ASNT Handbook Volume 2 Liquid Penetrant Testing
ASNT Handbook Volume 2 Liquid Penetrant Testing
ASNT Handbook Volume 2 Liquid Penetrant Testing
NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING
HANDBOOK
Volume 2
Liquid Penetrant
Testing
Technical Editor
Noel A. Tracy
Editor
Patrick O. Moore
HANDBOOK
Volume 2
Liquid Penetrant
Testing
Technical Editor
Noel A. Tracy
Editor
Patrick O. Moore
FOUN
DED
1941
American Society for Nondestructive Testing
Copyright 1999
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING, INC.
All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Nothing contained in this book is to be construed as a grant of any right of manufacture, sale or use in connection with
any method, process, apparatus, product or composition, whether or not covered by letters patent or registered
trademark, nor as a defense against liability for the infringement of letters patent or registered trademark.
The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, its employees and the contributors to this volume are not responsible
for the authenticity or accuracy of information herein, and opinions and statements published herein do not necessarily
reflect the opinion of the American Society for Nondestructive Testing or carry its endorsement or recommendation.
The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, its employees, and the contributors to this volume assume no
responsibility for the safety of persons using the information in this book.
Liquid Penetrant Testing is the second The existence of Liquid Penetrant Testing
volume of the third edition of the is testimony to the commitment of the
Nondestructive Testing Handbook. This American Society for Nondestructive
volume continues to advance the series Testing (ASNT) to its missions of
mission of disseminating information providing technical information and
about the technology. instructional materials and of promoting
Nondestructive testing contributes to nondestructive testing technology as a
public safety and to our quality of life in profession.
countless ways. The technology has made
possible those advances in technology Robert E. Green, Jr.
that are the hallmark of this turn of the ASNT National President (1998-99)
century.
Technology typically relies on things
that can be counted, on numbers on
measurements and data that can be
quantified, processed and stored by
computer. In such an age, liquid
penetrant testing occupies a special place
because it is a qualitative method that has
defied quantification. At the same time,
the method remains extremely sensitive,
reliable, cost effective and useful to
industry. Because liquid penetrant testing
relies so much on the training and
experience of the human inspector, an
authoritative handbook is especially
important.
ASNT has been fortunate that the
Technical Councils Penetrant Committee
is superbly qualified to provide the
expertise needed to rewrite and review a
book of such importance and scope. The
collaboration between the volunteers and
staff in the writing and review of this
volume has made productive use of
ASNTs volunteer resources. Scores of
authors and reviewers have donated
thousands of hours to this volume.
Liquid Penetrant Testing was produced
under the guidance of ASNTs Handbook
Development Committee. A special note
of thanks is extended to Handbook
Development Director Gary Workman; to
recent Penetrant Committee Chairs
William E. Mooz, Vilma G. Holmgren,
Brian MacCracken and Michael L. White;
to Technical Editor Noel A. Tracy; and to
Handbook Editor Patrick Moore for their
dedicated efforts.
What could be simpler than directly in place of other, more expensive point
viewing a part with a suitable light to see sensitive techniques such as eddy current
an indication of a discontinuity produced testing. However, in some applications,
by dipping the part in a colored liquid, especially where residual compressive
washing excess liquid off with a water stresses exist, the surface opening of a
hose and drying the part? As one gains discontinuity may be too small for
experience with liquid penetrant testing, reliable liquid penetrant testing. A good
a more appropriate question may come to example is a small fatigue crack.
mind: how can a simple technique be so Liquid penetrant materials are
complex? constantly being improved to meet
Because the liquid penetrant test is general or specific application
fundamentally simple and the equipment requirements, to make the test process
(if any) is easy to operate, untrained more forgiving or to satisfy new
observers usually think they can save time environmental concerns. In some
and money by borrowing some liquid applications water washable liquid
penetrant materials and performing the penetrants are as sensitive as
test themselves. However, as training and postemulsifiable types. Equipment is also
experience show, the best materials are improving. Properly designed and
worthless without strict adherence to monitored automated processing systems
processing guidelines that direct and have the potential to more carefully
control the test from the preparation of control the liquid penetrant testing
the inspection surface (including the process while alleviating the monotony
crack surface), to the visual examination experienced by an inspector who applies
of the part to locate an indication. the test steps repetitively.
Furthermore, the materials themselves The technology of liquid penetrant
require some basic care so that they dont testing lacks a reliable and objective
spoil. Even experienced inspectors must scientific test for evaluating the sensitivity
avoid the trap of apparent simplicity, of a liquid penetrant test. Photometers
which breeds complacency. Inattention to have been used in the laboratory to assign
processing details and materials arbitrary sensitivity levels to liquid
maintenance will result in a test that will penetrant systems by measuring the
fail because it is out of control. The luminance of fluorescent indications.
editing of this volume has attempted to However, even with precisely controlled
emphasize these issues. processing parameters, the luminance
Perhaps complex is the wrong word to measurements on a set of low cycle
describe the test; methodical is probably a fatigue cracks have been reproducible
better descriptor. Apparent disadvantages only within 20 percent.
of the test can usually be overcome by Part of the problem has been the
modifying a step or applying a different difficulty of correlating the physical and
set of steps. For example, inspectors could chemical phenomena and properties of
work in tandem when testing large areas, liquid penetrants to practical liquid
for which process control is more penetrant test sensitivity. This difficulty
difficult, or use liquid penetrant that influenced the decision to limit the
requires more than just water to remove it theoretical discussions in this volume to
if removal of the liquid penetrant from the practical characteristics of liquid
shallow cracks is a concern. In another penetrant materials. Because an inspector
situation the requirement for strict is ultimately concerned about the
process control may be turned into an presence or absence of a relevant
advantage in that methodical adjustments indication, the more that is understood
in the process can adjust the sensitivity of about how the test process affects those
the test so that only the relevant characteristics, the more likely a visible
discontinuities are detected. indication will be produced.
Despite its subtlety liquid penetrant The future of liquid penetrant testing is
testing does work. Large areas, small areas, sure to include continued efforts to bring
plane surfaces, multifaceted surfaces, all machine vision and decision making up
can be inspected quickly and to the level of competency achieved with
economically. Because of this advantage it the human eye and brain. Initially,
is tempting to use liquid penetrant testing questions of economic feasibility will
Noel A. Tracy
Technical Editor
Editors Preface
Reviewers
Robert A. Baker
Thomas H. Bennett, Howmet Corporation
Lisa Brasche, Iowa State University
Patrick Dubosc, Babb Company SA
Rob Hagen, NDT Europa BV
William O. Holden, William Holden
Company
Stephen C. Hoyt, American Society for
Nondestructive Testing
James F. Jackson
Brian F. Larson, Iowa State University
Richard D. McGuire, National Board of
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors
Gregory F. Monks, QC Technologies,
Incorporated
Figure Sources
Chapter 4
Chapter 15
Figures 1-2, 5, 7, 9 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Toolworks, Glenview, IL.
Figure 1 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 3-4, 6 Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Figure 2-3 International Pipe Inspectors Association, Houston, TX.
Figure 8 Met-L-Chek, Santa Monica, CA.
Figure 4 Chrysler Corporation, Detroit, MI.
Figure 5 Gregory F. Monks, QC Technologies, Incorporated, Noblesville, IN.
Chapter 5 Figure 6 Dennis G. Hunley, Quality Assurance Corporation, Indianapolis, IN.
Figures 1-6, 8, 12-15, 18-25 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Toolworks,
Glenview, IL.
Figures 7, 26 Allied Signal Aerospace Company [formerly AiResearch
Manufacturing Division, Garrett Corporation], Los Angeles, CA.
Figure 16-17 Turbodyne Technologies, Incorporated, Woodland Hills, CA.
Chapter 6
Figures 2-11 Boeing Company, Long Beach, CA.
Figures 12-25 Boeing Company, St. Louis, MO.
Chapter 7
Figures 1-4f, 4h, 6-8a, 25-26, 31, 34, 36-43 Magnaflux Division of Illinois
Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 8b, 8c Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Figures 9-15 Boeing Company, St. Louis, MO.
Figure 17-24 Northrop Grumman Corporation, Los Angeles, CA.
Figures 33, 35a-35b Spectronics Corporation, Westbury, NY.
Figures 35c Ely Chemical Company, Aurora, IL.
Chapter 8
Figures 2-4 Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Figures 5-7, 9-12 Boeing Company, St. Louis, MO.
Figure 13 Turco Products, Incorporated, Long Beach, CA.
Chapter 9
Figures 1-7 D&W Enterprises, Limited, Littleton, CO.
Chapter 10
Figures 1-6 Westinghouse Hanford, Hanford, WA.
Figure 7 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 8-10 Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Chapter 11
Figures 1-13 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 14-15 Robert L. Crane, Air Force Research Laboratory,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
493
Movie Sources
Chapter 2 Chapter 12
Movie. Bleeding suggests discontinuity severity Hellier Associates, Movie. Rejectable discontinuity Hellier Associates, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Incorporated, Niantic, CT. Movie. Porosity in casting American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Movie. Fluorescent liquid penetrant Hellier Associates, Incorporated, Columbus, OH.
Niantic, CT. Movie. Fluorescent bleedout reveals shrinkage ASM International, Materials
Movie. Liquid penetrant seeps into discontinuity ASM International, Park, OH.
Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Solvent removes excess liquid penetrant from part surface ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Nonaqueous wet developer enhances visible dye contrast ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Hydrophilic prerinse Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Dip in hydrophilic emulsifier; dwell Howmet Castings,
Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Water wash Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Developer application Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Viewing of developed indications Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Developer is applied American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Wipe part American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Visible red dye liquid penetrant bleeds out American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. Indication in root pass of weld Hellier Associates, Incorporated,
Niantic, CT.
Movie. Water wash Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Developer application Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Nonaqueous wet developer enhances visible dye contrast ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Shake the spray can Hellier Associated, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Movie. Nonaqueous wet developer enhances visible dye contrast ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Chapter 3
Movie. Visible red dye liquid penetrant bleeds out American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Chapter 5
Movie. Fluorescent bleedout reveals shrinkage ASM International,
Incorporated, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Quenching cracks Hellier Associate, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Movie. Linear discontinuity American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Open and partially open cracks American Society for Nondestructive
Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. Pitting and porosity American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Porosity in casting American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Process control can mask discontinuities American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. False indications Hellier Associates, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Movie. Nonrelevant indications can mask relevant ones American Society
for Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. Nonrelevant indication from part geometry American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
494
C
1H A P T E R
Introduction to Liquid
Penetrant Testing
Nondestructive testing (NDT) has been sampling. Sampling (that is, less than 100
defined as comprising those test methods percent testing to draw inferences about
used to examine or inspect a part or the unsampled lots) is nondestructive
material or system without impairing its testing if the tested sample is returned to
future usefulness.1 The term is generally service. If the steel is tested to verify the
applied to nonmedical investigations of alloy in some bolts that can then be
material integrity. returned to service, then the test is
Strictly speaking, this definition of nondestructive. In contrast, even if
nondestructive testing includes spectroscopy used in the chemical testing
noninvasive medical diagnostics. X-rays, of many fluids is inherently
ultrasound and endoscopes are used by nondestructive, the testing is destructive if
both medical and industrial the samples are poured down the drain
nondestructive testing. Medical after testing.
nondestructive testing, however, has come Nondestructive testing is not confined
to be treated by a body of learning so to crack detection. Other discontinuities
separate from industrial nondestructive include porosity, wall thinning from
testing that today most physicians never corrosion and many sorts of disbonds.
use the word nondestructive. Nondestructive material characterization
Nondestructive testing is used to is a growing field concerned with material
investigate specifically the material properties including material
integrity of the test object. A number of identification and microstructural
other technologies for instance, radio characteristics such as resin curing, case
astronomy, voltage and amperage hardening and stress that have a direct
measurement and rheometry (flow influence on the service life of the test
measurement) are nondestructive but object.
are not used specifically to evaluate Nondestructive testing has also been
material properties. Radar and sonar are defined by listing or classifying the
classified as nondestructive testing when various techniques.1-3 This approach
used to inspect dams, for instance, but conveys a sense of nondestructive testing
not when they are used to chart a river that is a practical sense in that it typically
bottom. highlights methods in use by industry.
Nondestructive testing asks Is there
something wrong with this material?
Various performance and proof tests, in
contrast, ask Does this component Purposes of
work? This is the reason that it is not Nondestructive Testing
considered nondestructive testing when
an inspector checks a circuit by running Since the 1920s, the art of testing without
electric current through it. Hydrostatic destroying the test object has developed
pressure testing is another form of proof from a laboratory curiosity to an
testing, one that may destroy the test indispensable tool of production. No
object. longer is visual testing of materials, parts
Another gray area that invites various and complete products the principal
interpretations in defining nondestructive means of determining adequate quality.
testing is future usefulness. Some material Nondestructive tests in great variety are in
investigations involve taking a sample of worldwide use to detect variations in
the inspected part for testing that is structure, minute changes in surface
inherently destructive. A noncritical part finish, the presence of cracks or other
of a pressure vessel may be scraped or physical discontinuities, to measure the
shaved to get a sample for electron thickness of materials and coatings and to
microscopy, for example. Although future determine other characteristics of
usefulness of the vessel is not impaired by industrial products. Scientists and
the loss of material, the procedure is engineers of many countries have
inherently destructive and the shaving contributed greatly to nondestructive test
itself in one sense the true test object development and applications.
has been removed from service The various nondestructive testing
permanently. methods are covered in detail in the
The idea of future usefulness is relevant literature, but it is always wise to consider
to the quality control practice of objectives before details. How is
Basic Categories
Mechanical-optical color; cracks; dimensions; film thickness; gaging; reflectivity; strain distribution and magnitude; surface
finish; surface flaws; through-cracks
Penetrating radiation cracks; density and chemistry variations; elemental distribution; foreign objects; inclusions; microporosity;
misalignment; missing parts; segregation; service degradation; shrinkage; thickness; voids
Electromagnetic-electronic alloy content; anisotropy; cavities; cold work; local strain, hardness; composition; contamination;
corrosion; cracks; crack depth; crystal structure; electrical and thermal conductivities; flakes; heat
treatment; hot tears; inclusions; ion concentrations; laps; lattice strain; layer thickness; moisture content;
polarization; seams; segregation; shrinkage; state of cure; tensile strength; thickness; disbonds
Sonic-ultrasonic crack initiaion and propagation; cracks, voids; damping factor; degree of cure; degree of impregnation; degree of
sintering; delaminations; density; dimensions; elastic moduli; grain size; inclusions;
mechanical degradation; misalignment; porosity; radiation degradation; structure of composites; surface stress;
tensile, shear and compressive strength; disbonds; wear
Thermal and infrared bonding; composition; emissivity; heat contours; plating thickness; porosity; reflectivity; stress; thermal
conductivity; thickness; voids
Chemical-analytical alloy identification; composition; cracks; elemental analysis and distribution; grain size; inclusions; macrostructure;
porosity; segregation; surface anomalies
Auxiliary Categories
Image generation dimensional variations; dynamic performance; anomaly characterization and definition; anomaly
distribution; anomaly propagation; magnetic field configurations
Signal image analysis data selection, processing and display; anomaly mapping, correlation and identification; image enhancement;
separation of multiple variables; signature analysis
FIGURE 1. Aluminum alloy flat plate by crack length: (a) as machined; (b) after etch; (c) after
proof.
(a)
100
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Actual Crack Length, mm (in.)
(b)
100
90
Probability of Detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Actual Crack Length, mm (in.)
(c)
100
90
Probability of Detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Actual Crack Length, mm (in.)
Legend
= predicted probability of detection
X = hit data
Copyright 1999, D&W Enterprises, Littleton, CO.
FIGURE 2. Aluminum alloy flat plate by crack depth: (a) as machined; (b) after etch; (c) after
proof.
(a)
100
90
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20)
Actual Crack Depth, mm (in.)
(b)
100
90
Probability of Detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20)
Actual Crack Depth, mm (in.)
(c)
100
90
Probability of Detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20)
Actual Crack Depth, mm (in.)
Legend
= predicted probability of detection
X = hit data
Copyright 1999, D&W Enterprises, Littleton, CO.
