Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors
Trial Purpose:
7th contaminant cleaning
Date Run:
04/11/2002Experiment Procedure:
Thirteen preweighed coupons were coated with a parrafin wax, by heating the wax with a Master Appliance heat gun and rubbing the coupons with the hot wax. Once cooled, coupons were reweighed. Five coupons were clipped to wire racks and immersed into the Flow-Matic machine and cleaned for 1 minutes using ultrasonics at 92 F, removed and rinsed in a tap water spray and re-immersed into the ultrasonics for an additional 1 minute followed by a second 5 second rinse. The coupons were then dried using an air knife for 15 seconds. A second set of five coupons followed the same cleaning cycle except they were hung on a wire stand and immersed into a Crest 40 kHz ultrasonic tank. The final three coupons were cleaned in water using stir-bar agitation, rinsed with the spray and dried with air knives.
Trial Results:
Comparison of the two processes revealed that both system were ineffective at removing the wax from the stainless steel coupons.
Table 1. Cleaning Efficiencies
Process | Flow-Matic | Traditional |
-0.28 | 0.00 | |
-0.21 | 0.42 | |
2.46 | 0.16 | |
-0.94 | 0.68 | |
-0.96 | 0.04 | |
Average | 0.01 | 0.26 |
Std Dev | 1.41 | 0.29 |
Water in the immersion cleaning removed about the same amount of wax as the ultrasonic systems.
Wax
-0.32
-0.42
-0.14
-0.30
0.14
Success Rating:
A follow up test, usually based on company input.Conclusion:
Neither system was effective in cleaning the wax.