Screen acid service and build a drawing-based RFQ. Grade approval requires supplier review.
Source-reviewed on September 20, 2026. These boundaries support RFQ screening only; the released quote still depends on the exact chemical media, drawing, and pressure requirements.
Evidence: Phenolic and fluoropolymer grades have different published limits; even blocks and tubes in one material family can differ.
Action: Request the exact grade, part form and current datasheet. Compare process peaks, joints and cleaning conditions, not just the bulk graphite temperature.
Source: Mersen Graphilor product data — BS, XBS, XTH, XC sectionsEvidence: Mersen limits standard BS in oxidizing media and describes specialist XTH applications. Neither blanket acceptance nor rejection of every graphite grade is justified.
Action: Disclose nitric acid, other oxidizers, mixtures and contaminants; obtain a written compatibility review before selecting a grade.
Source: Mersen Graphilor product data — BS, XBS, XTH, XC sectionsEvidence: Impregnation addresses permeability in the base material. Published material properties do not qualify a finished assembly.
Action: Specify design pressure with gauge/absolute units, vacuum and transients. Agree joint design, leak-test conditions and documentation for the part.
Source: SGL Carbon DIABON materials sheet — PDF p. 1, material constructionEvidence: The DIABON table distinguishes plates, blocks and tubes instead of assigning one temperature to all fluoropolymer or phenolic parts.
Action: Provide the component drawing, tolerances and installation loads. Budget for qualification and assembly review before comparing unit prices.
Source: SGL Carbon DIABON materials sheet — PDF pp. 1–2, dated May 2018Identify acid, wt%, mixtures and oxidizers.
Record peak temperature, pressure and cycling.
Confirm grade, joints and drawing with the supplier.
Agree inspection, leak testing and acceptance.
The checker prepares the first two steps. Supplier evidence and component review control release.
This is a conservative intake checklist, not a corrosion-rate calculation. The numeric range (0–400°C and >0–100 wt%) controls input handling only. Concentration is recorded for the supplier; the checker does not interpolate chemical charts.
| Input condition | Review outcome | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Missing / malformed / out of intake range | No result; keep partial brief | Correct the field or send actual process conditions for manual review. |
| Nitric acid, oxidizers, unknown chemistry, HF or sulfuric acid | Hold for specialist review at every entered concentration | Obtain grade-specific compatibility evidence for the complete fluid. This is an editorial review rule, not a claim that all grades fail. |
| Temperature ≥200°C | Additional grade review hold | The 200°C BS example is a review trigger, not a universal failure threshold; compare the source table. |
| HCl below 200°C; no oxidizers reported | Candidate for supplier review | Supplier must still verify concentration, grade, fluid phase and all process conditions. |
| Any pressure duty / unknown duty | Mechanical review remains open | No pressure cut-off or life estimate is calculated. All flags accumulate; one condition never cancels another. |
Evidence reviewed September 20, 2026. Public supplier data informs the review prompts; compatibility, lifetime, price and component pressure remain unconfirmed. Supplier brand examples do not imply CGP authorization or equivalent material supply.
Illustrative scenarios, not operating recommendations or customer test results.
Inputs: 31 wt%, 80°C, positive pressure, no oxidizers reported.
Review: Candidate for supplier review; pressure and compatibility remain unconfirmed.
Next: Send the old grade, drawing, pressure units and joint details. Request written chemical confirmation and leak-test acceptance.
Inputs: 98 wt%, 220°C, positive pressure, contaminants unknown.
Review: Hold: chemistry, sulfuric condition and temperature flags all remain visible.
Next: Do not order from temperature alone. Obtain a specialist review and compare qualified material systems.
Inputs: Mixed acid, 60°C, concentration of each constituent unresolved.
Review: Hold for complete composition; selecting “Other / mixed” never assumes a non-oxidizing fluid.
Next: Send the full composition, cleaning chemistry and transient conditions before discussing a specialist grade.
| Decision | Risk to budget or fit | Minimum comparison |
|---|---|---|
| Repeat a documented grade | Old operating assumptions may miss new cleaning agents or temperature excursions. | Compare current process and drawing revisions; retain traceability and acceptance tests. |
| Change impregnant or graphite supplier | Requalification, machining yield and changed joint design can outweigh a lower blank price. | Obtain samples, certificates, dimensional inspection and an agreed leak-test plan. Prices and lead times require an RFQ. |
| Consider SiC, fluoropolymer-lined or metallic equipment | Material names do not establish suitability or interchangeability for the acid and assembly. | Ask the equipment designer for a complete chemistry, heat-transfer, pressure and lifecycle-cost comparison. No substitute is approved here. |
Public references checked on September 20, 2026. They support the page logic but do not replace customer drawings, internal process recipes, or production qualification.
