Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer in Anodizing Operations:Metal Tech Speaking Template USE THIS.

qxd 9/12/2011 3:00 PM Page 1

TECHNICALLY 5 Galaxy aircraft, as well as the main

speaking
landing gear from this aircraft, is
presented in Figure 1 [Refs. 1, 2, 3].
A sealing operation usually com-
pletes the anodizing process. During
the sealing process, the micropores
BY ROBERT B. MASON,A CEF; SARAH CLARKA; AND MELISSA KLINGENBERGA, of the anodized (oxide) layer are
PH.D; ELIZABETH BERMAN, PHDB; AND NATASHA VOEVODIN, PHDC. hydrated. Because the hydrated form
of the oxide has a greater volume
aConcurrent Technologies Corporation, Largo, Fla.; Dayton, Ohio; than the unhydrated form, this
and Johnstown, Pa. process fills the micropores and sub-
bUnited States Air Force Research Laboratory, sequently improves corrosion and
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio staining resistance [Ref. 4]. The most
cUnited States Air Force Research Laboratory/University of Dayton Research commonly used sealing process, a
Institute Dayton, Ohio sodium dichromate solution, has
been used for many years and has
Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer proven to be both effective and
robust. A standard dichromate sealer
in Anodizing Operations bath can last a year or longer with
standard loading. However, this
solution contains hexavalent
ABSTRACT chromium (Cr6+). Note: Cr6+ is a haz-
Ogden Air Logistics Center (OO-ALC) is the primary facility within the United ardous material that is listed on the
States Air Force for maintaining and overhauling aircraft landing gear. Office of the Secretary of Defense
Aluminum landing gear components are anodized at OO-ALC to provide (OSD) Emerging Contaminants
enhanced corrosion resistance, paint adhesion, and wear resistance; a sodium Action List, the Environmental
dichromate sealing operation usually completes the anodizing process. Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) list of
During sealing, the pores of the anodized (oxide) layer are hydrated, which fills toxic industrial chemicals to be vol-
the pores and provides improved corrosion resistance. However, this sealer untarily reduced or eliminated, and
contains hexavalent chromium, which is listed on the Environmental in Superfund Amendments and
Protection Agency’s list of industrial toxic chemicals that are targeted for vol- Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title
untary reduction or elimination. The specification that outlines the sodium 313 [Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)].
dichromate sealing process delineates three alternative processes that are Additionally, the Department of
approved for use: 1) boiling de-ionized water, 2) cobalt acetate, and 3) nickel Defense (DoD) issued a policy direc-
acetate. While some research to support the use of these and other sealing tive in April 2009 that restricts the
processes has been gathered under past efforts, additional work must be con- use of Cr6+ compounds on military
ducted to fully integrate non-chromate sealers into OO-ALC’s anodizing oper- vehicles and weapon systems [Ref. 5].
ations. To meet this need, the Air Force Research Laboratory tasked Therefore, the DoD has an ongoing
Concurrent Technologies Corporation to identify viable alternatives to the need to identify and validate a
sodium dichromate sealer, conduct testing on these alternatives, and recom- chromium-free sealer to reduce the
mend the most promising sealer(s) for implementation based on the test use of Cr6+ in anodizing operations,
results. This paper will describe the requirements for anodizing and sealing thereby reducing associated environ-
operations within OO-ALC, as well as the sealing technologies that are avail- mental and compliance burdens.
able and a path forward to demonstrate/validate the most promising alterna- MIL-A-8625F is the military spec-
tives for the specific needs and applications of OO-ALC. ification that establishes the
requirements for anodizing and
sealing processes used for military

A nodizing is a mature and com-

monly used electrochemical
process that controls and enhances
the formation of protective oxide
coatings on aluminum (Al) and Al
alloys. The process is used for a wide
variety of commercial and military
applications. For example, anodiz-
ing operations are routinely per-
formed at the Ogden Air Logistics
Center (OO-ALC) at Hill Air Force
Base, Utah, as part of the depot
maintenance process, on numerous
vehicles and weapon systems within
the United States Air Force (USAF)
inventory. Specifically, OO-ALC is
the primary facility within the USAF
for maintaining and overhauling air-
craft landing gear. Al landing gear
components are anodized at OO-
ALC to provide wear- and corrosion-
resistant surfaces. A photo of the C-
components [Ref. 6]. This specifica-
tion delineates three alternative
sealing processes that are approved
for use: boiling deionized (DI)
water, solutions containing cobalt
acetate, and solutions containing
nickel acetate. However, sufficient
data to promote the use of these
and other chromium-free sealing
processes do not exist.
To address these issues, the Air

www.metalfinishing.com June 2011 I metalfinishing I 25

Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer in Anodizing Operations:Metal Tech Speaking Template USE THIS.qxd 9/12/2011 3:00 PM Page 2

