SURFACE SOLUTIONS LABORATORY INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES in CLEANING

1
SURFACE SOLUTIONS LABORATORYINNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGIES in CLEANING

• No Chemistry Cleaning

Jason Marshall Manager of Laboratory
Testing Surface Solutions Lab
2
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES-Whats New, Useful,
Different and Most of Us Dont Know About
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Flo-Matic A No Chemistry Parts Cleaning
  Machine

3
No Chemistry Parts Cleaning
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• System Review
• How it works
• Laboratory Review
• Preliminary testing
• Site Visits
• Manufacturer of System
• User of System

4
How does No-Chemistry Cleaning Really Work?
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• For years, workers have noticed that an emulsion
  of organic soil was formed on parts when they
  were bombarded with ultrasonic-induced pressure
  waves in batch cleaning tanks.
• Flo-Matic discovered how to provide those
  pressure waves in a continuous process, and how
  to rinse off the water-soil emulsion.
• No-chemistry cleaning produces an emulsion and
  rinses it from parts.

5
How is the Cleaning Done so Fast?
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• No-chemistry cleaning is fast because the steps
  of which it is comprised can be done quickly
• Form an emulsion of soil and water due to the
  action of pressure waves produced by ultrasonic
  transducers. Because sound waves travel at the
  speed of sound in water, this step takes just a
  few seconds.
• Rinse that emulsion from parts. This step takes
  just a few seconds because the emulsion is only
  loosely bound to the part surface. The final
  rinse is done in air.
• Contrast this with conventional aqueous cleaning
• Diffusion of detergents through soil mixtures
  takes minutes
• Chemical attack of metal surfaces can take
  minutes
• Velocities of pressure sprays are seldom more
  than 50 fps.

6
Is the System Limited by the Brand of Ultrasonics?
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Flo-Matics No Chemistry ultrasonic cleaning
  process works well with any brand of ultrasonic
  transducers.
• It has been tested with transducers from
• Branson Ultrasonics
• CAE Blackstone
• CREST Ultrasonics
• Telsonics
• Ultrasonic Power
• Flo-Matic purchases product from all these firms
  based on price and availability.

7
How Does the System Manage Water-Soluble Soils?
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Basically, by adding additional evaporator
  capacity.
• The purpose of the second evaporator is to
  increase capacity for water purification, so as
  to minimize changes of re-infecting parts.
• Water soluble soils do form water-soil emulsions
  when bombarded by pressure waves generated by
  ultrasonic transducers.
• But these emulsions are very unstable relative to
  the emulsions of water and oil-soluble soils.
• Soon, oil soluble soil is dissolved in the
  cleaning bath, and can re-infect parts.

8
What Happens to the Water Dried From my Parts?
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• It is recovered for reuse.
• High velocity air expanding from a compressed air
  line, impacts your parts and dislodges water
  sheets and droplets. There is little evaporation.
• The rapidly moving air, containing entrained
  liquid, flows downward and impinges upon a baffle
  made of perforated metal. The water droplets hit
  the baffle, are separated from the air, collect
  in a sheet, and drain back into the oil
  separation tank.
• The moving air is vented to the work room through
  another set of baffles.

9
Added Benefits
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• What you dont expect to get is a soil removal
  and soil management system
• No-chemistry technology allows shrinkage of
  process vessels in a cleaning machine
• Waste water is collected in two ways
• The emulsion of soil in water is fed from the
  ultrasonic bath to a small evaporator
• Tramp oil is removed from the machine by impact
  with pressurized water and separated from the
  water by gravity

10
Systems Management
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Manages your parts, the soils removed from them,
  and about 25 gallons of water
• Fills itself with tap water.
• Removes soil from your parts with
  ultrasonic-driven pressure waves, and uses no
  cleaning chemistry.
• Rinses and dries your parts, and recovers latent
  water.
• Boils 3 gallons of dirty water per hour to
  produce 3 gallons of distilled water, and a
  soil-water concentrate.
• Removes tramp insoluble soil upstream of the
  cleaning operation and produces nearly water-free
  oil.
• Removes heat and maintains the proper cleaning
  temperature.

11
Process Function Management
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Minimize the number of sensors which could
  provide data to the PLC.
• Directly control all possible process functions
  via equipment design rather via computer action.
• Eliminate, where possible indirect control via
  time delays. Instead time delays are used to
  back-up sensors.
• This approach is based on the belief that the
  system which is more simply designed has the
  least chance of failure.

12
Process Control Responsibilities
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Flo-Matic cleaning machine will remove soil from
  parts, separate oil-soluble soil from water as
  nearly pure soil, and concentrate both
  oil-soluble and water-soluble soils in the
  evaporator.
• The user must drain the concentrated soils from
  the evaporator and collect the nearly pure soil
  from the oil separator.

