The MetalworkingFluidAdditives.com Editorial Team writes every page on this site, and no company pays for a listing, a ranking or a sentence. The site sells no fluid, additive or service, and each figure on a page names the instrument, standard or study it comes from.
The site brand is the publisher, and no named expert is claimed as author or reviewer. What does each page rest on? Primary sources, cited inside the sentence that uses them.
Standards, regulations and exposure limits are checked against their issuing bodies, product values against the named data sheet, and every figure carries its source and date; see our methodology and fact-checking.
Editorial Independence From Fluid Makers, Suppliers and Providers#
No company pays to be listed, ranked or written about on MetalworkingFluidAdditives.com, and no page carries advertising, sponsored content or paid rankings.
The two request forms pass requests to independent providers and suppliers. No receiver has been chosen yet, and requests are stored until one exists. Passing on a request never changes what a page says, and no analytics or advertising vendor is loaded on the site.
Suppliers are described from public facts and by what a buyer specifies, never ranked or favored. How to compare metalworking fluid suppliers without a ranking is set out on the sourcing page.
Which Primary Sources the Pages Are Compiled From#
Every page is compiled from named primary sources: regulators such as OSHA, NIOSH, the EPA, HSE and ECHA, standards bodies such as ISO, ASTM and DIN, IARC monographs, STLE publications and peer-reviewed journals.
US rules are read in the eCFR, EU rules in EUR-Lex and hazard classifications on ECHA. The table shows which source type may supply which kind of value.
| Source type | Examples | What it may supply | How it is labeled |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regulators and public agencies | OSHA (eCFR), NIOSH and CDC, EPA, HSE, ECHA, EUR-Lex | legal limits, guidance limits, hazard classifications, regulatory dates | instrument, article or section, date |
| Standards bodies | ISO, ASTM, DIN | test methods, classifications, editions, withdrawal status | standard number with edition or withdrawal year |
| Cancer evaluations | IARC monographs | carcinogen group | group, volume and year |
| Technical societies | STLE | formulation and practice context | publication and year |
| Peer-reviewed journals | tribology and occupational-health journals | study results, survey data | authors, journal and year inside the sentence |
| Supplier data sheets | one named product | one product's value, never a requirement or a class value | "one supplier's data sheet" on hubs and management pages; product name on substance pages |
Where two source types disagree, the standard or regulation is written and the difference is checked at the newer official source.
Trade-press articles, vendor blogs and forum threads are background and are never cited as the source of a value.
Standards and Regulations Before Supplier Data Sheets#
A standard or regulation outranks a supplier data sheet, and a newer official source replaces an older record.
One product's value is never presented as the value of a fluid type or an additive class, and a value is called common only when two independent sources give it. A refractometer shows the rule: concentration equals the Brix reading times the product's own refractometer factor, so the page gives the rule and the data sheet gives the factor.
Treat rates carry their basis, concentrate or diluted fluid.
How Facts Are Checked, Cited and Dated#
Every figure is cited inside its sentence with the instrument, edition and date it comes from, for example the 5 mg/m³ 8-hour time-weighted average for mineral oil mist under OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1000 Table Z-1.
Exposure limits carry the body, year, aerosol fraction and averaging time. Statutory limits stay apart from guidance values, and a guidance value is never called a legal limit. Units run metric first with US units in parentheses, and each page records its publication date and last change. Five examples show the citation format.
- Exposure limit: mineral oil mist, 5 mg/m³ 8-hour time-weighted average, OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1000 Table Z-1; OSHA has no standard specific to metalworking fluids
- Withdrawn standard: ASTM D5619 (tapping torque), withdrawn in 2016, last version D5619-00(2011), named as withdrawn, never as current
- Current edition: ASTM D4172-25, four-ball wear test
- Waste code: EU List of Waste entry 12 01 09*, machining emulsions and solutions free of halogens, Decision 2000/532/EC as amended by Decision 2014/955/EU, applying from June 1, 2015
- Hazard note: the CLP carcinogen classification of petroleum base oils carries Note L, which removes it when the DMSO extract is below 3 % by IP 346, so no page calls base oils carcinogens without that note
A value that cannot be confirmed at its primary source is left out, not hedged. The procedure behind how we source, check and update every fact is on the methodology page.
How Provider and Supplier Requests Are Disclosed#
Every request form on the site carries the same disclosure: "Requests go to independent providers and suppliers. No company pays for placement; see our editorial policy."
The site has two request forms.
- Find a Coolant Management or Recycling Provider: "We pass your request to independent providers who manage, test and recycle metalworking fluids."
- Request Quotes for Metalworking Fluids and Additives: "Send one specification to independent suppliers."
No company receives requests at present. Requests are kept until a receiver is chosen, and the forms name no receiver. The forms promise no response time, no number of quotes and no price.
Form submissions are stored on the site's hosting for 24 months.
Corrections Policy: How to Report an Error to the Editorial Team#
Errors are reported by email to editorial@metalworkingfluidadditives.com, and each report is checked against the primary source the page cites.
Anyone may report an error. A report that can be checked has four parts.
- Write to editorial@metalworkingfluidadditives.com with the page URL
- Quote the sentence, table cell or figure in question
- Name the source that shows the correct value: standard and edition, regulation and article, or paper with authors and year
- State whether you write for a company named on the page
No response time is promised.
A request from a company to add a promotion, change an order or remove an unfavorable sourced fact is declined, because the site ranks no company. Companies and rights holders contact the editorial team through the same route.
Company and Product Names on the Site#
Company and product names appear only as the named source of one product's value or in one neutral alphabetical supplier table, never as a recommendation.
Hub, fluid-type, additive-class, operation, management, safety and regulation pages name no company. Equipment such as refractometers and mist collectors is named only as a class, never as a model.
Editorial Policy, Methodology and Privacy: How the Trust Pages Work Together#
This editorial policy works with four other trust pages: about, methodology, contact and privacy, which describe the site, how facts are checked, how to reach the editors and how personal data is handled.
Form retention and reader rights are set out in the privacy policy.
How Outbound Links Are Followed or Nofollowed#
Links to government, EU and intergovernmental bodies, standards bodies and peer-reviewed publishers are followed; every other outbound link is nofollow.
A nofollow link is a citation, not an endorsement. No outbound link is paid for.
Why Health, Safety and Legal Pages Give No Personal Advice#
Health and safety pages describe hazards, exposure routes, limits and controls with their sources, and give no diagnosis, treatment or legal advice.
An occupational physician answers medical questions, and the competent authority answers legal ones. Regulatory pages state what an instrument requires, never whether a reader's product complies.