Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Calling All Platinum Experts -- Porosity??

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Oh gosh, what an ordeal!
I am sooo glad you are getting a NEW setting, at no cost to you.
I was going to write that you are deranged for offering to eat some of the cost, LOL, but I kept reading.

Y''know, a cousin of mine mails very valuable items constantly for her business, and has never had an issue. Perhaps a misplaced parcel here and there, but never a flat out theft. I know that is has happened to some unlucky Pricescopers, but statistically it is still unlikely. Hope you get you new, PERFECT setting back soon!
 
Dem, I''m keeping my fingers crossed that the new ring is absolutely perfect. Congrats on finally getting the resolution that you should have had to begin with. Your ring will be okay. The power of PS is floating good vibes for your package.
2.gif


shay
 
Okay, final update: The last I reported the vendor was going to make a new mounting and I was going to send him my diamond for setting. Well, the vendor changed his mind about setting my stone because he knew I was nervous about sending the stone across the country and, though he didn't say this, probably didn't want the liability of setting such a large stone. Don't blame him for that one bit. Instead, he said he would take extensive pictures of the ring and wouldn't send it off till I gave him the thumbs up.

That was fine until I consulted with my jeweler in WA. He's 1 of only 3 certified master bench jewelers in the state of Washington with a lot of years of experience working with precious metals. In other words, I trusted that he would be straight with me. So, I drove down today and showed him the ring. He apologized for not catching the hole before it left his store. But he did confirm that it is porosity. He explained to me the following: porosity (i.e. air bubbles) can exist in any cast platinum mounting at any level (on the surface or deep within) and may not be visible until the piece is worked on in some way -- setting, sizing, polishing, etc. That is likely what happened here which confirms what the vendor said about not seeing it before it left the factory.

By the way, I never, ever thought that the vendor intentionally sent out a bad mounting. But that doesn't mean that it wasn't porous -- it just may not have been visible. My jeweler UNCOVERED the hole, he didn't CAUSE it. Very important distinction.

Anyway, he said that it is an easy fix to plug the hole and that this is what he would recommend rather than getting a new mounting. He said that there can NEVER be any guarantee that a cast piece won't have porosity (this is much less likely with something that is diestruck, by the way), even if not visible at first. SInce this ring has already been polished during the setting process, he said it is doubtful that there is anymore problematic porosity lurking just beneath the surface. He examined it under 40x and saw nothing else of concern. With a new mounting, he said it's possible for it to look great until the stone is set or it is sized or it is polished. Since the vendor is not setting the stone, I am assuming the lifetime guarantee would be voided once again and I didn't want to risk being in the same place I am now with no recourse. So, I took a calculated risk and told him to go ahead and do it.

Happy to say, it looks great and he gave me a deal on the repair since he said he should have caught it the first time. I have decided not to loupe it. I figure, if I can't see it with the naked eye, it ain't there. The original hole was easily visible with the naked eye (even my hubby could see it). I emailed the vendor to tell him that I have decided not to proceed with the new mounting as this would be more economical for him and more expedient for me. I did, however, ask that he pay for the repair and he agreed.

So, that's the long and short of it. If I still lived in Bellingham, this probably would have been easier since I could have checked with my jeweler as soon as I noticed the problem. But I just don't know anyone in Vancouver whom I trust and this was my first chance to go down to WA. My next task is going to be to find a great local jeweler. They are invaluable.

One last note: I have been very careful not to badmouth this vendor (hope I've succeeded). I disagree with his handling of this in the beginning, but he did offer to make me a new setting at no cost to me and now he is paying for the repair. I posted here NOT to be vindictive, but to get the support, opinions, and expertise of the PS community when I didn't really know where else to turn since initially the vendor didn't seem receptive to my request for help and my jeweler is over an international border.

Wow, this is turning into a novella! Sorry!!
 
Well. A proper explanation. He uncovered it, he didn''t cause it. Now that makes sense.
It sounds like an ideal resolution: you''re not out any money, you have your ring on your finger, properly mended. Don''t loupe it! Just ogle it with your hand outstretched, take a look at it in the mirrors as you walk by (my favorite shot), hold your hand in front of the rearview mirror at stoplights. But no loupe. You know how there''s a Turn Off the TV Week? I think that we need a Turn Off Your Loupes and Enjoy Your Diamonds Week.
1.gif


Man, I hope this is IT for the Demelza Diamond Saga.
 
Date: 11/10/2005 1:39:46 AM
Author: MrsFrk
But no loupe. You know how there''s a Turn Off the TV Week? I think that we need a Turn Off Your Loupes and Enjoy Your Diamonds Week.
1.gif



Man, I hope this is IT for the Demelza Diamond Saga.
Click to expand...

You''re funny, Mrs F. The Demelza Diamond saga -- I like that! That can be the title of my novella, hehe.
 
Hi Demelza!
35.gif
I have been following your saga, and I just wanted to say that I''m so glad that everything worked out!
1.gif
 
Date: 11/9/2005 11:34:31 PM
Author: Demelza
I have decided not to loupe it. I figure, if I can''t see it with the naked eye, it ain''t there.
Click to expand...
That is exactly the right thing to do Dem.