TABLE 3. Probability of detection for fluorescent liquid penetrant testing of aluminum flat
plates (see Figs. 1 and 2). False calls were not documented.
Quantity Threshold for 90 Percent
of Cracks Probability of Detection
Data Set Condition Detected/Present mm (in.)
Crack Length
C1001C (Fig. 1a) as machined 233/311 7.95 mm (0.313 in.)
C1002C (Fig. 1b) after etch 260/311 2.69 mm (0.106 in.)
C1003C (Fig. 1c) after proof testing 280/306 1.50 mm (0.059 in.)
Crack Depth
C1001C (Fig. 2a) as machined 233/311 3.56 mm (0.140 in.)
C1002C (Fig. 2b) after etch 260/311 0.79 mm (0.031 in.)
C1003C (Fig. 2c) after proof testing 280/306 0.38 mm (0.015 in.)
Cascading Dyes
The next significant development was of
cascading dyes, first accomplished by
James Alburger. This became another
Parker effort.27 This approach permitted
another quantum leap in sensitivity.
Parker discovered that sensitivity could be
improved dramatically by combining
several different dyes in the liquid
penetrant. What occurred in this mixture
was a cascading effect or a linking between
the dyes. One dye had its absorption peak
in the ultraviolet range whereas its main
emission peak was in the blue range. The
other dye had its main absorption in the
blue and its main emission in the yellow
or yellow-green range. The cascading effect
had a net efficiency greater than that of a
single dye. A patent was applied for by
Parker and Joseph Switzer, and the process
was incorporated into commercial
products in 1954.32
yotta Y 1024
zetta Z 1021
exa E 1018 SI Units to Express
peta P 1015 Particular Quantities in
tera T 1012 Nondestructive Testing
giga G 109
mega M 106
kilo k 103 Pressure
hectoa h 102 The pascal (Pa), equal to one newton per
deka (or deca)a da 10 square meter (1 Nm2), is used to express
decia d 101 pressure, stress etc. It is used in place of
centia c 102 units of pound force per square inch
milli m 103 (lbfin.2), atmosphere, millimeter of
micro 106 mercury (mm Hg), torr, bar, inch of
mercury (in. Hg), inch of water (H2O) and
nano n 109
other units. The text must indicate
pico p 1012
whether gage, absolute or differential
femto f 1015 pressure is meant.
atto a 1018
zepto z 1021
Volume
yocto y 1024
The cubic meter (m3) is the only volume
a. Avoid these prefixes (except in dm3 and cm3) for
science and engineering.
measurement unit in SI. It takes the place
of cubic foot, cubic inch, gallon, pint,
barrel and more. In SI, the liter (L) is also
Note that 1 cm3 is not equal to 0.01 m3. approved for use. The liter is a special
Also, in equations, submultiples such as name for cubic decimeter (1 L = 1 dm3 =
centimeter (cm) or decimeter (dm) should 103 m3). Only the milli (m) and micro ()
be avoided because they disturb the prefixes may be used with liter.
convenient 103 or 103 intervals that The fundamental units of time,
make equations easy to manipulate. temperature, pressure and volume are
In SI, the distinction between upper expressed every time movement of a fluid
and lower case letters is meaningful and (liquid or gas) is measured.
Porosity
Porosity is reported as a ratio of volume to
volume and can be expressed as a
percentage. For example, if hydrogen
content in aluminum is measured as
2.5 mm3g1, this value reduces to
2.50 mm3(0.37 cm3)1 1000 mm3cm3 =
0.675 or about 0.7 percent. Therefore the
hydrogen content should be reported as
6.75 mm3cm3 in volume for a porosity
of 0.7 percent.
Principles of Liquid
Penetrant Testing
FIGURE 3. Postemulsifiable liquid penetrant processes: (a) lipophilic; (b) hydrophilic. Shaded areas indicate
steps that differ between lipophilic and hydrophilic techniques.
(a) (b)
Clean
Dwell Prerinse
Dwell Dwell
Aqueous Aqueous
Dry Dry Dry Dry
developer developer
Nonaqueous Nonaqueous
Dry developer Dry Dry developer Dry
developer developer
Dwell Dwell
Inspect Inspect
Postclean Postclean
(c)
Clean
Emulsified liquid penetrant
Dwell
Emulsifier reaction zone
movement is stopped at
part surface (before it can Initial dry wipe
Liquid penetrant enter entrapment by careful
entrapped in defect timing before rinse starts
not emulsified Solvent wipe
(d)
Room temperature water spray at 45 degrees Final dry wipe
removes emulsified surface liquid penetrant only MOVIE.
Nonaqueous developer Developer is
applied.
Dwell
Inspect
Nonemulsified liquid
penetrant within
Postclean
entrapment is not
removable
(a)
(b)
Water spray
Entrapped
(b) liquid
penetrant
(c)
Water spray
Entrapped
Lost liquid liquid
penetrant penetrant
MOVIE.
Nonaqueous
Nonaqueous Wet
wet developer Developer
enhances Another common developer type is the so
visible dye called nonaqueous wet developer whose
contrast. developer solids come premixed and
suspended in a volatile solvent. The
volatile solvent tends to pull liquid
penetrant from indications by solvent
action. It also accelerates drying so that a
supplementary drying operation is not
(b) (b)
(c)
(c)
(d) (d)
Contrast of Fluorescent
Liquid Penetrant Test Placement of Light Sources
Indications in Liquid Penetrant Testing
In the case of fluorescent liquid penetrant Booth
discontinuity indications, visual Consideration should be given to the
perceptibility is enhanced by light disposition of lights within an inspection
emission mechanisms within the liquid booth and to the effect on an operator of
penetrant indications and conditions of placement of light sources. Although
viewing are quite different. Using ultraviolet-A radiation will not damage
brightness contrast, the bright the eye permanently, some of the layers of
yellow-green indication is seen against a the eyeball exhibit strong tendencies to
nearly black or at least a very dark fluoresce. If the inspection light is placed
background. The indication itself is so that its rays fall directly or are reflected
actually a source of light which, even into the eyes of operators, this eyeball
though small, is quite intense. Contrast fluorescence can become extremely
can be exceptionally high. Some estimates annoying and will impair inspector
give it a value as high as 100 to 1 or even effectiveness to a very marked degree.
much greater, because it is the presence of Use of special filtering eyeglasses will
light compared to absence of light. increase operator perception and reduce
With fluorescent liquid penetrants, the fatigue. Yellow tinted eyeglasses filter out
most effective way to increase visibility the ultraviolet radiation before it reaches
(and improve resolution of fine the eye, yet they do not reduce the
discontinuities) is to increase the visibility of fluorescent indications.
fluorescent brilliance of the liquid
penetrant material. The fluorescent
indications are generally viewed in the
substantial absence of visible light, so that Interpretation of Liquid
the background remains unseen. Penetrant Indications
The interpretation of liquid penetrant
Visibility of Fluorescent Liquid indications is normally a matter of
Penetrant Indications considerable judgment. It might be said
From the point of view of color contrast, that it involves three phases:
most fluorescent liquid penetrants provide (1) observation of indications,
yellow or yellow-green indications against (2) verification of indication cause and
a black background. This has been proven significance and (3) disposition of test
by research into visibility of such objects objects in accordance with applicable
as highway signs to be one of the most criteria for acceptance and rejection.
seeable combinations possible. The The first step is that of visually
normal human eye has its highest observing the indication and verifying
sensitivity in the yellow or yellow green that it is relevant, i.e., that it is indicating
wavelength range. In fluorescent testing, a discontinuity rather than a material
the eye looks at a fine source of light of characteristic that is a normal condition
high brightness. Under this condition, of the surface under investigation.
probably because of halation, the source Figures 12 and 13 show some typical
size appears to be greatly exaggerated liquid penetrant indications.
whereas the dark background tends to be The American Society for Testing and
minimized. Materials (ASTM) has issued ASTM E 433,
Standard Reference Photographs for Liquid
Penetrant Inspection.5 This publication
Background Fluorescence Caused contains reference photographs to be used
by Rough or Porous Surfaces as a means of establishing and classifying
In some practical applications where the type and characteristics of surface
test object surface is porous or rough, discontinuities detectable by liquid
fluorescent liquid penetrant tends to be penetrant test techniques. They may be
retained on the surface as well as in used as a reference for acceptance
discontinuities. This condition reduces standards, specifications and drawings.
contrast between the background and However, no attempt has been made to
indications and may impair establish limits of acceptability or the
discrimination. For this reason, a extent of the metallurgical discontinuity.
compromise between the removability of
(a) (b)
FIGURE 13. Blow holes in casting shown by fluorescent liquid penetrant testing.
Acceptance/Rejection
Criteria for Critical Parts
Test acceptance/rejection criteria for parts
or surfaces would normally be referenced
by an applicable specification, standard
for a particular part or some other
governing document that would outline
what type of discontinuity would be cause
for rejection. An extreme example of this
would be the approach taken by
companies that are working with fracture
mechanics, whereby a particular structure
or part is analyzed for specific types of
discontinuities that may or may not
constitute a rejectable discontinuity.
Standards are then drawn up for the items
for nondestructive test criteria, which may
include liquid penetrant testing. These
would include minimum acceptable
indication size and strict uniform liquid
penetrant processing.
The importance of carefully controlled
liquid penetrant testing and the necessity
to record the exact techniques used to
process the parts on the technique card or
other applicable document cannot be over
emphasized. In a number of
specifications, porosity bleedout diameters
are specified as accept/reject criteria. The
maximum acceptable size limits for liquid
penetrant indications apply to the
bleedout indication immediately after
wiping the indication one time with a
swab or brush dipped in solvent.
Bleedback refers to the recurrence of the
liquid penetrant indication after once
wiping away the original indication.
(a)
Field Application of
Nonaqueous Developers
A convenient developer for use under
field conditions is nonaqueous developer
applied from an aerosol container.
Before applying the developer, the
container should be shaken vigorously to
make certain the materials are well mixed
and all solids are brought into suspension.
The developer should be used sparingly.
Just enough developer is applied with a
spray can to cover the part thinly and
evenly. The proper developer thickness
will dry to a thin, translucent layer. Too
much developer may mask indications.
Care should be taken to use a short
distance of up to 0.3 m (12 in.) between
spray nozzles and test parts to ensure
application of a wet developer coat.
(b) Excessive spraying distances result in
solvent flashoff so that the benefits of a
nonaqueous developer that aids liquid
penetrant from entrapments to reach the
test surface will be lost. The user should
exercise caution because some developers
sprayed from aerosol cans are flammable.
Viewing of Fluorescent
Liquid Penetrant
Indications
For field inspection under ultraviolet
radiation, curtains or other means of
shutting out the natural light are
recommended. The darker the inspection
area, the more reliable the inspection will
be. Outdoor testing is often done at night.
Inspectors should accommodate their eyes
to darkness before inspection.
Maintaining Cleanliness in
Control of Atmospheric Liquid Penetrant
Pollution from Liquid Processing and Test Areas
Good housekeeping in and around liquid
Penetrant Testing Systems penetrant test units should be observed at
Air sampling to ensure that the area all times. A clean piece of equipment not
surrounding the liquid penetrant only looks better but also provides a
processing is being maintained at safe much better inspection. Accumulations of
health levels is an advisable precaution, expendable test materials on equipment
particularly if toxic solvents are known to should be avoided. Liquid penetrant,
be involved. The Environmental either visible or fluorescent, can be
Protection Agency (EPA) has placed especially bad if allowed to collect on
restrictions on the concentrations of work surfaces. It can be picked up by parts
certain volatile solvents in the and may lead to false indications or, at
atmosphere,6 and the Occupational Safety least, confusion to the inspector.
and Health Administration administers Collection of quantities of fluorescent
regulations that limit the accumulated liquid penetrant on interior surfaces of
exposures of personnel to toxic gases or the ultraviolet radiation inspection booth
vapors.7 Continued monitoring of the can be particularly bad. Under the
atmosphere in work areas and of influence of the ultraviolet radiation
emissions from exhaust systems into the always present in the inspection booth,
environmental atmosphere may be masses of fluorescent material can easily
necessary to ensure compliance with these emit enough visible light to affect the
requirements. Some liquid penetrant inspectors darkness adaptation, thereby
processing materials have been specifically lowering the overall sensitivity of the
formulated to abide by air pollution entire liquid penetrant testing process.
restrictions such as those in Los Angeles Precautions must also be taken to
and San Francisco. Because of the rapid ensure that developer powder is free from
changes in environmental and health liquid penetrant contamination.
regulations, users of liquid penetrants and Fluorescent or color dyes in the developer
solvent materials should check their may be carried onto part surfaces with the
compliance with federal, state and developer to produce false indications.
municipal or other applicable codes and Bright fluorescent spots in tank developers
regulations on a continual basis. may also emit light that may interfere
with the inspectors dark adaptation.
Another common source of trouble is the
accumulation of dust behind the filter of
Ultraviolet Lamp the ultraviolet lamp. The filter should be
Maintenance removed and the back of the filter and the
face of the ultraviolet lamp bulb should
An integral part of the fluorescent liquid both be wiped clean whenever dust
penetrant system is the ultraviolet accumulates.
radiation source (ultraviolet lamp), the
intensity of which is vital to a reliable
result. It is recommended that this
intensity be checked weekly or more often
if the light is being operated at an
intensity level close to the minimum.
Ultraviolet radiation intensity should be
measured with a meter calibrated to
requirements of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology. On a
commercially available ultraviolet
radiation meter, measurements are taken
at distances of 380 mm (15 in.) from the
face of the filter on the ultraviolet lamp,
Summary of Ultraviolet
Radiation Safety
With appropriate precautions, fluorescent
penetrant testing can be performed in a
safe and effective manner.
The general rules of ultraviolet safety
are designed to protect the people who
may be exposed to such radiation, directly
or accidentally.
The first level of protection includes
posting areas where ultraviolet radiation
exists in excess of safe limits. Legal
signage must display standard caution
ultraviolet radiation warnings and may
contain additional health protection
information. The color and size of such
signs should meet Federal and state
requirements (see 29 CFR 1910.115).7
Control of the environment is another
critical safety measure.
Equipment that produces ultraviolet
radiation should be enclosed by
partitions, screens or walls painted with
nonreflective paint. Paint containing
metallic particles should not be used. In
addition, this equipment must be labeled
to inform individuals of its potential
health and safety hazards.
Contact the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA), the
American National Standards Institute
(ANSI), the American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists
(ACGIH) and the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
before performing any fluorescent liquid
penetrant test procedure.
