7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
1/59
Penetrant Testing
Course Material
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/cc_pt_index.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/cc_pt_index.htm7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
2/59
troductio
Introduction and History of Penetrant Inspection
Liquid Penetrant inspection is a method that is used to reveal surface
breaking flaws by bleedout of a colored or fluorescent dye from the flaw.The technique is based on the ability of a liquid to be drawn into a "clean"
surface breaking flaw by capillary action. After a period of time called the"dwell," ecess surface penetrant is removed and a developer applied.
This acts as a blotter. !t draws the penetrant from the flaw to reveal its
presence. olored #contrast$ penetrants require good white light while
fluorescent penetrants need to be used in darkened conditions with anultraviolet "black light".
A very early surface inspection technique involved the rubbing of carbon black on gla%ed pottery, whereby
the carbon black would settle in surface cracks rendering them visible. Later, it became the practice in
railway workshops to eamine iron and steel components by the "oil and whiting" method. !n this method, aheavy oil commonly available in railway workshops was diluted with kerosene in large tanks so that
locomotive parts such as wheels could be submerged. After removal and careful cleaning, the surface was
then coated with a fine suspension of chalk in alcohol so that a white surface layer was formed once thealcohol had evaporated. The ob&ect was then vibrated by being struck with a hammer, causing the residual
oil in any surface cracks to seep out and stain the white coating. This method was in use from the latter part
of the '(th century to approimately '()*, when the magnetic particle method was introduced and found tobe more sensitive for ferromagnetic iron and steels.
A different #though related$ method was introduced in the '()*+s. The surface under eamination was coated
with a lacquer, and after drying, the sample was caused to vibrate by the tap of a hammer. The vibration
causes the brittle lacquer layer to crack generally around surface defects. The brittle lacquer #stress coat$ hasbeen used primarily to show the distribution of stresses in a part and not for finding defects.
any of these early developments were carried out by agnaflu in hicago, !L, -A in association with
wit%er /ros., leveland, 01, -A. ore effective penetrating oils containing highly visible #usually red$
dyes were developed by agnaflu to enhance flaw detection capability. This method, known as the visibleor color contrast dye penetrant method, is still used quite etensively today. !n '()2, agnaflu introduced
the 3yglo system of penetrant inspection where fluorescentdyes were added to the liquid penetrant. These
dyes would then fluoresce when eposed to ultraviolet light #sometimes referred to as "black light"$rendering indications from cracks and other surface flaws more readily visible to inspectors.
Why a Penetrant Inspection Improves the Detectability of Flaws
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt1.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt2.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt3.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt4.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt1.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt2.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt3.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/Introduction/Keywords/pt4.htm7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
3/59
The advantage that a liquid penetrant inspection #LP!$ offers over an unaided visual inspection is that it
makes defects easier to see for the inspector. There are basically two ways that a penetrant inspection processmakes flaws more easily seen. 4irst, LP! produces a flaw indication that is much larger and easier for the eye
to detect than the flaw itself. any flaws are so small or narrow that they are undetectable by the unaided
eye. 5ue to the physical features of the eye, there is a threshold below which ob&ects cannot be resolved. Thisthreshold of visual acuity is around *.**6 inch for a person with 2*72* vision.
The second way that LP! improves the detectability of a flaw is that it produces aflaw indication with a high level of contrast between the indication and the
background also helping to make the indication more easily seen. 8hen a visibledye penetrant inspection is performed, the penetrant materials are formulated
using a bright red dye that provides for a high level of contrast between the white
developer. !n other words, the developer serves as a high contrast background aswell as a blotter to pull the trapped penetrant from the flaw. 8hen a fluorescent
penetrant inspection is performed, the penetrant materials are formulated to glow
brightly and to give off light at a wavelength that the eye is most sensitive to
under dim lighting conditions.
Additional information on the human eye can be found as below.
isual !cuity of the Human "ye
The eye has a visual acuity threshold below which an ob&ect will go undetected. This threshold varies from
person to person, but as an eample, the case of a person with normal 2*72* vision can be considered. As
light enters the eye through the pupil, it passes through the lens and is pro&ected on the retina at the back ofthe eye. uscles called etraocular muscles move the eyeball in the orbits and allow the image to be focused
on the central retinal or fovea.
The retina is a mosaic of two basic types of photoreceptors9 rods, and cones. :ods are sensitive to blue;green
light with peak sensitivity at a wavelength of )(< nm, and are used for vision under dark or dim conditions.There are three types of cones that give us our basic color vision9 L;cones #red$ with a peak sensitivity of =>)
nm, ;cones #green$ with a peak sensitivity of =66 nm, and ;cones #blue$ with a peak sensitivity of )6?
nm.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
4/59
ones are highly concentrated in a region near the center of the retina called the fovea region. The maimum
concentration of cones is roughly '
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
5/59
4or the case of normal visual acuity the angle Theta is '7>* of a degree. /y bisecting this angle we have a
right triangle with angle Theta72 that is '7'2* of a degree. -sing this right triangle it is easy to calculate thedistance B72 for a given distance d.
B72 C d #tan Theta72$
8hen visually inspecting an ob&ect for a defect such as a crack, the distance #d$ might be around '2 inches.
This would be a comfortable viewing distance. At '2 inches, the normal visual acuity of the human eye is*.**6)( inch. 8hat this means is that if you had alternating black and white lines that were all *.**6)( inch
wide, it would appear to most people as a mass of solid gray.
Contrast #ensitivity
8hen conducting a visible dye penetrant inspection, the contrast sensitivity of the eye is important. ontrast
sensitivity is a measure of how faded or washed out an image can be before it becomes indistinguishablefrom a uniform field. !t has been eperimentally determined that the minimum discernible difference in gray
scale level that the eye can detect is about 2D of full brightness. ontrast sensitivity is a function of the si%e
or spatial frequency of the features in the image. 1owever, this is not a direct relationship as larger ob&ects
are not always easier to see than smaller ob&ects #as demonstrated by the image below$.
!n the image below, the luminance of piels is varied sinusoidally in the hori%ontal direction. The spatial
frequency increases eponentially from left to right. The contrast also varies logarithmically from '**D at
the bottom to about *.=D at the top. The luminance of peaks and troughs remains constant along a givenhori%ontal path through the image. !f the detection of contrast was dictated solely by image contrast, the
alternating bright and dark bars should appear to have equal height everywhere in the image. 1owever, the
bars seem to be taller in the middle of the image.
ampbell, 4. 8. and :obson, E. F. #'(>
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
6/59
The Human "ye$s %esponse to &ight
The three curves in the figure above shows the normali%ed response of an average human eye to various
amounts of ambient light. The shift in sensitivity occurs because two types of photoreceptors called cones
and rods are responsible for the eye+s response to light. The curve on the right shows the eye+s response undernormal lighting conditions and this is called the photopic response. The cones respond to light under these
conditions.
