Plating thickness ?
Dave Bester
mils, 50 mils, 100 mils. My question is - what is a mil when used in this
industry to describe a plating / coating thickness? How does it relate to an
inch or mm as a decimal part of? How does it relate to a micron? How does
a micron relate to an inch or mm as a decimal part of?
--
DCB
Chunk Kiesling
The dictionary backs this up at
http://www.eb.com:180/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=mil
Does the jewelry industry use a different definition?
Chunk Kiesling
M and N Stevens wrote:
>
> Dave,
>
> I can give you the FTC guidelines:
>
> * Less than 7 millionths of an inch of 24K, can be quality marked as "gold
> flash" or "gold wash"
>
> * 7 millionths of an inch or greater of 24K, can be quality marked as "gold
> electroplated"
>
> * 100 millionths of an inch or greater of 24K, may be quality marked "heavy
> gold electroplate."
>
> The FTC is demonstrating the glacial stupidity of all bureaucracies in not
> converting to metric measurements for these standards. Mil is slang for a
> million, probably referring to millionths of an inch, in this case. I leave the
> conversions to you, using the usual well-known formula: 1 inch = .0254 m.
>
> Equipment to measure this is so expensive that it is only available to large
> production shops, and this is a shame, because the equipment to actually do the
> plating is inexpensive, and easy to use, and safer than in the past if you use
> non-cyanide solutions.
Dave Bester
mil as applied to the jewelry industry because I'm hearing different
explanations. I agree mil normally = 1/1,000. Now the question becomes is
the Stevens correct on the FTC info. Is the coating measured in the
millionths as stated or in the thousandths?
DCB
Chunk Kiesling wrote in message ...
M Stevens
Ya, I stand corrected.
MS
M Stevens
p. 50. Millionths is spelled out in FTC information.
MS
On Sun, 20 Feb 2000 21:03:04 -0800, "Dave Bester" <dbe...@bright.net>
wrote:
>Not sure why you say a mistake on my part. All I did was ask the meaning of
>mil as applied to the jewelry industry because I'm hearing different
>explanations. I agree mil normally = 1/1,000. Now the question becomes is
>the Stevens correct on the FTC info. Is the coating measured in the
>millionths as stated or in the thousandths?
>
>
>DCB
>
>Chunk Kiesling wrote in message ...
M Stevens
from the FTC's site:
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/guides/jewel-gd.htm#§ 23.4 Misrepresentation
as to gold content.
(4) An industry product or part thereof, on which there has been
affixed on all significant
surfaces by an electrolytic process, an electroplating of gold,
or of a gold alloy of not less
than 10 karat fineness, which has a minimum thickness
throughout equivalent to .175
microns (approximately 7/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold,
may be marked or
described as "Gold Electroplate" or "Gold Electroplated," or
abbreviated, as, for example,
"G.E.P." When the electroplating meets the minimum fineness but
not the minimum
thickness specified above, the marking or description may be
"Gold Flashed" or "Gold
Washed." When the electroplating is of the minimum fineness
specified above and of a
minimum thickness throughout equivalent to two and one half (2
1/2) microns (or
approximately 100/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold, the
marking or description may
be "Heavy Gold Electroplate" or "Heavy Gold Electroplated."
When electroplatings
qualify for the term "Gold Electroplate" (or "Gold
Electroplated"), or the term "Heavy
Gold Electroplate" (or "Heavy Gold Electroplated"), and have
been applied by use of a
particular kind of electrolytic process, the marking may be
accompanied by identification
of the process used, as for example, "Gold Electroplated (X
Process)" or "Heavy Gold
Electroplated (Y Process)."
MS
C M
Stevens) wrote:
>Source on that is Midas Plating Guide, 1994, Rio Grande, Albuquerque,
>p. 50. Millionths is spelled out in FTC information.
>MS
>
>
But that assumes that the person writing the information had any
idea what they were talking about.
\~^~/ http://www.sfgate.com/sf/farley/winkelman.html
\\|||||// WIN With WINKELMAN
\\\\\|///// Peace and Quiet Party
\\\\\|///// copper_...@yahoo.com
\\\\|////
\\|//
#
#
# `
# ))
# (( (:B)
# )) )(@ ~*
# (((((@)& The Copper Squirrel in his virtual tree
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
C M
Stevens) wrote:
>Since the Rio Grande reference is from '94, here's the latest stuff
>from the FTC's site:
>
> http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/guides/jewel-gd.htm#§ 23.4 Misrepresentation
>as to gold content.