Characteristics of Liquid
Penetrant and Processing
Materials
Penetrants and their ancillaries must have toward the liquids interior, and the
physical properties that fall within fairly surface acts like a skin. It acts to minimize
narrow ranges. None are difficult to attain the surface area of the liquid and it
but properties cannot stray very far from requires effort (the surface tension) to
optimum. The coverage of these topics is stretch this skin.
essentially practical. Some physical Contact angle is the measured angle
chemistry is included, particularly relating that a drop of liquid makes with a solid
to capillarity, light absorption and surface. If contact angle is zero, cos = 1
scattering but not enough to require that and the liquid will wet and spread. If the
the reader be a professional physical contact angle is 90 degrees or more, cos
chemist. Discussions are limited to = 0 and the liquid will not wet but will
descriptions of usable processes and how remain as a rounded drop. Intermediate
they work. No effort is made to discuss contact angles indicate intermediate
unproved processes or theories. degrees of wetting. Contact angles can be
For readers who have interests in other measured on special sample surfaces with
theories behind the mechanisms of special equipment.
penetration, surface wetting, adsorption Energy of adhesion is a measure of the
and development and other fundamental strength of attraction of a liquid to a solid
physical chemistries of liquid penetrant surface and is of more theoretical than
testing, additional readings1-7 are practical value.
suggested. Penetration of a discontinuity is
primarily a capillary effect. The forces
involved are those associated with
capillary action and are called capillary
Penetration pressure or excess surface pressure. This
The very name penetrant suggests that the pressure is given by Eq. 1:
ability to penetrate into voids is the major
feature of a penetrant. This is no doubt 2
(1) P =
true but it is not a critical feature. Very R
nearly any liquid will wet a solid surface
and penetrate into voids. In fact, it is not where is the surface tension of the liquid
easy to find a liquid that will not and R is the radius of curvature of the
penetrate. If it wets, it will penetrate; if liquid surface. The effect of this capillary
not, it will not. pressure can best be shown by examining
Wetting of smooth, chemically clean the two systems depicted in Figs. 1a
surfaces has been studied extensively with and 1b.
relationships worked out between surface In Fig. 1a the liquid wets the capillary
tension, interfacial tension, wetting and the pressure P1 is up. In Fig. 1b the
contact angle, energy of adhesion. None liquid does not wet the capillary and the
are very appropriate because many of pressure P2 is down. The ability to wet or
these quantities are not measurable on the not wet determines in which direction the
kinds of surfaces that are tested with surface will curve, whereas the degree of
liquid penetrant. Even a cleaned surface wetting determines to what extent the
can pick up a molecular monolayer of oil surface will curve. Therefore, the first
or oxide in a very short time. The requirement for penetration is its ability
slightest taint of oil on a surface can to wet the surface of the discontinuity.
change a surface and cause a penetrant The dimensions of the capillary are
film to become less wet and to pull up also important and the radius of the
into droplets. As a practical matter, this is capillary can be related to the capillary
not too serious. Reapplication of pressure by examining Fig. 1c. It is found
penetrant will usually dissolve this film that R = r/cos , i.e., cos = r/R, where r is
and allow testing to proceed. the radius of the tube and is the angle
Surface tension can be defined as the of contact of the liquid and the tube.
force needed to expand (or pull apart) the Equation 1 becomes:
surface of a liquid. It results from the
2 cos
attraction of all the molecules within the (2) P =
liquid for each other. At the surface, with r
no more liquid outside, the net force is
R1 P1
r
R2 P2
R
Legend
P = pressure
R = radius of liquid surface curvature
r = tube radius
= angle of contact between liquid and tube
Capillary Radius
_________________________________________________________________________________
1.0 mm 0.1 mm 0.01 mm 1.0 m 0.5 m
(4 102 in.) (4 103 in.) (4 104 in.) (4 105 in.) (2 105 in.)
0.025 (1.7 103) 50 (7) 500 (70) 5000 (700) 50 000 (7000) 100 000 (200 000)
0.035 (2.4 103) 70 (10) 700 (100) 7000 (1000) 70 000 (10 000) 140 000 (20 000)
Viscosity
Liquid penetrants drain off surfaces at a
rate that depends on their viscosities and
to an extent that depends on drainage
time and surface roughness. Studies in the
laboratory with nonvolatile liquids
draining from calibrated, vertical surfaces
led to Eq. 8:
(8) D = S + 7.86 10 3
T
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 0.00001
(400) (40) (4) (0.4) (0.04) (0.004) (0.0004)
Importance of Light
Scattering for Fluorescent
Liquid Penetrant Testing
Partially fill a clear glass container, beaker
or cylinder with fluorescent liquid
penetrant, place it under a near ultraviolet Penetrant layer
lamp and look at it from above. What you
see is a dim greenish fluorescent liquid
surface. Next squat down and view the Part surface
liquid penetrant surface from the
edge. What you now see is a thin bright Legend
yellow layer at the surface with nothing = Angle at which total internal reflection begins
I0 It
Penetrant layer
Part surface
I0
Layer of developer
and liquid penetrant
Part surface
(15) F = Q I 0 (1 10 ect )
Required ultraviolet
light intensities measured in various
lighting environments. 10 (1000)
Eyesight is very important to any
inspector and much has been written
about the need for vision acuity and dark 1 (100)
adaptation. Other factors exist. Cataracts
can affect the ability of an inspector to see 0.1 (10)
fluorescent indications. First there is a 10.76 107.60 1076.00
defocusing that can be partially corrected (1) (10) (100)
with glasses. Second, the eyes lenses
become yellow and absorb the violet Ambient visible light intensity, Ix (ftc)
(405 nm) emission peak from the visible
fluorescent radiation, making it appear
red. Thus acuity decreases, but because
less violet radiation is seen the field of
view darkens and contrast
increases. Replacing cataracts with clear
plastic lenses allows the 405 nm radiation
to be seen. Ultraviolet lamps then seem to
emit an intense violet light that washes
out faint indications.
Assessing vision acuity can become
very complex, as there are a wide range of
eye conditions that may affect an
inspectors ability to see and evaluate
indications. Color blindness and ordinary
ability to resolve tiny lines and spots are
only the most well known
conditions. None of this has much to do
with liquid penetrant materials
themselves but as long as human eyes are
part of the liquid penetrant testing
process, their performance must be
anticipated in planning tests and
considered in evaluating test results.
The quality of an inspection made with review and the latest changes are often
liquid penetrants can be no better than important improvements over previous
the quality of the liquid penetrant test issues. Using the version specified by
materials used for the inspection. contract is essential if the liquid penetrant
Recognizing this basic fact requires that test system is subject to audit, because the
liquid penetrant materials meet certain auditor will immediately check to see that
industry standards before they are the correct issues are being followed.
purchased for use. It also requires that
these materials and the liquid penetrant
systems in which they are used be
monitored and tested on a periodic and
regular basis. To ensure the materials
purchased are of desired quality and that
the proper tests are made at the proper
intervals during their use, a variety of
specifications have been developed. A list
of some of the better known
nondestructive testing specifications
appears in the references.1-19
These specifications can be broadly
classified as to their origin, typically the
United States military, various United
States technical societies or corporate
users. Many of the specifications
describing the materials have common
threads running through them whereas
some have been specifically tailored to the
specialized use of a particular industry or
customer. For example, although virtually
every liquid penetrant in use has had to
meet the requirements of MIL-I-251351
(or its commercial replacement,
AMS-26442), liquid penetrants used in the
nuclear industry must additionally have
particularly low contents of certain low
melting metals, as well as sulfur and
halogens. Aircraft turbine engine
manufacturers require products with low
fluoride, sodium, chloride and sulfur
content. Specifications detailing the
testing of materials in use have revolved
mainly around the military specification
MIL-STD-68663 (or its commercial
replacement, ASTM E 14174) but other
corporate specifications may also exist.
These specifications, in turn, often refer to
tests which are called out in other
specifications. For example,
MIL-STD-68663 refers to tests which are
outlined and described in MIL-I-251351 or
AMS 2644,2 and NAVSHIPS 250-1500-120
refers to tests documented by the
American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM).
When using any specification, it is
important to find out whether the latest
version of the specification is used.
Specifications are usually under constant
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1.33 1.35 1.37 1.39 1.41 1.43 1.45 1.47
Refractive index
FIGURE 8. Two examples of matched halves of chrome plated, cracked panels for evaluating
liquid penetrant system performance: (a) coarse cracks, relatively deep; (b) fine cracks,
relatively shallow.
(a) (b)
Interpretation of Liquid
Penetrant Indications
Sources of Discontinuities in
FIGURE 4. Thermal cracks and shrinkage in cast motor
housings. Forgings
If the ingot or billet is used for forging, a
variety of discontinuities can be produced,
usually because of improper handling of
the metal under the hammer or to
working at too low a temperature.
Common discontinuities are laps and
folds. Forging bursts, both external and
internal, can also occur. Figure 5 shows a
forging lap.
In the case of die or drop forging, laps
and surface tears and bursts may be
produced. In die forgings, excess metal is
forced out between the two halves of the
die forming the flash and this excess
metal is subsequently trimmed off. If not
properly done, flashline cracks or tears
may be formed. Another type of forging
discontinuity is the internal rupture
Sources of Discontinuities in
Machined and Ground Surfaces
Sometimes machining operations, as for
instance too heavy a cut with improper
tools, may cause surface damage, leaving
discontinuities in the form of surface
tears. Grinding of surfaces for accurate
dimensions or for finish is a prolific
source of surface cracking, especially on
hardened steel surfaces. Parts that have
been hardened may have residual internal
Persistence of Liquid
Penetrant Indications
One good way to estimate the size of
discontinuity is by the persistence of the
indication. If it reappears after the
developer has been removed and
reapplied, there must be a reservoir of
liquid penetrant present. In case of faint
or weak indications where there is some
doubt as to the type or even the existence
of a discontinuity, it is good practice to
repeat the entire liquid penetrant test. If
the indication reappears, it is probably
due to a small discontinuity rather than
to incomplete cleaning.
Types of Specifications for FIGURE 12. Crack in stainless steel tube: (a) fluorescent liquid
penetrant indication; (b) cross section.
Liquid Penetrant Testing
(a)
Specifications and standards applicable to
liquid penetrant testing may be divided
into two broad classes: (1) those dealing
with techniques and (b) those dealing
with materials. Each of these groups can
be broken down further. Some of the
subgroups are below.
Techniques
Specifications and standards may apply to
the following types of techniques:
1. broad procedural guidelines; (b)
2. company procedural guidelines;
3. procedural guides for specific types of
products or for industries;
4. procedures for testing specific articles,
specified by a purchaser or by process
specifications internal to the
company;
5. procedures specified for overall
inspection of a companys products;
6. specifications for certification of
operators;
7. standards for acceptance or rejection,
set up by buyer or by company for
quality control;
8. repair station requirements;
9. equipment specifications; and
10. instructions for operating specific
types of equipment or individual
special units.
Materials
by comparing it with standard film but
Specifications that apply to materials may the many factors affecting liquid
be of the following types: penetrant testing have retarded the
1. specifications designed for use in establishment of standards for this
purchasing liquid penetrants and process. Differences in indications may be
other materials and due to personnel or technique, as well as
2. specifications designed for testing and to variations in discontinuities. The
evaluating performance of liquid inspector must know the technique used
penetrants and other materials. and its effect on liquid penetrant
indications. Possible causes of inadequate
liquid penetrant indications are shown in
Table 4.
Lack of Standard Liquid
Penetrant Indications
There are as yet no standard liquid
penetrant indications for comparison.
Radiographers can judge the seriousness
of a discontinuity revealed on X-ray film
Defect fine crack or cold shut general porosity porosity large flaws
Fabrication prior anodize or chromate embedded grease rough surface
Cleaning wet, acid, or caustic oily or greasy scale or rust
Temperature too low
Washing inadequate inadequate
Lighting inadequate
Inspector poor sighta poor sighta
a. Inadequate vision of inspector may be due to (1) inattention, (2) maladaption to darkness or (3) poor vision acuity,
which may be due to vitamin A deficiency.
Indications of
Miscellaneous Parts
Many test laboratories handling a wide
variety of work do not have the advantage
of inspecting large quantities of any one
item. Most of these commercial
laboratories are performing tests to
government specifications and
consequently, the liquid penetrant
inspectors are trained and tested. There is
no substitute for experience, which is
gained only by seeing which
discontinuities caused which indications.
(a)
Cracks Occurring during
Processing of Metals
Hot and cold working of metals and alloys
can induce cracking. Hot short
materials can crack when hot working
stresses exceed loads that can be
supported at grain boundaries. Cold
working to excess leads to cracking as well
as work hardening. Heating and cooling
(as when hardening by quenching parts in
water after removal from hot furnaces)
can lead to thermal stress and quench
cracking.
Forging Cracks
Forgings may have indications of cracks,
often at the juncture of light and heavy
sections or in thin fins. As in castings,
cracks are regarded as rejectable.
Indications similar to those from cracks
are produced by forging laps, discussed
elsewhere in this chapter.
(b)
Cracks in Sheets or Tubing
Formed parts such as sheet or tubing or
castings that have been straightened may
crack at the point of maximum stress.
Such cracks may be very small; there are
usually several in close proximity and
they are generally considered rejectable
discontinuities.
Machining Marks
Machining practice may produce cracklike
indications from dull tools, chatter marks
and similar tool marks. Such indications
are ordinarily not intense and are not
considered sufficient cause for rejection.
Grinding Cracks
Grinding cracks are minute, often Fig. 15a were taken under normal light;
invisible to the unaided eye and are cause the photographs in Fig. 15b show the
for rejection. The type of precision part same tools, processed with water washable
that must have a ground surface cannot liquid penetrant, under ultraviolet
tolerate any surface cracks, however small. radiation. These cracks would soon
While grinding cracks are extremely fine progress to failure if the tools were used.
and may be shallow, they usually occur in Notice that the indications are bright and
a definite network that is easily identified. well defined because the cracks are deep
Extensive grinding cracks are shown in and rather tight lipped.
the two carbide tipped cutting tools
illustrated in Fig. 15. The photographs in
(c)
from these areas, this porosity is probably cause for rejection unless they can be
harmless. lapped out within the acceptable
dimensional tolerance.
Cracks in Valve Heads
Some valves are faced with special alloys Stress Corrosion Cracks
to increase their resistance to heat and Another crack that is caused by operating
wear. Because this facing is nonmagnetic, conditions is stress corrosion cracking.
cracks can be detected only by liquid Deep drawn parts used to contain
penetrant testing (Fig. 20). Such cracks are chemicals and items for maritime service
are especially likely to crack from stress
corrosion. Stress corrosion cracking does
not necessarily start from an edge or stress
FIGURE 18. Fatigue cracks in aluminum piston head.
raiser. Indications of these cracks often
appear in a pattern at the area of
maximum stress and are easily identified.
Stress corrosion cracks are considered
cause for rejection.
Heat Checks
The third type of crack that may show up
on maintenance overhaul is the heat
check, occurring when surfaces are
overheated. Like grinding cracks (which
are initiated in the same way by local
overheating), heat checks are usually quite
shallow but occur in definite, recognizable
network. These indications may or may
not, be cause for rejection, depending on
the use of the part.
(a)
(b)
Seams
FIGURE 21. Forging laps in aluminum forging. Seams in bar stock, laminations in sheet
or plate and seam conditions in forgings
give liquid penetrant indications similar
to those from extrusion discontinuities.
Seams are often extremely narrow, having
been compressed and elongated in
manufacture. Indication lines are usually
quite straight, easy to recognize and in
the longitudinal direction. They may be
only short lines when examined
transverse to the direction of rolling.
Seams are usually bases for rejection
(Fig. 22).
Extrusion Discontinuities
Depending on the orientation of the
surface being examined, an extrusion
discontinuity may cause continuous or
dotted liquid penetrant indications. A
typical extrusion discontinuity is an internal
unsound area, longitudinally squeezed
during extrusion and sometimes
breaching the surface (Fig. 23). If the
extrusion is sectioned and a longitudinal
surface examined, the extrusion
discontinuity will show up as a line, like a
crack. If a cross section is inspected, liquid
penetrant indications will appear as short
lines or dots. An extrusion discontinuity
is usually considered a basis for rejection
in aircraft applications but may be
acceptable for other service where only
longitudinal strength is required.
Gas Holes FIGURE 25. Leak testing of welded seam with fluorescent
liquid penetrant: (a) spray application of liquid penetrant to
Liquid penetrant indications of gas holes interior wall at weld seam; (b) spray application of developer
are round blobs of rich color or to exterior wall at weld seam; (c) leak indications in welded
fluorescence. Large gas holes are bases for seam shown by fluorescence.
rejection, not only because they reduce
strength but also because they produce a (a)
rough surface. Small gas holes may not be
rejectable discontinuities, because they do
not have the serious effect on strength
that a crack or a lap does. If pressure
tightness or smooth surface is required,
then even tiny pinholes are considered a
basis for rejection. Figure 24 shows
fluorescent liquid penetrant indications of
extreme porosity in a casting.
Shrinkage Cavities
Porosity resulting from shrinkage cavities
may produce rounded liquid penetrant
indications or may give the appearance of
MOVIE. cracks. Usually, shrinkage cavities have a
Porosity in dendritic pattern that helps the inspector
casting. identify them. For high stress
applications, shrinkage cavities are (b)
rejectable discontinuities. These are cases
where the amount of shrinkage and its
location on the part do not detrimentally
affect service; in such cases the part is
acceptable.
(c)
Porosity in Ceramics
Liquid penetrant testing is a good way to
locate porosity in ceramics. The
appearance and interpretation of
indications are the same as in metals,
with the one extra caution that special
attention must be paid to cleaning
because most ceramics are somewhat
porous.
