Browse Client Types

Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors

Trial Number 2

Trial Purpose:

To test the soil loading characteristics

Date Run:

02/20/1996

Experiment Procedure:

The purpose of this trial is to test the soil loading characteristics of the EP-921 and HTF 85B as compared to NMP. By observing how efficient the chemicals are at various levels of dissolved urethanes, the best performing terpene can be picked out.
Three 400ml beakers were filled with 350 ml of each chemical. The initial plan of this experiment is to clean 5 coupons in each chemistry at each percentage of soil loading. The soil loading will be done as a weight percentage of basecoat #51144 to the total weight of contaminated cleaning solution. Soil loadings will be increased in increments of 10% from 0% to 30%. So a total of 30 coupons will be cleaned for each chemical.
Cleaning will be performed at 160F for 30 minutes with stir-bar agitation. Rinsing will start with a one minute tap water rinse at 130F followed by a brief acetone rinse (so the gravimetric results do not pick up residual cleaner). The coupons will then be dried under a UV light for 10 minutes and then allowed to cool down overnight.
Since it was determined that the Basecoat #51144 was tougher to remove, we just experimented with this to expedite the soil loading tests. All coupons were contaminated in an identical fashion to the phase 1 testing.
To determine the amount of Basecoat #51144 needed to achieve a particular percentage, the specific gravity of the cleaning solutions was obtained from the MSDS sheets (NMP=1.025, EP-921=.9800, HTF85B=.9932). The below chart shows the grams of basecoat #51144 that needs to be added to each chemistry to achieve a specified loading

Product 10% 20% 30%
NMP  40.00 89.69 153.75
EP-921 38.11 85.75 147.00
HTF85B 38.86 86.91 148.98

The amount of urethane removed during cleaning was taken into consideration when increasing the soil loading. All urethane added to increase soil loading was uncured to reduce the time taken to dissolve. A note of some of the assumptions made with respect to chemical volume. It was assumed that there wereno evaporative and drag-out losses. So for all soil loading calculations made, a solvent volume of 350 ml was used.

SUBSTRATE MATERIAL: 304 Stainless Steel Coupons
CONTAMINANTS: Durane Base Coatings #51144
CONTAMINATING PROCESS USED: Rubbed on with swab and allowed to cure overnight

Trial Results:

GRAVIMETRIC RESULTS

NMP- No soil loading.

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
1 60.4200 61.2718 60.4887 0.7831 91.93%
2 59.7665 60.4789 59.8633 0.6156 86.41%
3 60.4839 61.3083 60.6515 0.6568 79.67%
4 59.9056 60.6630 59.9399 0.7231 95.47%
5 60.0143 60.9037 60.1513 0.7524 84.60%
        3.531 87.62%
          6.21%

Inland Tech-EP-921no soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
1 60.6562 61.3097 60.6566 0.6531 99.94%
2 60.7081 61.3835 60.7082 0.6753 99.99%
3 60.3344 61.3955 60.3350 1.0605 99.94%
4 60.7016 61.6404 60.7170 0.9234 98.36%
5 60.3590 61.2314 60.3592 0.8722 99.98%
        4.1845 99.64%
          0.72%

Terpene Tech HTF85B-No soil loading

sample #

 

clean mass (g)

mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
1  59.9047 60.8014 59.9049 0.8965 99.98%
2 60.2195 60.8220 60.2197 0.6023 99.97%
3 60.4770 61.1145 60.4773 0.6372 99.95%
4 60.2211 60.8589 60.2211 0.6378 100.00%
5 60.0083 60.7290 60.0090 0.7200 99.90%
        3.4938 99.96%
          0.04%

NMP-10% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
6 60.4197 61.2909 60.5188 0.7721 88.62%
7 59.7668 60.5674 59.8698 0.6976 87.13%
8 60.4838 61.4613 60.6831 0.7782 79.61%
9 59.9053 60.9938 60.0204 0.9734 89.43%
10 60.1101 60.9607 60.3303 0.6304 74.11%
        3.8517 83.78%
          6.66%

