Plating Rack

4.0 DESIGN MODIFICATIONS AFTER PROTOTYPE TESTING The prototype tests showed that no significant design changes were necessary for the

hub anodes. Initially, prototype test results were also positive for the sleeve anode.

However, subsequent to prototype testing, WR-ALC reported problems with the

prototype sleeve anode. Specifically, a sufficiently thick chromium deposit was not

consistently present near the bottom of the sleeve.

The plating problem with the sleeve was traced to the pre-machining step performed

during refurbishment. The sleeve is not chromium plated as an OEM part; chromium is

only applied during the overhaul process for dimensional restoration. Prior to chromium

plating, the inside diameter of the steel sleeve is undercut to allow for a minimum

chromium thickness of 3 mils (after grinding). Undercutting the sleeve leaves a ridge

near the bottom of the part, where the grinding stone stopped cutting away steel. This

ridge is located approximately at the point where the chromium deposit must end.

During plating, the ridge is a high current density area, and the area around the ridge is

a low current density area. Chromium plates more readily on the ridge (high current

density area) than below it. This results in a “lump” of chromium along the ridge and

7




there are other areas where there is insufficient chromium. Increasing the plating time

will not solve this problem because chromium deposits faster on the ridge, which

exacerbates the high vs. low current density situation.

In order to overcome this problem, it was necessary to fine-tune the sleeve tooling

design to direct the deposit in a manner that overcame the influence of the ridge. In

addition to the tooling design change, it was recommended that the grind shop reduce

the undercut to an acceptable minimum. This action decreased the height of the ridge

and its influence on the deposit. Therefore, through a design change and the

cooperative efforts of the grind shop, the sleeve tooling was successfully implemented.

In addition to anode changes, several changes to the rack frames were necessary to

adapt them to the plating tanks used at Warner Robins and to make them more user-

friendly. Specifically, the following changes were made:

• twisted copper flat bars were added on the anode (+) side of the rack; and

• twisted aluminum flat bars were added to the cathode (-) side of the rack.

These changes to the upper structure of the rack frames allow plating shop personnel to

lower each rack fixture into the tank and set it down on the flat buss bars without

attaching cables at the tank, as originally designed.

5.0 PRODUCTION UNIT TESTING A set of production units was fabricated and shipped to WR-ALC and tested during

November and December 2004 (Figures 6 and 7). During the first week of production

unit testing, six hubs were successfully plated using a range of amperage settings.

Multiple sleeves were also plated, but with variable success. Two additional weeks of

production unit sleeve testing were needed to refine the tooling design, as discussed in

the previous section of this report. Subsequently, both the hub and sleeve tooling were

successfully implemented. Production unit test data are summarized in Table 1.

8




Figure 6: Production Unit Testing for Hub No-Mask Anode

Figure 7: Production Unit Testing for Sleeve No-Mask Anode

9




Table 1: Production Unit Test Data

Date Part Amps Volts Plating Time, hours

Chromium Thickness,

mils

Chromium Plating Rate,

mils / hour thick

11/16/04 Hub 380 4.4 8.1 12.0 1.5 11/17/04 Hub 283 4.0 11.9 11.5 1.0 11/18/04 Hub 385 4.4 8.2 13.0 1.6 11/18/04 Hub 230 3.7 12.5 10.5 0.8 11/16/04 Sleeve (2) 150 5.1 6.0 12.5 2.1 11/16/04 Sleeve (2) 103 4.5 11.9 15.0 1.3 11/17/04 Sleeve (2) 150 5.1 6.5 13.0 2.0 11/18/04 Sleeve (2) 75 4.0 16.4 14.0 0.9 12/7/04 Sleeve (1) 50 4.2 11.0 12.5 1.1 12/8/04 Sleeve (1) 75 4.4 7.5 15.0 2.0 12/9/04 Sleeve (1) 75 4.4 11.0 21.0 1.9 12/14/04 Sleeve (4) 240 4.2 16.5 26.0 1.6 12/15/04 Sleeve (4) 300 4.2 11.0 22.0 2.0 Notes: During plating, tank temperature ranged between 132 oF and 135 oF.

Prior to plating, parts were reversed etched for 2.0 minutes (380 A for hub and 150 A for sleeves).

One objective of the production unit testing was to determine amperage settings under

different operational conditions expected for WR-ALC so that the new tooling could be

used under various schedules. Two recommended scenarios are described below.

• Meeting current production levels. To meet current production

requirements, it is recommended that WR-ALC rack parts during the first shift

and start the plating cycles toward the end of the first shift. Then, the parts

should be pulled at the start of the morning shift. This will provide

approximately 16 hours of plating time. To prevent over-plating of the parts, a

low amperage setting would be used under this scenario.

• Meeting high production levels. To meet higher production levels, WR-

ALC can plate two sets of parts each day. This can be accomplished by

plating at higher amperage settings. Using ATC tooling, the minimum plating

times are 8 to 10 hours for the selected parts. First shift operators could

10




complete two plating cycle for the hubs and sleeves by working approximately

4 hours of overtime. Parts would be loaded at the start of the first shift and

pulled after 8 to 10 hours of plating. A second set of parts would then be

plated overnight and pulled in the morning.

