hammer ? stainless steel ?

I had another go at causing contamination corrosion with a hammer. I installed the bolts and hangers in plastic to eliminate the alkalinity of the concrete I used in the earlier try. This time the mist solution was 2.5% sodium chloride (for chloride), 2.5% magnesium sulfate (for sulfate) and 0.5% HCl (for acidity). I didn't get any contamination corrosion of a 316 bolt hammered with a chrome-moly hammer. It looks like I got some contamination corrosion on the milled slot in the cone nut of a 304 sleeve bolt.

The 1st photo is the 316 hanger and bolt pounded with the chrome-moly hammer after 8 days.

The 2nd photo is the 304 bolt with some rust stains on the cone nut after 8 days.

The 3rd photo is a piece of mild steel after 4 days.

hey everyone-- I remembered reading this thread a long time ago and I came up with a fairly simple solution: just braze a piece of stainless to the front of a regular mason's hammer. came out pretty good: 

it's not so hard if you have the tools. I'm going to see how durable this is under actual use, as the brazing kind of makes any heat treatment go out the window. if I like the results, I'm happy to make some more for people that want one.

Dan Merrick wrote:

I had another go at causing contamination corrosion with a hammer. I installed the bolts and hangers in plastic to eliminate the alkalinity of the concrete I used in the earlier try. This time the mist solution was 2.5% sodium chloride (for chloride), 2.5% magnesium sulfate (for sulfate) and 0.5% HCl (for acidity). I didn't get any contamination corrosion of a 316 bolt hammered with a chrome-moly hammer. It looks like I got some contamination corrosion on the milled slot in the cone nut of a 304 sleeve bolt.

The 1st photo is the 316 hanger and bolt pounded with the chrome-moly hammer after 8 days.

The 2nd photo is the 304 bolt with some rust stains on the cone nut after 8 days.

The 3rd photo is a piece of mild steel after 4 days.

Ok so it is well known that the expansion cone on a 5 piece is not 304 it is actually even lower 303 .

I use a Ti framing hammer. When I get the chance I'm going to try modifying the claw end. 

I don't rap bolt so it's not getting a ton of use as yet.

timothy fisher wrote:

Ok so it is well known that the expansion cone on a 5 piece is not 304 it is actually even lower 303 .

The difference between 304 and 303 for the end user is minimal, 303 is the machining grade with either sulfur or selenium added.

The 2nd photo is the 304 bolt with some rust stains on the cone nut after 8 days.

The cone is 303, but it's also zinc plated. 

Circling back to this thread, has there been any documented strength reduction in a glue in from surface rust by using a non-stainless hammer? 

Would be interested in hearing if there has been or if anyone has tests in the works. I've seen some surface corrosion/rust on the surface waves in the wild and wonder if I should head back out to clean them up.

Any longer-term success stories with cleaning surface rust/corrosion by the way? Wonder what those bolts from 2020 that Jonathan knight posted on page 4  look like now!

Has anyone ever cleaned the surface of rust and applied a lil JB weld to block the potential corrosion point on a wave from contacting oxygen and rusting further? any reason not to do this?

Anecdotal info, waves that got placed with a waffle faced framing hammer 10 years ago have gotten less rust stained with time.

I'm not sure the answer to your strength reduction in surface contaminated glue ins question. But I do think it's worth trying to clean up the surface. A break in the passive chromium oxide layer of the stainless could be bad news in certain environments, the question would be whether or not this layer exists underneath the rust contamination, or if it's compromised.  Green or Stainless Scotch bright pads, a little water,  and some elbow grease,  along with a paper towel to wipe it off afterwards is a good method.  JB Bond on top of the corrosion seems like a bad idea IMO. 

timothy fisher wrote:

Anecdotal info, waves that got placed with a waffle faced framing hammer 10 years ago have gotten less rust stained with time.

guess all the iron from the waffle rusted out and wave didn't visibly rust/corrode further for some reason?

Shawn S wrote:

Circling back to this thread, has there been any documented strength reduction in a glue in from surface rust by using a non-stainless hammer? 

Would be interested in hearing if there has been or if anyone has tests in the works. I've seen some surface corrosion/rust on the surface waves in the wild and wonder if I should head back out to clean them up.

Any longer-term success stories with cleaning surface rust/corrosion by the way? Wonder what those bolts from 2020 that Jonathan knight posted on page 4  look like now!

Has anyone ever cleaned the surface of rust and applied a lil JB weld to block the potential corrosion point on a wave from contacting oxygen and rusting further? any reason not to do this?

I do know of glue-ins corroded by using ferrous hammers. The anchors in question have not been pulled and I doubt the corrosion at this point is anywhere sufficient to impair the anchor strength. For now at least and perhaps never in the longterm either but it's conjecture without formal tests.

The corrosion is however definitely very noticeable and ultimately preventable anyway by using the correct tool which is n't a big 'ask' to use. SS hammer, mallet (wood/rubber) or shim.

mattm wrote:

KONG lists the Eagle and Eagle light as carbon steel on their site.  I was curious about the Eagle light as a "mid weight" but the carbon steel was a no go.  Anyone know for sure?

Name:xxxxxx
City: xxxxxxx
Nation: USA
Phone: xxxxxxx
Email: xxxxx@xxxxx.net
Message: Some retailers are listing the older version of the Speleagle Hammer as "stainless steel". Is this correct? Is the yellow handled version in fact stainless steel? If so, can you tell me what specification of stainless steel. For example: extremegear.org/shop/p/spel… Thanks

Privacy acceptance privacy: True
Newsletter subscription: False
Address of origin: kong.it/
Source page: kong.it/en/product/speleagle/
Date and time: 26/12/2022 19:47
 Timestamp: 638076808256896838 

_____________________________

From: D. L. <xxxxxx@kong.it>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2022 2:18 AM
To:xxxxxx@xxxxxx.net
Cc: J. D. <xxxxxx@kongusa.com>
 Subject: Information Request: Speleagle

Good morning,

here at this link you can find more information about the Speleagle.
This product has never been made in stainless steel. This is made in Steel.
The “color” black or gray (the new one) depends on the type of zinc finishing.
The new one grey great a longer resistance to corrosion.