As mentioned previously, cones are composed of three different photo pigments that enable color perception.
This curve peaks at === nanometers, which means that under normal lighting conditions, the eye is mostsensitive to a yellowish;green color. 8hen the light levels drop to near total darkness, the response of the eye
changes significantly as shown by the scotopic response curve on the left. At this level of light, the rods are
most active and the human eye is more sensitive to the light present, and less sensitive to the range of color.:ods are highly sensitive to light but are comprised of a single photo pigment, which accounts for the loss in
ability to discriminate color. At this very low light level, sensitivity to blue, violet, and ultraviolet is
increased, but sensitivity to yellow and red is reduced. The heavier curve in the middle represents the eye+sresponse at the ambient light level found in a typical inspection booth. This curve peaks at ==* nanometers,
which means the eye is most sensitive to yellowish;green color at this light level. 4luorescent penetrant
inspection materials are designed to fluoresce at around ==* nanometers to produce optimal sensitivity under
dim lighting conditions.
:eferences9
:obinson, . E. and chmidt, E. T., 4luorescent Penetrant ensitivity and :emovability ; 8hat the Hye an
ee, a 4luorometer an easure, aterials Hvaluation, Gol. )2, @o.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
7/59
'asic Processing #teps of a &i(uid Penetrant Inspection
'. Surface Preparation: 0ne of the most critical steps of a liquid penetrant inspection is the surface
preparation. The surface must be free of oil, grease, water, or other contaminants that may prevent
penetrant from entering flaws. The sample may also require etching if mechanical operations such as
machining, sanding, or grit blasting have been performed. These and other mechanical operations cansmear metal over the flaw opening and prevent the Penetrant from entering.
2. Penetrant Application:0nce the surface has been thoroughly cleaned and dried, the penetrantmaterial is applied by spraying, brushing, or
immersing the part in a penetrant bath
6. Penetrant Dwell: The Penetrant is left on the
surface for a sufficient time to allow as much
Penetrant as possible to be drawn from or to seepinto a defect. Penetrant dwell time is the total time
that the penetrant is in contact with the part surface.
5well times are usually recommended by the penetrant producers or required by the specification
being followed. The times vary depending on the application, penetrant materials used, the material,the form of the material being inspected, and the type of defect being inspected for. inimum dwell
times typically range from five to >* minutes. Fenerally, there is no harm in using a longer penetrantdwell time as long as the penetrant is not allowed to dry. The ideal dwell time is often determined by
eperimentation and may be very specific to a particular application.
). Excess Penetrant Removal:This is the most delicate part of the inspection procedure because theecess penetrant must be removed from the surface of the sample while removing as little penetrant
as possible from defects. 5epending on the penetrant system used, this step may involve cleaning
with a solvent, direct rinsing with water, or first treating the part with an emulsifier and then rinsingwith water.
=. Developer Application: A thin layer of developer is then applied to the sample to draw penetrant
trapped in flaws back to the surface where it will be visible. 5evelopers come in a variety of forms
that may be applied by dusting #dry powdered$, dipping, or spraying #wet developers$.
>. Indication Development:The developer is allowed to stand on the part surface for a period of time
sufficient to permit the etraction of the trapped penetrant out of any surface flaws. This development
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
8/59
time is usually a minimum of '* minutes. ignificantly longer times may be necessary for tight
cracks.
?. Inspection:!nspection is then performed under appropriate lighting to detect indications from any
flaws which may be present.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
9/59
Frinding cracks
0verload and impact fractures
Porosity
Laps
eams
Pin holes in welds
Lack of fusion or braising along the edge of the bond line
As mentioned above, one of the ma&or limitations of a penetrant inspection is that flaws must be open to thesurface. To learn more about the advantages and disadvantages of LP!, proceed to the net page.
!dvantages and Disadvantages of Penetrant Testing
Like all nondestructive inspection methods, liquid penetrant inspection has both advantages and
disadvantages. The primary advantages and disadvantages when compared to other @5H methods aresummari%ed below.
Primary Advantages
The method has high sensitivity to small surface discontinuities.
The method has few material limitations, i.e. metallic and nonmetallic, magnetic and nonmagnetic,
and conductive and nonconductive materials may be inspected.
Large areas and large volumes of parts7materials can be inspected rapidly and at low cost.
Parts with comple geometric shapes are routinely inspected.
!ndications are produced directly on the surface of the part and constitute a visual representation of
the flaw.
Aerosol spray cans make penetrant materials very portable.
Penetrant materials and associated equipment are relatively inepensive.
Primary Disadvantages
0nly surface breaking defects can be detected.
0nly materials with a relatively nonporous surface can be inspected.
Precleaning is critical since contaminants can mask defects.
etal smearing from machining, grinding, and grit or vapor blasting must be removed prior to LP!.
The inspector must have direct access to the surface being inspected.
urface finish and roughness can affect inspection sensitivity.
ultiple process operations must be performed and controlled.
Post cleaning of acceptable parts or materials is required.
hemical handling and proper disposal is required.
Penetrant Testing Materials
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
10/59
The penetrant materials used today are much more sophisticated than the kerosene and whiting first used by
railroad inspectors near the turn of the 2*th century. Today+s penetrants are carefully formulated to producethe level of sensitivity desired by the inspector. To perform well, a penetrant must possess a number of
important characteristics. A penetrant must9
spread easily over the surface of the material being inspected to provide complete and even coverage.
be drawn into surface breaking defects by capillary action.
remain in the defect but remove easily from the surface of the part.
remain fluid so it can be drawn back to the surface of the part through the drying and developing
steps.
be highly visible or fluoresce brightly to produce easy to see indications.
not be harmful to the material being tested or the inspector.
All penetrant materials do not perform the same and are not
designed to perform the same. Penetrant manufactures have
developed different formulations to address a variety ofinspection applications. ome applications call for the detection
of the smallest defects possible and have smooth surfaces where
the penetrant is easy to remove. !n other applications, there&ectable defect si%e may be larger and a penetrant formulated to
find larger flaws can be used. The penetrants that are used to
detect the smallest defect will also produce the largest amount ofirrelevant indications.
