Trial Purpose:
To evaluate the effectiveness of a solvent and aqueous based cleaners on the removal of acrylic and silicone adhesives from stainless steel coupons using unheated and heated immersion as a replacement for NMP.
Date Run:
02/06/2020Experiment Procedure:
Twelve pre-weighed stainless steel coupons, three for each cleaner, were soiled for each contaminant tested. Approximately 0.5 g of the soil was applied using a hand held swab. Each set of coupons were placed into a beaker and immersed for 30 minutes. During this process, any noticeable soil removal was observed at ten minute intervals. Coupons were allowed to dry for 24 hours, and afterwards final weights were recorded as well as efficiency of removal was calculated for each coupon cleaned. This process was then repeated with the application of a heated immersion.
Trial Results:
Table 1: Unheated Immersion Acrylic
| Cleaner | Conc. | Initial wt. of cont. (g) | Final wt. of cont. (g) | % Cont. Removed | % Average |
| Aquavantage 1400 GD | 10% | 0.5078 | 0.4125 | 18.77 | 19.04 |
| 0.4132 | 0.3398 | 17.76 | |||
| 0.7461 | 0.5924 | 20.60 | |||
| Surface Clean 930 | 2% | 0.4284 | 0.3319 | 22.53 | 26.40 |
| 0.5068 | 0.3369 | 33.52 | |||
| 0.4074 | 0.3131 | 23.15 | |||
| SC Aircraft and Metal Cleaner | 1% | 0.3893 | 0.2876 | 26.12 | 25.95 |
| 0.5171 | 0.4175 | 19.26 | |||
| 0.636 | 0.4296 | 32.45 | |||
| Sta-Sol® ESS 160 | 100% | 0.4052 | 0.3683 | 9.11 | 18.67 |
| 0.5334 | 0.4288 | 19.61 | |||
| 0.5471 | 0.3977 | 27.31 |
Table 2: Unheated Immersion Silicone
| Cleaner | Conc. | Initial wt. of cont. (g) | Final wt. of cont. (g) | % Cont. Removed | % Average |
| Aquavantage 1400 GD | 10% | 0.5603 | 0.502 | 10.41 | 7.24 |
| 0.591 | 0.5456 | 7.68 | |||
| 0.552 | 0.532 | 3.62 | |||
| Surface Clean 930 | 2% | 0.4133 | 0.391 | 5.40 | 6.06 |
| 0.6106 | 0.5706 | 6.55 | |||
| 0.519 | 0.4866 | 6.24 | |||
| SC Aircraft and Metal Cleaner | 1% | 0.5225 | 0.4986 | 4.57 | 5.21 |
| 0.5579 | 0.5226 | 6.33 | |||
| 0.4982 | 0.4747 | 4.72 | |||
| Sta-Sol® ESS 160 | 100% | 0.5504 | 0.5473 | 0.56 | 1.78 |
| 0.5818 | 0.5639 | 3.08 | |||
| 0.4602 | 0.4524 | 1.69 |
Table 3: Heated Immersion Acrylic
| Cleaner | Conc. | Temp. | Initial wt. of cont. | Final wt. of cont. | % Cont. Removed | % Average |
| Aquavantage 1400 GD | 10% | 145° F | 0.4011 | 0.291 | 27.45 | 25.67 |
| 0.4632 | 0.37 | 20.12 | ||||
| 0.5516 | 0.3892 | 29.44 | ||||
| Surface Clean 930 | 2% | 90° F | 0.5563 | 0.4179 | 24.88 | 26.98 |
| 0.293 | 0.212 | 27.65 | ||||
| 0.5133 | 0.3674 | 28.42 | ||||
| SC Aircraft and Metal Cleaner | 1% | 140° F | 0.4291 | 0.3647 | 15.01 | 16.27 |
| 0.3131 | 0.264 | 15.68 | ||||
| 0.3738 | 0.3061 | 18.11 | ||||
| Sta-Sol® ESS 160 | 100% | 130° F | 0.5067 | 0.379 | 25.20 | 18.82 |
| 0.3531 | 0.3376 | 4.39 | ||||
| 0.5076 | 0.3712 | 26.87 |
Table 4: Heated Immersion Silicone
| Cleaner | Conc. | Temp. | Initial wt. of cont. | Final wt. of cont. | % Cont. Removed | % Average |
| Aquavantage 1400 GD | 10% | 145° F | 0.6875 | 0.6757 | 1.72 | 5.67 |
| 0.6501 | 0.6277 | 3.45 | ||||
| 0.3591 | 0.3165 | 11.86 | ||||
| Surface Clean 930 | 2% | 90° F | 0.504 | 0.5 | 0.79 | 1.80 |
| 0.5575 | 0.5328 | 4.43 | ||||
| 0.5587 | 0.5577 | 0.18 | ||||
| SC Aircraft and Metal Cleaner | 1% | 140° F | 0.4012 | 0.2981 | 25.70 | 11.25 |
| 0.634 | 0.6167 | 2.73 | ||||
| 0.7278 | 0.689 | 5.33 | ||||
| Sta-Sol | 100% | 130° F | 0.5114 | 0.4913 | 3.93 | 3.79 |
| 0.4732 | 0.452 | 4.48 | ||||
| 0.5676 | 0.5508 | 2.96 |
| Manufacturer | Product Name | Immersion Method | Acrylic Adhesive | Silicone Adhesive |
| Efficiency % | Efficiency % | |||
| Brulin Holding Company | Aquavantage 1400 GD (10%) | Unheated | 19.04 | 7.24 |
| Heated (145° F) | 25.67 | 5.67 | ||
| International Products | Surface Clean 930 (2%) | Unheated | 26.40 | 6.06 |
| Heated (90° F) | 26.98 | 1.80 | ||
| Gemtek | SC Aircraft and Metal Cleaner (1%) | Unheated | 25.95 | 5.21 |
| Heated (140° F) | 16.27 | 11.25 | ||
| JR Hess | Sta-Sol® ESS 160 | Unheated | 18.67 | 1.78 |
| Heated (130° F) | 18.82 | 3.79 |
Success Rating:
Test showed little or no promise.Conclusion:
All of the chemistries evaluated were not efficient in the removal of acrylic or silicone adhesive in both unheated and heated immersion, but an improvement was seen with heat. The next step will be to apply agitation using ultrasonics. Silicone will be the only contaminant tested going forward due to it being the hardest contaminant to remove thus far.