13
Process Flow
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Flo-Matic cleaning equipment are arranged in
  three main process flow loops. They are
• CIRCULATION AROUND WASH TANK
• FEED OF SOIL EMULSION TO EVAPORATOR
• TRAMP OIL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
• Please note that the main cleaning function does
  NOT involve one of these loops. These loops deal
  chiefly with soil management.

14
CIRCULATION AROUND WASH TANK

• This loop has three roles to play
• Rinsing of the emulsion from parts by spraying
  them with water from a set of nozzles.
• Removal of heat of vaporization. Water,
  containing emulsion and soil, is purified by
  distillation. The steam and condensate are
  returned to the wash tank through an air-driven
  cooler.
• Control of temperature in wash tank. This can
  have a major impact of cleaning efficiency.
• Flow rate is quite high contents of the wash
  tank are turned over about every 30.

15
FEED OF SOIL EMULSION TO EVAPORATOR
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• This loop has two roles to play
• Separation of water from the water-soil emulsion
  and soil mixture circulated within the wash tank.
• Purification of 3 gal per hr of water, and return
  of distilled water to the wash tank. Contents of
  the wash tank are purified about twice per day.
• Without this loop, concentration of emulsion and
  soil would buildup within the wash tank causing
  cleaning quality to decline.
• Consistent operation of the evaporator produces
  consistent cleaning quality.

16
TRAMP OIL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Tramp oil is that contaminating the cleaning
  machine, but not associated with parts.
• This loop has five roles to play
• Removal of BOTH water-soluble and water-insoluble
  oils - at nearly any rate of oil intrusion. It is
  not necessary to know which type of oil has
  intruded.
• Protection of the cleaning integrity of wash
  tank.
• Collection and removal of large and small
  particles.
• Collection of water drainage from unit -- drying
  section, for example.
• Central feed point of waste materials to
  evaporator.

17
Desired Outcome of Cleaning Process
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• CLEANING
• Parts contain no raw (untreated or unemulsified)
  soil. Crevices are free of smut or oils.
• RINSING
• There should be no water-spotting on ferrous
  parts. There should be no stains or dry
  shadows. There should be no free emulsion of
  soil in water.
• DRYING
• Parts should be dry to the touch. This means
  that they should contain no visible moisture. As
  well, they should feel dry. Some hard-to-get-at
  crevices may contain tiny droplets.

18
Causes of Poor Performance
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• CLEANING
• Smut or unemulsified soil
• Crevices not clean
• Free soil on parts
• RINSING
• Water-spotting on ferrous parts
• Stains or dry shadows
• Free emulsion of soil in water
• DRYING
• Visible moisture
• Feel wet
• Droplets in crevices

• CAUSE
• Sonic contact too short
• Flow-through holes, or parts not exposed
  adequately
• Oily air used for drying
• Evaporator not producing distillate
• Rinse nozzles dont cover parts
• Insufficient rinse velocity
• No air contact, or water reflections
• Nozzles not aimed properly, or wet air
• Inadequate air velocity, or above.

19
Performance Limitations

• There are two major limitations of good
  performance.
• Failure of a sensor or component. This can be
  actual sensor or component failure, or
  misalignment, pluggage, fouling, etc. of that
  component.
• Change of the cleaning job. This can be change of
  soil, part or part flow rate, or tramp soil
  intrusion rate.

20
SSL Evaluation of Cleaning Process
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Cleaning Cycle Parameters
• Two-1 minute cleanings with ultrasonics
• Two-5 second tap water spray rinses
• One-15 second air knives
• One-15 second hot air drying (if needed)
• Normally parts would run automatically in
  Flo-Matic System
• Problems with set up of system
• Modified to run samples manually

21
Laboratory Control Study
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Cleaning Cycle Parameters
• Immersion with stir-bar agitation
• 92 F
• Two-1 minute cleanings
• Two-5 second tap water spray rinses
• One-15 second air knives

22
Laboratory Evaluation 1
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Comparison of Flo-Matic to Traditional Method
• Bencyn B-5186 (64742-52-5, 9003-29-6, 39464-69-2,
  63197-48-8)
• Heavy metal working fluid
• Flo-Matic results 85.7 removal
• Traditional results 66.8 removal
• Control results
• 75.9 removal

• Previous testing on the heavy metal working fluid
  yielded limited success
• 5 minute immersion cleaning
• Tap water bath rinse
• Heat gun drying
• 6 Aqueous cleaners _at_ 5
• 56 - 80 removal
• 5 Semi-Aqueous cleaners
• Only 2 effective cleaners
• 97 99 removal