Penetrant materials are classified in the various industry and
government specifications by their physical characteristics and
their performance. Aerospace aterial pecification #A$2>)), !nspection aterial, Penetrant, is now the primary specification used in the -A to control penetrant
materials. 1istorically, ilitary tandard 2='6=, !nspection aterials, Penetrants, has been the primary
document for specifying penetrants but this document is slowly being phased out and replaced by A2>)). 0ther specifications such as AT ')'?, tandard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Haminations, may
also contain information on the classification of penetrant materials but they are generally referred back to
!L;!;2='6= or A 2>)).
Penetrant materials come in two basic types. These types are listed below9
Type ' ; 4luorescent Penetrants
Type 2 ; Gisible Penetrants
4luorescent penetrants contain a dye or several dyes that
fluoresce when eposed to ultraviolet radiation. Gisible
penetrants contain a red dye that provides high contrast againstthe white developer background. 4luorescent penetrant systems
are more sensitive than visible penetrant systems because the
eye is drawn to the glow of the fluorescing indication.
1owever, visible penetrants do not require a darkened area andan ultraviolet light in order to make an inspection. Gisible
penetrants are also less vulnerable to contamination from things
such as cleaning fluid that can significantly reduce the strengthof a fluorescent indication.
Penetrants are then classified by the method used to remove the ecess penetrant from the part. The four
methods are listed below9
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
11/59
ethod A ; 8ater 8ashable
ethod / ; Post;Hmulsifiable, Lipophilic
ethod ; olvent :emovable
ethod 5 ; Post;Hmulsifiable, 1ydrophilic
8ater washable #ethod A$ penetrants can be removed from the part by rinsing with water alone. These
penetrants contain an emulsifying agent #detergent$ that makes it possible to wash the penetrant from the partsurface with water alone. 8ater washable penetrants are sometimes referred to as self;emulsifying systems.
Post;emulsifiable penetrants come in two varieties, lipophilic and hydrophilic. !n post;emulsifiers, lipophilicsystems #ethod /$, the penetrant is oil soluble and interacts with the oil;based emulsifier to make removal
possible. Post;emulsifiable, hydrophilic systems #ethod 5$, use an emulsifier that is a water soluble
detergent which lifts the ecess penetrant from the surface of the part with a water wash. olvent removablepenetrants require the use of a solvent to remove the penetrant from the part.
Penetrants are then classified based on the strength or detectability of the indication that is produced for a
number of very small and tight fatigue cracks. The five sensitivity levels are shown below9
Level K ; -ltra Low ensitivity Level ' ; Low ensitivity
Level 2 ; edium ensitivity
Level 6 ; 1igh ensitivity
Level ) ; -ltra;1igh ensitivity
The ma&or - government and industry specifications currently rely on the - Air 4orce aterials
Laboratory at 8right;Patterson Air 4orce /ase to classify penetrants into one of the five sensitivity levels.This procedure uses titanium and !nconel specimens with small surface cracks produced in low cycle fatigue
bending to classify penetrant systems. The brightness of the indication produced is measured using a
photometer. The sensitivity levels and the test procedure used can be found in ilitary pecification !L;!;2='6= and Aerospace aterial pecification 2>)), Penetrant !nspection aterials.
An interesting note about the sensitivity levels is that only four levels were originally planned. 1owever,
when some penetrants were &udged to have sensitivities significantly less than most others in the level '
category, the K level was created. An ecellent historical summary of the development of test specimens forevaluating the performance of penetrant materials can be found in the following reference.
:eference9
4laherty, E. E., 1istory of Penetrants9 The 4irst 2* ears, '()';>', aterials Hvaluation, Gol. )), @o. '2,
@ovember '(, pp. '6?';'6?), '6?>, '6?
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
12/59
capability, viscosity, color, brightness, ultraviolet stability, thermal stability, water tolerance, and
removability.
ore information on how some of these properties can affect penetrant testing can be found by followingthese links.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
13/59
#urface "nergy *#urface Wetting Capability+
As previously mentioned, one of the important characteristics of a liquid penetrant material is its ability to
freely wet the surface of the ob&ect being inspected. At the liquid;solid surface interface, if the molecules of
the liquid have a stronger attraction to the molecules of the solid surface than to each other #the adhesiveforces are stronger than the cohesive forces$, wetting of the surface occurs. Alternately, if the liquid
molecules are more strongly attracted to each other than the molecules of the solid surface #the cohesiveforces are stronger than the adhesive forces$, the liquid beads;up and does not wet the surface of the part.
0ne way to quantify a liquid+s surface wetting characteristics is to measure the contact angle of a drop of
liquid placed on the surface of an ob&ect. The contact angle is the angle formed by the solid7liquid interface
and the liquid7vapor interface measured from the side of the liquid. #ee the figure below.$ Liquids wet
surfaces when the contact angle is less than (* degrees. 4or a penetrant material to be effective, the contactangle should be as small as possible. !n fact, the contact angle for most liquid penetrants is very close to %ero
degrees.
8etting ability of a liquid is a function of the surface energies of the solid;gas interface, the liquid;gas
interface, and the solid;liquid interface. The surface energy across an interface or the surface tension at the
interface is a measure of the energy required to form a unit area of new surface at the interface. Theintermolecular bonds or cohesive forces between the molecules of a liquid cause surface tension. 8hen the
liquid encounters another substance, there is usually an attraction between the two materials. The adhesive
forces between the liquid and the second substance will compete against the cohesive forces of the liquid.Liquids with weak cohesive bonds and a strong attraction to another material #or the desire to create adhesive
bonds$ will tend to spread over the material. Liquids with strong cohesive bonds and weaker adhesive forces
will tend to bead;up or form a droplet when in contact with another material.
!n liquid penetrant testing, there are usually three surface interfaces involved, the solid;gas interface, theliquid;gas interface, and the solid;liquid interface. 4or a liquid to spread over the surface of a part, two
conditions must be met. 4irst, the surface energy of the solid;gas interface must be greater than the combined
surface energies of the liquid;gas and the solid;liquid interfaces. econd, the surface energy of the solid;gasinterface must eceed the surface energy of the solid;liquid interface.
