G110 vs G67 is a question about the scope of aluminum intergranular corrosion testing. Before comparing results, identify the alloy family, product form and purpose of the report. A document headed “corrosion test” does not supply those details.
For purchasing, begin with the requirement owner’s decision about applicable evidence. Give the laboratory a traceable material description, then ask it to explain how the proposed method answers that requirement. Keep any change to a specified method visible in the quotation.
On this page
1. G110 vs G67: read applicability before results
The ASTM G110 public description primarily addresses wrought heat-treatable aluminum alloys, particularly the 2xxx and 7xxx series. It identifies the method as poorly suited to non-heat-treatable, work-hardenable 1xxx, 3xxx and 5xxx alloys and points to G67.
The ASTM G67 public description addresses intergranular corrosion susceptibility in wrought 5xxx aluminum alloys through the nitric acid mass loss test, or NAMLT. Its stated scope excludes cast products.
These scope statements give you an initial applicability question. They do not establish that every order needs either test. Ask the responsible materials reviewer to connect the purchasing requirement to the proposed evaluation.
A search result or standard title can help identify a document. The laboratory needs the applicable complete method and the agreed specification to plan the actual work. This guide covers document review rather than laboratory instructions.
Record the edition in the offer. If the order cites an earlier edition while the laboratory proposes a later one, request a written decision from the requirement owner before treating that change as agreed.
2. Supply the material identity the laboratory needs
Send the full alloy designation, temper, product form and lot identity from the purchasing documents. Attach the relevant certificate and drawing revision. If one field is missing, leave it explicitly unresolved rather than filling it from a visually similar sample.
Separate the test specimen description from the finished component description. A coupon, stock plate and cut assembly member can occupy different places in the supply chain. The report should make the connection to the ordered material understandable.
Our 5083 aluminum plate guide organizes the material-ordering discussion. For this testing inquiry, use the identity on your actual order and certificate. An alloy guide cannot certify an unknown piece of stock.
Ask which organization supplies the specimen and maintains its identity. The stock supplier may prepare it, the cutting shop may separate it from a marked piece, or the laboratory may request material directly. Agree the handoff before the material loses its original markings.
3. Resolve a method mismatch before scheduling work
Consider this invented quotation example, reference C57. The buyer identifies a wrought 5xxx material and asks for evidence concerning intergranular corrosion. The laboratory offer lists G110 without explaining applicability. No specimens have been tested.
The buyer’s next step is to return the scope question to the laboratory and requirement owner. Ask them to review the identified material, explain the offered method and state any proposed correction. Do not silently rename the test on the purchase order.
A revised offer should show what changed and whether the price, specimen request or delivery plan changed with it. Keep the original offer attached so the decision is traceable. Approving a corrected scope is a separate decision from accepting a future result.
This example shows an incomplete agreement. It gives no corrosion rating, acceptance threshold or service-life claim. A real order still needs its own applicable specification and authorized review.
| Document field | Review question |
|---|---|
| Material identity | Does the offered scope address the named alloy and product form? |
| Method and edition | Does the offer match the requirement, or identify an approved change? |
| Reported outcome | What observation or quantity will the laboratory report? |
| Acceptance owner | Who will compare that report with the agreed requirement? |
Keep the measurement separate from the acceptance decision
G67’s public description identifies mass loss as a quantitative indication of susceptibility within its scope. G110’s description states that interpretation and sampling are outside its practice and require agreement between producer and user.
For your inquiry, ask for a sample report layout or list of report fields. Check that specimen identity, method reference and result can be followed without relying on an email explanation that might later be separated from the report.
Keep the acceptance requirement in a controlled order document. If the laboratory is only reporting observations, record who makes the acceptance decision afterward. Avoid letting an unqualified “pass” label hide a missing contractual basis.
Intergranular corrosion evidence also needs a clearly named purpose. Our aluminum pitting corrosion guide addresses a different review question. Ask for clarification when a report title and the requirement describe different forms of corrosion.
Keep the cutting handoff traceable
If stock must be cut before delivery to the laboratory, obtain its specimen request first. Send that request with the material identity and agreed handling instructions. Confirm which party is authorized to decide any change to the requested sample.
Use separate records for dimensional checks and corrosion evaluation. A cut-length result answers a dimensional requirement. The laboratory report answers the identified test scope. Keep both connected to the same material record when both are required.
Send JiurunCut your drawing and cutting request with the stock form, quantities and any agreed sample-handling requirements. Include the laboratory’s instructions when specimen separation forms part of the inquiry, so the cutting discussion starts from the correct handoff.
Questions about G110 vs G67
Are the methods interchangeable for every aluminum alloy?
No. Their stated material scopes differ. Have the laboratory and requirement owner review applicability to the identified product before accepting the offer.
Does a G67 result certify the finished assembly for its service life?
The test scope concerns susceptibility in the identified material. Any broader assembly or service claim needs its own justified review.
Can this guide supply a laboratory procedure?
No. Use the applicable complete method, specification and laboratory controls. This article helps a buyer request a clear scope and report.
What should I do when a certificate omits product form?
Ask the supplier to resolve the material identity before arranging the test. Keep the missing field visible in the quotation review.