For more information you can write to our USA subsidiary (in copy) 

Regards

J- Ru wrote:

Name:xxxxxx
City: xxxxxxx
Nation: USA
Phone: xxxxxxx
Email: xxxxx@xxxxx.net
Message: Some retailers are listing the older version of the Speleagle Hammer as "stainless steel". Is this correct? Is the yellow handled version in fact stainless steel? If so, can you tell me what specification of stainless steel. For example: extremegear.org/shop/p/spel… Thanks

Privacy acceptance privacy: True
Newsletter subscription: False
Address of origin: kong.it/
Source page: kong.it/en/product/speleagle/
Date and time: 26/12/2022 19:47
 Timestamp: 638076808256896838 

_____________________________

From: D. L.
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2022 2:18 AM
To:xxxxxx@xxxxxx.net
Cc: J. D.
 Subject: Information Request: Speleagle

Good morning,

here at this link you can find more information about the Speleagle.
This product has never been made in stainless steel. This is made in Steel.
The “color” black or gray (the new one) depends on the type of zinc finishing.
The new one grey great a longer resistance to corrosion.

For more information you can write to our USA subsidiary (in copy) 

Regards

The speleagle is awesome and I have been using it for the last 3 years and no issues. I cut the socket off the bottom and it is light weight and compact. I have the yellow version for reference.

I use this hammer for bolting, which is made out of 420J stainless steel: https://www.amazon.com/CAMPINGMOON-Stainless-Steel-Hammer-Campming/dp/B099ZC51JR

Does anyone know if a hammer made with this type of stainless steel would be sufficient to not cause corrosion on stainless bolts, or is there still a potential corrosion concern with the 2 different types of stainless steel?

Alex Fischer wrote:

I use this hammer for bolting, which is made out of 420J stainless steel: https://www.amazon.com/CAMPINGMOON-Stainless-Steel-Hammer-Campming/dp/B099ZC51JR

Does anyone know if a hammer made with this type of stainless steel would be sufficient to not cause corrosion on stainless bolts, or is there still a potential corrosion concern with the 2 different types of stainless steel?

Any stainless is fine.  The issue with non-stainless is that it has iron molecules on the surface of the hammer that can be deposited on any parts of the bolt where the chromium oxide layer is damaged during installation which will keep the chromium oxide layer from being able to reform .  With a stainless hammer, there is a chromium oxide layer over the surface of the hammer (this is what makes it stainless to begin with).  This chromium oxide layer in essence traps the iron molecules inside and doesn't allow them to be deposited on the bolt. 

Ken Noyce wrote:

Any stainless is fine.  The issue with non-stainless is that it has iron molecules on the surface of the hammer that can be deposited on any parts of the bolt where the chromium oxide layer is damaged during installation which will keep the chromium oxide layer from being able to reform .  With a stainless hammer, there is a chromium oxide layer over the surface of the hammer (this is what makes it stainless to begin with).  This chromium oxide layer in essence traps the iron molecules inside and doesn't allow them to be deposited on the bolt. 

The inexpensive SS used in most hammers has a high iron content. It looks like 420J2 is about 82% iron. https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=9170

The 17-4 SS used in the BD Yosemite hammer and some others is about 78% iron. https://www.progressivealloy.com/17-4-ph-stainless-steel/

Whether or not this is a problem for installing SS bolt is up for debate. I am not aware of any bolt failures due to iron contamination. They get rusty and ugly but I haven't seen any evidence of structural damage.

Dan Merrick wrote:

The inexpensive SS used in most hammers has a high iron content. It looks like 420J2 is about 82% iron. https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=9170

The 17-4 SS used in the BD Yosemite hammer and some others is about 78% iron. https://www.progressivealloy.com/17-4-ph-stainless-steel/

Whether or not this is a problem for installing SS bolt is up for debate. I am not aware of any bolt failures due to iron contamination. They get rusty and ugly but I haven't seen any evidence of structural damage.

I agree, it's probably not a huge concern in most bolts, I could see it becoming an issue in certain environments (where in reality, titanium should probably be used anyway).  

The important thing with stainless isn't the iron content, it's the chromium content.  As long as there is at least 12% chromium the chromium oxide passive layer will form, and that is what keeps the iron "trapped" in the steel.

I think this thread was started and funded by Big Stainless Steel Hammer.    It’s a money grab. 

Dan Merrick wrote:

I had another go at causing contamination corrosion with a hammer. I installed the bolts and hangers in plastic to eliminate the alkalinity of the concrete I used in the earlier try. This time the mist solution was 2.5% sodium chloride (for chloride), 2.5% magnesium sulfate (for sulfate) and 0.5% HCl (for acidity). I didn't get any contamination corrosion of a 316 bolt hammered with a chrome-moly hammer. It looks like I got some contamination corrosion on the milled slot in the cone nut of a 304 sleeve bolt.

The 1st photo is the 316 hanger and bolt pounded with the chrome-moly hammer after 8 days.

The 2nd photo is the 304 bolt with some rust stains on the cone nut after 8 days.

The 3rd photo is a piece of mild steel after 4 days.

Dan, could you please share photos of the same specimens after three years of exposure.

Yury wrote:

Dan, could you please share photos of the same specimens after three years of exposure.

No, not possible. An elevated temperature salt spray environment is very corrosive. My home built tank components gave out a long time ago.