Strong Electrode Conductivity Pre-Baked Carbon Anode Block for Alminum Plant

Name: Strong Electrode Conductivity Pre-Baked Carbon Anode Block for Alminum Plant
Brand: Hebei Fanghe New Material Co.,LTD
SKU: 2213514115

Hebei, ChinaHebei Fanghe New Material Co.,LTD

US$750.00

20-49 Tons

US$720.00

50-99 Tons

US$710.00

100-499 Tons

US$700.00

500-999 Tons

US$450.00

1,000+ Tons

Sample price:US$1.00/piece.Request sample

Product profile

Customization

Available

Application

Chemical Industry, Metallurgical Industry

Carbon Content

High-Carbon

Model NO.

Anode block 16

Expansion Ratio

Many Grade

Grain Size

Custom

Type

Graphite Block

Composition

High Density Graphite

Moisture

1% Max

Ash

1% Max

S

1% Max

Size

150-300mm

Density

1.7-1.78g/cm3

Transport Package

Standard Packages in Wooden Pallet

Trademark

Origin

China

HS Code

8545110000

Company profile

Hebei Fanghe New Material Co.,LTD

Hebei, China

Business Type: Manufacturer/Factory, Trading CompanyExport Year: 2000-04-03Nearest Port: TIANJIN, QINGDAOAverage Response Time: ≤4.62hTerms of Payment: LC, T/T, PayPal, etc.International Commercial Terms(Incoterms): FOB, EXW, CFR, CIF, DAP

AI-Powered supplier vetting

SummaryThe supplier is a limited company offering lubricating oil and related industrial lubricant products, with stated manufacturing, storage, transportation, sales, and service functions. It reports multiple management-system certifications, nine production lines, six to ten quality-control staff, and an export license. However, the evidence also identifies material weaknesses: no available SDK, zero reported R&D patents, no auditable R&D design documentation, and no written procedures or records for service evaluation, corrective actions, or complaint handling. Financial information is represented only by years, not performance results, so financial credibility cannot be determined. Overseas service coverage and customer case evidence are also insufficient.

Supplier typeThe supplier is identified as a limited company with no larger-company affiliation. Its stated business scope includes chemical-product sales and import/export, while its offered product scope is lubricating oil; the company description also states that it manufactures, stores, transports, sells, and services lubricant products.

CertificationsThe supplier states that it completed ISO/TS 16949 and HSE management-system certification, and separately lists ISO 9000, ISO 14001, ISO 9001, ISO 14000, ISO 20000, QC 080000, and ISO 14064. These statements provide explicit evidence of multiple certifications, although the slices do not provide certificate validity dates or verification documents.

After-Sales capabilityThe supplier has stated service terms, lead times of within 15 working days in both peak and off-season, and two qualified service-capability suppliers. However, it has no written procedures or records for service-capability assessment, corrective and preventive actions, or effective customer-complaint handling, which is an explicit process deficiency.

R&D capabilityThe supplier reports CAD and PS software capability and R&D engineers with 21–30 years of total experience. Nevertheless, it reports no available SDK, zero R&D patents, and no auditable design-input, design-output, review, verification, or validation documentation, providing explicit evidence of weak documented innovation capability.

Production capacityThe supplier describes automatic blending and packaging lines and production of crankcase oil, gear oil, hydraulic oil, greases, brake fluid, metalworking fluid, marine oil, additives, and other products. It reports nine production lines, six to ten quality-control staff, and stated annual output information for lubricating grease and lubricating oil, supporting a positive production-capability assessment.

Customization capabilityThe R&D engineer responsibilities explicitly include designing products according to customer requirements, and the supplier offers a broad range of lubricant categories. However, the absence of auditable R&D design documentation limits verification of a controlled customization process; the evidence supports the existence of customization activity but not its documented maturity.