Evaluation of Nonrelevant
Indications
One technique that an inspector can use
to help identify a nonrelevant indication
is wiping off the indication with a solvent
dampened lint free swab or cloth and
reapplying the developer. The original
developer dwell time must be repeated;
however, the inspector should monitor
the bleedout to help evaluate the
indication. If there is no bleedout, the
original indication can be considered
nonrelevant or false. This technique may
also reveal multiple relevant indications
that had previously merged into one or
had been hidden by excessive bleedout
from an adjacent nonrelevant indication
during the developer dwell.
Evaluating Indications to
Determine Causes of
Discontinuities
It is possible to examine an indication of
a discontinuity and to determine its cause
as well as its extent. Such an appraisal can
be made if something is known about the
manufacturing processes to which the
part has been subjected. The extent of the
indication or accumulation of liquid
penetrant, will show the extent of
discontinuity and the breadth and
brilliance will be a measure of its depth.
Deep cracks will hold more liquid
penetrant and therefore will be broader
and more brilliant. Very fine openings can
hold only small amounts of liquid
TABLE 5. Typical aerospace manufacturers liquid penetrant testing acceptance and rejection criteria.
High
Material and Stainless Iron Temperature
Discontinuity Aluminum Copper Magnesium Nickel Steel Alloy Titanium Alloy
Bar Stock
cracks N N N N N N N N
seams N N N N N N N N
Castings
cold shuts Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
cracks N N N N N N N N
porosity A A Q A A A A A
sand blisters A A A A A A A A
shrinkage Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
Extrusions
blisters N N N N N N N N
broken surface N N N N N N
deep scratches Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
die drag Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
die weld cracks N N N
cracks N N N N N N N N
inclusions Q Q N Q Q Q N Q
metal pick up A A A A A A A A
pitting A Q N Q Q A N Q
Forgings
cracks N N N N N N N N
inclusions Q Q N Q Q Q N Q
laps N N N N N N N N
Formed Part
cracks N N N N N N N N
inclusions Q Q N Q Q Q N Q
metal pick up A A A A A A A A
orange peel Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
Heat Treated
cracks N N N N N N N N
scale A A A
Machined parts
cracks N N N N N N N N
grinding cracks N N N N N N N N
tool marks Q Q N Q Q Q N Q
Plate
cracks N N N N N N N N
inclusions Q N N Q Q Q N Q
laminations N N N N N N N N
pitting A Q N Q Q A N Q
scratches A A N A A A N A
Sheet
cracks N N N N N N N N
inclusions Q Q N Q Q Q N Q
laminations N N N N N N N N
pitting A Q N Q Q A N Q
scratches A A N A A A N A
A = Acceptable.
N = Not acceptable.
Q = Questionable.
Grade E Allows same flaws as Grade B, Allows same bleedback as in Allows same indications as in
plus four negative flaws per Grade B, plus four bleedback Grade B, plus diameter 0.4
side of 0.4 to 1.5 mm (0.016 indications per side of 0.4 to to 1.5 mm (0.016 to 0.06 in.)
to 0.06 in.) diameter and an 1.5 mm (0.016 to 0.06 in.) limited to four places per area
estimated depth 0.5 mm diameter if clearly separated a designated if clearly separated
(0.02 in.) or 25 percent of the minimum of 6 mm (0.24 in.) a distance 3 mm (0.12 in.)
local drawing thickness, apart apart and each does not
whichever is least, if clearly Allows indications 0.8 mm exceed 20 percent of the
separated a distance 6 mm (0.032 in.) diameter if spaced local drawing specified
(0.24 in.) apart 3 mm (0.12 in.) apart thickness
Negative flaws of diameter Allows indications of diameter
0.8 mm (0.032 in.) allowed 0.8 mm (0.032 in.) if
if spaced 3 mm (0.12 in.) spaced 3 mm (0.12 in.)
apart
Stock surfaces, Negative defects allowed to For any grade, bleedback Unlimited flaws allowed to
all grades depth of machining stock allowed to depth of depth of machining stock
Negative flaws of 0.1 mm machining stock Negative flaws of 0.1 mm
(0.004 in.) diameter shall be Negative flaws of 0.1 mm (0.004 in.) diameter shall be
considered not interpretable (0.004 in.) diameter shall be considered not interpretable
and shall be acceptable considered not interpretable and shall be acceptable
regardless of location if clearly and shall be acceptable regardless of location if clearly
separated by 2.5 mm regardless of location if clearly separated by 2.5 mm
(0.1 in.) separated by 2.5 mm (0.1 in.)
Cracks, folds, cold shuts, or (0.1 in.) Cracks, folds, cold shuts, or
linear flaws (width 1/3 its Cracks, folds, cold shuts or linear flaws (width 1/3 its
length) are not allowed linear flaws (width 1/3 its length) are not allowed
length) are not allowed
(b)
Other than removing loose dirt with After surface preparation and cleaning,
nonabrasive techniques and cleaning with any residues of cleaning agents, including
a simple solvent wipe, a nondestructive water, must be removed. The part and
testing inspector is unqualified to perform discontinuity surfaces must be not only
most cleaning operations. However, clean but also dry.
the inspector needs to know (1) what
contaminants and surface conditions
adversely affect the liquid penetrant test,
(2) the cleaning techniques or other Surface Conditions
processes required to eliminate the Interfering with Liquid
adverse conditions and (3) the
consequences of using those techniques Penetrant Testing
and processes. Knowledge of these Test material surface conditions that may
conditions and techniques enables the interfere with the application of liquid
inspector to request the proper operations penetrants or their entry into surface
and be assured that the surface is properly connected discontinuities may be
prepared for liquid penetrant testing. classified into two groups:
The mesh numbers used in this chapter (1) contaminants on the surface or within
to express the coarseness of grit used in discontinuities that prevent surface
mechanical processing correspond to wetting and capillary flow of the liquid
particle diameters, as explained in this penetrants; (2) contaminants or surface
volumes discussion of measurement conditions that physically block the
units. entrances to discontinuities so that liquid
penetrants cannot enter.
Similarly, surface conditions or
contaminants that trap liquid penetrant
Test Object Preparation for or tracer liquids to produce false
Liquid Penetrant Testing indications or inhibit or prevent
extraction of liquid penetrant retained in
The first step of the liquid penetrant test leaks or discontinuities during
process is the preparation and cleaning of development, can be classified into two
the test surface and any surface connected groups: (1) porous, adherent coatings or
discontinuities. Surface preparation aids contaminants providing interstices that
wetting and flow of the liquid penetrant. retain liquid penetrants on test object
Surface conditions, e.g., soil surfaces or impede their entry into
contamination or surface irregularities, underlying discontinuities or leaks; and
can reduce the effectiveness of the test (2) coatings on interior surfaces of
process by interfering with (1) wetting of discontinuities or leaks that have high
the test surface by the liquid penetrant, surface energies and resist extraction of
(2) entry of the liquid penetrant into the liquid penetrant from the
discontinuities and (3) subsequent discontinuities into the developer coating.
bleedout of liquid penetrant to form
discontinuity indications.
Such interfering surface conditions
must be eliminated by surface preparation Types of Surface
before application of liquid penetrant.
The surface preparation technique Contamination Found on
selected must effectively remove the Test Objects
potential sources of interference without Surface contamination and contamination
damaging the parts being processed. within leaks or surface connected
Reliable liquid penetrant testing cannot discontinuities can be of many types,
be expected unless the parts to be tested including (1) preservative, forming,
are free from contamination. Foreign machining or lubricating oils and other
material adhering to the surface or liquids containing organic constituents;
contained within the discontinuities or (2) carbon, varnish and other tightly held
leak passageways, as well as the surface soil; (3) scale, rust, oxides, corrosion
effects cited above, can produce erroneous products and weld metal and weld flux
test indications or prevent indications residues; (4) paint and organic protective
from forming. coatings; (5) water, hydrates or other
TABLE 1. Contaminants that are on the test object surface or contained in voids or discontinuities and that interfere
with liquid penetrant action during processing, with removal procedures or corrective treatments.
3. Scale, rust, oxides and Surface soils tend to adsorb or absorb penetrant, 1. alkaline or acid type removal procedures
corrosion resulting in background color or fluorescence. 2. wire brushingb
These contaminants may also obstruct 3. vapor or sand blastingb
penetration into defects, impede wetting 4. electrocleaning
action or bridge discontinuities.
4. Paint coatings Paint coatings impede wetting. 1. solvent type paint removers
Paint coatings may also obscure or bridge surface 2. alkaline type paint removers
discontinuity openings. 3. abrasive removal proceduresb
4. burning
5. Water Water impedes wetting and penetration. 1. air dry
2. force dry with dry air
3. oven dry at elevated temperature
6. Strong acids or alkalines Strong acids or alkalines impede wetting and 1. rinse with fresh water
penetration. 2. use neutralizing rinse, fresh water rinse and
These contaminants may also also may react with dry
penetrant to decompose or degrade dyes or
other constituents.
a. Agitation such as used in ultrasonic cleaning may be beneficial with this surface treatment.
b. Mechanical processes that peen or smear surface material may act to close openings into discontinuities so that liquid penetrant indications cannot form.
Such abrasive cleaning techniques are often prohibited or require a subsequent acid etching treatment to reopen the discontinuity to the part surface so that
penetrant can enter.
FIGURE 1. Flowsheet for cleaning processes used with liquid penetrant testing.
Incoming parts
Preclean
Mechanical Paint stripper Ultrasonic
Dry
Etch
Inspect
(optional)
Inspect
Postclean
Dry
Outgoing parts
Removal of Fingerprints
from Test Surfaces
Most cleaning techniques will remove
fingerprint contamination on test objects.
However, in critical applications, it may
be necessary to use special procedures
such as electrocleaning or special
fingerprint removal products. The
mandatory use of cotton gloves for
handling test parts may be justified where
contamination from fingerprints, during
test handling or operations, is suspected
of causing trouble.
FIGURE 2. Effect of honing or lapping on liquid penetrant indications in cracked aluminum test specimens: (a) original crack
pattern of standard quench cracked block; (b) crack pattern after removal of 0.06 mm (0.0025 in.) of material using 30 grit
wheel with coolant and controlled feed and speed; (c) crack pattern after removal of 25 m (0.001 in.) by simulated cylinder
honing operation; (d) crack pattern after removal of 0.008 mm (0.0003 in.) per side by standard preanodic etch method;
(e) crack pattern after removal of 0.06 mm (0.0025 in.) by milling.
(a) (b) (c)
(d) (e)
(d) (e)
FIGURE 4. Effect of hand sanding using 240 grit on liquid penetrant indications in cracked
aluminum alloy test block: (a) original crack pattern of standard quench cracked block;
(b) crack pattern after removal of 0.05 mm (0.002 in.) material by hand sanding using 240
aluminum oxide grit paper; (c) crack pattern after removal of 0.008 mm (0.0003 in.) per side
by standard preanodic etch method; (d) crack pattern after removal of 0.06 mm (0.0025 in.)
material by milling. Note that crack obscuring effect of 240 grit is noticeably more than that
indicated by use of coarser 180 grit.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
FIGURE 5. Effect on liquid penetrant indications from combination of hand sanding of cracked
aluminum alloy test block with 80 grit paper and finish grind using motor driven 240 grit
quill: (a) original crack pattern of standard quench cracked block; (b) crack pattern after finish
grind; (c) crack pattern after removal of 0.008 mm (0.0003 in.) material per side by standard
preanodic etch; (d) crack pattern after removal of 0.06 mm (0.0025 in.) material by milling.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
FIGURE 6. Effect of hand scraping using carbide tip scraper on liquid penetrant indications in cracked aluminum alloy test
block: (a) original crack pattern of quench cracked block; (b) crack pattern after removal of 0.12 mm (0.005 in.) by hand
scraping entire surface; (c) crack pattern after removal of 0.008 mm (0.0003 in.) per side by preanodic etch. Note that some
streaking and slight loss of crack pattern is evidenced in Fig. 5b due to variations in scraping technique.
FIGURE 7. Effect of standard shot peen process on liquid penetrant indications in cracked aluminum alloy test block:
(a) original crack pattern of standard quench cracked block; (b) crack pattern after shot peen; (c) crack pattern after removal
of 0.008 mm (0.0003 in.) material per side by standard preanodic etch process; (d) crack pattern after removal of 0.12 mm
(0.005 in.) material by milling; (e) crack pattern after removal of an additional 0.12 mm (0.005 in.) by milling.
(d) (e)
(a) (a)
(b) (b)
(c) (c)
(d) (d)
FIGURE 10. Effect of grit blasting using 150 alum oxide grit on liquid penetrant indications in cracked
aluminum alloy test block: (a) original crack pattern of quench cracked block; (b) crack pattern after grit blast;
(c) crack pattern after 0.008 mm (0.0003 in.) per side was removed by standard preanodic etch. Note that
textured surface of block in Fig 5c definitely affected spread of liquid penetrant during development period.
Because liquid penetrant pattern was returned in its entirety, no further work was done with this example.
FIGURE 11. Effect of chromic anodic anodize treatment on liquid penetrant indications in cracked aluminum
alloy test block: (a) original crack pattern as developed in 7075-T6 block by quench crack method;
(b) chromic acid bleed back stain after anodizing; (c) crack pattern as developed by liquid penetrant process
after anodizing. Note that here, as in grit blasted specimen, surface texture promoted increased spreading of
liquid penetrant during development.
TABLE 4. Amount of surface material to be removed by etching to restore liquid penetrant indications.
Surface Material to Be Removed
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
No. 120 aluminum oxide grit blasting 7.5 300 1.8 70 0.8 30 ___ ___
No. 50 aluminum oxide grit blasting 100.0 4000 1.5 60 0.5 20 ___ ___
Liquid honing 2.5 100 1.8 70 0.8a 30 ___ ___
Shot penning 100.0 4000 4.5 180 2.5 100 ___ ___
Tumble deburring 2.5 100 1.5 60 1.0a 40 5 (200)
Sanding, 100 grit no effect 1.5a 60 no effect 5 (200)
Sanding, 180 grit 2.5 100 1.8a 70 no effect 5 (200)
Finish sanding of O-ring grooves ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 1.3 (30)
Conventional machining ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 5 (200)
Etch with
nitric-chromic-hydrofluoric Liquid penetrant test
Etch with proprietary
acid etch (1 L nitric acid,
alkaline etch cleaner
0.1 L hydrofluoric acid and
0.5 kg chromic acid) Etch for 10 min with nitric-chromic-hydrofluoric
acid etch (1 L nitric acid, 0.1 L hydrofluoric acid
and 0.5 kg chromic acid to remove 5 m or
0.0002 in.) of material
30 s etch 10 min 20 min
60 s etch 120 s etch 5 min etch
(remove etch etch
(remove (remove (remove
1.3 m or (Remove (remove
2.5 m or 5 m or 2.5 m or Etch with proprietary alkaline
0.00005 5 m or 7.5 m or
0.0001 in.) 0.0002 in.) 0.0001 in.) 0.0002 in.) etchant for 15 s to remove
in.) 0.0003 in.)
0.6 m (0.000025 in.) of
material
(b)
(b)
(c)
Recommended Metal
Removal by Etching of
Sanded Aluminum Parts
These results indicate that aluminum
parts subjected to (1) a sanding operation
with 180 grit butterfly type sanding units
or (2) a sanding operation with 100 grit
emery cloth sanding disks or (3) tumble
End
FIGURE 19. Typical grinding crack pattern in carburized AISI 1018 steel.
TABLE 6. Summary of mechanical processing effects on liquid penetrant indications. Blank boxes indicate that tests were
not performed under those conditions.a
1018 and Titanium
Operation Aluminum 4340 Steel 300M Steel 4130 Steel (6AI-4V)
Grit blasting, 120 grit aluminum oxide not performeda masked someb masked someb not performeda masked mostc
Grit blasting, 50 grit aluminum oxide not performeda masked someb masked someb not performeda masked mostc
Liquid honing not performeda masked someb reduced strengthd masked mostc masked someb
Shot peening not performeda masked mostc masked mostc not performeda masked mostc
Tumble deburring masked someb masked someb reduced strengthd not performeda masked someb
Sanding, 100 grit masked someb reduced strengthd no effecte not performeda no effecte
Sanding, 180 grit masked someb reduced strengthd no effecte not performeda masked someb
Finish sanding O-ring grooves masked mostc not performeda not performeda not performeda not performeda
FIGURE 21. Effect of liquid honing on liquid penetrant indications in 300 M steel (water
washable liquid penetrant without developer): (a) before liquid honing; (b) after liquid
honing.