TECHNICALLY
speaking REQUIREMENT
Type II Type IIB
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
Type III
Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Coating Weight 1,000 minimum 200–1,000 4,320 minimum
Energy and Environment Team (milligram/square for every 0.001
(RXSCP) tasked Concurrent feet [mg/ft2]), inch of coating
Technologies Corporation (CTC) to unsealed
identify and demonstrate/validate an Corrosion Minimal corrosion after Not specified
alternative to sodium dichromate Resistance 336 hours
sealers used in anodizing operations
at OO-ALC. The successful imple- Paint Adhesion No intercoat separation Not applicable
mentation of a chromium-free seal- between the paint system
ing technology will reduce environ- and the anodic coating or
mental compliance burdens and fos- between the anodic coating
ter enhanced worker safety at OO- and the base metal.
ALC. Under this effort, numerous Coating 0.07–1.0 0.02–0.7 0.5–4.5
interviews with OO-ALC personnel Thickness
were conducted. The purpose of the (mils [0.001 in])
interviews was to identify the techni-
Table 1. MIL-A-8625F Performance Requirements for Anodic Coatings on Aluminum Alloy
cal requirements for the parts being Components
processed and to capture the desired
characteristics of an alternative seal-
er. CTC then identified relevant and Type IIB) and hard coat (Type Federal Test Method Standard 141,
products by conducting Internet III) anodizing at its facility. Method 6301 [Ref. 8]. (1See Table 2:
searches, vendor interviews, and liter- Therefore, processing and coating Acceptance Criteria for Corrosion
ature reviews. requirements for Types II, IIB, and III Resistance.) .
This article presents the findings anodizing at OO-ALC were deter-
from the interviews with ALC per- mined. Based on interviews with SULFURIC ACID (TYPE II AND TYPE
sonnel (requirements analysis) and OO-ALC personnel, anodizing IIB) ANODIZING
product search (technology assess- processes at OO-ALC are used to OO-ALC uses sulfuric acid (Type II
ment) conducted during this effort. treat components made from 2000, and Type IIB) anodizing to anodize
Although this activity focused on the 6000, and 7000 series Al alloys. The the components of various aircraft
specific needs of OO-ALC (e.g., mili- performance requirements for the landing gear. Current is applied
tary components and applications), three types of anodizing conducted when parts enter into the solution
the information and methodology at OO-ALC must meet the require- and is gradually increased to the
presented herein is useful for anyone ments of MIL-A-8625F, which are desired current density (typically 12
interested in exploring alternatives summarized in Table 1 [Ref. 6]. to 22 volts). The coatings become
to dichromate sealers for anodizing The acceptance criteria recognize harder and denser as the purity of
operations. that corrosion resistance is deter- the aluminum in the substrate
mined using the standard salt spray increases [Ref. 4].
ANODIZING AND SEALING test in accordance with ASTM B117 Parts that have been anodized with
REQUIREMENTS [Ref. 7], and that paint adhesion is the Type II and IIB processes are
OO-ALC uses sulfuric acid (Type II determined in accordance with sealed with the sodium dichromate

Figure 1. C-5 Galaxy, Aircraft (left) and Main Landing Gear (right).

