Official EK statement - Nickel Plating Issues

[NaeKuh]

You're not very forgiving about this, are you Naekuh?

Forgiving disappeared when EK tried to cover half of this messup, and is trying to shelf half the responsibility.

Sorry cant sidestep this time.

[aqualab]

The report show 100% pure copper for the block, , if the block Kayin have is not 100 % pure copper, it's means the institute don't receive the same batch ...... if you have a defective block and you live near an university, you can always ask the chemical departement to check some shaving ... the best is to know a student there.

[NaeKuh]

The report show 100% pure copper for the block, , if the block Kayin have is not 100 % pure copper, it's means the institute don't receive the same batch ...... if you have a defective block and you live near an university, you can always ask the chemical departement to check some shaving ... the best is to know a student there.

or the samples they gave the testing site were setup perfect cherries, and not random pickouts from the batch.

[paulbagz]

People say its EK's fault if they had impure Copper, but how are you to test an entire block of Copper for impurities prior to the plating stage without melting the block down?

Just wondering as I have no idea about said testing methods.

As I've been saying all along, I think this situation is obviously are lot more complex then people first thought when reaching for the pitchforks, a degree of benefit of the doubt should be applied in such a situation until a further response is made in regards to recent developments.

-PB

[Sparky]

The report show 100% pure copper for the block, , if the block Kayin have is not 100 % pure copper, it's means the institute don't receive the same batch ...... if you have a defective block and you live near an university, you can always ask the chemical departement to check some shaving ... the best is to know a student there.

Exactly.

If it is a matter of some batches of copper being good, some being bad (as was mentioned by another), it is entirely possible that the institute that did the testing got a block that was made from the good copper. So, therefore, the tests wouldn't show anything wrong at all! While at the very same time, there are blocks out there that are made from the bad copper.

See naekuh, this is why I think we still need to give Eddy the benefit of the doubt in this because there are too many variables yet. That's why we need to wait until he checks his supplier and more blocks to look for the bad.

That's all.

or the samples they gave the testing site were setup perfect cherries, and not random pickouts from the batch.

Again, as I mentioned before, without proof of such a thing happening, all that is is simply a can of worms leading to accusations without a solid basis on which to do so. So please, DON'T GO THERE.

[NaeKuh]

People say its EK's fault if they had impure Copper, but how are you to test an entire block of Copper for impurities prior to the plating stage without melting the block down?

-PB

The plater wasn't the problem.

I hit this thing with a few tests, and every single one of them came back positive for the same answer-that isn't copper. Not pure copper, anyway. And it's not just surface impurities.

Testing shavings did not give straight copper (II) sulfate, peroxide would not give light blue, ammonia did not give dark blue, and hydrochloric acid attacked the surface. None of that should have happened.

So I did a density test. This is where it gets ****ing odd.

Copper has a density of 8.93 g/cm3. This is closer to 8 g/cm3. Whatever I have, it ain't pure copper.

At the end of my rope, I set a scraping alight. On nichrome wire, mind you.

Blue-green and some purple. It ain't copper.

Best guesses at this juncture? Phosphor copper, ex-aluminum casting. Maybe mixed with regular copper, but there's enough of an amount that you would have trouble plating it right.

That also sounds pretty good to me too, but i wont say anything for sure until he's done at least 2 samples.

But if the second sample shows up the same..
And then kayin's control comes out positive...
...

Again, as I mentioned before, without proof of such a thing happening, all that is is simply a can of worms leading to accusations without a solid basis on which to do so. So please, DON'T GO THERE.

Ive been keeping my comments contained in this thread.
And i dont pass judgement on 1 test and only 1 test.

However, if they had impure copper they should of known about it.
The first RMA they got which looked corroded should of hinted to them its possible bad copper.
Then how many followed? and they still didnt check the copper?
The bad copper should of been caught by THEM and NOT US.

IF its bad copper.