A penetrant+s wetting characteristics are also largely responsible for its ability to fill a void. Penetrant
materials are often pulled into surface breaking defects by capillary action. The capillary force driving the
penetrant into the crack is a function of the surface tension of the liquid;gas interface, the contact angle, andthe si%e of the defect opening. The driving force for the capillary action can be epressed as the following
formula9
Force ! r"#cos
8here9
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
14/59
r C radius of the crack opening #2pr is the line of contact between the liquid and the solid tubular surface.$
LFC liquid;gas surface tension
C contact angle
ince pressure is the force over a given area, it can be written that the pressure developed, called thecapillary pressure, is
Capillary Pressure $!
"#cos
%& r
The above equations are for a cylindrical defect but the relationships of the variables are the same for a flaw
with a noncircular cross section. apillary pressure equations only apply when there is simultaneous contact
of the penetrant along the entire length of the crack opening and a liquid front forms that is an equidistantfrom the surface. A liquid penetrant surface could take;on a comple shape as a consequence of the various
deviations from flat parallel walls that an actual crack could have. !n this case, the epression for pressure is
Capillary Pressure !$S#' s S"%&r ! &r
8here9
FC the surface energy at the solid;gas interface.
LC the surface energy at the solid;liquid interface.
r C the radius of the opening.
C the adhesion tension #F; L$.
Therefore, at times, it is the adhesion tension that is primarily responsible for a penetrant+s movement into a
flaw and not the surface energy of the liquid;gas interface. Adhesion tension is the force acting on a unit
length of the wetting line from the direction of the solid. The wetting performance of the penetrant isdegraded when adhesion tension is the primary driving force.
!t can be seen from the equations in this section that the surface wetting characteristics #defined by the
surface energies$ are important in order for a penetrant to fill a void. A liquid penetrant will continue to fill
the void until an opposing force balances the capillary pressure. This force is usually the pressure of trappedgas in a void, as most flaws are open only at the surface of the part. ince the gas originally in a flaw volume
cannot escape through the layer of penetrant, the gas is compressed near the closed end of a void.
ince the contact angle for penetrants is very close to %ero, other methods have been devised to make relative
comparisons of the wetting characteristics of these liquids. 0ne method is to measure the height that a liquidreaches in a capillary tube. 1owever, the solid interface in this method is usually glass and may not
accurately represent the surface that the penetrant inspection will be performed on. Another method of
comparative evaluation is to measure the radius, the diameter, or the area of a spot formed when a drop ofpenetrant is placed on the test surface and allowed to stand undisturbed for a specific amount of time.
1owever, using this method, other factors are also acting in the comparison. These methods include the
density, viscosity, and volatility of the liquid, which do not enter into the capillarity equations, but may havean effect on the inspection as discussed in the related pages.
:eferences9
art%, L., @ondestructive Testing, A !nternational, aterials Park, 01, '((=, pp. '6=;'6>.
Tugrul, A. /., apillarity Hffect Analysis for Alternative Liquid Penetrant hemicals, @5T M H
!nternational, Golume 6* @umber ', Published by Hlsevier cience Ltd., 0ford Hngland, 4ebruary '((?, pp.'(;26.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
15/59
Density or #pecific ,ravity
The density or specific gravity of a penetrant material has a slight to negligible effect on the performance of
a penetrant. The gravitational force acting on the penetrant liquid can be working either with or against the
capillary force depending on the orientation of the flaw during the dwell cycle. 8hen the gravitational pull isworking against the capillary rise, the strength of the force is given by the following equation9
Force r!(pg
8here9
r C radius of the crack opening
h C height of penetrant above its free surfacep C density of the penetrant
g C acceleration due to gravity
8hen the direction of capillary flow is in the same direction as the force of gravity, the added force driving
the penetrant into the flaw is given by the formula shown below9
Force (Ap
8here9
h C height of penetrant above its free surface
A C cross;sectional area of the openingP C density of the penetrant
!ncreasing the specific gravity by decreasing the percent of solvent #by volume$ in the solution will increase
the penetration speed.
:eference9
Tugrul, A. /., apillarity Hffect Analysis for Alternative Liquid Penetrant hemicals, @5T M H!nternational, Golume 6* @umber ', Published by Hlsevier cience Ltd., 0ford Hngland, 4ebruary '((?, pp.
'(;26.
iscosity
Giscosity describes a fluid+s resistance to flow. Liquids such as water that flow easily, have a lower viscosity
than do liquids such as ketchup. Giscosity has little effect on the ability of a penetrant material to enter adefect but it does have an effect on the speed at which the penetrant fills a defect. The equations for the fill
times of a cylindrical void and an elliptical void are shown below9
ylindrical Goid
Fill time $!l!%& rcos"#
Hlliptical Goid
Fill time )$!l!% & "#cos* + )a!,-!& $a,-%a-*
8here9 lC defect depth
C viscosity
rC radius of the crack opening
LFC liquid;gas surface tension
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
16/59
C contact angle
a C flaw widthb C flaw length
4rom these equations, it can be seen that fill time is directly proportional to penetrant viscosity. 8hile it has
no real bearing on this discussion, it should be noted that the two equations do not take into account
entrapped gas that could be present in a closed end capillary.
:eference9
5eutsch, . A, Preliminary tudy of the 4luid echanics of Liquid Penetrant Testing, Eournal of :esearch of
the @ational /ureau of tandards, Gol.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
17/59
Why Things Fluoresce
4luorescent Penetrant materials usually contain several dye compounds that are especially suited for the
production of fluorescence. 4luorescence is the process wherein a molecule absorbs a photon of radiantenergy at a particular wavelength and then quickly re;emits the energy at a slightly longer wavelength. !t is
the rapid and short;term re;remittance of energy that distinguishes fluorescence from phosphorescence.
Phosphorescence is usually the result of a chemical reaction which sustains the release of energy for a
significant period of time. 4luorescence was first described in the siteenth century and was probablyobserved long before that time since a large number of plant and animal products fluoresce.
The phenomenon of fluorescence requires a short lesson in quantum mechanics which eplains why
fluorescence was not understood until the twentieth century. !n the nineteenth century, 1uygen+s wave theoryof light had replaced @ewton+s concept of the particulate nature of light and fluorescence was one of the
embarrassing phenomena which simply could not be eplained by use of the wave theory. The wave theory,
as with most classical physics, generally assumes change to be a continuous process with no abrupt changes.@ear the beginning of the twentieth century, a Planck suggested that energy changes might occur in a
stepwise manner. This concept forms the basis of quantum mechanics and Hinstein applied the quantum
concept of energy to light and revived the idea of the particulate nature of light. Planck formali%ed the
relationship with the equation shown below9
E (n
8here9
H C energy
h C a constant
nC the frequency of light
This equations shows that the si%e of the energy steps change with the
frequency or wavelength of the light. Hinstein introduced the term photonto describe the smallest increments of light.