26 I metalfinishing I June 2011 www.metalfinishing.com

Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer in Anodizing Operations:Metal Tech Speaking Template USE THIS.qxd 9/12/2011 3:00 PM Page 3

TECHNICALLY
speaking
sealer; therefore, these processes were
the primary focus of this study. The
main Environmental Health and
Safety (EHS) concerns expressed by
OO-ALC personnel for these process-
es are the corrosive nature of the
sodium dichromate solution and the
fact that it contains Cr+6.
HARD COAT (TYPE III) ANODIZING
OO-ALC performs the hard coat
(Type III) anodizing process, after
conducting Type II anodizing on a
part, as part of their aircraft refur-
bishment processes. Because Type III
anodized coatings are sealed in boil-
ing DI water, the primary EHS con-
cern is thermal exposure to the boil-
ing water. Therefore, this process was
not a focus of this study.
SEALING PROCESS AND
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
OO-ALC personnel reported that
OO-ALC has two sodium dichro-
mate sealer tanks for sealing
anodized parts. Both of these tanks
contain solutions with concentra-
tion of 5 to 9 ounces per gallon
(oz/gal) sodium dichromate. The
pH is maintained between 5.0 and
6.3 with sodium hydroxide, and the
temperature is maintained between
95–98 degrees Celsius (°C) (203–208
degrees Fahrenheit [°F]).
Considering the requirements of
MIL-A-8625F and the needs identi-
fied by OO-ALC, acceptance criteria
for an alternative sealing process for
Type II and Type IIB anodize were
defined, as listed in Table 2 [Ref. 6].
OO-ALC personnel confirmed that
the above tests would be sufficient to
test alternatives for their acceptance
as candidates to replace the sodium
dichromate sealer.
TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT:
AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES TO
SODIUM DICHROMATE SEALERS
To identify candidate technologies
that meet the requirements
described above (technologies that
may be promising for future study), a
thorough technology assessment
was conducted. The following activi-
ties were undertaken:
Review of past efforts that evaluat-
ed sealers for anodized coatings,
specifically those focused on sodium
dichromate replacement
Internet searches
Discussions with vendors
Literature search(es)
Processes undergoing research
and development (R&D), as well as
commercially available processes,
were considered. For processes that
were evaluated under past efforts,
vendors were contacted to obtain
the most recent information
regarding their products. This
assessment also identified recently
developed or improved inorganic
sealers that would require technolo-
gy verification testing if found to be
promising.
As expected, a number of technolo-
gies were identified for sealing
anodized Al alloys. These alternatives
are based on a variety of materials,
such as nickel acetate, silicon, cobalt
and molybdenum fluorides, and
trivalent chromium, among others.
Prior work in this field [Ref. 11] has
classified the more prominent seal-
ing processes into general categories
that include:
Water-based sealing processes,
such as boiling DI water and steam
Chromate sealing
Sodium silicate sealing
Nickel-based sealing technologies,
such as nickel acetate and cold
nickel fluoride
The additional category of cobalt-

TEST TEST METHOD ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

Coating Weight ASTM B137 1,000 mg/ft2 minimum for Type II;
(prior to sealing) [Ref. 9] 200 mg/ft2 minimum –
1,000 mg/ft2 maximum for Type IIB
Corrosion ASTM B117 a. No more than a total of 15 isolated pits, none larger than 0.031 inch in diam-
Resistance [Ref. 7] eter, in a total of 150 square inches of test area grouped from five or more test
pieces (areas within 0.062 inch from identification markings, edges and elec-
trode contact marks remaining after processing shall be excluded), and
b. No more than 5 isolated pits, none larger than 0.031 inch in diameter, in a
total of 30 square inches from one or more test pieces (areas within 0.062 inch
from identification markings, edges and electrode contact marks remaining after
processing excluded).
Wet Tape Adhesion FED-STD-141, No intercoat separation between the paint system and anodic coating or the
Method 6301 anodic coating and the base metal.
[Ref. 8]

Dry Tape Adhesion ASTM D3359, No intercoat separation between the paint system and anodic coating or the
Method B anodic coating and the base metal.
[Ref. 10]

