Project #1 / Central Metal Finishing / Clients / Media

Name

Project #1

Test Objective

To identify alternative cleaners for removing oil and smut from parts prior to plating.

Witnessed

No

Confidential

No

Help Implementing

No

Submission Date

08/16/2000

Representatives

Chris Ford

Substrates

Steel

Sample Type

Product Use

Percentages Cleaned

Weight Min

Weight Max

Approximate Size

6 x 6 inches

Approximate Size ID

Small

Weight Range ID

Less than 1 lb

Shape

Rough

Hardness

Hard

Shape Type

Simple

Return Samples

No

Return Sample Address

Contaminants

Cutting/Tapping Fluids
Lubricating/Lapping Oils
Dirt
Oil

Samples Available

No

Pre Clean Manufacturing Step

received from mfr

Post Clean Manufacturing Step

plating

Parts Cleaned Per Week

Parts Cleaned Per Bath

Frequency

40

PSI

Equipments

Ultrasonics
Vapor Degreasing

Vendor

Cleaning Chemicals

Potassium Hydroxide, Hexylene glycol

Concentration

Cleaning Temp

Cleaning Time

Cleaning Water Type

Problems With Current Method

Does not remove all of the oil and smut (black coating). Results in high reject rate (30%).

Purpose of Cleaning

To prepare for plating

Rinse Time

Rinse Temp

Rinse Water Type

Drying Method

No relation

Drying Time

Drying Temp

Storage Type ID

Used Immediately

How Stored

How Long Stored

Analysis Method

Visual

Performance Test

Comments or Concerns

Summary

Three cleaners were tested, the Oakite product had the best ranking visually and from the wipe test.
Envirosolutions was the second cleanest looking part but was third in the wipe test. Hazwell was third best visually and second with the wipe test

Implementation

No

In Progress

No

Technolog Transfer

No

Analysis Only

No

Part Picture

Yes

Name	Class	Section
Trial #0	Trial	3
Trial #1	Trial	3

Default object view. Click to create a custom template, Node ID: 4372, Object ID: 4371

Project #1