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 22. Effect of shot peening on liquid penetrant indications in 300M steel: (a) as
cracked; (b) after shot peening; (c) after etching.
(a)
(b)
(c)
FIGURE 23. Effect of grit blasting on liquid penetrant indications in 300M steel: (a) as cracked;
(b) after grit blasting; (c) after etching.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(b)
(b)
Effects of Mechanical
Processing of Titanium on
Liquid Penetrant
Indications
The effect of mechanical processing on
titanium can be seen in Table 6. The effect Recommended Metal
on the liquid penetrant indications varied
depending on the mechanical process. For
Removal by Etching to
example, grit blasting and shot peening Restore Indications in
resulted in a total loss of liquid penetrant Titanium
indications (see Fig. 24) and were the
most detrimental processes. Consequently, The amount of etching required to restore
it can be seen that if liquid penetrant masked liquid penetrant indications also
testing of titanium is performed varied depending on the mechanical
immediately after grit blasting or shot process and the material (see Table 4). The
peening without etching, the test would average required amount of etching for
be highly ineffective. The effectiveness of Ti-6Al-4V alloy varied from 2.5 to 100 m
the liquid penetrant testing was reduced (0.0001 to 0.004 in.).
to a lesser degree by liquid honing,
tumble deburring and 180 grit sanding
(see Fig. 25). For those processes, finer
indications were lost but the larger
indications remained. Finally, 100 grit
sanding had no observable effect on
either the number of liquid penetrant
indications or their strength.
FIGURE 1. Small self-contained water washable fluorescent liquid penetrant testing unit.
Inspection hood
Splash shield
F
E
Drain pan and grille C
Curtain
D Ultraviolet lamp
Drier
B curtain
Hand hose
Whirl wash
Control
panel
Legend
A = liquid penetrant tank
B = drain area
C = rinse tank
D = drier
E = developer tank
F = inspection table
is equipped with a drain, hose and spray large pieces. Curtains to close the front of
nozzle for washing parts by hand. An the drier retain heat and maintain proper
ultraviolet radiation source is mounted air circulation inside the cabinet but are
over the wash tank so that the operator still convenient for in-and-out handling
can see when all excess liquid penetrant of parts.
has been removed in fluorescent liquid
penetrant testing. An automatic washer is
often incorporated into this wash tank, as
FIGURE 3. Automatic washer inserted in wash tank, as seen
shown in Fig. 3. This feature is desirable
from above.
when large numbers of parts are
inspected. With an automatic washer, no
personnel are required for the washing
operation. Parts are cleaned by multiple
water sprays as they rotate on the
automatic turntable located at the bottom
of the tank. Washing time can be
regulated to suit the application. The
wash station is plumbed with inline
pressure and temperature control devices.
(g) (h)
Conventional Spray
Application of Liquid
Penetrants
Conventional or electrostatic techniques
of spray application of liquid penetrants,
emulsifiers, removers and developers
provide effective ways of applying these
liquids with complete coverage of the
surfaces of test objects. Spraying is usually
more economical than immersion dip
tanks, primarily because of reduced
formation of pools of liquid penetrant in
cavities. Pooling often results in
substantial dragout losses of liquids. The
conventional liquid penetrant spray
station sketched in Fig. 7a is typical of the
various liquid penetrant process spray
stations in common use. It can spray a
variety of part sizes and can be equipped
for quick changeover from one liquid
material to another. In contrast to
immersion tanks with their liquid dragout
FIGURE 8. Application with electrostatic spray system minimizes consumption of liquid penetrant material and helps ensure
coverage of complete surface: (a) diagram shows arrangement of system components; (b) technician applies fluorescent liquid
penetrant with hand held electrostatic spray gun that makes atomized particles attracted to part; (c) two reciprocating
automatic electrostatic spray guns in conveyorized installation are used to apply liquid penetrant to one side of parts while
other guns (not illustrated) operate from opposite side further down line.
Fluorescent
ultraviolet
Extractor or lamps
regulator
Power supply
Air hose
(b) (c)
Hydrophilic Liquid
Penetrant Removal System Disposal of Waste Liquid
for Automatic Testing of Penetrant Processing
Jet Engine Blades Materials
The flow-line sequence can be used in an
Control of effluents from liquid penetrant
automated liquid penetrant testing line
test processing systems constitutes a
for jet engine blade production capable of
unique waste treatment and
processing several baskets of blades per
environmental protection problem area.
hour. In this system, the baskets of blades
Local ordinances may not permit
are placed on hooks of the continuously
discharge of these waste materials into
moving overhead conveyor. The basket
municipal sewer systems or open streams.
then moves through the precleaning
More information on control of
system and to the liquid penetrant dip
effluents is provided elsewhere in this
tank. The conveyor dips the basket into
volume.
Hot
air Inspection
knife
Advantages and
Automated Electrostatic or Limitations of Automated
Atomized Spray Liquid Penetrant Testing
Application of Liquid Lines
Penetrants to Parts In summary, there are a number of
After the cleaning process, the parts are advantages to an automated liquid
automatically moved into the module penetrant testing system such as that just
where the liquid penetrant is applied. described. Possibilities of human error can
Reciprocating spray guns fed with liquid be minimized by the automatic
penetrant pumped directly from its movement of the parts through each
shipping barrel provide consistent phase of the liquid penetrant system.
coverage with minimum waste of liquid Large parts as well as small parts can be
penetrants. The spray guns might be inspected efficiently. Waste of cleaning
installed to oscillate vertically or in any solutions and liquid penetrant materials
other suitable paths. The liquid penetrant can be held to a minimum. Production
spray module is kept under negative testing rates can be more easily
pressure by the adjacent air knives and/or controlled.
a mist collector to eliminate drifting of
the liquid penetrant out of the spray
application module. The liquid penetrant
dwell time is controlled by the distance Precautions in Large Scale
and the rate of movement of the Automated Liquid
overhead load bar during transit from the
liquid penetrant spray modules to the
Penetrant Testing Systems
water spray module. Despite the many advantages of an
automated liquid penetrant system, a
number of cautions should be observed to
Automated Water Spray for maintain its consistent and optimum
Removal of Excess Surface Liquid performance. The manner in which the
Penetrant parts are initially racked must be carefully
The parts rack automatically moves into a considered to allow adequate cleaning,
water spray module that removes excess drying, liquid penetrant application and
liquid penetrant from the parts. A series of dwell, removal and drying. The
adjustable water nozzles are commonly application of emulsifiers or removers and
used in the module while air knives act to application of developers must also be
keep the water in the module. To prevent considered. In some cases, the only
overwashing, it may be necessary to adequate way to arrive at the best
conduct experiments to determine the technique is through a development
proper wash water temperature, spray program with cracked production parts.
nozzle water pressure, time of washing By observing these precautions, an
and positions of nozzles. Production parts efficient and effective automated liquid
with known cracks or discontinuities or penetrant system can be developed to
cracked reference panels could be used for improve the production liquid penetrant
this type of development program. testing of aerospace components.
FIGURE 16. Schematic diagram of automated conveyorized liquid penetrant system layout. Cleaned parts are located on
conveyor; loaded parts travel through liquid penetrant spray booth; drain dwell time is consumed in travel to rinse station.
Following rinse, parts are dried in drier and nonaqueous developer is sprayed on parts in developer spray booth. Developing
time is consumed in travel to ultraviolet radiation inspection booth; white light inspection follows before parts unloading.
Developer
Rinse
Drier
Drain dwell
Liquid penetrant
FIGURE 17. Area for liquid penetrant testing of aviation FIGURE 18. Supervisory control panel for liquid penetrant
components includes dip tank operation (left) and testing system.
automated spray system (right). The spray system is painted
in bright reds, blues, yellows and oranges.
Electrostatic Spray
Application of Developer
After drying, developer (nonaqueous type)
is applied by electrostatic spray guns as
was done with the liquid penetrant. Spray
guns are shown in foreground of Fig. 21.
This permits a thin uniform developer
film, essential for maximum sensitivity
testing. Parts move from the developer
station to holding area, shown in Fig. 22,
before entering a darkroom inspection
booth. The holding area can
accommodate a backlog of at least 30 min
ahead of the inspection station.
FIGURE 25. Electromagnetic spectrum showing narrow range of ultraviolet radiation used for
inspection of fluorescent liquid penetrant indications.
Visible
400 to 700 nm
Very high frequency
Microwave
1 mm to 1 m
X-rays Ultraviolet Infrared Radio waves
frequency
Ultrahigh
Wavelength
Near ultraviolet
320 to 400 nm
Visible light
ultraviolet
107 (3 1011)
ultraviolet
ultraviolet
Orange
Extreme
Yellow
Green
Violet
0 10 20 30 40
Near
Blue
Red
Far
Time (min)
1000
0.5
Reciprocal contrast sensitivity (BB1)
1
A
0.1
0.05
0.1
1.0
Main electrode 1
Filtered
mercury arc
Resistor
0
Auxiliary starting electrode 300 350 400 450
Wavelength (nm)
Main electrode 2
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
(e) (f)
FIGURE 34. Ultraviolet radiation intensity varies in intensity as function of distance from center
of beam.
100 (10 000)
100 W spot,
fluted filter
10 (1000)
Illumination intensity, Wm2 (Wcm2)
400 W bulb,
plain filter
1 (100)
40 W tubular
fluorescent
0.1 (10)
280 240 200 160 120 80 40 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280
(11) (9.5) (7.9) (6.3) (4.7) (3.2) (1.6) (1.6)(3.2) (6.3) (4.7) (7.9) (9.5) (11)
Distance, mm (in.)
(c)
Examples of Ultraviolet
Radiation Measurement
Instruments
Measurement of ultraviolet radiation
intensity requires a special meter
calibrated in watt per square meter or
microwatt per square centimeter. An
example is a commercially available, hand
held digital radiometer or photometer
(Fig. 35). The hand held instrument is
shock resistant and water resistant and
can be easily inserted in areas of limited
accessibility. Through two interchangeable
sensors, such portable radiometers provide
long wave coverage from 0 to
199.99 Wm2 (0 to 19999 Wcm2) and
visible light coverage from 0 to 1999 lx
(0 to 199.9 ftc).
Each sensor head contains an optical
stack of specialty components to provide
a cosine response, to define the spectral
bandpass and to convert light radiation
into electrical current.
100 W bulb
can be made with the same style digital 100 (10 000)
radiometer as used for ultraviolet 80 (8000)
radiation. Several manufacturers offer 60 (6000)
50 (5000) 400 W
digital readout units that will accept a 40 (4000) bulb
visible light sensor. These sensors follow a
30 (3000)
standard curve of the International
Commission on Illumination (CIE) and 20 (2000)
mimic the human response to visible
light, peaking at a wavelength of 555 nm. 40 W
10 (1000) tubular
8 (800)
6 (600)
Selecting Ultraviolet 5
4
(500)
(400)
Irradiation Levels for 3 (300)
FIGURE 39. Functional components of flying spot laser scanning system for fluorescent liquid
penetrant test indications.
Pattern
recognition
Scanning electronics
mirror
Laser
Light collecting mirror
Photocell Threshold
Amp
gate
Stationary
mirror
Scanner Fluorescent
indication
Signal
output
FIGURE 40. Laser scanning arrangement for line scanning of test objects in motion.
Staircase System
generator clock
Helium-cadmium
laser 441.6 nm
Scanning mirror
Lens
Discontinuity
Stationary mirror
Motion of scanned object
Object to be scanned
Pattern Recognition of
Fluorescent Liquid
Penetrant Indications FIGURE 42. Example of test situation
producing sharp electrical signal pulse from
Recognition of significant test indications phototube detector: straight, linear
is generally the most complex part of the fluorescent test indication is parallel to line
automated scanning system. Pattern focused scanning laser beam.
recognition is accomplished by one of
Area scanned
three approaches: (1) an optical
technique, (2) a hardwired digital process
or (3) a microprocessor or digital
computer.
Direction of scan
Seam
Object to
be scanned
Comparators and
Reference Panels
FIGURE 1. Cracked aluminum penetrant comparator block: (a) schematic; (b) planar view; (c) cross section;
(d) photograph of liquid penetrant processed cracked aluminum block, sometimes referred to as liqiud
penetrant comparator, used to compare performance of two different visible dye liquid penetrant processes.
Dimensions are for guidance only and are not critical.
(a) (b) (c)
2 mm (0.08 in.)
B
80 mm (3 in.)
10 mm (0.4 in.)
40 mm (1.5 in.)
50 mm (2 in.)
(d)
m (in. 103)
25 000 (1000)
Crack width Crack depth
Aluminum process induced
Titanium stress
2500 (100)
cracked (end grain)
Aluminum quench
corrosion
cracked (long grain)
Aluminum quench
Aluminum quench
cracked (end grain)
250 (10)
Ti-6AI-4V stress
corrosion cracked
25 (1)
Aluminum quench
cracked (long grain)
2.5 (0.1)
0.25 (0.01)
Legend
average
Crack Sizes in
Nickel-Chrome Test Panels
Variations in the composition of the
plating baths and plating techniques Chrome
determine the type and size of cracking in
the nickel-chrome test panels: (1) coarse (b)
crack panel with cracks measuring about
Brass
10 m (0.0004 in.) wide and 50 m
(0.002 in.) deep; (2) medium crack panel
with cracks about 2 to 3 m (8 105 to
1.2 104 in.) wide and 40 m
(0.0016 in.) deep; and fine crack panel
with cracks about 0.5 m (2 105 in.) in Nickel
width.
Figure 8 shows a magnified cross
section of the plated portion of a medium
crack panel. The nickel-chrome sensitivity
panels of Fig. 9 lend themselves to reuse
with proper cleaning. The same panels Chrome
were used throughout a test program; it
was reported that, even after multiple use
in tests, the panels showed no evidence of (c)
change in crack size.
FIGURE 9. Cracked nickel-chrome panels for testing crack sensitivity of liquid penetrant tests: (a) cracked chrome panel is
made by plating brass panel with nickel and chromium, bending to create cracks and then straightening; (b) twin fine crack
panels used to compare brightness enhancement capabilities of two different powder developers (same fluorescent liquid
penetrant and processing procedures were used on both panels; (c) cracks in nickel-chrome panel run parallel to each other as
shown in coarse crack panels used to evaluate red visible dye liquid penetrant system with nonaqueous developer system.
FIGURE 12. Liquid penetrant system monitor panel includes five crack centers of different sizes for evaluating sensitivity and
includes grit blasted section for judging wash characteristics of liquid penetrant system: (a) drawing; (b) under white light;
(c) under ultraviolet radiation.
(a) (b) (c)
0.8
regions. However, the toe region of
interest is where the relative brightness
0.6 values are about 0.2 to 0.4.