Table 2. Acceptance Criteria for OO-ALC Anodized Parts Sealed with Sodium Dichromate

www.metalfinishing.com June 2011 I metalfinishing I 27

Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer in Anodizing Operations:Metal Tech Speaking Template USE THIS.qxd 9/12/2011 3:00 PM Page 4
TECHNICALLY
speaking
based sealers was identified during
the current effort. A special assess-
ment also was performed for emerg-
ing technologies. Each of these cate-
gories is briefly described in the fol-
lowing sections.
WATER-BASED SEALING
TECHNOLOGIES
Water-based technologies have been
a viable method for sealing
anodized coatings for many years.
The performance of the seal is
dependent upon the pH, tempera-
ture, and purity of the water, as well
as immersion time and current den-
sity used during anodizing [Refs. 4,
11]. DI water is commonly used for
this reason. Past work has shown
that hot water sealing may be the
best sealing process for enhancing
the dielectric strength of anodized
coatings on Al [Ref. 12], which is
essential for applications requiring
electrical conductivity [Ref. 13].
Water-based sealing technologies
work by converting aluminum oxide
(anodic coating) to boehmite, which
fills the micropores of the anodic
coating. The mechanism is presented
in Equation 1 [Ref. 11]:
Al2O3 + H2O 2AlO(OH) (1)
Steam sealing is a variation of
boiling DI water sealing. This tech-
nique is used frequently in Japan
and Europe and is generally more
efficient than boiling DI water
immersion, with a reported reac-
tion rate increase of two to four
times that of DI immersion [Ref.
11]. However, steam sealing
requires specialized equipment, and
it is rarely employed in the United
States due to the high capital
investment and production costs.
Because boiling DI water is
approved as a sealer in MIL-A-8625F
and is already used at OO-ALC for
Type III anodizing operations, it was
a viable sealer for Types II and IIB
anodizing. As such, it was considered
to be a baseline process for future
testing.
28 I metalfinishing I June 2011
CHROMATE SEALING
Sodium dichromate solutions have
been used as seals for anodized coat-
ings for many years. The abilities of
chromates to inhibit corrosion are
well recognized and have been
reported by Brooman [Ref. 14],
Klingenberg [Ref. 15], and numerous
others. Unlike water-based sealing
technologies, chromate sealing tech-
nologies form either aluminum oxy-
dichromate (lower pH ranges) or alu-
minum oxychromate (higher pH
ranges) in the coating micropores
[Ref. 11].
Cr+6 is used in most chromate seal-
ing systems, especially those used for
military applications, due to the
enhanced corrosion protection that
they impart. The Cr+6-containing
sodium dichromate solution (5–9
oz/gal) being used at OO-ALC was
identified as the baseline being tar-
geted for replacement. The bath
temperature for this seal is main-
tained at 90–100°C (194–212°F) and
the pH is maintained between 5.0
and 6.0; immersion time is 15 min-
utes [Refs. 6, 11]. It is noted that,
because OO-ALC is actively trying to
reduce the use of or replace chromi-
um-containing processes, even seal-
ers based on trivalent chromium,
which have been developed in recent
years and are available and being
used commercially, were not consid-
ered under this pollution prevention
effort. However, it was determined
that a sealing solution with a
reduced sodium dichromate content
(50 parts per million [ppm] as
chromium) could be evaluated as a
benchmark because successful
results had been achieved in past
work [Ref. 16] and reducing the Cr+6
content in the existing solution
would be an interim contribution to
OO-ALC’s goal for chromium reduc-
tion.
SODIUM SILICATE SEALING
TECHNOLOGIES
Sodium silicate sealing is a mature,
effective sealing technique that is
commonly used for Type III anodiz-
ing. The bath temperature is main-
tained at 85–95°C (185–203°F) and
the pH is maintained at around 11.0;
immersion time is 10-15 minutes
[Ref. 11]. Like hot water sealing, sili-
cate sealing converts aluminum
oxide to boehmite (Eq. 1) [Ref. 11].
While promising for some applica-
tions, these processes are reported to
be inferior with respect to corrosion
resistance [Ref. 11] to other types of
sealing processes, specifically hot
water, dichromate, and nickel-based
sealers. In addition, silicate sealers
are not recommended for applica-
tions that require dielectric strength
[Ref. 12]. Furthermore, silicate is rec-