23
Laboratory Evaluation 2
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Comparison of Flo-Matic to Traditional Method
• The Valvoline Co, Tectyl 505 (8052-41-3)
• Rust Preventative
• Flo-Matic results 99.75 removal
• Traditional results
• 98.3 removal
• Control results
• 67.56 removal

• Previous testing on the rust preventative only
  one effective product
• 10 minute immersion
• Tap water bath rinse
• Heat gun drying
• 6 Aqueous cleaners _at_ 5
• Effective Cleaner (Caustic) 99.4
• Other 5 12-33

24
Laboratory Evaluation 3
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Comparison of Flo-Matic to Traditional Method
• C.A. Wood C-Eblis (64742-53-6, 64742-52-5)
• Cutting Fluid
• Flo-Matic results 99.03 removal
• Traditional results
• 98.57 removal
• Control results
• 93.45 removal

• Previous testing on the cutting fluid
• Immersion/Soak
• Steel
• 8 Alkaline Aqueous products
• 65-81 removal
• Ultrasonics
• Steel
• 5 Alkaline Aqueous, 5, 5 min
• 98-100 removal
• Water 55 removal
• Semi Aqueous Cleaning
• Teflon
• Full Strength, 68 F, 1 minute
• 2 Effective Products
• Agitated Immersion

25
Laboratory Evaluation 4
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Comparison of Flo-Matic to Traditional Method
• Castrol Inc. Braycote 601
• Perfluoropolyether grease
• Flo-Matic results 24.06 removal
• Traditional results
• 53.57 removal
• Control results
• 3.61 removal

• Previous testing on the grease
• 5 Minute Immersion, 150 F
• Tap water rinse
• Hot air drying
• 7 Alkaline Aqueous Cleaners
• lt4 removal
• 2 Semi-Aqueous products
• lt 8 removal
• 5 Minute Ultrasonics
• lt6
• 25 minutes, Water w/ Ultrasonics
• 42 removal
• Low Pressure(15psi) parts washer
• Effective after 30 minute cleaning cycle.

26
Laboratory Evaluation 5
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Comparison of Flo-Matic to Traditional Method
• ITW Devcon Safetap
• Stick Grease
• Flo-Matic results 89.36 removal
• Traditional results
• 91.37 removal
• Control results
• 78.61 removal

• Previous testing on the grease
• 5 min Immersion, 120 F
• Tap water rinse
• Heat gun drying
• 4 Alkaline Aqueous, 5
• 69-100 removal

27
Laboratory Evaluation 6
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Comparison of Flo-Matic to Traditional Method
• Solutia Gelva 2895 (50862-46-9 141-78-6
  142-82-5 67-63-0 64-17-5 108-05-4)
• Multipolymer resin
• Flo-Matic results
• 12.59 removal
• Traditional results
• 12.96 removal
• Control results
• 12.61 removal

• Previous testing on the grease
• 10 min immersion, 120 F
• Tap water rinse
• Air dry
• 7 Alkaline Aqueous, 5-10
• 4 Semi Aqueous, 10
• -2 - 10 removal
• 2 hr immersion, 120 F w/ wipe
• Tap water rinse
• Air dry
• 2 Semi-Aqueous
• 70-99 removal

28
Laboratory Evaluation 7
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Comparison of Flo-Matic to Traditional Method
• Paraffin Wax
• Wax
• Flo-Matic results
• 0.01 removal
• Traditional results
• 0.26 removal
• Control results
• -0.30 removal

• Previous testing on the grease
• 5 min immersion,
• Tap water rinse, Air dry
• 5 Alkaline Aqueous,5,130 F
• 2 Semi Aqueous 100, 68F
• lt2 removal
• 5 min ultrasonic
• Tap water rinse, Air dry
• 1 Semi Aqueous, 100 68 F
• 99.74
• Water (10 min)
• 4.69

29
Laboratory Evaluation Summary
Jason Marshall SSL 2002
30
On-Site Evaluation 1
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• SSL Visit to Manufacturer of System
• Cleaned steel coupons and screws
• Moderate to difficult soil
• Chem Ecol Insoluble cutting oil
• lt 15 minute cleaning cycle time
• Visibly clean
• Acceptable to job shop needs and requirements

31
On-Site Evaluation 2
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• SSL Visit to Company Using System
• Tough soil
• Adjustments to initial system to handle soil
  separation
• Cleaning improved over previous system

32
Innovative Cleaning Processes Are Available for
Your Testing Needs
Jason Marshall SSL 2002

• Flo-Matic
• No Chemistry Cleaning
• www.flo-matic.com
• Contact SSL to Arrange for Your Cleaning Trial
• 978-934-3133 978-934-3249
• Website www.cleanersolutions.org
• Email sclab_at_cleanersolutions.org