I am so glad this all worked out for you.
 
Glad to see it worked out for you, Demelza.

Your jeweler''s explanation is dead-on, and he sounds like a man with good judgement.

I also want to comment that I''ve always found SuperbCert''s customer service to be professional and conscientious.
 
I''m glad everything is settled!
36.gif
 
Hi, Dem...I''m delighted that this problem has been resolved to everyone''s satisfaction! Whew!
36.gif


I''ve been following this thread with great interest. Dem, I commend you for not bad-mouthing the vendor, as some others seemed so quick to do.

If I got this right, the "hole" was revealed in the setting/repolishing process, and by his own admission, "missed" by the jeweler before he returned the ring to you.

This explains to me why a manufacturer might choose have in place a warranty that is voided when the piece is worked on by an outsider who has a lot less to loose if he "misses" something...

In any case...all is well now. You have a GORGEOUS RING!!
30.gif


Congratulations!

widget
 
Demelza, I''m SO GLAD that it is fixed and you can now enjoy your ring!
36.gif


Who would have thought that something so pretty and sparkly could cause one so much anxiety?!

It does sound like you have a good jeweler there. It''s too bad that he is so far away.
8.gif
 
Date: 11/10/2005 11:19:21 AM
Author: widget
If I got this right, the 'hole' was revealed in the setting/repolishing process, and by his own admission, 'missed' by the jeweler before he returned the ring to you.


This explains to me why a manufacturer might choose have in place a warranty that is voided when the piece is worked on by an outsider who has a lot less to loose if he 'misses' something...

widget
Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind words, Widget.

I do want to clarify one thing, though. Yes, the hole was revealed in the polishing process which means that the vendor was not at fault for sending out a faulty mounting. However, the hole, regardless of how it turned up, is a sign of a casting problem. Therefore, I really don't think this should void a warranty when there is no way a setter could CAUSE porosity in a mounting. My setter missed it after he polished it, but it would still not be his responsibilty to fix. Had he found it after he initially set the stone, I would have been in the same position: either have it fixed or replace the mounting.
 
Author: Demelza
the hole, regardless of how it turned up, is a sign of a casting problem.
Click to expand...
Is it? This is where I''m confused.

Your jeweler said that there can never be a guarantee that a cast piece won''t have porosity....this made me wonder if maybe it isn''t unusual for a cast piece to have "holes" in it before it is properly finished and polished.

Experts?

widget
 
Date: 11/10/2005 12:17:28 PM
Author: widget


Author: Demelza
the hole, regardless of how it turned up, is a sign of a casting problem.
Click to expand...
Is it? This is where I'm confused.

Your jeweler said that there can never be a guarantee that a cast piece won't have porosity....this made me wonder if maybe it isn't unusual for a cast piece to have 'holes' in it before it is properly finished and polished.

Experts?

widget
Click to expand...
Whether or not a cast piece can have porosity...it seems like that there would be a better way to check for it before shipping it out? Maybe that way has not been 'created' yet but seems like it'd be smart. In the year 2005, no less. It's kind of scary to think that any cast piece can have porosity that may not show up til years later when a stone is reset or ring polished etc.

This whole thing has been a mess of confusion. I totally understand a company having a policy where if someone else plays with the setting the warranty is void, but I think that the vendors should say WHY. Consumers will not just inately understand why that policy applies. Dem didn't understand it until her jeweler explained it to her in English.

This is the perfect example. The correspondence with the vendor was that they were claiming this was absolutely NOT their fault, that porosity had NEVER happened to them before, so it HAD to be the jeweler who did something wrong. Well lo and behold the jeweler says the porosity WAS there, but yes he did not uncover it. So both professionals are at fault IMO. There is always a first time for something happening! I also do agree that if the problem with porosity is done when casting, then someone 'exposing' it later should not void a warranty.

Bottom line, I'm so glad that it was able to be fixed without having to send the ring and stone away or having a new piece remade etc etc. And now we are all just a little bit smarter than we started out.
9.gif
 
It isn't uncommon, but it IS a casting issue. It's not supposed to happen and it can weaken a mounting and make it brittle if severe enough. And it can't always be fixed. I ordered a mouting from Stuller once that had severe porosity. They sent a new one right away. So, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer. I don't want to freak everyone out. I don't think it means that we have terribly porous mountings just waiting to reveal a huge pit. I'm sure many have none. But this one did and it was result of casting and therefore a manufacturing issue, regardless of who found it. Again, I do not at all blame the vendor for sending this mounting out. But I don't think a warranty should be voided if the problem was simply discovered by another jeweler and not caused by him.
 
Widget,

Porosity is a common issue that all casters have to address. Dealing with it is part of the manufacturing process. People get PhD's in this. This kind of 'repair' is a regular process for all of the manufacturers and, as mentioned above, it's not evidence of faulty craftsmanship. It's a shame that this thread started to turn nasty over a minor topic that's easily resolved. These things tend to snowball and I'm thrilled that it worked out quickly and well.