ognized as being detrimental to con-
ventional anodizing electrolytes, as
contamination of the anodizing bath
with silicates reduces the corrosion
resistance of the resulting coating
[Ref. 17]. Due to these limitations, as
well as a lack of available informa-
tion to justify the consideration of
silicate sealing technologies, these
types of sealers were not considered
for further study.
NICKEL-BASED SEALING
TECHNOLOGIES
A number of nickel-based sealing
technologies are available. These are
usually based on either nickel acetate
(approved for use under MIL-A-
8625F) or nickel fluoride. Nickel
acetate sealing is one of the most pre-
dominant sealing processes in U.S.
anodizing operations due to the
superior corrosion resistance it
imparts [Refs. 4, 11]. Nickel fluoride
sealing technologies have been
adopted for some applications, but,
reportedly, do not perform as well as
nickel acetate sealers [Ref. 11].
The mechanism for nickel acetate
sealing appears to be more complex
than that of hot water or silicate seal-
ing. Along with the aluminum oxide
conversion to boehmite (Equation
1), the precipitation of nickel
hydroxide also occurs, as described
in Equation 2 [Ref. 11]:
Ni2+ + 2OH Ni(OH)2 (2)
These concurrent precipitation
reactions (e.g., Equations 1 and 2) fill
the micropores.
While nickel-based sealing process-
es are technically promising, nickel
www.metalfinishing.com
Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer in Anodizing Operations:Metal Tech Speaking Template USE THIS.qxd 9/12/2011 3:00 PM Page 5
TECHNICALLY
speaking
has also come under increased scruti-
ny from an EHS standpoint in recent
years. Nickel is considered a carcino-
gen by the International Agency for
Research on Cancer (IARC) and the
National Toxicology Program (NTP),
although it is not yet classifiable as a
human carcinogen by the American
Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) [Ref.
18]. Nevertheless, the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) maintains a long-standing
permissible exposure limit (PEL) on
the use of the soluble salts of nickel
at one milligram per cubic meter
(mg/m). Perhaps most importantly,
nickel is on the OSD Emerging
Contaminants Watch List [Ref. 19].
Despite these concerns, numerous
nickel-based sealing technologies
were identified under this activity,
and at least three of these were found
to be promising based on the review
of the technical literature. Based on
the maturity and availability of nick-
el-based sealers, as well as their
approval under MIL-A-8625F, a com-
mercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) nickel-
based sealer product was selected as a
candidate. This product operates at a
lower temperature than the sodium
dichromate sealer (29–35°C
[85–95°F]), contains no chromates,
and has low nickel content (5-10% by
weight). Recommended immersion
(sealing) time is between 4 and 15
minutes. It is noted that, as expected,
the sealing reaction occurs much
slower in lower temperature seals
than in higher temperature seals. It
has been found that a warm water
rinse (71°C [160°F]) accelerates the
sealing process [Ref. 4]. With this in
mind, the COTS nickel-based seal
was considered in two scenarios:
with warm water rinse afterwards,
and without the rinse.
COBALT-BASED SEALING
TECHNOLOGIES
Cobalt-based sealers are also
approved as a dichromate sealer
replacement under MIL-A-8625F;
www.metalfinishing.com
SEALER
Sodium dichromate solution, 5-9 oz/gal Baseline
Boiling deionized water
Unsealed
Sodium dichromate solution, 50 parts Benchmark
per million (ppm)
COTS permanganate solution
COTS low nickel seal solution, with hot Candidate
water seal
COTS low nickel seal solution, without Candidate
hot water seal
Table 3. Test Matrix: Sodium Dichromate Sealers and Most Promising Seals to Evaluate for
Replacement
however, these sealers appear to be a
relatively new development, and suf-
ficient data to support using cobalt
as a sealer were not available. Even
some process data, such as optimum
immersion time and temperature,
were not readily available. In addi-
tion, cobalt is on the OSD Emerging
Contaminants Watch List [Ref. 19].
Based on these considerations,
cobalt-based sealing technologies
were not considered to be viable can-
didates for OO-ALC sealing require-
ments at this time. Therefore, they
were not considered for further
study.
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
Several additional technologies were