[matari]

I am not sure what to say; it is not uncommon for blocks to be made with low grade copper. Second, outside XS there are several people performing test on the blocks and have shown imperfections with the plating. Third, there are companies that have re-platted EK blocks and those blocks do not have issues. While the copper may be low grade, it is not the only issue.

[Erdrick1980]

I don't know what you guys are talking about, but my block (EK Nickle) on my ATI 5970 is good (about a year on it).. none of that flaking crap, and all i use is distilled and silver coil.

[Sparky]

Here's something that came to mind.

I don't know which thread it was, but Waterlogged commented on how usually you plate a copper layer first, to assure good adhesion, then you plate the nickel.

If this is done, then the rest of the block could theoretically be a lower grade copper, which is then sealed off by the high grade copper plate that attaches the nickel to the base copper.

So here's a possibility - EK's plater isn't doing the copper layer first, assuming the copper is high grade already? Maybe because EK said it is (because maybe it is supposed to be and they're getting batches of cheap stuff thrown in the mix?)?

Just ideas coming to mind.

[stangracin3]

Here's something that came to mind.

I don't know which thread it was, but Waterlogged commented on how usually you plate a copper layer first, to assure good adhesion, then you plate the nickel.

If this is done, then the rest of the block could theoretically be a lower grade copper, which is then sealed off by the high grade copper plate that attaches the nickel to the base copper.

So here's a possibility - EK's plater isn't doing the copper layer first, assuming the copper is high grade already? Maybe because EK said it is (because maybe it is supposed to be and they're getting batches of cheap stuff thrown in the mix?)?

Just ideas coming to mind.

i think this is what makes the most sense. If EK is paying for high grade copper, then he probably thought he was getting high grade copper. He is expecting to get high grade copper

[matari]

Copper is expensive, and the current market already pushes the consumers price limit. If you want high grade copper than have custom block made by someone who knows what they are doing.

[paulbagz]

Copper is expensive, and the current market already pushes the consumers price limit. If you want high grade copper than have custom block made by someone who knows what they are doing.

Pretty sure that's what everybody thought they were doing when they bought EK/Swiftech/Koolance etc blocks.

-PB

[Aedubber]

No offense but you can nickel plate more then just copper Kayin , saw that you mentioned somewhere that nickel wouldnt plate on brass or bronze..

[matari]

EK is a business after all, they are trying to make money. You can't really blame them for trying to have mass market appeal. That is not possible with blocks in the 150-250 USD range. Since most watercoolers won't accept anything but copper blocks, cost has to cut somewhere. So you use cheap copper and plate the stuff yourself.

[Aedubber]

Ok thanks !

[wermad]

I ran a 4870x2, 4870 GS, and Supreme Lt in copper in 2010, surely these guys were made/casted in 2009 (raw copper production). Used them for about 6-7 months and there was no issue with the copper. And I ran dye

Only thing is the copper tarnishes brown BUT on the surfaces exposed to air, the "wet surfaces" were very nice and clean when I prepped them for sale.

[Erklat]

Only thing is the copper tarnishes brown BUT on the surfaces exposed to air

Supposedly those scuffs can be remedied by ketchup, don't know how tho
But I'll gladly trade scuffs for the sake of the rest of the components in my loop.

I was looking at the nickel plated blocks from EK for a while now, if I hadn't bought mobo block, I'd probably sunk my HD6970. But now, plain copper+acetal, no hacks, no bullsh*t ftw.

I guess I should change my avatar too.

What's up with that sigs? I mean, u r not funny. Not one bit

Whatever EK responds in the regard with the manufacturing process, would hardly matter here. Nickel plated sales took a hit and will need a good year or two to recover. I'd even think of limiting nickel plated production for the time being, no point in stockpiling it somewhere, but he'll know better from his projection charts in a month or two.

[wermad]

I used Tarnish, brought a purrrrrrtty finish.