A plating chart covering various plating times and rectifier settings is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Operational Recommendations for Plating

Hubs and Sleeves

Plating Time, hours

Amperage Setting, amps

Expected Plating Rate, mils / hour

Expected Plating Thickness, mils

Hubs 8.0 380 1.5 12 12.0 280 1.0 12 16.0 230 0.8 12

Sleeves (2) 10.0 150 2.0 20 12.5 120 1.6 20 16.0 110 1.3 20

The above plating times are based on desired plating thickness of 12 mils for hubs and 20 mils for sleeves. It is likely that the target chromium deposit for sleeves can be reduced, which will proportionally decrease plating times.

To maintain the no-mask anodes in good working condition, WR-ALC should filter the

chromium baths a minimum of one time per year. If the baths are not filtered, the no-

mask anodes will collect particulates and will require periodic cleaning (recommend

using a stiff plastic bristle brush). It is anticipated that the no-mask anodes will provide

50 to 100 plating cycles, without a significant decrease in plating rates. Eventually,

however, the plating rate will diminish and the anodes should be refurbished (lead

replacement).

11




6.0 TRAINING Operator training was provided at WR-ALC during the week of November 15, 2004 for

the two primary chromium platers and two additional plating staff persons, in

accordance with the Scope of Services. Training was provided by the ATC staff.

Training consisted of the following steps:

• Assembly and disassembly of ATC racks used for hubs and sleeves,

• Masking procedure for hubs, • Racking procedures for both

parts, • Reverse etch procedure for

both parts,

• Plating procedure for both parts,

• Rinsing procedure for both parts,

• Unracking procedure for both parts, and

• Baking procedure for both parts.

Trainees were shown the proper methods for each process step and the trainees

subsequently performed each step under the observation and guidance of the trainers

(Figure 8). Parts processed by the trainees were successfully plated.

Figure 8: Training Session for Plating Hubs

12




7.0 COST - BENEFIT ANALYSIS A production and cost comparison was prepared based on data collected during

prototype and production unit testing for the following factors:

• labor requirements / cost,

• turn - around production time,

• production capacity,

• electricity use / cost, and

• waste disposal costs.

Labor costs and production turn-around time for the hub and sleeve are evaluated in

Tables 3 and 4, respectively. Using existing procedures the overall labor time for

plating a single hub is 12.6 hours. Using the ATC no-mask tooling, the labor time per

hub is reduced to 4.9 hours. The main savings are due to the elimination of wax

maskant, reduced tank plating time, and reduced grinding time. The total time required

for processing a hub is reduced by use of the ATC tooling from 79.1 hours to 50.0 hours

(37% reduction).

Even more dramatic results were observed for the sleeves. Using existing procedures

the overall labor time for successfully plating a pair of sleeves is 31.4 hours. Using the

ATC no-mask tooling, the labor time per sleeve is reduced to 4.9 hours. The main

reason for the savings is the elimination of rework and wax maskant, reduced tank

plating time, and reduced grinding time. The total time required for processing a pair of

sleeves is reduced by use of the ATC tooling from 244.7 hours to 50.0 hours (80%

reduction).

The resultant labor cost savings are shown in Table 5. Using a “loaded” shop labor rate

of $72 / hour, the expected labor cost savings from implementation of ATC no-mask

tooling is $892,080 per year.

13




The production capacity analysis is shown in Table 6. Production capacity is an

important factor because the workload at WR-ALC is nearing the capacity of the existing

equipment (mainly limited by tank space due to the bulky nature of the old tooling) and

additional workload increases are expected in 2005. The production capacity analysis

shows that the plating facility is expected to show a 206% increase in production

capacity for the two selected parts by implementing the ATC tooling. This is based on

plating two batches of parts per day (260 days / year). An additional two-fold increase

in production capacity is possible by plating two full sets of hubs and sleeves per day

(see Table 2 and associated discussion for operational parameters that enable faster

plating times with the new tooling).

An electricity use / cost comparison analysis is shown in Table 7. This evaluation

shows an expected decrease of 68,142 kilowatt hours (kWh) and $6,814 per year

respectively for electricity use and cost.

Estimates of hazardous waste reduction and resultant cost savings are shown in Table

8. Based on current production levels, a reduction of 42,000 pounds / year of

hazardous waste will be achieved with a resultant cost savings of $10,500 / year.

14




Table 3: Labor and Turn-Around Time Analysis for the Hub

Existing Set-Up No-Mask Tooling Operation Location Labor,

hours Turn-Around Time, hours

Labor, hours

Turn-Around Time, hours

Strip existing chromium Plating Shop 0.3 24.0 0.3 24.0 NDI Inspection Inspection Area 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Grinding Machine Shop 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Pre-wax masking Plating Shop 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Racking Plating Shop 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 Wax application Plating Shop 1.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 Wax trimming Plating Shop 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Cleaning (pumice) Plating Shop 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Anode attachment Plating Shop 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Plating* Plating Shop 3.6 36.0 1.5 15.0 Rinsing Plating Shop 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Anode removal Plating Shop 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 Dewax Plating Shop 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 Degrease Plating Shop 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 Heat treat Heat Treat Area 0.1 8.0 0.1 8.0 Grinding Machine Shop 2.0 2.0 0.5 0.5 Inspection Inspection Area 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

TOTALS 12.6 79.1 4.9 50.0

*Plating labor is estimated to be 10% of plating tank time.