found to be promising under this
effort, based on a review of past work
[Refs. 20–23] as well as vendor sur-
veys.
The Non-Chrome Post Treatment
(NCP) process was found to be
promising as a non-chromium seal
for anodizing. NCP is a proprietary
product of the United States Naval
Air Systems Command (NAVAIR).
Testing was conducted by NAVAIR
under past work [Ref. 20], and the
results demonstrated exceptional
performance in corrosion-resistance
testing and adhesion testing. While
these results demonstrate that the
NCP sealer might be viable for the
needs of OO-ALC, the process was
unavailable for demonstration at the
time of testing; therefore, it could
www.metalfinishing.com/advertisers
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Baseline
Baseline
Candidate
not be considered.
A COTS chromium- and nickel-
free anodize sealer based on perman-
ganate was identified that reportedly
provides similar characteristics to
those of the dichromate sealer. This
solution was evaluated by the AFRL
and CTC under past work [Ref. 20]
and showed exceptional perform-
ance in corrosion resistance. This
sealer also passed the dry tape adhe-
sion test, but failed the wet tape
adhesion test.
Sealing anodized coatings by
using a liquid colloidal dispersion
that solidifies (e.g., sol-gel) has been
demonstrated. Specimens were
anodized and then immersed in a
working solution at 270°C for 15
minutes; the resulting specimens
reportedly demonstrated compara-
ble corrosion resistance to dichro-
mate sealed specimens [Ref. 22].
However, this process is more expen-
sive and decreases the abrasion resist-
ance and hardness of the overall
coating system. The incorporation of
additional materials within the seal-
er, such as polytetrafluoroetheylene
(PTFE) has also been explored [Ref.
23]. These technologies are typically
used for low friction and/or “non-
stick” applications; sufficient data
that these sealers could meet the
stringent needs of military specifica-
tions could not be obtained, and so
they were not considered.
June 2011 I metalfinishing I 29
Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer in Anodizing Operations:Metal Tech Speaking Template USE THIS.qxd 9/12/2011 3:00 PM Page 6
TECHNICALLY
speaking
DEMONSTRATION/VALIDATION
TESTING
Based on the findings of this activity,
three candidates were selected for
laboratory testing: the COTS per-
manganate solution, the COTS low-
nickel sealing solution, and a 50 ppm
sodium dichromate solution that
will serve as a benchmark. As men-
tioned previously, the COTS low-
nickel seal will be considered with
and without a warm water rinse after
the sealing process. The currently
used sodium dichromate sealer, the
boiling DI water seal, and unsealed
options will be evaluated as baselines
for all testing conducted for this
effort. The candidate test matrix is
summarized in Table 3.
Efforts to test aluminum alloy test
panels that have been anodized and
sealed with the above processes are in
progress.
(2 The ideal processing temperature
of the NCP process is 100°F and the
optimum processing time is 10 min-
utes. 3 The solution was made up at
10% by volume. Temperature was
maintained at 170-180°F, pH was
maintained between 5.0 and 8.0, and
seal time was 12 to 15 minutes.)
SUMMARY
The overall objective of this effort
was to identify alternatives to the
sodium dichromate sealer used in
anodizing operations. To this end,
the requirements for the sodium
dichromate sealer currently in use at
OO-ALC were determined.
Furthermore, extensive literature
and vendor searches identified
promising candidates that may meet
the requirements. The findings were
then used to derive a path forward to
demonstrate/validate the most-
promising alternatives for the specif-
ic needs and applications of OO-
ALC.
FUTURE WORK
Having established the test methods
and acceptance criteria for replacing
30 I metalfinishing I June 2011
sodium dichromate sealers, as well as
available candidates for testing, the
effort will focus on testing and data
evaluation. It is anticipated that this
work will identify a candidate that
can meet the needs of OO-ALC with
respect to an anodizing seal. Once
this candidate has been identified,
thoroughly validated through test-
ing, and recommended for use at
OO-ALC, the process of modifica-
tion of the relevant technical order
(TO) for conducting anodizing and
sealing operations at OO-ALC will be
initiated accordingly. The replace-
ment of sodium dichromate in this