Demzilla,

It's worth pointing out that your jeweler has simply completed the manufacturing process on behalf of the original maker. This should not be taken as evidence that you have a second quality or repaired ring. I agree that it should be covered by the warranty even though it was discovered later and by a 3rd party and the work should not in any way affect the future of your warranty coverage.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver
 
Date: 11/10/2005 12:41:32 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Demzilla,


It''s worth pointing out that your jeweler has simply completed the manufacturing process on behalf of the original maker. This should not be taken as evidence that you have a second quality or repaired ring. I agree that it should be covered by the warranty even though it was discovered later and by a 3rd party and the work should not in any affect the future of your warranty coverage.


Neil Beaty

GG(GIA) ISA NAJA

Professional Appraisals in Denver
Click to expand...
Thanks Neil.

Did you mean to call me Demzilla
9.gif
9.gif
? I''m nice, I really am!!!
 
Dem,
I''m so glad all this is getting resolved in a satisfactory manner for you. I think you handled this in a most mature way. Some of us wouldn''t have had the patience that you showed and can''t wait until it''s back on your finger where it belongs!!!
1.gif
 
Date: 11/10/2005 12:46:33 PM
Author: Demelza

Date: 11/10/2005 12:41:32 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Demzilla,


It''s worth pointing out that your jeweler has simply completed the manufacturing process on behalf of the original maker. This should not be taken as evidence that you have a second quality or repaired ring. I agree that it should be covered by the warranty even though it was discovered later and by a 3rd party and the work should not in any affect the future of your warranty coverage.


Neil Beaty

GG(GIA) ISA NAJA

Professional Appraisals in Denver
Click to expand...
Thanks Neil.

Did you mean to call me Demzilla
9.gif
9.gif
? I''m nice, I really am!!!
Click to expand...
Hahah, this had me hysterically laughing. Freudian Slip?!?!
5.gif
 
Author: Demelza
Did you mean to call me Demzilla
9.gif
9.gif
? I''m nice, I really am!!!
Click to expand...
Hee hee..."Demzilla" you definitely aint!!!

It''s patently obvious to everyone that you are indeed, really really nice!!!
1.gif


widget
 
Date: 11/10/2005 7:25:50 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood
So, is Godzilla taken care of now?
Click to expand...

If you''re referring to me, Yes, I am
9.gif
!
 
The one thing that bothers me about the whole issue of porosity - is that their are known industrial fixes out their to eliminate it when casting metals.

Most porosity occurs because moltent metal absorbs various gasses. As the metals solidify the gas has to escape - or it forms "air pockets" (Porosity). In a few cases the mold releases gases when the hot metals are pored on them. In a poorly designed mold the air gets trapped by the moltent metal and has to bubble through the metal to get out.

Common solutions are to:

1) add elements that reduce the amount of gases that are absorbed by the moltent metal. The big disadvantage is that often thes aditional elements change the material properties - and not necessarily in a good way.

2) Using a shield gas that the metal does not absorb (example: some metals like to absorbe nitorgen, but will not absorb carbon dioxide).

3) Putting the melted metal in a vacuum chamber for a period of time so that the gases are "boiled" out of the metal (Vacuum degasing). In some cases the mold can also be maintained in a vacuum chamber such that their are no gasses to displace when the metal is pored into the mold.

I am surprised that someone has not marketed a small vacuum degassing & mold chamber to the jewelry industry given that jewelry items are small, and that especiailly for semi-custom to custom work their is not a real price point (people willingly pay a premium for good work).

To me, porosity is a solvable issue for high quality rings. But, just like a laser - people have to change their ways...

Perry
 
But what of the cost to the manufactures? If it was simple and would not cost overmuch it would have been done. But the people making rings are a business just like any other. And to make the machines which actually make the rings is quite costly.
 
Date: 11/10/2005 10:50:34 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood
Babezilla...
Click to expand...

Oh, I like that. Maybe I should change my username? I am Babezilla, hear me roar!!
 
Matatora says:

But what of the cost to the manufactures? If it was simple and would not cost overmuch it would have been done. But the people making rings are a business just like any other. And to make the machines which actually make the rings is quite costly.


In ordinary foundry business producing comercial parts qotes are lost on pennies per piece. If you cannot compete you are out of business (and their are lots of competitors). Now I will admit that most foundries do not use vacuum degassing; but a solid percentage has it for certain metals and certain shapes. It is the most economical method for those metals and shapes when you eliminate scrapping of pieces.

In the end, I doubt that the process would be that expensive at all on a per ring basis - and good quality jewelry can be marked up substaintially even if it is.

To me there is a disconnect. I just don''t think that jewelers know about the technology, or are afraid to try something new. Thus, they have never tried it. Without a market, the people making the equipment would not be routinely producing small melt pots and vacuum chambers (but I believe this could be easily rigged up).

Perry
 
I''m glad that your local jeweler was able to fix the ring for you and all is well now!
1.gif


BTW, do you know what alloy mix SuperbCert uses?
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top