!n today+s current model of the atom, protons and neutrons are found in the nucleus and electrons are found
spinning around outside the nucleus. Hlectrons spin and rotate around the nucleus billions of times a second.
According to modern theory, electrons are arranged in energy levels as they rotate around the nucleus. 8henelectrons gain or lose energy, they &ump between energy levels as they are rotating around the nucleus. As
electrons gain energy, they move to the third, or outer level and as they lose energy, they move to the inner or
first energy level. ince the energy of the system is restricted to certain energy values, the atom is said to be
quanti%ed. !n the animated image below, it can be seen that the electrons move to a different energy stateonly when a specific amount of energy is added to or removed from the system.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
18/59
Another way of illustrating this point is with an energy diagram as presented below. This diagram shows the
quanti%ed energy levels for an atom. Hach energy level corresponds to a quantum state of the atom. Thelowest energy state is called the ground state and is the H* line in the diagram. !f energy is added to the
system, an electron or electrons will &ump to a higher level and the atom is said to be at an ecited state. The
upward arrow in the illustration represents a quantum &ump of the atom from the ground state to the secondecited state. 5epending on the amount of energy input into the atom, the energy &ump could have been to
any of the levels. 1owever, the &ump must be to one of the levels shown, as the atom cannot have an
intermediate value of energy. Atoms will generally be in their ground state.
8hen considering fluorescence, energy must be considered at a molecular level. 8hen molecules form, twoor more atoms form an association where the energy of the molecule is lower than that of the constituent
atoms when they were separate. The total energy of the molecule is the sum of the energies holding the
nuclei together and the energy of the chemical bonds holding the molecule together. olecules haverotational, vibrational and electronic #due to the electrons$ energy. !t is the vibrational and electronic energies
of the molecule that contribute to fluorescence. olecules, like atoms, will generally be in their ground state.
olecules can move to a greater energy state only when energy is added to their system. 0ne of the ways a
molecule can gain energy is by absorbing light. !f a molecule absorbs light, the energy of the light must beequal to the energy required to put the molecule in one of the higher energy states. 8hen a molecule reaches
an ecited state, it does not stay there for very long. :ather it quickly returns to a lower energy state either
by emitting light or colliding with another atomic particle. 8hen a molecule emits light, the energy of thatlight is equal to the energy difference between the quantum levels that molecules has moved between
Dimensional Threshold of Fluorescence
The dimensional threshold of fluorescence is a property that is not currently controlled by the specifications
but appears to largely determine the sensitivity of a fluorescent penetrant. A. L. 8alters and :. . caster
conducted an eperiment that led to the understanding of this condition. Two optically flat plates of glasswere clamped tightly together. A drop of fluorescent penetrant was placed at the interface of the plates. The
penetrant could be seen migrating in between the plates but when eposed to black light, no fluorescence
was seen. The phenomenon was not fully understood until '(>* when Alburger introduced the concept ofthin;film transition of fluorescent response.
The dimensional magnitudes of typical crack defects correspond to the dimensional thresholds of
fluorescence response which are characteristic of the available penetrant. Alternately stated, the degree of
fluorescence response, under a given intensity of ultraviolet radiation, is dependent on the absorption ofultraviolet radiation, which in turn depends on dye concentration and film thickness. Therefore, the ability of
a penetrant to yield an indication depends primarily on its ability to fluoresce as a very thin film. The
performance of penetrants based on the physical constraints of the dyes can be predicted using /eer+s Lawequation. This law states that the absorption of light by a solution changes eponentially with the
concentration of the solution. This equation does not hold true when very thin layers are involved but works
well to establish general relationships between variables.
I Ioxe'Ct
8here9
IC Transmitted light intensity
IoC !ncident light intensityeC /ase of natural log #2.?'
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
19/59
This equation states that the intensity of the transmitted energy is directly proportional to the intensity of the
incident light and varies eponentially with the thickness of the penetrant layer and its dye concentration.Therefore, when the dye concentration is increased, the brightness of the thin layer of penetrant generally
increases. 1owever, the dye concentration can only be increased so much before it starts to have a negative
effect on brightness. A eniscus;ethod Apparatus can be used to measure the dimensional threshold offluorescence.
:eferences9
Alburger, E.:., @otes on the 1istory of Testing Panels for !nspection Penetrants, Paper ummaries, @ations
pring onference, @ew 0rleans, LA, Published by A@T, April '(?).
Fram, /., echanisms ontributing to 4luorescence and Gisibility of Penetrants, Proceedings of the 4ifth
!nternational onference on @ondestructive Testing, ay '(>?, pp 22=;266.
)ltraviolet and Thermal #tability of Penetrant Indications
Hposure to intense ultraviolet light and elevated temperatures can have a negative effect on fluorescent
penetrant indications. 4luorescent materials can lose their brightness after a period of eposure to highintensity -G light. 0ne study measured the intensity of fluorescent penetrant indications on a sample that
was sub&ected to multiple -G eposure cycles. Hach cycle consisted of '= minutes of *o4$. !t
should be noted that the sensitivity of an 4P! inspection can be improved if a part is heated prior to applying
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
20/59
the penetrant material, but the temperature should be kept below ?' o #'>*o4$. ome high temperature
penetrants in use today are formulated with dyes with high melting points, greatly reducing heat relatedproblems. The penetrants also have high boiling points and the heat related problems are greatly reduced.
1owever, a loss of brightness can still take place when the penetrant is eposed to elevated temperatures
over an etended period of time. 8hen one heat resistant formulation was tested, a 2* D reduction wasmeasured after the material was sub&ected to '>6o #62=o4$ for 2?6 hours. The various types of fluorescent
dyes commonly employed in today+s penetrant materials begin decomposition at ?'o #'>*o4$. 8hen the
temperature approaches ()
o
#2**
o
4$, there is almost total attenuation of fluorescent brightness of thecomposition and sublimation of the fluorescent dyestuffs.
:eferences9
/rittain, P.!., Assessment of Penetrant ystems by 4luorescent !ntensity, Proceedings of the )th Huropean
onference on @ondestructive Testing, Gol. ), Published by Perganon Press, '(
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
21/59
). ethod 59 Post;Hmulsifiable, 1ydrophilic
ethod relies on a solvent cleaner to remove the penetrant from the part being inspected. ethod A has
emulsifiers built into the penetrant liquid that makes it possible to remove the ecess penetrant with a simplewater wash. ethod / and 5 penetrants require an additional processing step where a separate
emulsification agent is applied to make the ecess penetrant more removable with a water wash. Lipophilic
emulsification systems are oil;based materials that are supplied in ready;to;use form. 1ydrophilic systems
are water;based and supplied as a concentrate that must be diluted with water prior to use .
Lipophilic emulsifiers #ethod /$ were introduced in the late '(=*+s and work with both a chemical and
mechanical action. After the emulsifier has coated the surface of the ob&ect, mechanical action starts to
remove some of the ecess penetrant as the miture drains from the part. 5uring the emulsification time, theemulsifier diffuses into the remaining penetrant and the resulting miture is easily removed with a water
spray.
1ydrophilic emulsifiers #ethod 5$ also remove the ecess penetrant with mechanical and chemical action
but the action is different because no diffusion takes place. 1ydrophilic emulsifiers are basically detergentsthat contain solvents and surfactants. The hydrophilic emulsifier breaks up the penetrant into small quantities
and prevents these pieces from recombining or reattaching to the surface of the part. The mechanical actionof the rinse water removes the displaced penetrant from the part and causes fresh remover to contact and liftnewly eposed penetrant from the surface.
The hydrophilic post;emulsifiable method #ethod 5$ was
introduced in the mid '(?*+s. ince it is more sensitive than the
lipophilic post emulsifiable method it has made the later methodvirtually obsolete. The ma&or advantage of hydrophilic emulsifiers is
that they are less sensitive to variation in the contact and removal
time. 8hile emulsification time should be controlled as closely aspossible, a variation of one minute or more in the contact time will
have little effect on flaw detectability when a hydrophilic emulsifier is
used. 1owever, a variation of as little as '= to 6* seconds can have asignificant effect when a lipophilic system is used.
:eferences9
;; /oisvert, /.8., 1ardy, F., 5organ, E.4., and elner, :.1., The 4luorescent Penetrant 1ydrophilic :emover
Process, aterials Hvaluation, 4ebruary '(
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
22/59
'. 4orm a ; 5ry Powder
2. 4orm b ; 8ater oluble
6. 4orm c ; 8ater uspendable
). 4orm d ; @onaqueous Type ' 4luorescent #olvent /ased$
=. 4orm e ; @onaqueous Type 2 Gisible 5ye #olvent /ased$
>. 4orm f ; pecial Applications
The developer classifications are based on the method that the developer is applied. The developer can be
applied as a dry powder, or dissolved or suspended in a liquid carrier. Hach of the developer forms hasadvantages and disadvantages.
Dry Powder
5ry powder developer is generally considered to be the
least sensitive but it is inepensive to use and easy to
apply. 5ry developers are white, fluffy powders that canbe applied to a thoroughly dry surface in a number of
ways. The developer can be applied by dipping parts in a
container of developer, or by using a puffer to dust partswith the developer. Parts can also be placed in a dust
cabinet where the developer is blown around and allowed
to settle on the part. Hlectrostatic powder spray guns arealso available to apply the developer. The goal is to allow
the developer to come in contact with the whole
inspection area.
-nless the part is electrostatically charged, the powderwill only adhere to areas where trapped penetrant has wet the surface of the part. The penetrant will try to
wet the surface of the penetrant particle and fill the voids between the particles, which brings more penetrant
to the surface of the part where it can be seen. ince dry powder developers only stick to the area wherepenetrant is present, the dry developer does not provide a uniform white background as the other forms of
developers do. 1aving a uniform light background is very important for a visible inspection to be effective
and since dry developers do not provide one, they are seldom used for visible inspections. 8hen a dry
developer is used, indications tend to stay bright and sharp since the penetrant has a limited amount of roomto spread.
/ater Solu-le
As the name implies, water soluble developers consist of a group of
chemicals that are dissolved in water and form a developer layerwhen the water is evaporated away. The best method for applying
water soluble developers is by spraying it on the part. The part can be
wet or dry. 5ipping, pouring, or brushing the solution on to thesurface is sometimes used but these methods are less desirable.
Aqueous developers contain wetting agents that cause the solution to
function much like dilute hydrophilic emulsifier and can lead to
additional removal of entrapped penetrant. 5rying is achieved byplacing the wet but well drained part in a recirculating, warm air dryer
with the temperature held between ?* and ?=4. !f the parts are not
dried quickly, the indications will will be blurred and indistinct. Properly developed parts will have an even,pale white coating over the entire surface.
/ater Suspenda-le
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
23/59
8ater suspendable developers consist of insoluble developer particles suspended in water. 8ater suspendable
developers require frequent stirring or agitation to keep the particles from settling out of suspension. 8atersuspendable developers are applied to parts in the same manner as water soluble developers. Parts coated
with a water suspendable developer must be forced dried &ust as parts coated with a water soluble developer
are forced dried. The surface of a part coated with a water suspendable developer will have a slightlytranslucent white coating.
0ona1ueous
@onaqueous developers suspend the developer in a volatile solvent
and are typically applied with a spray gun. @onaqueous developers
are commonly distributed in aerosol spray cans for portability. Thesolvent tends to pull penetrant from the indications by solvent action.
ince the solvent is highly volatile, forced drying is not required. A
nonaqueous developer should be applied to a thoroughly dried part toform a slightly translucent white coating.
Special Applications
Plastic or lacquer developers are special developers that are primarily
used when a permanent record of the inspection is required.
Preparation of Part
0ne of the most critical steps in the penetrant inspection process is preparingthe part for inspection. All coatings, such as paints, varnishes, plating, and
heavy oides must be removed to ensure that defects are open to the surface
of the part. !f the parts have been machined, sanded, or blasted prior to thepenetrant inspection, it is possible that a thin layer of metal may have
smeared across the surface and closed off defects. !t is even possible for metal
smearing to occur as a result of cleaning operations such as grit or vaporblasting. This layer of metal smearing must be removed before inspection.
Contaminants
oatings, such as paint, are much more elastic than metal and will not
fracture even though a large defect may be present &ust below the coating. The
part must be thoroughly cleaned as surface contaminates can prevent the
penetrant from entering a defect. urface contaminants can also lead to ahigher level of background noise since the ecess penetrant may be more
difficult to remove.
ommon coatings and contaminates that must be removed include9 paint, dirt, flu, scale, varnish, oil,
etchant, smut, plating, grease, oide, wa, decals, machining fluid, rust, and residue from previous penetrant
inspections.
ome of these contaminants would obviously prevent penetrant from entering defects, so it is clear they mustbe removed. 1owever, the impact of other contaminants such as the residue from previous penetrant
inspections is less clear, but they can have a disastrous effect on the inspection. Take the link below to review
some of the research that has been done to evaluate the effects of contaminants on LP! sensitivity.
lick here to learn more about possible problems with leaning Practices.
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/MethodsTech/researchoncleaning.htmhttp://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/PenetrantTest/MethodsTech/researchoncleaning.htm7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
24/59
A good cleaning procedure will remove all contamination from the
part and not leave any residue that may interfere with the inspectionprocess. !t has been found that some alkaline cleaners can be
detrimental to the penetrant inspection process if they have silicates in
concentrations above *.= percent. odium metasilicate, sodiumsilicate, and related compounds can adhere to the surface of parts and
form a coating that prevents penetrant entry into cracks. :esearchers
in :ussia have also found that some domestic soaps and commercialdetergents can clog flaw cavities and reduce the wettability of themetal surface, thus reducing the sensitivity of the penetrant. onrad
and audill found that media from plastic media blasting was
partially responsible for loss of LP! indication strength.icrophotographs of cracks after plastic media blasting showed
media entrapment in addition to metal smearing.
!t is very important that the material being inspected has not been
smeared across its own surface during machining or cleaningoperations. !t is well recogni%ed that machining, honing, lapping,
hand sanding, hand scraping, grit blasting, tumble deburring, and
peening operations can cause some materials to smear. !t is perhaps less recogni%ed that some cleaningoperations, such as steam cleaning, can also cause metal smearing in the softer materials. Take the link below
to learn more about metal smearing and its affects on LP!
lick here to learn more about metal smearing.
:eferences9
:obinson, am E., 1ere Today, Fone TomorrowI :eplacing ethyl hloroform in the Penetrant Process,aterials Hvaluation, Gol. =*, @o. , @o. =, August '((,
@o. 6, @ew ork, @ Plenum7onsultants /ureau, Eanuary '((*, pp. 6>';6>?.
Fla%kov, u . A., /ruevich, H.P., and amokhin, @.L, pecial 4eatures of Application of Aqueous olutions
of ommercial 5etergents in apillary 4law !nspection, 5efektoskopiya ; The oviet Eournal of@ondestructive Testing, Gol. '(, @o.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
25/59
8hen sensitivity is the primary consideration for choosing a penetrant system, the first decision that must be
made is whether to use fluorescent penetrant or visible dye penetrant. 4luorescent penetrants are generallymore capable of producing a detectable indication from a small defect. Also, the human eye is more sensitive
to a light indication on a dark background and the eye is naturally drawn to a fluorescent indication.
The graph below presents a series of curves that show the contrast ratio required for a spot of a certain
diameter to be seen. The ordinate is the spot diameter, which was viewed from one foot. The abscissa is the
contrast ratio between the spot brightness and the background brightness. To the left of the contrast ratio ofone, the spot is darker than the background #representative of visible dye penetrant testing$Q and to the right
of one, the spot is brighter than the background #representative of fluorescent penetrant inspection$. Hach ofthe three curves right or left of the contrast ratio of one are for different background brightness #in foot;
Lamberts$, but simply consider the general trend of each group of curves right or left of the contrast ratio of
one. The curves show that for indication larger than *.*?> mm #*.**6 inch$ in diameter, it does not reallymatter if it is a dark spot on a light background or a light spot on a dark background. 1owever, when a dark
indication on a light background is further reduced in si%e, it is no longer detectable even though contrast is
increased. 4urthermore, with a light indication on a dark background, indications down to *.**6 mm #*.***'
inch$ were detectable when the contrast between the flaw and the background was high.
4rom this data, it can be seen why a fluorescent penetrant offers an advantage over a visible penetrant forfinding very small defects. 5ata presented by 5e Fraaf and 5e :i&k supports this statement. They inspected
"identical" fatigue cracked specimens using a red dye penetrant and a fluorescent dye penetrant. The
fluorescent penetrant found >* defects while the visible dye was only able to find 6( of the defects.
:ef9 5e Fraaf, H. and 5e :i&k, P., omparison /etween :eliability, ensitivity, and Accuracy of
@ondestructive !nspection ethods, '6th ymposium on @ondestructive Hvaluation Proceedings, an
Antonio, TB, published by @T!A, outhwest :esearch !nstitute, an Antonio, TB, April '(6 Lester 1onor Lecture,@ondestructive Testing, Gol. 2', @o. >, @ov.;5ec. '(>6, pp. 6=);6>
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
26/59
sensitivity and are very convenient to use. 1owever, they are usually not practical for large area inspection
or in high;volume production settings.
Another consideration in the selection of a penetrant system is whether water washable, post;emulsifiable orsolvent removable penetrants will be used. Post;emulsifiable systems are designed to reduce the possibility
of over;washing, which is one of the factors known to reduce sensitivity. 1owever, these systems add
another step, and thus cost, to the inspection process.
Penetrants are evaluated by the - Air 4orce according to the requirements in !L;!;2='6= and each
penetrant system is classified into one of five sensitivity levels. This procedure uses titanium and !nconel
specimens with small surface cracks produced in low cycle fatigue bending to classify penetrant systems.
The brightness of the indications produced after processing a set of specimens with a particular penetrantsystem is measured using a photometer. A procedure for producing and evaluating the penetrant qualification
specimens was reported on by oore and Larson at the '((? A@T 4all onference. ost commercially
available penetrant materials are listed in the Jualified Products List of !L;!;2='6= according to their type,method and sensitivity level. Gisible dye and dual;purpose penetrants are not classified into sensitivity levels
as fluorescent penetrants are. The sensitivity of a visible dye penetrant is regarded as level ' and largely
dependent on obtaining good contrast between the indication and the background.
Penetrant !pplication and Dwell Time
The penetrant material can be applied in a number of different ways,including spraying, brushing, or immersing the parts in a penetrant
bath. The method of penetrant application has little effect on the
inspection sensitivity but an electrostatic spraying method is reportedto produce slightly better results than other methods. 0nce the part is
covered in penetrant it must be allowed to dwell so the penetrant has
time to enter any defect present.
There are basically two dwell mode options, immersion;dwell#keeping the part immersed in the penetrant during the dwell period$
and drain;dwell #letting the part drain during the dwell period$. Prior
to a study by herwin, the immersion;dwell mode was generallyconsidered to be more sensitive but recogni%ed to be less economical
because more penetrant was washed away and emulsifiers were
contaminated more rapidly. The reasoning for thinking this method was
more sensitive was that the penetrant was more migratory and more likelyto fill flaws when kept completely fluid and not allowed to lose volatile
constituents by evaporation. 1owever, herwin showed that if the
specimens are allowed to drain;dwell, the sensitivity is higher because the
evaporation increases the dyestuff concentration of the penetrant on thespecimen. As pointed;out in the section on penetrant materials, sensitivity
increases as the dyestuff concentration increases. herwin also cautions thatthe samples being inspected should be placed outside the penetrant tank
wall so that vapors from the tank do not accumulate and dilute the dyestuff
concentration of the penetrant on the specimen.
;; Gaerman, E., 4luorescent Penetrant !nspection, Juantified Hvolution ofthe ensitivity Gersus Process 5eviations, Proceedings of the )th Huropean
onference on @ondestructive Testing, Pergamon Press, awell 1ouse,
4airview Park, Hlmsford, @ew ork, Golume ), eptember '(
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
27/59
Penetrant Dwell 2ime
Penetrant dwell time is the total time that the penetrant is in contact with the part surface. The dwell time is
important because it allows the penetrant the time necessary to seep or be drawn into a defect. 5well timesare usually recommended by the penetrant producers or required by the specification being followed. The
time required to fill a flaw depends on a number of variables which include the following9
The surface tension of the penetrant. The contact angle of the penetrant.
The dynamic shear viscosity of the penetrant, which can vary with the diameter of the capillary. The
viscosity of a penetrant in microcapillary flaws is higher than its viscosity in bulk, which slows theinfiltration of the tight flaws.
The atmospheric pressure at the flaw opening.
The capillary pressure at the flaw opening.
The pressure of the gas trapped in the flaw by the penetrant.
The radius of the flaw or the distance between the flaw walls.
The density or specific gravity of the penetrant.
icrostructural properties of the penetrant.
The ideal dwell time is often determined by eperimentation and is often very specific to a particular
application. 4or eample, A 2>)?A requires that the dwell time for all aircraft and engine parts be at least2* minutes, while AT H'2*( only requires a five minute dwell time for parts made of titanium and other
heat resistant alloys. Fenerally, there is no harm in using a longer penetrant dwell time as long as the
penetrant is not allowed to dry.
The following tables summari%e the dwell time requirements of several commonly used specifications. Theinformation provided below is intended for general reference and no guarantee is made about its correctness.
Please consult the specifications for the actual dwell time requirements.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
28/59
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
29/59
Some Researc( Results on Dwell 2ime
An interesting point that 5eutsch makes about dwell time is that if the elliptical flaw has a length to widthratio of '**, it will take the penetrant nearly ten times longer to fill than it will a cylindrical flaw with the
same volume.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
30/59
;; 5eutsch, . A, Preliminary tudy of the 4luid echanics of Liquid Penetrant Testing, Eournal of :esearch
of the @ational /ureau of tandards, Gol.
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
31/59
emulsifier as an integral part of the formulation. The ecess penetrant may be removed from the ob&ect
surface with a simple water rinse. These materials have the property of forming relatively viscous gels uponcontact with water, which results in the formation of gel;like plugs in surface openings. 8hile they are
completely soluble in water, given enough contact time, the plugs offer a brief period of protection against
rapid wash removal. Thus, water;washable penetrant systems provide ease of use and a high level ofsensitivity.
8hen removal of the penetrant from the defect due to over;washing of the part is a concern, a post;emulsifiable penetrant system can be used. Post;emulsifiable penetrants require a separate emulsifier to
breakdown the penetrant and make it water washable. The part is usually immersed in the emulsifier buthydrophilic emulsifiers may also be sprayed on the ob&ect. pray application is not recommended for
lipophilic emulsifiers because it can result in non;uniform emulsification if not properly applied. /rushing
the emulsifier on to the part is not recommended either because the bristles of the brush may force emulsifierinto discontinuities, causing the entrapped penetrant to be removed. The emulsifier is allowed sufficient time
to react with the penetrant on the surface of the part but not given time to make its way into defects to react
with the trapped penetrant. The penetrant that has reacted with the emulsifier is easily cleaned away.
ontrolling the reaction time is of essential importance when using a post;emulsifiable system. !f theemulsification time is too short, an ecessive amount of penetrant will be left on the surface, leading to high
background levels. !f the emulsification time is too long, the emulsifier will react with the penetrant
entrapped in discontinuities, making it possible to deplete the amount needed to form an indication.
The hydrophilic post;emulsifiable method #ethod 5$ is more sensitive than the lipophilic post;emulsifiablemethod #ethod /$. ince these methods are generally only used when very high sensitivity is needed, the
hydrophilic method renders the lipophilic method virtually obsolete. The ma&or advantage of hydrophilic
emulsifiers is that they are less sensitive to variation in the contact and removal time. 8hile emulsificationtime should be controlled as closely as possible, a variation of one minute or more in the contact time will
have little effect on flaw detectability when a hydrophilic emulsifier is used. 0n the contrary, a variation of
as little as '= to 6* seconds can have a significant effect when a lipophilic system is used. -sing anemulsifier involves adding a couple of steps to the penetrant process, slightly increases the cost of an
inspection. 8hen using an emulsifier, the penetrant process includes the following steps #etra steps in bold$9
'. pre;clean part, 2. apply penetrant and allow to dwell, 6. pre'rinse to remove first layer of penetrant456
apply (ydrop(ilic emulsifier and allow contact for specified time4=. rinse to remove ecess penetrant, >.
dry part, ?. apply developer and allow part to develop, and
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
32/59
two pieces of acrylic with two thin sheets of vinyl clamped between as spaces. The plates were clamped in
the corners and all but one of the edges sealed. The unsealed edge acted as the flaw. The clearance betweenthe plates varied from '= microns #*.*=( inch$ at the clamping points to 6* microns #*.''< inch$ at the
midpoint between the clamps. The distance between the clamping points was believed to be 6* mm #'.'th !nternational onference,
3urich, wit%erland, @ovember ; 5ecember '(?
Developer Form
@onaqueous, 8et olvent
Plastic 4ilm
8ater;oluble
8ater;uspendable8ater;oluble
8ater;uspendable5ry
3et(od of Application
pray
pray
pray
pray!mmersion
!mmersion5ust loud #Hlectrostatic$
7/24/2019 Penetrant Testing-Course Material.doc
33/59