application will reduce the environ-
mental burden and increase worker
health and safety at OO-ALC.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Rob Mason is a Senior Materials and
Process Scientist at Concurrent
Technologies Corporation (CTC) in
Largo, Fla. In this role, he provides techni-
cal support to CTC’s clients in govern-
ment and commercial industry. His cur-
rent work includes providing support to
inorganic coating activities conducted by
the Air Force Research Laboratory
(AFRL). Mr. Mason has more than 20
years cumulative experience in surface
engineering, coatings R&D, and testing
and evaluation methodology develop-
ment, and has co-authored over 50 techni-
cal publications and presentations on these
subjects. He earned his B.S. in Chemistry
from Fairleigh-Dickinson University, New
Jersey. He is a member of the National
Association of Surface Finishers (NASF),
NACE International, and Toastmasters
International.
Sarah Clark is an Associate Chemical
Engineer at CTC in Dayton, Ohio. Her
main responsibilities are providing project
management and technical project sup-
port to various inorganic coating focused
projects. Ms. Clark is subtask lead for the
Dichromate Sealer Replacement Subtask
of the Inorganic Finishing Technologies
Task Order for the AFRL. She is responsi-
ble for providing budget management and
technical planning, as well as leadership
and oversight to the technical staff sup-
porting the Subtasks. Ms. Clark holds a
Bachelor of Science in Chemical
Engineering from the University of
Dayton with a minor in Environmental
Engineering.
Dr. Melissa Klingenberg is an Advisor
Engineer at CTC in Johnstown, Pa. She
provides overall support to the
Environmental Technologies Discipline
with particular emphasis in the laser
decoating and inorganic finishing areas.
Her primary inorganic finishing responsi-
bilities lie in innovative coating and sur-
face finishing processes, with her areas of
expertise being advanced vacuum deposi-
tion/surface finishing technologies and
plating processes. Dr. Klingenberg
received a B.S. in Chemistry and engaged
in post-baccalaureate studies in biology at
the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown.
She received an M.S. in Manufacturing
Systems Engineering at the University of
Pittsburgh and a Ph.D. in Materials
Engineering at the Pennsylvania State
University. Dr. Klingenberg has been an
active member of NASF since 1994, and
has presented and/or written numerous
papers for NASF and AESF events and
publications.
Dr. Elizabeth Berman is a Senior
Research Engineer in the Materials &
Manufacturing Directorate of the AFRL at
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
She has 17 years experience with the Air
Force, two years with the Navy, and 10
years in private industry. Dr. Berman cur-
rently is assigned to the Environment and
Energy Quality Team. She is the AFRL
lead and manager for programs to reduce
cadmium and chromium in metal plating
operations. She is also the AFRL lead on
aircraft and runway deicing technology
programs, and the technical manager for
both fluid and non-fluid methods to elimi-
nate hazardous pollutants used in aircraft
and runway deicing. Additionally, Dr.
Berman is leading the Air Force effort on
algae research to manage carbon dioxide
sequestration concerns. Dr. Berman has
two years experience at the Naval Aviation
Depot in Alameda, Calif., managing air-
craft painting systems and processes. She
also worked for three years at the Air Force
Center for Environmental Excellence
where she represented the Air Force in tech-
nical negotiations with base, contractor,
regulator, and community representatives
on more than 25 Air Force installations.
Dr. Natasha Voevodin is a Senior
Research Engineer with the University of
www.metalfinishing.com
Alternatives to Dichromate Sealer in Anodizing Operations:Metal Tech Speaking Template USE THIS.qxd 9/12/2011 3:00 PM Page 7
TECHNICALLY
speaking
Dayton Research Institute, working for
the Environmental and Energy Quality
Team in the Materials & Manufacturing
Directorate of the AFRL. She has more
than 20 years experience in materials
research, specializing in coating formula-
tion, corrosion science, chemical analyses,
and spectroscopic techniques. She has a
strong background in material science of
organic, inorganic, and polymer coatings,
application of analytical and spectroscopic
techniques. Her most recent work
