Determining if it's stainless steel and what type

I've always wished there was a method for the home shop guy to identify metal alloys, especially stainless steels. I have some 2" OD stainless that was given to me and I used a chunk of it last year to make a scale model cannon barrel. I assumed it is probably 304 or 316 because it is non-magnetic and was very difficult to machine, but it is just a guess.

Ted
 
I've always wished there was a method for the home shop guy to identify metal alloys, especially stainless steels. I have some 2" OD stainless that was given to me and I used a chunk of it last year to make a scale model cannon barrel. I assumed it is probably 304 or 316 because it is non-magnetic and was very difficult to machine, but it is just a guess.

Ted
They're working on it.
 
I have between 500 and 1,000 lbs. of 1/4" x 5/8" stainless bar that is unidentified. Unfortunately, all the paperwork involved in the purchase is long since gone. It is an austenitic stainless, most likely 304 but I can't be positive. The color coding on the ends of the bars is of no use as there is no standardized system between manufacturers.
 
Well, I started trying to read through some of that thread. It might as well have been written in Greek. Those folks are so far above my comprehension level of electronics it's almost comical.

Ted
They have gone well above my pay grade as well. But the bottom line is that they have done much work on developing a DIY x-ray diffraction spectrometer for identification of unknown metals. I believe they are fairly close to a working prototype. I also expect that they intend to publish their results when when finished with the project. It may still be too complicated for the average but at least there will be a road map.

@graham-xrf and @homebrewed are the two most active developers. Perhaps they will chime in.
 
They have gone well above my pay grade as well. But the bottom line is that they have done much work on developing a DIY x-ray diffraction spectrometer for identification of unknown metals. I believe they are fairly close to a working prototype. I also expect that they intend to publish their results when when finished with the project. It may still be too complicated for the average but at least there will be a road map.

@graham-xrf and @homebrewed are the two most active developers. Perhaps they will chime in.
At the least. Mark is well ahead, working on software that will capture the energy in a pulse, and he has had real pulses in the past from the x-ray photodiode that happened in his test setup.

To answer the question about whether the average HM user can get one going, the design intention is to make that as easy as possible and as affordable as possible, using stuff most members already posses, such as a smartphone that has a web browser, or a laptop, or PC.

Making available a little PCB, with electronics already on it, is not beyond us. There needs to be be enough instructions to allow members to make up the bits that hold the little circuit in place, and contrive a mount with some lead shielding to arrange that the smoke detector sources point at the (stainless?) or whatever, so that what comes out hits the photodiode. If one trawls the thread looking for CAD pictures, you see some concepts, and look more, you come across pictures of Mark's experimental test setup.

The other part in there is a little computing board. Teensy, or Raspberry Pi, or whatever. The software to go in it will be provided, at this site, possibly with some arrangement to ensure it is not all simply stolen to appear somewhere as a product. I expect there will be a new thread, much shorter, where we set out what is needed, and start asking members how they want to proceed.

One idea is that the internal little computer makes a web page with the application on it, and all one needs is a smartphone or computer within network range, to simply start using it. That could be Bluetooth or WiFi or USB. The hope is that nobody needs to get much entangled with electronics build any much more than kids presently do at school.

We are not there yet. I very much want to get back into this project, as soon as my new living arrangements and house changes allow. That said, all pieces of the theory, and subsequent tryouts of proof of concept in experimental hookups have so far been OK. Mark @homebrewed has been a hero about proving that. I am completely convinced that it should work. I would not have bought so many bits, nor put in so much design effort, had I ever thought we were getting into marginal territory!

Expect that HM members who want one will have to machine up some bits to a plan, add in a PCB and wire up to 5V power, and find it affordable. That is the concept that drives pretty much all of my design choices! :)
 
Stainless steel is not really stainless but rather stain resistant. In particular, hydrochloric acid, aka muriatic acid, will attack it. OTOH, "regular" steel can have some resistance to staining so that is not a good means of discrimination. A spark test is fairly good and identifying stainless steels but not the various alloys within the group. A magnet test will separate the 300 series from the 400 series. Various 300 series alloys can be slightly magnetic or non magnetic depending upon whether they were cold worked or not. As previously mentioned, the machinability of 303 stainless is much better than 304 or 316. 18-8 is another alloy found in fasteners but it is essentially the same as 304. 316 stainless has 2 -3 % molybdenum which could conceivably be used to separate from other common stainless alloys. My qualitative chemical analysis class was back in the fall of 1962 so I am very rusty as to procedures. I'll have to check to see what the textbook has to say.
 
Stainless had the interesting property that you can make it rot at the boundary of water and air. Get a strip of stainless and leave it in a glass of water, with some sticking up above the water, and the rest below. Enjoy the spectacle of of a line of rust at the boundary. This happens with A2. I think A4 is more resistant to this phenomenon. The name of the process is "differential aeration".

I have also reduced "stainless" into rusty mush. It does take temperatures above 700C, and it having seen some calcium chloride salt. That stuff does not wash away completely, even if you use loads of water.

A word about stainless, and getting it wet with any chemicals. It has hexavalent chomium. That stuff is so unbelievably toxic that it's an outright hazard to us! Trying to use a stainless ex-chip fry tub as a vessel for electrolysis de-rusting, to also be one electrode, was a very bad idea!

[The curious can google "hexavalent chromium", and decide the most we should do with stainless is to machine it. If you start, use lube, cut deep enough, and don't stop on the way. If it rubs, the tool is immediately trashed from work hardening! ]
 
Last edited:
Excuese me, but 304 is definitely magnetic; the 400 series are mostly non magnetic or only slightly so. If I understand your posting correctly.
Don't know how I screwed up, but I definitely got it backwards, 300 series SS is non magnetic, 400 series are magnetic, some 300 series are faintly magnetic. What was I possibly thinking??? Or not thinking.
 
Another thing with most stainless grades is oxygen deprivation corrosion, for instance, I once saw a centrifuge bowl used in wine production, at the end of the season, it was flushed out with water and closed up, leaving a small amount of water in the bowl, and Alge bloom ensued which depleted the oxygen present in the bowl, the result was an area of several inches that was eaten up to a depth of nearly 3/16" deep in the middle with sloping sides, this was subsequently welded up and re machined flush with the original surface.
 
Back
Top