Inland Tech EP-921-10% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
6 60.6562 61.3019 60.6708 0.6311 97.74%
7 60.0137 60.6603 60.0164 0.6439 99.58%
8 60.7082 61.6846 60.7346 0.9500 97.30%
9 60.2780 61.0849 60.2823 0.8026 99.47%
10 60.3344 61.4548 60.4056 1.0492 93.65%
        4.0768 97.55%
          2.41%

Terpene Tech HTF85B-10% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
6 60.539 61.4090 60.5428 0.8662 99.56%
7 60.7019 61.8941 60.7044 1.1897 99.79%
8 60.5755 61.2914 60.5788 0.7126 99.54%
9 60.3591 61.2216 60.3643 0.8573 99.40%
10 59.3007 60.1078 59.3208 0.787 97.51%
        4.4128 99.16%
          0.93%

NMP-20% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
11 60.6562 61.4064 60.6783 0.7281 97.05%
12 60.0137 60.7303 60.0804 0.6499 90.69%
13 60.7082 61.2288 60.7426 0.4862 93.39%
14 60.2780 60.9753 60.4015 0.5738 82.29%
15 60.3344 61.1885 60.4885 0.7000 81.96%
        3.138 89.08%
          6.74%

Inland Tech EP-921-20% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
11 60.1058 60.6858 60.1275 0.5583 96.26%
12 60.2287 61.0412 60.2767 0.7645 94.09%
13 60.5201 61.2172 60.5646 0.6526 93.62%
14 60.2423 60.9690 60.3341 0.6349 87.37%
15 59.9511 60.6721 60.0110 0.6611 91.69%
        3.2714 92.61%
          3.35%

Terpene Tech HTF85B-20% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
11 59.9047 60.7873 59.9083 0.8790 99.59%
12 60.2195 60.9210 60.2228 0.6982 99.53%
13 60.4770 61.0192 60.4990 0.5202 95.94%
14 60.2211 61.0052 60.2619 0.7433 94.80%
15 60.0083 60.7387 60.0424 0.6963 95.33%
        3.5370 97.04%
          2.34%

NMP-30% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
16 60.5386 61.7741 60.7543 1.0198 82.54%
17 60.7016 61.9505 61.2649 0.6856 54.90%
18 60.5752 61.7028 60.9753 0.7275 64.52%
19 60.3590 61.2255 60.7621 0.4634 53.48%
20 59.9047 60.9930 60.4955 0.4975 45.71%
        3.3938 60.23%
          14.15%

Inland Tech EP-921-30% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
16 60.6562 61.6654 60.8742 0.7912 78.40%
17 60.0137 61.1050 60.2685 0.8365 76.65%
18 60.7082 61.8099 60.9082 0.9017 81.85%
19 60.2780 61.4399 60.5666 0.8733 75.16%
20 60.3344 61.2438 60.5804 0.6634 72.95%
        4.0661 77.00%
          3.37%

Terpene Tech HTF85B-30% soil loading

sample # clean mass (g) mass with contamination (g) mass after cleaning (g) contaminant removed (g) Percent Removal
16 60.4197 61.4393 60.5603 0.8790 86.21%
17 59.7668 60.6630 59.9172 0.7458 83.22%
18 60.4839 61.5339 60.5702 0.9637 91.78%
19 60.1101 61.3927 60.4882 0.9045 70.52%
20          
        3.493 82.93%
          9.00%

Success Rating:

Results suggest a scale-up feasible match for cleaning chemistry and equipment. Pilot plant study with actual parts recommended.

Conclusion:

All data obtained shows that the HTF85B is the best solvent tested for Coatings Manufacturer and should be tested on a pilot scale level.  Phase III testing will focus on determining the most effective aqueous cleaner (U.S. Polychem & General chemical products).

Save Report as a PDF