1.0 3.53 (0.14) 3.0 7.07 (0.28) 5.0 14.1 (0.56) 7.0 28.3 (1.11)
1.2 3.78 (0.15) 3.2 7.55 (0.30) 5.2 15.1 (0.59) 7.2 30.2 (1.19)
1.4 4.06 (0.16) 3.4 8.10 (0.32) 5.4 16.2 (0.64) 7.4 32.4 (1.28)
1.6 4.35 (0.17) 3.6 8.70 (0.34) 5.6 17.4 (0.69) 7.6 34.8 (1.37)
1.8 4.66 (0.18) 3.8 9.30 (0.37) 5.8 18.6 (0.73) 7.8 37.2 (1.46)
2.0 5.00 (0.20) 4.0 10.0 (0.39) 6.0 20.0 (0.79) 8.0 40.0 (1.57)
2.2 5.35 (0.21) 4.2 10.7 (0.42) 6.2 21.4 (0.84) 8.2 42.8 (1.69)
2.4 5.75 (0.23) 4.4 11.5 (0.45) 6.4 23.0 (0.91) 8.4 46.0 (1.81)
2.6 6.15 (0.24) 4.6 12.3 (0.48) 6.6 24.6 (0.97) 8.6 49.2 (1.94)
2.8 6.60 (0.26) 4.8 13.2 (0.52) 6.8 26.4 (1.04) 8.8 52.8 (2.08)
Relative brightness
Relative brightness
Relative brightness
0.8 0.8 0.8
0 0 0
3.6 5 7 10 14 20 28 40 3.6 5 7 10 14 20 28 40 3.6 5 7 10 14 20 28 40
(1.4) (2) (2.8) (4) (5.5) (8) (11) (16) (1.4) (2) (2.8) (4) (5.5) (8) (11) (16) (1.4) (2) (2.8) (4) (5.5) (8) (11) (16)
Flaw magnitude, m (in. 104) Flaw magnitude, m (in. 104) Flaw magnitude, m (in. 104)
Relative brightness
Relative brightness
0 0 0
3.6 5 7 10 14 20 28 40 3.6 5 7 10 14 20 28 40 3.6 5 7 10 14 20 28 40
(1.4) (2) (2.8) (4) (5.5) (8) (11) (16) (1.4) (2) (2.8) (4) (5.5) (8) (11) (16) (1.4) (2) (2.8) (4) (5.5) (8) (11) (16)
Flaw magnitude, m (in. 104) Flaw magnitude, m (in. 104) Flaw magnitude, m (in. 104)
Legend
= 30 s
= 1 min
= 2 min
= 4 min
FIGURE 1. General form of probability of detection curve for liquid penetrant testing
procedure. Accepted 90 percent threshold detection point is noted.
100
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
Threshold
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
FIGURE 2. Effect of ultraviolet radiation level for liquid penetrant testing procedure (water wash
process without developer, on tightly closed fatigue cracks in cobalt alloy; with 55 to 107 lx
[5 to 10 ftc] white light illumination): (a) 4 Wm2 (400 Wcm2) ultraviolet radiation;
(b) 12 Wm2 (1200 Wcm2) ultraviolet radiation.1
(a)
100
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
(b)
100
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Legend
= predicted probability of detection
X = hit datum (along top edge) or miss datum (along bottom edge)
(a)
100
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Legend
= predicted probability of detection
X = hit datum (along top edge) or miss datum (along bottom edge)
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Actual crack length, mm (in.)
(b)
100
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Actual crack length, mm (in.)
(c)
100
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Actual crack length, mm (in.)
Legend
= predicted probability of detection
X = hit datum (along top edge) or miss datum (along bottom edge)
90
Probability of detection (percent) 80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45)(0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
Actual crack length, mm (in.)
(b)
100
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45) (0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
90
Probability of detection (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.8 19.1
0 (0.05) (0.10) (0.15) (0.20) (0.25) (0.30) (0.35) (0.40) (0.45)(0.50) (0.55) (0.60) (0.65) (0.70) (0.75)
(relative units)
Human Performance in
Liquid Penetrant Testing
The individual performance of the human
operator is a significant element in
end-to-end process performance capability
and reliability. Inspection process Signal amplitude
parameters are readily measured and (relative units)
controlled by application of appropriate
tools when applied by knowledgeable (b)
supervision. The readout or interpretation
Probability density distribution
(Response to discontinuity
detectable and have a high probability of P(A,a) P(A,n)
detection. Positive (A) True positive (hit) False positive
No error Type II error
The varying cases of signal-to-noise
discrimination are consistent with the
POD results shown in Figs. 2 to 5. Larger
and brighter liquid penetrant indications
produce discrimination at a low level P(N,a) P(N,n)
Negative (N) False negative (miss) True negative
i.e., developer versus no developer, higher
Type I error No error
ultraviolet radiation levels and removal of
smeared surface material by etching.
As a result of this observation of the
liquid penetrant indications, the decision
of a human operator has four possible noted on engineering drawings are below
outcomes. the capabilities of the best performing test
1. A discontinuity may be called when a facilities. Qualification and validation of
discontinuity is present (correct call). test facilities, procedures and personnel
2. A discontinuity may be called when are therefore required for fracture critical
no discontinuity is present (Type II components.
error). Two modes of qualification and
3. A no discontinuity condition may be validation are in general use; these are the
called when no discontinuity is full POD demonstration and the subset
present (correct call). demonstration (widely known as the
4. A no discontinuity condition may be 29-out-of-29 method). A full POD
called when a discontinuity is present demonstration is always the most rigorous
(Type I error). mode and is used when dealing with new
materials, new fabrication processes or
The conditional probability new liquid penetrant processing facilities.
discrimination decision process is shown A full POD demonstration is desirable for
schematically in Fig. 7 and Table 1. qualification of less experienced
inspectors. Although the full POD
demonstration is desirable, the cost of test
components and the time involved
Liquid Penetrant Process warrant consideration of alternative
Performance methods. A large amount of liquid
Demonstration penetrant process characterization data
has been generated and is available.1
The structural integrity of modern When requirements are such that a
engineering materials, components, significant margin is realized by the use of
structures and systems are increasingly standard, generic liquid penetrant
dependent on the ability of processing techniques, no demonstration
nondestructive testing processes to find may be necessary. When standard, generic
small discontinuities. Components process techniques are applied to the
requiring test capabilities below the detection of small discontinuities within
general detection level are often termed the envelope of previously demonstrated
fracture critical. Although well intentioned, capabilities, a subset demonstration may
the assumed capabilities for a given liquid be considered.
penetrant test operation are generally
incorrect and, in some cases, the criteria
Summary
Liquid penetrant testing is an effective
and economical method of discontinuity
detection and is widely used in the
process of ensuring the safety and
structural integrity of engineering
materials, components, structures and
systems. Its wide use and superficially
simple application result in a wide range
of results that vary from consistent
detection of critical discontinuities to
parts washing exercises that do not add
value to the parts. Fortunately, it costs no
more to perform a valid inspection than it
does to conduct a parts washing exercise.
It is logical that a multiparameter testing
process requires attention to detail and
process control for successful application.
The tools and techniques for materials
and process control are readily available.
The end to end process performance may
also be quantified using the information
and techniques discussed herein. If the
Metallurgical Conditioning of
AISI 304 Stainless Steel Specimens
Test specimens for each of the following
metallurgical conditions were used in the
evaluation: (1) solution annealed,
(2) sensitized and (3) sensitized and
etched. The solution annealed specimens
were included because AISI 304 stainless
steel in this metallurgical condition is
much less susceptible to halogen induced
stress corrosion cracking than material in
the sensitized condition. Specimens that
Conclusions on Control of
Stress Corrosion Cracking
As long as the ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code3 limits total halogens in liquid
materials for nondestructive testing
methods to one percent, materials for use
on austenitic stainless steel components
should be selected for minimum halide
content consistent with effectiveness and
cost. The lower the halide residual
concentration in the environment, the
lower the possibility of stress corrosion.
Thorough cleaning for removal of halide
containing materials after their use will
effectively eliminate any potential for
stress corrosion.
Stainless steels containing a nominal
8 percent nickel such as AISI 304,
AISI 316 and AISI 347 have maximum
sensitivity to chloride stress corrosion
cracking. Attainment of minimum stress
levels in stainless steel components is
therefore desirable. Thermal, vibrational
or peening stress relief can reduce residual
stresses. Residual and/or applied tensile
stresses as low as 14 MPa (2000 lbfin.2)
in combination with 74 C (165 F) or
higher fluid environments containing 1 to
50 gg1 or less of certain chlorides and 1
FIGURE 7. Schematic cross section drawing of permeator showing membrane used to pass oil
free water radially outward and retain oily contaminants in tubular enclosure.
Membrane
Dilute
oil feed Oil concentrate
Oil
free
water
Ultrafiltration process
1 60.8
2 57.6 Water Immiscible Solvent
3 57.2 Removers
4 64.0 Another approach to the effluent problem
5 48.0 is the removal of nonwater washable
6 64.0 liquid penetrants by aqueous dispersions
of volatile, water immiscible solvents. This
results in an effluent whose typical
composition is as follows: (1) 99 percent
water, (2) 0.98 percent solvent and
(3) 0.02 percent liquid penetrant.
Liquid Penetrant Removal The mutual compatibility of the liquid
by Adsorption penetrant and solvent remover and their
Studies have shown that the clarification combined immiscibility in water
of effluent containing liquid penetrant predetermines an easy separation of water
waste also can be accomplished by the by centrifugation or gravity stratification
adsorption technique. It is essentially in a holding tank. Apart from exhibiting a
based on the affinity of certain absorbent slight bluish fluorescence, the recovered
particles toward typical ingredients of water is sufficiently uncontaminated (oil
liquid penetrants. In practice, the oil content less than 100 gg1) to be
contaminant is extracted by stirring disposed of as a regular aqueous waste.
vigorously 7 kg (15 lb) of absorbent into The density of the removing solvent must
10 000 L (2600 gal) of waste water be either lighter than water or heavier
containing about 0.06 percent liquid than water in order for it to be separated
penetrant. A solution of a flocculating by centrifugation or gravity. The
agent is then added and the treated batch considerably smaller volume of the
Economic Feasibility of
Liquid Penetrant Waste Comparison of Hydrophilic with
Water Clarification Lipophilic Liquid Penetrant
In many localities, effluents from Techniques
nonprewash liquid penetrant processes
cannot go directly to the sewer. They Using the hydrophilic technique is like
require extensive treatment (1) to break using the lipophilic postemulsification
the emulsion, (2) to separate the organics technique inasmuch as a postemulsifiable
and (3) to clarify the water. Although liquid penetrant is used for both.
water may be reclaimed after expensive Nevertheless, the two processes differ
processing, the separated liquid penetrant slightly. In the hydrophilic process, a
and emulsifier oils will be chemically plain water wash precedes application of
altered and the economics of reclaiming an emulsifying agent. Also, instead of a
these materials might be questioned. If full strength emulsifier solution, the
the effluent is not an emulsion, then hydrophilic system relies on a very dilute
treatment costs are reduced. A solution of hydrophilic emulsifier. The
nonemulsified effluent separates by hydrophilic and lipophilic systems are
gravity. Whether the pollutants float to distinguished elsewhere in this volume.
the top of the tank or sink to the bottom Although an additional step is required to
depends on their specific gravity. In either perform the hydrophilic process, this
case, separation takes place without disadvantage may be more than offset by
expensive filtration or chemical addition. savings in the costs of material and
Therefore, a nonemulsified effluent can reclaiming rinse water.
minimize water clarification cost.
Applications of Filtered
Particle Tests
The most significant use of filtered
particle testing is in the clayware
industry.5-8 This is particularly true of
sanitary ware and high tension insulator
manufacture.9 Here, the objects under test
usually are relatively expensive or involve
a great deal of workmanship. The filtered
particle technique is important in these
two industries, because a crack in unfired
clay always opens on firing. In the case of
sanitary ware, if the crack opens wide
enough to break open the glaze, the ware
will have unsightly marks on it and
cannot be sold. Opening of a crack during
the firing process will provide a path for
electrical breakdown on high tension
insulators so that they cannot be used in
service. Another application of filtered
particle testing is for testing carbide
inserts for cutting tools before final firing.
W X
Line Y
50 mm (2 in.)
70 mm
(2.75 in.)
1 mm (0.04 in.)
70 mm (2.75 in.)
Colorless
penetrating
Solid Tracer Particles for fluid
Test Media
Crack
In all filtered particle test fluids, the solid
tracer particles are selected for proper size Porous material
and shape. The particles are extensively generally dark purple
milled to produce a wide range of particle under ultraviolet
sizes with a predominance of particles of radiation
micrometer size. In all cases, these
particles will fire off at temperatures of
200 to 315 C (400 to 600 F). Where
Red fluorescent
particles
Yellow fluorescent
penetrating fluid
Porous material
generally dark purple
under ultraviolet
radiation
(b)
Fluorescent Liquid
Penetrant Testing Used in
Malleable and Gray Iron
Foundries
Malleable and gray iron castings are
widely used in heavy machinery and
transportation industries producing diesel
engines, tractors and earthmoving
equipment, for example. Foundry testing
of pilot castings and sampling testing of
production runs by fluorescent liquid
penetrants allows the foundrymen to see
immediately whenever one of the many
variables in casting is out of control. This
dictates changes in gating procedures,
pouring temperatures, metal composition,
molding sand etc., to permit pouring of
good castings and to avoid the expense of
scrap castings.
In many facilities, experience with
liquid penetrant testing began on a small
scale with hand processing and visual
testing of critical castings, both in the
foundry and in the customers receiving
test departments. As needs increased,
automatic conveyorized liquid penetrant
processing equipment was installed in
larger plants. Fluorescent indications are
viewed with overhead ultraviolet lamps in
test booths or with portable ultraviolet
lamps. Inspectors evaluate the seriousness
of casting discontinuities and set aside
rejectable anomalous castings for disposal.
Effective control of malleable and gray
iron is claimed by liquid penetrant
testing. Some castings are spot checked;
more critical parts are often given 100
percent testing. A reject during spot
checking results in 100 percent checking
of the entire lot of castings. Experience
shows that although control of castings is
thorough with liquid penetrant testing,
an actual decrease in numbers of rejects is
often realized. Intelligent use of
information on discontinuities located
Porosity
Multiple Method Testing
Most castings are tested by more than one
Porosity is a common discontinuity in method. Problems may arise if the
aluminum castings. It usually appears on sequence of tests and the discontinuity
a radiographic film as distinct, globular, evaluation process are not clearly
MOVIE. gas voids. Porosity can also be detected by
Porosity in established. Assume that a casting has to
liquid penetrant testing if the gas voids be examined by liquid penetrant testing
casting. are on the surface of the casting. Porosity and radiography. It should be understood
is formed at elevated temperatures when that, for example, if radiography is
aluminum absorbs hydrogen. As the performed before any removal of
temperature of the aluminum rises, discontinuities, including excavations and
hydrogen separates from moisture in the subsequent repairs, the results of these
contact with the molten metal. When the procedures must be verified by
metal cools near to the point of radiography. Liquid penetrant testing will
solidification, its capacity to hold be used also to verify the discontinuity
hydrogen in solution drops drastically. excavations and the repairs. However, if
The hydrogen then comes out of solution an attempt is made to check a
and is embedded in the casting as radiographically tested excavation by
porosity. liquid penetrant, some difficulties may be
encountered. What is acceptable
Eutectic Melting radiographically may not be accepted by
Eutectic melting is a rare metallurgical liquid penetrant.
deformation caused by exceeding the There is one exception to this rule.
melting point of the eutectic component Because liquid penetrant lacks clearly
in the casting during heat treatment. defined acceptance reference standards,
Radiography rarely detects eutectic radiography is sometimes used on thin
melting because the cavities left by it are walled aluminum castings to check
too small to appear on the film. Liquid whether the discontinuities detected by
penetrant testing will reveal eutectic liquid penetrant are within the acceptable
melting if the indications form as a mass range. This exception is only valid when
of minute discontinuities on the surface.
Fluorescent Penetrant
Testing in Aluminum
Industry
Through refinements of test techniques
and the addition of macroscopic visual
examination, both the locating and the
characterization of smaller discontinuities
in aluminum and its alloys have come
within the realm of liquid penetrant
testing. In the primary aluminum
production industry, liquid penetrant
testing has expanded from a single
go/no-go testing to its use in actual process
quality control.
(b)
Liquid Penetrant Testing of
Aluminum Ingots
Cross sections of all sizes of aluminum
ingots are inspected for cracks and
porosity before and after macroetching.
Most cracks and gross porosity can be
detected readily on the machined surface
of the ingot slice. However, macroetching
is usually required to permit the inspector
to distinguish fine porosity (see Fig. 2).
Testing of this type can be used as a
routine check on degassing and casting
practices in primary production of
aluminum.
Porosity is reported as a ratio of
volume to volume and can be expressed
as a percentage. For the case in Fig. 2,
hydrogen content in aluminum was
measured as 2.5 mm3g1. This calculates
to 2.50 mm3(0.37 cm3)1 =
6.75 mm3cm3 = 0.675 or about
0.7 percent. Therefore the hydrogen
Aerospace Applications
Support of Other
Operations
Liquid penetrant testing is performed for
purposes other than assessing the
integrity of items for their acceptance for
future use.