includes: programs to reduce hazardous
materials in metal plating operations, the
development of advanced inorganic finish-
ing technologies; environmental and ener-
gy technology evaluations; and the evalua-
tion of environmentally benign coating
removal processes.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was conducted under
tasking by the Air Force Research
Laboratory. The authors would like
to express thanks to Mr. Tom Naguy
for his support of this work.
Additionally, the authors would like
to express thanks to Ms. Ruth
Schaefer, Ms. Laurie Swenson, and
Mr. Nathan Hughes of OO-ALC for
their time and consideration in sup-
port of this effort. The authors also
appreciate the efforts of Ms. Donna
Provance of CTC, for not only her
outstanding leadership but also her
technical editing of this document.
Finally, the authors would like to rec-
ognize Dr. Eric Brooman for his out-
standing work in the field of metal
finishing during many years of serv-
ice, and to wish him well in his well-
deserved retirement.
REFERENCES
1. University of New Hampshire
website:
“http://pubpages.unh.edu/~rrt23
/finalproject5.html” http://pub-
pages.unh.edu/~rrt23/finalpro-
ject5.html
2. S. Clark et al, “Requirements for
Replacement of Dichromate
Sealer for U.S. Air Force
Anodizing Operations,” presenta-
tion to SUR/FIN 2010, Grand
www.metalfinishing.com
Rapids, MI, June 2010.
3. Hill Air Force Base website:
http://www.hill.af.mil/library/fac
tsheets/factsheet.asp?id=5753
4. C. Grubbs, “Anodizing of
Aluminum,” Metal Finishing
2009/2010 Guidebook and
Directory, Elsevier Inc., New York,
2009, p. 370.
5. J. Young, “Minimizing the Use of
Hexavalent Chromium,”
Memorandum for Secretaries of
the Military Departments, Office
of the Under Secretary of
Defense, Washington, D.C., April
8, 2009.
6. MIL-A-8625F, Military
Specification, Anodic Coatings for
Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys,
Department of Defense, 10
September 1993.
7. ASTM B117, Standard Test Method
for Operating Salt Spray (Fog)
Testing Apparatus, ASTM
International, West
Conshohocken, PA.
8. Federal Test Method Standard
141, Paint, Varnish, Lacquer and
Related Materials: Methods of
Inspection, Sampling and
Testing, Method 6301, Adhesion
(Wet) Tape Test
9. ASTM B137, Standard Test Method
for Measurement of Coating Mass per
Unit Area on Anodically Coated
Aluminum, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA.
10. ASTM D3359, Standard Test
Methods for Measuring Adhesion by
Tape Test, Method B, Cross-Cut
Tape Test, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA.
11. L. Hao and B. Cheng, “Sealing
Processes of Anodic Coatings –
Past, Present, and Future,” Metal
Finishing, Elsevier Inc., December
2000, pp. 8-18.
12. T. Westre, “Performance Results
for Sealed Type III Anodic
Coatings,” SUR/FIN 2000, June
2000.
13. Southern Aluminum Finishing
website: http://www.saf.com/con-
tent.php?action=showPage&pid=
69&cat_id=12
14. E. Brooman, “Corrosion
Protection of Environmentally
www.metalfinishing.com/advertisers
Acceptable Alternatives to
Cadmium and Chromium
Coatings: Cadmium, Part I &
Part II,” Metal Finishing, Elsevier
Inc., Part I April 2000, Part II
June 2000.
15. M. Klingenberg et al., “Update
on Developments in Cr-free
Coatings for Aerospace
Applications,” SUR/FIN 2008,
June 2008.
16. BAC 5884, Anodizing of
Aluminum Alloys, Boeing Process
Specification, April 12, 1995.
17. J. Hogue and J. French,
Evaluation of the Effects of
Contamination by Silicates of
Anodizing Seal Water, Final report
for Contract Number
DAAJ0173C0378, July 1973.
18. R. Straw, “USAF Nickel Plating
Issues,” presentation to SERDP
Pollution Prevention Technology
Thrust Area Working Group
(March 1999).
19. C. Long, “Update on OSD’s
Emerging Contaminants
Program,” Air Force Restoration
and Technology Transfer
Workshop, March 2011.
20. Final Report, Subtask 35G-01:
Alternatives to Sodium
Dichromate Sealers, Phase II,
General Service Administration
Contract GS-23F-0061L, 2004.
21. Final Report, Non-Chromate
Conversion Coatings and Sealers
for Aluminum Alloys, Strategic
Environmental Research and
Development Program, Project
number PP-673, 2000.
22. M. Zemanova and M.
Chovancova, “New Approaches
for Sealing Anodic Coatings,”
Metal Finishing, Elsevier Inc., New
York, October 2005, pp. 33-34.
23. A. Kuhn, “PTFE Coating vs.
Impregnation,” Metal Finishing,
Elsevier, Inc., New York, October
2005, pp. 35-38.
June 2011 I metalfinishing I 31