Browse Client Types

Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors

Trial Number 0

Client Number 131

Project Number 3

Trial Purpose:

To find the best fit product for cleaning Leach Garner’s #4 Master draw 419TT from copper and stainless steel surfaces meant to resemble the cleaning of precious metals.

Date Run:

08/29/2016

Experiment Procedure:

Coupons of stainless steel and copper were selected and arranged on trays, so that each cleaner had an assigned set of each surface. Before taking initial weights coupons were wiped down with Kimwipes. After taking weights the coupons were promptly soiled and reweighed. All cleaners were gathered in respective bottles and beakers. A stir bar was used in conjunction with a heating plate equipped to stir the solutions. The coupons were added to the beakers three of a kind at one time, and then allowed to sit in the stirred solution at room temperature for 15 minutes, in 5 minute increments while observations were taken. Finally, clean weights were taken at the end of all the testing.

Trial Results:

Cleaner Substrate Initial wt. Final wt. % Cont Removed  % Overall
Fluosolv CX Stainless steel 0.2041 0.0165 91.92  
Fluosolv CX Stainless steel 0.2693 0.0233 91.35 94.30
Fluosolv CX Stainless steel 0.3391 0.0013 99.62  
Fluosolv CX Copper 0.2048 0.0297 85.5  
Fluosolv CX Copper 0.2924 0.0431 85.26 90.02
Fluosolv CX Copper 0.1567 0.0011 99.3  
Fluosolv NC Stainless steel 0.2559 0.0431 83.16  
Fluosolv NC Stainless steel 0.2239 0.0478 78.65 84.40
Fluosolv NC Stainless steel 0.1695 0.0146 91.39  
Fluosolv NC Copper 0.1929 0.0349 81.91  
Fluosolv NC Copper 0.2416 0.0440 81.79 81.88
Fluosolv NC Copper 0.1673 0.0302 81.95  
Vetrel Sion Stainless steel 0.1358 0.0006 99.56  
Vetrel Sion Stainless steel 0.1155 0.0005 99.57 99.59
Vertel Sion Stainless steel 0.1335 0.0005 99.63  
Vertrel Sion Copper 0.0629 0.0101 83.94  
Vertrel Sion Copper 0.1927 0.0112 94.19 89.40
Vertrel Sion Copper 0.1593 0.0158 90.08  
Honeywell PF Stainless steel 0.2087 0.0861 58.74  
Honeywell PF Stainless steel 0.1095 0.0317 71.05 65.7
Honeywell PF Stainless steel 0.1845 0.0603 67.32  
Honeywell PF Copper 0.2050 0.1010 50.73  
Honeywell PF Copper 0.3218 0.2171 32.54 48.69
Honeywell PF Copper 0.1951 0.0726 62.79  

Success Rating:

Results successful using TACT (time, agitation, concentration, and temperature, as well as rinsing and drying) and/or other cleaning chemistries examined.

Conclusion:

When the experiment began, the first batch of coupons cleaned still contained wet soil and therefore the removal was easier. The rest of the coupons dried and removal was less facilitated, then. Many of the cleaners left a film behind and white residue after drying. Honeywell’s Solstice PF performed the worst, perhaps because it was cleaned last and the soil had dried so much by then. White residue was visible while the coupons were in the solution, there were no signs of peeling and white residue persisted once the coupons dried. It seemed that not the entire surface was penetrated by the cleaner, as patches of soil were still visible on the coupons. Although percent removals were quite high for most of the cleaners, the visuals were not nearly as satisfactory. In conclusion, the experiment was unsuccessful and further testing will be required. In this case, the next step will be heated immersion with stir bar.

Save Report as a PDF