Document Center is acquired by Nimonik

1.1 These test methods cover procedures to perform porosity ratings on metallographic specimens of thermal sprayed coatings (TSCs) prepared in accordance with Guide E1920 by direct comparison to standard images and via the use of automatic image analysis equipment.

1.2 These test methods deal only with recommended measuring methods and nothing in them should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability for any measured value of porosity.

1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

4.1 TSCs are susceptible to the formation of porosity due to a lack of fusion between sprayed particles or the expansion of gases generated during the spraying process. The determination of area percent porosity is important in order to monitor the effect of variable spray parameters and the suitability of a coating for its intended purpose. Depending on application, some or none of this porosity may be tolerable.

4.2 These test methods cover the determination of the area percentage porosity of TSCs. Method A is a manual, direct comparison method utilizing the seven standard images in Figs. 1-7 which depict typical distributions of porosity in TSCs. Method B is an automated technique requiring the use of a computerized image analyzer.

4.3 These methods quantify area percent porosity only on the basis of light reflectivity from a metallographically polished cross section. See Guide E1920 for recommended metallographic preparation procedures.

4.4 The person using these test methods must be familiar with the visual features of TSCs and be able to determine differences between inherent porosity and oxides. The individual must be aware of the possible types of artifacts that may be created during sectioning and specimen preparation, for example, pullouts and smearing, so that results are reported only on properly prepared specimens. Examples of properly prepared specimens are shown in Figs. 8-10. If there are doubts as to the integrity of the specimen preparation it is suggested that other means be used to confirm microstructural features. This may include energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS), wavelength dispersive spectroscopy (WDS) or cryogenic fracture of the coating followed by analysis of the fractured surfaces with a scanning electron microscope (SEM).