>
>(4) An industry product or part thereof, on which there has been
>affixed on all significant
> surfaces by an electrolytic process, an electroplating of gold,
>or of a gold alloy of not less
> than 10 karat fineness, which has a minimum thickness
>throughout equivalent to .175
> microns (approximately 7/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold,
Ah. This says 'microns' not 'mil' A micron is indeed a millionth
of an inch.
Dave Bester
What prompted my question was a recent conversation with a jewelry "Mfr" who
was touting their product having a 50 mil gold coating. At the point I had
asked to many questions he said that didn't mean an even 50 mil coating but
rather that was the heaviest coating area, and if the product should tarnish
it would be where the coating was not as heavy, and of course they offer a
"lifetime" replacement policy should it tarnish. That must have been because
he noticed all of my grey hair ;-)
I felt you were correct based on the jewelry I've inspected. Even though
every other industry uses the 1/1,000th definition. I think what it boils
down to is the % of retailers who insist on misleading the buyer of jewelry
because they know they can get away with it most of the time, and the even
larger % w/i the industry who are willing to leave the "problem" alone. No
wonder the industry is such easy picking for the likes of 20/20.
Can't help but notice the number of wire jewelry makers who have reverted to
the term "Rolled Gold" for gold filled materials. Had to laugh recently when
I asked a wire jewelry vendor at a craft show "What's rolled gold, is that
like gold filled?" and the reply was "Yes, only different." I didn't even
want to pursue that one. Notice, I called her a vendor, not a crafts
person. A true crafts person would gladly have answered my question in an
honest manner.
Thanks to all who have responded to my original question
DCB
M Stevens wrote in message ...
>Source on that is Midas Plating Guide, 1994, Rio Grande, Albuquerque,
>p. 50. Millionths is spelled out in FTC information.
>MS
>
>
Kullervo Nurmi
>On Tue, 22 Feb 2000 21:22:34 -0800, steve...@earthlink.net (M
>Stevens) wrote:
>
>>Since the Rio Grande reference is from '94, here's the latest stuff
>>from the FTC's site:
>>
>> http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/guides/jewel-gd.htm#§ 23.4 Misrepresentation
>>as to gold content.
>>
>>(4) An industry product or part thereof, on which there has been
>>affixed on all significant
>> surfaces by an electrolytic process, an electroplating of gold,
>>or of a gold alloy of not less
>> than 10 karat fineness, which has a minimum thickness
>>throughout equivalent to .175
>> microns (approximately 7/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold,
> Ah. This says 'microns' not 'mil' A micron is indeed a millionth
>of an inch.
No. It's a millionth part of a meter, or 1/1000th of a millimeter --
especially in the FTC context here; I did the conversion and it works
out that way.
Kultsi
--
kullervo*nurmi at pp*inet*fi --- URL http://personal.inet.fi/cool/kultsi/
"Hand me those electrocardial stimulators, nurse!"
"What?"
"The *jumper cables*, you fool!" --Afterlife
C M
(Kullervo Nurmi) wrote:
>C M <copper_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 22 Feb 2000 21:22:34 -0800, steve...@earthlink.net (M
>>Stevens) wrote:
>>
>>>Since the Rio Grande reference is from '94, here's the latest stuff
>>>from the FTC's site:
>>>
>>> http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/guides/jewel-gd.htm#=A7 23.4 Misrepresentation
>>>as to gold content.=20
>>>
>>>(4) An industry product or part thereof, on which there has been
>>>affixed on all significant
>>> surfaces by an electrolytic process, an electroplating of gold,
>>>or of a gold alloy of not less
>>> than 10 karat fineness, which has a minimum thickness
>>>throughout equivalent to .175
>>> microns (approximately 7/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold,
>> Ah. This says 'microns' not 'mil' A micron is indeed a millionth
>>of an inch.
>
>No. It's a millionth part of a meter, or 1/1000th of a millimeter --
>especially in the FTC context here; I did the conversion and it works
>out that way.
>
Ah, you're right. But it isn't a mil which is what someone was
using where they should have been using micron(Gee...does NASA employ
jewelers? :-) )
=20
=20
=20
Hige sceal =FEe heardra
\~^~/ heorte =FEe cenre=20
\\|||||// mod sceal =FEe mare
\\\\\|///// =FEe ure m=E6gen lytla=F0! =20
\\\\\|///// copper_...@yahoo.com
\\\\|////
\\|//
#
#=20
# `
# ))
# (( (:B)
# )) )(@ ~*
# (((((@)& The Copper Squirrel in his virtual tree
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////=
//////
Monk
....plating is defined as being measured in microns, which are units of
measurement which are equivalent to the thousandth part if a milllimeter, or
0.00004 ". Plating thicknesses on jewellery vary from less than 1 micron tp
40 microns ( 0.00004 - 0.0016" )..........
Government finishing specifications set standardized requirements for
electrodeposited gold plating as follows:
Class 00 - 0.00002" thick, minimum
Class 0 - 0.00003: thick, min.
Class 1 - 0.00005" thick. min
Class 2 - 0.00010" thick. mon.
Class 3 - 0.00020 " thick, min.
Class 4 -0.00030" thick, min
Class 5 - 0.00050" thick, min
Class 6 - 0.00150" thick, min
When you refer to ' mils " you are in fact referring to 'mm' ( millimeters,
" mils" being a slang term short form for the full measurement name. )
Hope this helps
Christine
Dave Bester <dbe...@bright.net> wrote in message
news:mh2naskvrv7b7j4e9...@4ax.com...
MS
The part where you have me quoted as saying "Ah. This says 'microns'
not 'mil' A micron is indeed a millionth of an inch." is not from my
post. Please go back to the post in the oribinal thread and look. I
havn't said anything whatever about microns. I simply downloaded the
FTC guideline.
MS
On Sun, 27 Feb 2000 15:14:03 -0800, kultsi....@pp.inet.fi
(Kullervo Nurmi) wrote:
>C M <copper_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 22 Feb 2000 21:22:34 -0800, steve...@earthlink.net (M
>>Stevens) wrote:
>>
>>>Since the Rio Grande reference is from '94, here's the latest stuff
>>>from the FTC's site:
>>>
>>> http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/guides/jewel-gd.htm#§ 23.4 Misrepresentation
>>>as to gold content.
>>>
>>>(4) An industry product or part thereof, on which there has been
>>>affixed on all significant
>>> surfaces by an electrolytic process, an electroplating of gold,
>>>or of a gold alloy of not less
>>> than 10 karat fineness, which has a minimum thickness
>>>throughout equivalent to .175
>>> microns (approximately 7/1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold,
>> Ah. This says 'microns' not 'mil' A micron is indeed a millionth
>>of an inch.
>
>No. It's a millionth part of a meter, or 1/1000th of a millimeter --
>especially in the FTC context here; I did the conversion and it works
>out that way.
>
Mark Iennaco
> According to Oppi Untracht - Jewellery Concepts and Technology,
> ....plating is defined as being measured in microns, which are units of
> measurement which are equivalent to the thousandth part if a milllimeter,
or
> 0.00004 ". Plating thicknesses on jewellery vary from less than 1 micron
tp
> 40 microns ( 0.00004 - 0.0016" )..........
> Government finishing specifications set standardized requirements for
> electrodeposited gold plating as follows:
>
> Class 00 - 0.00002" thick, minimum
> Class 0 - 0.00003: thick, min.
> Class 1 - 0.00005" thick. min
> Class 2 - 0.00010" thick. mon.
> Class 3 - 0.00020 " thick, min.
> Class 4 -0.00030" thick, min
> Class 5 - 0.00050" thick, min
> Class 6 - 0.00150" thick, min
>
> When you refer to ' mils " you are in fact referring to 'mm'
> " mils" being a slang term short form for the full measurement name. )
>
> Hope this helps
That table is nice, I didn't know that. However...
The problem _everyone_ is having is with the term "mils".
These are the typical problems of industry slangs.
1) A micron (one millionth of a meter, or thousandth of a mm) is
never refered to as a "mil", the common slang is "mike".
2) A Mil is a correct unit of measure in American/Imperial
machine tools. It is one thousandth of an inch. It may be
used in specifications and contracts, but due to possible
confusion with the next entry, is usually done with decimal
inch notation (0.001 inch = 1 Mil).
3) A mil is a _slang_ term in the plating industry for
one millionth of an inch. It is never used in contracts
or standards. I have ususally seen specificatons use
the form "XXX millions of an inch" but 0.0000xx inch"
(as above) are common.
Note: I avoded using the tick marks (' and ") due to
American / British ambiguity. Don't even as about
a Billion :-)