Faraday and Stainless

Some time ago, there was a thread in sci.chem that mentioned that
altho someone else was given credit for the discovery of stainless steel, it
was in fact Faraday who made the first stainless--a mere 3% Cr, but still...
Any knowledge of this one way or the other?
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll
Reply to
Proctologically Violated©®
Loading thread data ...
Yes and no. Faraday apparently made both iron-chromium and iron-chromium-nickel alloys. And no, 3% Cr steel isn't stainless.
The sci.chem thread was by the notorious Archimedes Plutonium. It's another example of the monkeys and typewriters syndrome. If you type enough crap, then you eventually get a few things right. You can find it on Google by doing an advanced search in Groups on the words Faraday and Stainless.
One of the replies in the previous thread refers to Levine's "A BRIEF HISTORY of STAINLESS BLADE STEEL", at the web address of:
formatting link
That history correctly states that an iron-chromium alloy resists corrosion, if there is enough chromium present (about 12%) but corrodes more than a plain carbon steel at lower chromium contents. If there is enough chromium, then the surface forms a very thin passive film. If there is not, then the surface is active and chromium hurts rather than helps resistance to aqueous corrosion.
However, Faraday also made an iron-chromium-nickel alloy that apparently anticipated the (austenitic?) stainless steels. The September 26, 1931 issue of Science News mentioned a Faraday centenary celebration:
formatting link
at which Sir Robert Hadfield discussed some of Faraday's work on alloying.
Pittsburgh Pete
We don't believe what we write, and neither should you. Information furnished to you is for topical (external) use only. This information may not be worth any more than either a groundhog turd, or what you paid for it (nothing). The author may not even have been either sane or sober when he wrote it down. Don't worry, be happy.
Reply to
Pittsburgh Pete
Faraday is, apparently, da man. Alloying was no doubt no trivial task back then. Most interesting observation on low Cr %. Any idea why this might be, chemically? Clearly not something one would anticipate. ---------------------------- Mr. P.V.'d formerly Droll Troll
Reply to
Proctologically Violated©®

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.