A third general and equally important
function of liquid penetrant testing is its
use in assisting in determining: (1) the
extent of cracking associated with
component failure investigations, (2) the
demonstrated performance of unusual
liquid penetrant testing applications as
part of research and development
activities, and (3) support for procedure,
process and personnel qualification. This
last class of liquid penetrant testing
applications is very popular in that it
accommodates the need to get a spot
check on the severity of surface connected
discontinuities, often identified at the
specific location of a failure or other area
of special interest. It represents an
intermediate step between general visual
examination and the detailed sectioning
and microscopic analysis of test pieces.
For example, liquid penetrant tests of
copper-nickel steam condenser tubes,
subjected to adverse chemical
environmental conditions, assisted in
demonstrating the adverse effects of
different test conditions. Experimental
evaluation of automatic welding
equipment for nickel clad tube sheet used
liquid penetrant testing to validate welds
made during remote operations in nuclear
facilities. Liquid penetrant testing was
used to confirm the through-wall nature
of cracks found in the base welds of male
slip joints used in steel transmission line
poles. When radiography determined the
presence of galvanizing coating materials
within the cracks, an investigation found
that the base welds had been repaired
earlier to remove some root cracking. The
repairs had been finished off with a
regalvanizing touchup. It was evident that
the hot ticking method of regalvanizing
was the root cause of the recurring base
weld cracking.
(b)
(b)
(c)
(c)
Notch indication
(d)
(b)
(f)
(c)
(d)
Examples of Liquid
Penetrant Indications of
Stress Corrosion Cracking
Figure 3 shows an example of the types of
liquid penetrant indications observed
when detecting the presence of stress
corrosion cracking near the heat affected
zones of circumferential welds in nuclear
grade type 304 stainless steel piping.
Figure 3a shows a photograph of a typical
pipe-to-pipe weld segment. The root area
is slightly rough and some hint of
counterbore preparation can be seen just
adjacent to the weld root. The as-welded
condition on the outside diameter is quite
acceptable for most nondestructive testing
applications.
However, Fig. 3b shows the presence of
several severe cracks when viewed under
ultraviolet radiation and when fluorescent
liquid penetrants are used for detection
purposes. The 60 mm (2.5 in.) long crack (b)
in the center of the pipe is aligned in a
circumferential direction (as would be
expected from the stress distribution in
such piping assemblies). The angled cracks
at the left are neither parallel nor
perpendicular to the weld center line and
were not detected when using generally
accepted inservice ultrasonic test
procedures. The indications from the large
crack appear to be very diffuse because
the liquid penetrant was running out of
the crack while the photograph was being
taken. The tighter, angled cracks did not
(c)
have this problem because the
photographs were taken only seconds into
the development period.
Figure 3c and 3d show close ups of the
long and angled cracks, respectively. The
long crack was broken open and found to
extend more than halfway through the
pipe wall. A 10 photographic
enlargement of the broken sample is
shown in Fig. 3e. The granular type of
surface morphology can be seen in the Stress corrosion crack
upper part of the photograph; the normal initiation site
ductile fracture of stainless steel can be
seen in the lower portion. Figure 3f shows Enlarged area,
the typical crack morphology when showing region of
depleted grain boundaries
sectioned in the transverse direction.
Example of Mechanized
Remote Liquid Penetrant
Pipe Weld Testing Device
Two basic problems involved in liquid
penetrant testing of nuclear power
systems are (1) lack of adequate access for
human test operators and observers and
(2) presence of high radiation fields in
areas to be inspected. Figure 5 shows a
device developed specifically for remote
liquid penetrant testing of piping welds
from the outside surface. This device
cleans the surface, applies liquid
(b) penetrant, removes excess liquid
penetrant, applies developer and presents
images of the liquid penetrant indications
by means of fiber optics and a remote
color television monitor. Visual and
position data are recorded in real time by
means of a video recorder. Test
identification data may be recorded
directly on the record tape by using the
keyboard printer and special effects
generator.
(c)
FIGURE 7. Typical quality assurance department of nuclear power system: (a) organizational
chart; (b) personnel structure.
(a)
Manager
Staff Staff
Headquarters
Documentation
of inspection
and testing
(b)
Quality control
construction
monitoring
Staff
Headquarters
Site
Quality control
superintendent
Supervisor Supervisor
Receiving
Piping Mechanical Instrumentation Documentation
inspection
Aerospace Applications of
Liquid Penetrant Testing
Portions of Part 1, Copyright 1995 by the American Society for Testing and Materials. Reprinted with permission.
PART 1. Liquid Penetrant Testing Process
Specifications in Aerospace Manufacturing
22.1 mm
(0.87 in.)
55.6 mm
(2.19 in.)
67.8 mm
(2.67 in.)
33.0 mm
(1.30 in.)
4.8 mm (0.19 in.) radius 21.6 mm
(0.85 in.)
(a)
(b)
(b)
Photographic Documentation
Procedure
The following equipment is used:
100 125 mm (4 5 in.) positive printing
camera, back mounted camera or enlarger
with stand; macro lens or enlarger lens
(2 magnification); light yellow filter;
maximum f-stop 16 aperture setting;
exposure times (see Table 1); TABLE 1. Photographic exposure data (filter over lens
100 125 mm (4.0 5.0 in.) instant, during all exposures).
positive printing, black-and-white film; Exposure Times
mercury vapor ultraviolet lamps and ______________________
indirect white light; 150 mm (6.0 in.) Positive Print, Aperture Ultraviolet White
scale graduated in tenths and hundredths; Instant Film Setting Radiation Light
background material or manila folder
paper or equivalent. ISO 400 f16 20 s 2s
In a room darkened to about 30 lx
(3 ftc) ambient light, position a 100 W Type 53 ISO 800 f16 10 s 1s
ultraviolet lamp on each side of the test
(b)
Without developer With developer
(c)
Without developer With developer
FIGURE 7. Dissipation of volatile tracer with heat: (a) oil phase liquid penetrant, before heat;
(b) oil phase liquid penetrant, after heat; (c) self-destruct liquid penetrant, before heat;
(d) self-destruct liquid penetrant, after heat. After heating test blocks in oven for 15 min at
93 C (200 F), indications of oil phase liquid penetrant are blurred but still present, while
indications of self-destruct liquid penetrant are completely dissipated.
(a) (c)
Before heat
(b) (d)
After heat
Graphite epoxy
leading edge skin
Graphite epoxy inbound and outbound
leading edge spar
Actuator cover
Full depth aluminum Closeout ribs
honeycomb core
Machined aluminum
ribs, both ends
Aluminum
honeycomb
slab ribs
2,2-Dihydroxyazobenzene yellow
8-Hydroxyquinoline yellow
2,2-Dihydroxy1,1-azonaphthalene, 4-sulfonic acid, sodium salt red
2,2-Dihydroxy1,1-naphthalene, azobenzene5-sulfonic acid, sodium salt orange
2,4,2-Trihydroxyazobenzene5-sulfonic acid, sodium salt yellow
SalicylidenceOaminophenol green
2,3,4,5,7-Pentahydroxyflavone blue
2-Hydroxy3-naphthoic acid blue
2.0 percent by weight), of the chelating the raw materials cost little and its use
agent 8-hydroxyquinoline were dissolved requires only minor changes to existing
in isopropyl alcohol, which served as the liquid penetrant techniques. Third, this
carrier. Using standard liquid penetrant system avoids oil contamination that can
techniques, this solution was applied to make repair of a composite structure
the surface of an organic matrix difficult.
composite aircraft component with an
aluminum honeycomb core. Some cracks
and indentations were quickly outlined by Alternative Chelating
a fluorescent halo when the part was
viewed under near ultraviolet light. Agents for Liquid
Because the dry fluorescence of the Penetrant Systems
chelate complex is frequently brighter
than wet fluorescence, it is advisable to It is possible to use any one of many
permit the solution to dry before an chelating agents to make a workable
inspection is performed. A developer liquid penetrant system. A compound
could also be applied to the component to might, for example, be chosen because it
absorb the chelated solution and thus detects a specific metal to the exclusion
enhance the indication. In this inspection of others. Several chelating compounds
those discontinuities that penetrated the are listed in Table 3 along with their
composite skin to the aluminum fluorescence color after chelation with
honeycomb core were easily detected. aluminum. It should be noted that some
While many surface discontinuities could of these compounds may have toxic
be seen, only those that would have properties. Even those thought to be safe
permitted water to penetrate to the should be used with caution particularly
aluminum core and thus cause corrosion when long exposures are involved.
were detected.
Advantages of Chelate
Liquid Penetrant System
If chelating compounds specific to a
particular metal are used, then different
metals can be detected by the color of
their fluorescence. In this way the depth
of the discontinuity can often be
determined. This liquid penetrant
technique can also be used to detect
through-thickness discontinuities in the
corrosion protective coatings on metal
holding tanks. Three important features of
the chelating liquid penetrant system
should be noted. First, the low surface
tension isopropyl alcohol carrier appears
to penetrate into very small cracks faster
than water or oil base liquid penetrants.
Second, this system is inexpensive because
Film
Honeycomb ring
(a)
35 mm film
Honeycomb ring
360
degrees
X-rays
Rod anode
X-ray tube
Focused ultrasonic probe Automatic
probe scan
(b) Rotary drive wheel
Water level
Thermal indicating
paint sprayed on inside Rotations per minute
diameter cell crowns established from test
standards
Quartz lamp
500 W quartz lamp
(d)
Hypodermic
needle Section A-A
Rotated by application A A
hand
Application point
Cotton
swab
Developer sprayed application
Application point on this face before
(e) applying liquid
penetrant
White light
Inspector
Trichlorotrifluoroethane
60 degrees
FIGURE 10. Nondestructive test results from inspection of brazed open face honeycomb ring seals. Arrows denote same
defective area during each test method: (a) radiography; (b) reverse ultrasonic C-scan facsimile recording; (c) thermographic
temperature indicating paint; (d) liquid penetrant testing with water base visible dye placed along edges of honeycomb;
(e) test method with normal white light background using trichlorotrifluoroethane; (f) test method using
trichlorotrifluoroethane and fluorescent liquid penetrant photographed under ultraviolet radiation.
(a) (d)
(b) (e)
(c) (f)
FIGURE 11. Surface tension forces acting on honeycomb cells using low viscosity liquids:
(a) unbrazed cells open to edge; (b) unbrazed cells not open to edge.
(a) (b)
Solid-to-vapor film
SV
Liquid-to-vapor film
Vapor A
SL
Ribbon LV
Braze
F H
joint
Solid-to-liquid film
L
P
SV
LV 30 degrees
A
SL
Legend
A = adhesive force, N (lbf)
F = total hydrostatic force, N (lbf)
H = pressure head, m (in.)
L = length of cell wall segment, m (in.)
P = hydrostatic pressure, Pa (lbfin.2)
LV = surface tension of liquid-to-vapor film, N (lbf)
SL = surface tension of solid-to-liquid film, N (lbf)
SV = surface tension of solid-to-vapor film, N (lbf)
= contact angle between liquid and solid (degree)
FIGURE 12. Typical large radioisotope heat source capsule design. Capsule outside diameter is
63 mm (2.5 in.), with an overall length of 140 mm (5.5 in.).
Fuel annulus
Iron titanate
emittance coating
Oxidation barrier
Outer liner
Inner liner
Retainer ring
Impact absorber
2.4 P-2.5
2.2
penetrants for inspection of radioisotope capsules.
2.0
Penetrant
Sensitivity
Number Relative Sensitivity 1.8
Liquid Penetrant
Examination of Automatic
Machine Welding of
Irradiated Fuel Rods
Remote assembly of irradiated fuel rods
for the power burst test facility required
weld certification of two hot cell
technicians for the remote automatic
welding of the end cap to cladding and
fill tube seal welds. Testing of the welds
consists of a remote liquid penetrant test
followed by a metallographic inspection.
For the liquid penetrant test, the welds
were to be inspected for all surface
Certification of Advanced
Test Reactor Fuel Element
Inspections
Inspections conducted using this
procedure are certified as being in
accordance with the requirements of the
following standards and specifications:
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,
Section V, Nondestructive Examination;17
RDT F3-6T;13 ANC IN-F-9-ATR;18
RDT F6-2T;19 ASNT Recommended Practice
No. SNT-TC-1A;4 and ANSI/ASNT-CP-189.14
1. SAE AMS 2644. Inspection Material, 12. ASTM F 22, Standard Test Method for
Penetrant. Warrendale, PA: Society of Hydrophobic Surface Films by the Water
Automotive Engineers (1996). Break Test. West Conshohocken, PA:
2. ASTM D 95. Standard Test Method for American Society for Testing and
Water in Petroleum Products and Materials (1992).
Bituminous Materials by Distillation. 14. ANSI/ASNT CP-189, Standard for
West Conshohocken, PA: American Qualification and Certification of
Society for Testing and Materials Nondestructive Testing Personnel.
(1990). Columbus, OH: American Society for
3. ASTM E 1417, Standard Practice for Nondestructive Testing.
Liquid Penetrant Examination. West 15. ASTM D 808, Standard Test Method for
Conshohocken, PA: American Society Chlorine in New and Used Petroleum
for Testing and Materials (1998). Products (Bomb Method). West
4. ASNT Recommended Practice Conshohocken, PA: American Society
No. SNT-TC-1A. Columbus, OH: for Testing and Materials (1995).
American Society for Nondestructive 16. ASTM D 129, Standard Test Method for
Testing. Sulfur in Petroleum Products (General
5. AIA NAS 410, Certification and Bomb Method). West Conshohocken,
Qualification of Nondestructive Test PA: American Society for Testing and
Personnel. Washington, DC: Aerospace Materials (1995).
Industries Association of America 17. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,
(May 1996). Section V, Nondestructive Examination.
6. ASTM E 165, Standard Test Method for New York, NY: American Society of
Liquid Penetrant Examination. West Mechanical Engineers (1998).
Conshohocken, PA: American Society 13. RDT F3-6T, Nondestructive Examination.
for Testing and Materials (1995). Washington, DC: United States
7. MIL-STD-2175, Castings, Classification Department of Energy.
and Inspection of. Washington, DC: 18. ANC IN-F-9-ATR, Specification for
United States Department of Defense. Advanced Test Reactor Mark VII Zone
8. Smith, D.S. Penetrant Performance Loaded Fuel Elements. Washington, DC:
with and without Developer. United States Department of Energy.
MDC 96K0028. Long Beach, CA: 19. RDT F6-2T, Welding of Reactor Core
McDonnell Douglas Corporation Components and Test Assemblies.
(1996). Presented at ASNT 1996 Spring Washington, DC: United States
Conference/Fifth Annual Research Department of Energy.
Symposium [Norfolk, MD]. Columbus,
OH: American Society for
Nondestructive Testing (March 1996):
p 139-141.
9. Southworth, H.L. et al. Practical
Sensitivity Limits of Production
Nondestructive Testing Methods in
Aluminum and Steel. AFML-TR-74-241.
Seattle, WA (Boeing Commercial
Airplane Company for Air Force
Materials Laboratory, Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base, OH) (March 1975).
10. Specification MSFC-SPEC-106, Testing
Compatibility of Materials for Liquid
Oxygen Systems. Huntsville, AL:
George C. Marshall Space Flight
Center, National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.
11. SAE AMS 5850. Steel, Corrosion and
Heat Resistant, Honeycomb Core
Resistance Welded, Square Cell.
Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive
Engineers (1993).
Various Applications of
Liquid Penetrant Testing
Drying
The surfaces of the bottom hole assembly
to be inspected must be completely dry
before the application of the developer.
With the solvent remover system, this is
Welding of pipe, pressure vessels, machinerya NAVSEA Technical Publication T9074-AR-GIB-010/2783 MIL-STD-20354
Structural welds, ships hullsb MIL-STD-16895
Structural welds, HY-80 submarine hulls NAVSEA Technical Publication T9074-AD-GIB-010/16883
Castings of pressure vessels NAVSEA Technical Publication T9074-AR-GIB-010/2783
Machinery-bronze propeller blades NAVSEA Technical Publication T9074-AR-GIB-010/2783
Hull castings other than HY-80 MIL-STD-16895 MIL-STD-16895
HY-80 hull castings NAVSEA Technical Publication T9074-AD-GIB-010/16883 NAVSEA Technical Publication
T9074-AD-GIB-010/16883
a. Technique requirements (how to do inspection) are covered in NAVSEA Technical Publication T9074-AS-GIB-010/271.3
b. Other than HY-80 submarine hulls.
