Browse Client Types

Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors

Trial Number 3

Trial Purpose:

To use OSSE to determine cleanliness of parts cleaned with new products

Date Run:

10/18/2002

Experiment Procedure:

Two products from the previous trial were selected for cleaning supplied parts. One was diluted to 5% and the other was diluted to 3% using DI water in 1500 ml beakers. Both products were heated to 130 F on a hot plate. Each solution was degassed for 5 minutes in a Crest 40 kHz ultrasonic tank. OSEE readings for five supplied parts were recorded using a PET SQM 100. Six readings were made for each side (Top-knife edge and Bottom). One part was then cleaned using Acetone. Two parts were cleaned in each solution for 6 minutes using ultrasonic energy. Parts were rinsed in DI water at 120 F for 15 seconds followed by drying with a Master Appliance Heat Gun at 500 F for 30 seconds. Once dry parts were dry, OSEE readings were recorded. The parts were then visibly inspected and wiped with a white towel soaked with Acetone to determine cleanliness.

Contaminant: Milacron Marketing Company CIMTECH® 310 metal working fluid concentrate (102-71-6, 78-96-6, 26896-20-8)

Trial Results:

The parts cleaned in the ultrasonic tank resulted in higher OSEE readings than the Acetone wiped part. All cleaned parts had higher average readings than the initial dirty readings. The average Dirty reading was found to be 209 with a standard deviation of 35. The clean readings had a higher standard deviation but were still greater than the dirty readings. The average Clean OSEE readings was 578 with a standard deviation of 220. The table below lists all readings made, averages for top and bottom, overall part average and finally the total average.

Table 1. OSEE Readings.

Cleaner Part OSEE Dirty T OSEE Dirty B OSEE Cleaned T OSEE Cleaned B
Acetone 1 154 195 277 349
    197 219 369 378
    229 208 361 390
    252 221 250 363
    261 203 361 498
    189 263 436 440
  Average 214 218 342 403
  Overall Ave 216   373  
Citrinox 2 153 108 882 262
    168 177 847 652
    193 244 833 871
    213 285 695 799
    210 272 782 781
    223 233 350 963
  Average 193 220 732 721
  Overall Ave 207   726  
Citrinox 3 180 175 730 279
    213 186 840 607
    209 194 810 542
    181 184 727 648
    254 212 774 624
    258 215 902 758
  Average 216 194 797 576
  Overall Ave 205   687  
Daraclean 4 162 183 574 278
    204 230 414 295
    218 247 443 574
    188 246 853 630
    202 208 281 519
    245 189 429 623
  Average 203 217 499 487
  Overall Ave 210   493  
Daraclean 5 133 182 451 604
    183 192 962 336
    207 195 960 665
    192 201 424 637
    261 225 962 453
    250 248 236 674
  Average 204 207 666 562
  Overall Ave 206   614  
    Total Dirty Average Total Clean Average
    209   578  

When the parts were wiped, only one part was thought to have any noticeable black residue on it.  The one part was cleaned in the Citranox. Upon further review under a microscope, the mark was indistinguishable from other sections of the wipe, and therefore the mark was considered to not be dirt.  The wipe that was used to clean the part with Acetone clearly had dirt all over.

Success Rating:

A follow up test, usually based on company input.

Conclusion:

Both cleaners were found to be very effective in removing the black dirt from the supplied parts.

Save Report as a PDF