Yeah, I too was an EK fan, now I'm taking my $$$ elsewhere

[tool_462]

I used Tarnish, brought a purrrrrrtty finish.

Yeah, I too was an EK fan, now I'm taking my $$$ elsewhere

Take it to a company without a bad streak of products?


Don't think any exist in the water world, you'll be on air

[mackintosh]

Take it to a company without a bad streak of products?


Don't think any exist in the water world, you'll be on air

There hardly are any companies in the world without a bad streak of products or other major fubars and snafus, it's just that some handle it better than others. My rig is chock full of EK products, there's more EK in here than anything else. Observing this debacle (while potentially being affected by the problem - all my GPU blocks are nickle plated) has most certainly convinced me to look elsewhere for my future needs.

Admittedly, I do understand the Catch-22 Eddy's in. If he admits to manufacturing defects and initiates a recall, that's thousands of euros in losses, I doubt a small company can afford that kind of a hit to their bottom line. If he admits to defects and apologises, but doesn't recall the faulty products, he's opening up to possible lawsuits. The RMA proposal on offer now isn't satisfactory to most users either, as clearly those without issues now, but with possibly defective products will be out in the cold, plus EK effectively offloads all the blame on end users, which is terrible to goodwill and return business...and so on and so forth.

[st0ned]

Guys with bad blocks you can in a easy way test them for copper density.

Get something with scale ( l / gallons(?) ). Fill it half way with water ( 0.5l ) or something. Then put the block ( only copper / nickle parts ) mesure again 0.6l ( ex ).

0.6l = 0.6dm^3 = 60cm^3 then wight the block in a cooking balance say it 800g . Then just do the math.

800/60 = 13,3(3) g/cm^3

You should get around the 8.9 , the error margin is low ( it depends on how accurate you balance and watter mesure are but with the normal stuff that would allow you to cook a cake you can do it in a pretty accurate way. [ 10g balance is a must have and a 0.05l scale it's Ok too ].

[.::NeO::.]

i was thinking that maybe Eddy or someone who can do nickel plating can also do a simple test:

take two block (for example: two Supreme HF, nickel plated version).

leave one block as it is, and plate the other in the "swiftech way" (more nickel).

put the two blocks in a loop (one pump, one rad and some approved coolant for each block) and see who fail first (if they fail at all).

if no one fail, then the problem is elsewere. If the standard HF fail then the problem is the nickel process.

sound stupid, but i think is the only way to give the customers a simple and effective answer.

[Church]

.::NeO::.: you are forgetting possibility that only same small part/batch, eg. 5-10% may fail even with rumored bad plating. So you have to test big pile of block samples, preferably from different batches/times. It rises testing load/work/time substantially, even with parallelizing process.

[.::NeO::.]

.::NeO::.: you are forgetting possibility that only same small part/batch, eg. 5-10% may fail even with rumored bad plating. So you have to test big pile of block samples, preferably from different batches/times. It rises testing load/work/time substantially, even with parallelizing process.

true that,

is there a way to check what batch each block belong?

[zalbard]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...0&postcount=24

And if someone wants to repeat some of these tests (as I'm running on a bare minimum of stuff here) I'll send out the block.

Petra, wanna test this and see if we get any correlation?

Thanks a lot for doing your tests!

OK, so if the plating is fine and EK is using phosphor copper, what do we do to prevent the corrosion (or whatever the issue is)? Will anti-corrosive additives help?

Questions:
1. Assuming the plating is fine... How would it corrode if water is only in contact with the plating and not that fake copper? Wouldn't plating have to have issues (such as micro-holes, etc) letting the water get in contact with the fake copper?
2. Assuming the plating is fine and they use two plating layers (copper and nickel)... Shouldn't copper layer prevent issues since it's between nickel plating and the base of the block?
3. How come plating on some blocks looks bad out of the box?

Because instead of voiding just his nickle blocks... we cant use ANY of his blocks...

Now that is scary.

Question:
4. Why don't users of copper blocks have any issues?