Nonlinear Indications
Nonlinear indications meeting the
standards of Table 2 are acceptable.
Nonrelevant indications
Rounded indications with diameter of
0.4 mm (0.016 in.) and less shall be
disregarded for material with thickness of
4.8 mm (0.19 in.) and less.
Rounded indications with diameter of
0.8 mm (0.03 in.) and less shall be
disregarded for material with thickness
greater than 4.8 mm (0.19 in.).
Precautions in Liquid
Penetrant Testing of Ship
Structures
Operator Safety
Operators should avoid skin contact with
liquid penetrant materials. The inhalation
of oils and possibly certain other
components of liquid penetrant materials
in moist form can cause lipoid
pneumonia. To protect against this
hazard, use a half mask respirator with
organic vapor cartridges while spraying.
At other times, avoid prolonged breathing
of vapors or volatile components. If
natural ventilation is poor, use exhaust
ventilation to prevent a high atmospheric
droplets from the air. Keep respirator on if
mist is visible in the air.
Linear
Linear
Linear
Rounded Cluster
Linear (cluster)
Linear Linear
Cluster
Cluster not to
exceed 6.3 mm
(0.25 in.) diameter
on one side and
13 mm (0.5 in.)
diameter on the
other
Caution
Wheels must be free of surface
contamination (especially in the bead seat
area) that would prevent liquid penetrant
from entering any discontinuities. Special
attention should be given to areas of
highest stress such as the pin drive holes
in the hub and the junction of the spokes
to the web, with both the hub and the
rim. The attached sketch is an example of
the inner wheel area only. The entire
wheel is to be inspected using the same
accept/reject criteria.
Marking of parts shall be per
specifications.
This procedure is not intended to limit
the type or amount of testing performed.
It is recommended that, whenever
practical, further testing be conducted to
reveal any potentially harmful internal
discontinuities and surface anomalies.
Interpretation of Glass
Bonded Mica and
Ceramoplastics
Glass bonded mica products are formed
by pressure blending powdered glass and
mica into electrical insulators. The
resultant mixture becomes a workable
material called glass bonded mica that
combines the advantages of low loss
factor and high dielectric strength while
eliminating the major deficiencies of the
brittleness of glass and the weak structural
homogeneity of mica.
Glass bonded mica and ceramoplastics,
a blend of powdered glass with synthetic
1. Swann, L.K. NDT Afloat The 12. Rules for Building and Classing Steel
Development of Nondestructive Vessels. Paramus, NJ: American Bureau
Testing at Newport News of Shipping.
Shipbuilding (Yesteryears). Materials 13. Monks, G. and L. Niro. NDT A
Evaluation. Vol. 44, No. 8. Columbus, Critical Procedure in Indy-Style Auto
OH: American Society for Racing. Materials Evaluation. Vol. 45,
Nondestructive Testing (July 1986): No. 10. Columbus, OH: American
p 908-911. Society for Nondestructive Testing
2. ASTM E 165, Standard Test Method for (1987): p 1154-1156.
Liquid Penetrant Examination. West 14. Nondestructive Testing Manual.
Conshohocken, PA: American Society Indianapolis, IN: United States Auto
for Testing and Materials (1995). Club (1994).
3. NAVSEA Technical Publication T9074,
Requirements for Nondestructive Testing
Methods. Philadelphia, PA: Naval
Inventory Control Point (April 1997).
4. MIL-STD-2035, Nondestructive Testing
Acceptance Criteria [superseding
NAVSHIPS 0900-003-8000].
Washington, DC: United States
Department of Defense.
5. MIL-STD-1689A, Fabrication, Welding,
and Inspection of Ships Structure
[superseding MIL-STD-1689, December
1983]. Washington, DC: United States
Department of Defense (November
1990).
6. NAVSHIPS 250-1500-1, Welding
Standard. Washington, DC: United
States Department of Defense, Naval
Sea Systems Command (revised 1993;
accepted June 1995).
7. MIL-STD-2132A, Nondestructive
Examination Requirements for Special
Applications [superceding
MIL-STD-2132, January 1981].
Washington, DC: United States
Department of Defense (March 1985).
8. Naval Ships Technical Manual (NSTM).
Washington, DC: United States
Department of Defense.
9. NAVSEA 59086-54-STM-010/CH556,
Naval Ships Technical Manual.
Chapter 556, Hydraulic Equipment
(Power Transmission and Control).
Washington, DC: United States
Department of Defense (August 1997).
10. 46 CFR 56, Piping Systems and
Appurtenances. [Code of Federal
Regulations: Title 46, Shipping.]
Washington, DC: United States
Department of Transportation, United
States Coast Guard; United States
Government Printing Office (1995).
11. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.
New York, NY: American Society of
Mechanical Engineers.
complete testing: Testing of entire crack: (1) Break, fissure or rupture, usually
production lot in prescribed manner. V shaped and with a relatively high
Sometimes complete testing entails depth-to-width aspect ratio. A
inspection of only critical regions of discontinuity that has a relatively
part. One hundred percent testing large cross section in one direction
requires inspection of the entire part and a small or negligible cross section
by prescribed methods. Compare when viewed in a direction
sampling, partial.8,10 perpendicular to the first.2,10
confidence level: Level of assurance for (2) Propagating discontinuity caused
detecting a specified discontinuity size by stresses such as heat treating or
with a specified probability. grinding. Difficult to detect unaided
contact time: See dwell time. because of fineness of line and pattern
contaminant: Any foreign substance (cracks together may have a radial or
present on the surface of a part, in the latticed appearance).6,10
cracks or in the inspection materials crack contaminant: Material that fills a
that will adversely affect the crack and that may prevent liquid
performance of liquid penetrant penetrants from entering or from
materials. forming indications.2,10
continuous casting: Casting technique in crack, base metal: Cracks existing in base
which an ingot, billet, tube or other metal before a manufacturing or
shape is continuously solidified while welding operation or occurring in base
being poured so that its length is not metal during the operation.2,10
determined by mold dimensions.3,10 crack, cold: Cracks that occur in a casting
contrast: Difference in visibility after solidification, due to excessive
(brightness or coloration) between an stress generally resulting from
indication and the surrounding nonuniform cooling.2,10
surface.13 crack, cooling: Cracks in bars of alloy or
control: See in control, process control and tool steels resulting from uneven
quality control.10 cooling after heating or hot rolling.
cooling stresses: Residual stresses They are usually deep and lie in a
resulting from nonuniform longitudinal direction, but are usually
distribution of temperature during not straight.2,10
cooling.2,3,10 crack, crater: Multisegment crack in a
corrosion: Deterioration of a metal by weld crater. Segments radiate from a
chemical or electrochemical reaction common point, often called star
with its environment. Removal of cracks.10
material by chemical attack, such as crack, fatigue: Progressive cracks that
the rusting of automobile develop in the surface and are caused
components.2,10 by the repeated loading and unloading
corrosion, crevice: Type of galvanic of the object.2,10
corrosion caused by differences in crack, forging: Crack developed in the
metal ion concentrations in forging operation because of forging at
neighboring portions of the too low a temperature, resulting in
corrodent.8,10 rupturing of the steel.2,10
corrosion embrittlement: Severe loss of crack, grinding: Thermal crack caused by
ductility of a metal, resulting from local overheating of surface being
corrosive attack, usually intergranular ground.2,10
and often not visually apparent.2,10 crack, hot: Crack that develops before
corrosion fatigue: Fatigue cracking casting has completely cooled, as
caused by repeated load applications contrasted with cold cracks, which
on metal in a corrosive develop after solidification.2,10
environment.2,10 crack, longitudinal: Crack parallel to
corrosion, fretting: Corrosion facilitated length of the test object.2,10
by fretting, particularly where a crack, machining: Crack caused by too
protective surface has been chafed in a heavy a cut, a dull tool or chatter.
corrosive environment.8,10 Typically called machining tear.2,10
corrosion, poultice: Corrosion occurring crack, pickling: Crack caused by
under a layer of foreign material (e.g. immersing objects with high internal
under mud in automobile rocker stresses in an acid solution.2,10
panels).8,10 crack, plating: Crack similar to pickling
corrosion-erosion: Simultaneous cracks, but occurring during plating
occurrence of erosion and when the object is immersed in a
corrosion.8,10 strong electrolyte.2,10
coupon: Piece of metal from which a test
object is prepared, often an extra
piece, as on a casting or forging.3,10
Introduction General
This bibliography lists published works
cited in the references at the end of each Engineering
chapter, as well as other works not cited
elsewhere in this volume. A listing in this Colangelo, V.J. and F.A. Heiser. Analysis of
bibliography is not be construed as any Metallurgical Failure, second edition.
sort of endorsement or recommendation New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons
of a technique, a service or equipment (1987).
described. Gruzleski, J.E. and B. Closet. The Treatment
The bibliography is divided into of Liquid Aluminum-Silicon Alloys. Des
sections, and a published work is Plaines, IL: American Foundrymens
generally cited only once. The reader is Society (1990).
therefore urged to look in more than one IES Lighting Handbook: Reference Volume.
section of the bibliography. A publication New York, NY: Illuminating
on fluorescent indication enhancement, Engineering Society of North America
for example, may be found under Specific (1984).
Techniques or under Evaluation of Liquid Lide, D.R., ed. CRC Handbook of Chemistry
Penetrant Materials and Systems or under and Physics, 76th edition. Cleveland,
Lighting and Indication Visibility but not OH: Chemical Rubber Company
under more than one of those headings. (1995-96).
The bibliography headings are the Polushkin, E.P. Defects and Failures of
following. Metals: Their Origin and Elimination.
New York, NY: Elsevier Publishing
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454 Company (1956).
Engineering Rogers, B.A. The Nature of Metals. ASM
Nondestructive Testing International, Materials Park, OH;
History Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA
Measurement Units (1964).
Liquid Penetrant Testing
Miscellaneous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
Specific Techniques Nondestructive Testing
Specific Applications
Barer, R.D. and B.F. Peters. Why Metals
Liquid Penetrant Materials . . . . . . . . 462
Fail. New York, NY: Gordon and
Chemistry Breach Science Publishers (1970).
Environmental and Safety Concerns
Bray, D.E. and R.K. Stanley. Nondestructive
Liquid Penetrant System and Evaluation: A Tool in Design,
Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 Manufacturing, and Service, revised
Precleaning edition. Boca Raton, LA: CRC Press
Automation (1996).
Lighting and Indication Visibility . . . 472 EPRI Learning Modules. Charlotte, NC:
Ultraviolet Radiation
Electric Power Research Institute
(various years).
Evaluation of Liquid Penetrant Halmshaw, R. Non-Destructive Testing.
Materials and Systems . . . . . . . . . . 473 London, United Kingdom: Edward
Sensitivity Arnold (Publishers) Limited (1987).
Standard Test Pieces for Reference and Hull, B. and V. John. Non-Destructive
Comparison Testing. Basingstoke, Hampshire,
Standards and Specifications . . . . . . 477 United Kingdom: Macmillan Press
Personnel Qualification and Limited (1988).
Certification McGonnagle, W.J. Nondestructive Testing.
Process Oriented, Current New York, NY: Gordon and Breach
Process Oriented, Inactive Science Publishers (1961).
Product Oriented, Current NASA-STD-P-015 (1998). [Previous version
Product Oriented, Inactive published as] MSFC-STD-1249,
Other Methods Using Liquid Standard, NDE Guidelines and
Penetrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481 Requirements for Fracture Control
Filtered Particle Testing Programs. Huntsville, AL: Marshall
Leak Testing Space Flight Center.
Radiometrically Opaque Liquid Nondestructive Testing Handbook, second
Penetrants edition: Vol. 10, Nondestructive Testing
Overview. Columbus, OH: American
Society for Nondestructive Testing
(1996).
Porter, J.P., E.R. Reinhart and T. Armor. Van Hoye, M. Fluorescent Penetrant Crack
A Study of NDE Evaluation Methods Detection. United States
for Turbine Blades. Paper Summaries of Patent 4 621 193 (November 1986).
the ASNT Spring and Fall National Varta Batteri AB. Defect Detection in E.g.
Conferences. Columbus, OH: American Lead-Coated Copper for Battery Cells
Society for Nondestructive Testing Using Penetrating Liquid Pressurised to
(October 1982): p 398-402. Above Yield Point of Protective Covering.
Pujari, V.K., D.M. Tracey, M.R. Foley, N.I. European Patent 502 837
Paille and P.J. Pelletier. Development of (September 1992).
Improved Processing and Evaluation West, C.N. (Westland Helicopters
Methods for High Reliability Structural Limited). Method and Apparatus for
Ceramics for Advanced Heat Engine Detecting Cracks in Helicopter Rotor
Applications, Phase I. Springfield, VA: Blades. United States Patent 5 014 544
National Technical Information (May 1991).
Service (August 1993). Wilson, B. and I. Jonsson. New
Rockwell International Corporation. Fluorescent Penetrant System for
Detecting Cracks in Metal Surfaces By Remote Testing inside Tubes.
Applying Etchant Penetrant and Proceedings of the 40th Conference on
Fluorescent Developer and Viewing under Remote Systems Technology [Boston,
Ultraviolet Light. British Patent MA]. Vol. 2. La Grange Park, IL:
2 117 125 (November 1983). American Nuclear Society (June 1993):
Rockwell International Corporation. p 92-97.
Method of Penetrant Inspection Yanishevsky, M. An Enhanced
Employing an Etchant Penetrant. United Fluorescent Liquid Penetrant
States Patent 4 375 384 (March 1983). Inspection Technique for
Shreder, V.L., A.E. Chalykh and V.N. Measurement of Surface Cracks. The
Krivoshei. Determination of Defects First Pan-American Conference for
in the Structure of Polymer Materials Nondestructive Testing [Toronto,
[English translation]. Industrial Ontario, Canada,]. Mississauga,
Laboratory. Vol. 53, No. 9. New York, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Society for
NY: Consultants Bureau (September Nondestructive Testing (September
1987): p 842-844. 1998): p 279-283.
Tanner, R.D., R.E. Ustruck and P.F.
Packman. Adsorption and Hysteresis
Behavior of Crack-Detecting Liquid
Penetrants on Steel Plates. Materials Liquid Penetrant Materials
Evaluation. Vol. 38, No. 9. Columbus,
OH: American Society for Alburger, J.R. Fading Effects in
Nondestructive Testing (September Fluorescent Tracers. Paper Summaries:
1980): p 41-46. National Spring Conference
Teller, C.M. The State-of-the-Art in [Philadelphia, PA]. Columbus, OH:
Nondestructive Evaluation of Steel American Society for Nondestructive
Bridges. Proceedings of the Conference Testing (March 1980): p 107-112.
on Nondestructive Evaluation of Bridges Alburger, J.R. An Integrated Overview of
[Arlington, VA, August 1992]. CRISP Recyclable Materials and
Washington, DC: United States Systems. Paper Summaries: Spring
Department of Transportation, Federal Conference [Phoenix, AZ]. Columbus,
Highway Administration (July 1993): OH: American Society for
p 51568. Nondestructive Testing (March 1977).
Thielsch, H. and F. Cone. Utilization of Alburger, J.R. Theoretical and Practical
Modern Nondestructive Testing Aspects of Recycling CRISP Penetrant.
Techniques on Plant Reliability Paper Summaries: 37th National Fall
Part 1. CSNDT Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3. Conference [Detroit, MI]. Columbus,
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada: OH: American Society for
Canadian Society for Non-Destructive Nondestructive Testing (October
Testing (May/June 1993): p 16-18. 1977): p 386.
Thielsch, H. and F. Cone. Utilization of Brittain, P.I. The Amplifying Action of
Modern Nondestructive Testing Developer Powders. QualTest-3
Techniques on Plant Reliability [Cincinnati OH]. Columbus, OH:
Part 2. CSNDT Journal, Vol. 14, No. 4. American Society for Nondestructive
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada: