where expertise comes together - since 1996

Web's Largest Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)
Open Access Database (Conference Proceedings, Articles, News), Exhibition, Forum, Network

All Forum Boards
Technical Discussions >
hydrophilic remover
Career Discussions
Job Offers
Job Seeks
Classified Ads
About NDT.net
Articles & News

DASEL SISTEMAS
Our Phased Array equipments, based on SITAU Technology, are among the PAS highest performance in the market.

1041 views
08:05 May-09-2008
diego
hydrophilic remover

hi, I just want to ask regarding the effectiveness of hydrophilic remover, according to military manual once that the part after you remove from hydrophilc remover the emulsification stop but the level 3 said once you remove the part from hydrophilic remover the action never stop, the hydrophilic remover action is dillution not diffusion like lipophilic emusifier, which one is correct?
tnx!


 
08:55 May-09-2008
theo micottis
Re: hydrophilic remover Hi Diego, I think hydrophilic remover is less hazardous than lipophilic remover.Its remover action is not diluition, it contains surface-active agents so it works by interface contact.The application time is less critical because it removes only excess of penetrant, it doesn't seep into the crack.The washable penetrant will be only excess of penetrant.
YOURS SINCERELY


 
05:21 May-10-2008
DJ Kallhof
Re: hydrophilic remover Whether you are using a 5% spray or a 20% dip application, once the intended dilution of the emulsifier has been diluted further by spraying or dipping with fresh water, the emulsification process has been rendered ineffective.

----------- Start Original Message -----------
: hi, I just want to ask regarding the effectiveness of hydrophilic remover, according to military manual once that the part after you remove from hydrophilc remover the emulsification stop but the level 3 said once you remove the part from hydrophilic remover the action never stop, the hydrophilic remover action is dillution not diffusion like lipophilic emusifier, which one is correct?
: tnx!
------------ End Original Message ------------




 
06:25 May-10-2008
DJ Kallhof
Re: hydrophilic remover Emulsification time for a specific piece must be established by experimentation. If emulsification time is excessive, penetrant WILL be removed from flaws, making detection impossible. These are excerps from the Metals Handbook, ninth edition. I would suggest, anyone who feels emulsification time is anything less then the most critical time in the post emulsified inspection process, go back to the books. Have a nice day.
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Hi Diego, I think hydrophilic remover is less hazardous than lipophilic remover.Its remover action is not diluition, it contains surface-active agents so it works by interface contact.The application time is less critical because it removes only excess of penetrant, it doesn't seep into the crack.The washable penetrant will be only excess of penetrant.
: YOURS SINCERELY
------------ End Original Message ------------




 
06:31 May-30-2008
diego
Re: hydrophilic remover yes I know, my question is if you removed the part from the emulsifier tank according to military manual the emulsification actions could stop, but other said even though you remove it from the emulsifier tank the emulsification action still working, which one is correct?
according to theory hydrophilic remover is not miscible to the oil unlike lipophilic the mode of action are dilution and drain, how about for the hydrophilic remover the action is detergent action.

----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Emulsification time for a specific piece must be established by experimentation. If emulsification time is excessive, penetrant WILL be removed from flaws, making detection impossible. These are excerps from the Metals Handbook, ninth edition. I would suggest, anyone who feels emulsification time is anything less then the most critical time in the post emulsified inspection process, go back to the books. Have a nice day.
: : Hi Diego, I think hydrophilic remover is less hazardous than lipophilic remover.Its remover action is not diluition, it contains surface-active agents so it works by interface contact.The application time is less critical because it removes only excess of penetrant, it doesn't seep into the crack.The washable penetrant will be only excess of penetrant.
: : YOURS SINCERELY
------------ End Original Message ------------




 


© NDT.net - The Web's Largest Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT) ISSN 1435-4934

Open Access Database, |Conference Proceedings| |Articles| |News| |Exhibition| |Forum| |Professional Network|