15




16

Table 4: Labor and Turn-Around Time Analysis for the Sleeve

Existing Set-Up No-Mask Tooling Operation Location Labor,

Hours Turn-Around Time, Hours

Labor, Hours

Turn-Around Time, Hours

Strip existing chromium Plating Shop 0.3 24.0 0.3 24.0 NDI Inspection Inspection Area 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Grinding Machine Shop 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Pre-wax masking Plating Shop 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Racking Plating Shop 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 Wax application Plating Shop 1.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 Wax trimming Plating Shop 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Cleaning (pumice) Plating Shop 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Anode attachment Plating Shop 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Plating* Plating Shop 12.0 120.0 1.5 15.0 Rinsing Plating Shop 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Anode removal Plating Shop 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 Dewax Plating Shop 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 Degrease Plating Shop 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 Heat treat Heat Treat Area 0.1 8.0 0.1 8.0 Grinding Machine Shop 2.0 2.0 0.5 0.5 Inspection Inspection Area 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

TOTALS 21.0 163.1 4.9 50.0 TOTALS

(Including 50% Rework Factor for Existing Tooling)

31.5 244.7 4.9 50.0

*Plating labor is estimated to be 10% of plating tank time.

Table 5: Labor Cost Savings Using No-Mask Tooling

Part

Annual Production,

Parts/Yr.

Existing Tooling

Labor Per Part, Hrs.

Existing Tooling

Labor Cost,

No Mask Tooling

Labor, Hrs.

No-Mask Tooling

Labor Cost,

No-Mask Tooling

Labor Cost Savings

Hub 780 12.6 $707,616 4.9 $275,184 $432,432Sleeve (pairs)* 240 31.5 $544,320 4.9 $84,672 $459,648

TOTALS $1,251,936 $359,856 $892,080Note: labor cost is estimated at $72 / hour. *Sleeves are plated two per rack; therefore this analysis is based on processing a pair (2) of sleeves.




17

Table 6: Production Capacity Changes Using No-Mask Tooling

Part Existing Tooling

Annual Production Capacity, parts / year

No-Mask Tooling* Annual Production,

parts / year

No-Mask Tooling Production Capacity Increase, parts / year

Hub 780 1,040 260 Sleeve (pairs) 240 2,080 1,840

TOTALS 1,020 3,120 2,100 *No-mask tooling includes four sets each for hub and sleeve (pairs), which can be used at a minimum of

one cycle each day (260 days / year).

Table 7: Electricity Use / Cost Analysis

Part Annual

Production, parts / year

Amps (per part or pair) Volts

Hrs. Plated (per part or

pair)

Annual Electricity Use, kWh

Annual Electricity

Cost, $ Existing Tooling

Hub 780 300 5.5 36.0 46,332 $4,633 Sleeve (pairs)* 360 150 5.5 120.0 35,640 $3,564

TOTALS 81,972 $8,197 No Mask Tooling

Hub 780 230 4.2 16.0 12,056 $1,206 Sleeve (pairs)* 240 110 4.2 16.0 1,774 $177

TOTALS 13,830 $1,383 CHANGE 68,142 $6,814

*Sleeves are plated two per rack; therefore this analysis is based on processing a pair (2) of sleeves. With existing tooling, there is a reject / rework factor of 50% for sleeves.

Electricity cost is estimated to be $0.10 / kWh.

Table 8: Hazardous Waste Reduction / Disposal Cost Analysis

Existing Tooling No-Mask Tooling Hazardous

Waste Annual

Generation Rate,

pounds

Unit Disposal

Cost, $ / pound

Disposal Cost,

$

Annual Generation

Rate, pounds

Unit Disposal

Cost, $ / pound

Disposal Cost,

$

F006 Sludge 200,000 $0.25 $50,000 160,000 $0.25 $40,000 PCE 10,000 $0.25 $2,500 8,000 $0.25 $2,000 TOTALS 210,000 $52,500 168,000 $42,000 Note: This analysis is limited to hazardous waste; the maskant wax waste is not included. Existing

tooling waste generation rates are based on recent annual averages. An estimated 20% F006 reduction is achieved with no-mask tooling as a result of reducing rework (affects dragout / wastewater from plating and stripping) and plating times (affects air emission / scrubber wastewater). An estimated 20% perchloroethylene (PCE) waste reduction is achieved by eliminating residual wax removal from parts after plating (residual wax is a major contributor to PCE exhaustion).

HARD CHROME PLATING IMPROVEMENT … CHROME PLATING IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ... edge of the tape curled up, exposing the underlying metal ... Hard Chrome Plating Improvement Implementation

Documents