Content responsibility: Custom Graphite Parts. Last substantive review: . The screening rules are our RFQ intake method, based on the supplier references below. Examples are illustrative; no customer test data or independent material certification is claimed.
| Decision Point | Public Source | How It Is Used | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Named-grade temperature examples | Mersen Graphilor product data — BS, XBS, XTH, XC sections | Published maximum design temperatures: BS (phenolic) 200°C; XBS (phenolic) 220°C; XTH (PTFE) 250°C; XC (carbon) 430°C. | These are Mersen grade examples, not CGP part ratings or approval for a particular acid. Confirm availability, chemistry, joints and the current supplier specification. |
| Chemistry depends on grade and conditions | Mersen corrosion resistance technical guide — PDF pp. 3–4 and chemical charts | The chart separates grades, temperatures and concentrations, and marks conditions without data. Its XC temperature example is 400°C, versus 430°C on the product page. | Do not interpolate charts for mixtures or treat missing data as resistance. Resolve the XC document difference with the supplier; this checker does not qualify any grade. |
| Part form and impregnation matter | SGL Carbon DIABON materials sheet — PDF pp. 1–2, dated May 2018 | The published table gives 200°C for N/NS1 blocks, 220°C for NS2 blocks, 140°C for F100 plates and 200°C for CT blocks. Listed tubes are rated at 200°C. | Historical reference retrieved on the review date; request the current revision. Material-family names alone do not establish a component rating. |
| Imperviousness requires a qualified material system | SGL Carbon DIABON materials sheet — PDF p. 1, material construction | DIABON uses a porous graphite base treated with resin or fluoropolymer to make it impervious. | No universal porosity percentage or allowable pressure follows from this. Agree a component leak test, design basis and acceptance criteria with the supplier. |
Send the drawing, chemical media details (acid, concentration), peak temperature, operating pressure, and any required certifications together so the parts quote can be checked against the same boundaries used on this page.
Complete RFQs are easier to review within 1-2 business days when drawings, graphite grade, quantity, and destination are included.
| Material Option | Best Fit Application | Watchouts & Risks |
|---|---|---|
| Phenolic-impregnated graphite | Candidate for specified non-oxidizing acid service after supplier confirmation. | Do not infer a universal temperature rating from “phenolic”; see named-grade evidence below. |
| PTFE / fluoropolymer graphite systems | Specialist chemistry review where the specific product has supporting evidence. | Impregnated, bonded, block and plate products are not interchangeable; request the exact construction and datasheet. |
| Carbon-impregnated graphite | Specialist high-temperature duties with supplier-qualified chemistry and design. | Resolve published temperature differences with the manufacturer; joints and process media may control the limit. |
| Bare graphite | Only if permeability is explicitly acceptable in a separately qualified application. | Do not replace an impervious acid-retaining part with an untreated porous blank. |
| Metric | Typical Range | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Chemical compatibility | Unconfirmed until exact grade and full process composition are reviewed | Acid name alone omits concentration, contaminants, cleaning fluids and temperature. |
| Temperature limit | Grade- and part-specific; see the linked source table | Material examples cannot establish finished-component or joint limits. |
| Allowable pressure / vacuum | Not calculated by this page | Requires geometry, material data, assembly design and the applicable design basis. |
| Leak rate / impermeability | Acceptance criterion to be agreed in RFQ | A nominal porosity figure is not evidence of finished-part leak performance. |
| Service life / price / lead time | Unknown before qualification and supplier quotation | No public generic value can replace process history, testing and the actual drawing. |
No. It identifies review needs and creates an RFQ brief. Even “Candidate for supplier review” leaves chemical compatibility, grade, allowable pressure and life unconfirmed.
HCl is a candidate application for named impregnated grades, but the supplier must confirm the concentration, temperature, fluid phase, impurities and joints. See the linked Mersen grade descriptions.
Send exact wt%, temperature, oxidizers and contaminants. This checker holds every sulfuric-acid entry for specialist review rather than inventing a concentration cut-off or interpolating a corrosion chart.
Do not assume standard phenolic graphite is suitable. Manufacturer literature includes specialist graphite grades for some oxidizing applications; obtain written evidence for the exact mixture and conditions.
Some named graphite systems list HF applications. The complete grade, impregnant, seals and service conditions still need confirmation; the checker keeps HF on specialist review.
The RFQ needs an explicit mass-fraction basis. Do not substitute volume percent or a vague “dilute” label. For mixtures, provide each constituent and its basis in the process brief.
No. It is a conservative review trigger based on one published grade example. The evidence table shows different values by manufacturer, grade and part form; none is a rating for the custom part.
The linked Mersen technical guide lists 400°C while its product page lists 430°C. Treat that difference as unresolved for procurement until the supplier confirms the applicable specification and revision.
No generic pressure rating is assigned. Provide the design basis, gauge or absolute units, vacuum, differential pressure, geometry and joints for mechanical review.
Do not specify “zero porosity” as proof of leak-tightness. Agree material construction and a finished-component leak-test method, conditions and acceptance criterion with the supplier.
Use the partial RFQ summary and send the actual conditions, full composition and drawing for manual review. The 0–400°C intake range is not an operating approval.
Use Email current RFQ summary, or copy the summary into the contact form. Add drawings, tolerances, quantity, destination and documentation needs. Grade availability, price, lead time and manufacturing feasibility are confirmed through RFQ review.
Send your drawing and process brief to [email protected]. Include quantity, destination and inspection requirements so the review covers the complete part.
Complete RFQs are easier to review within 1-2 business days when drawings, graphite grade, quantity, and destination are included.
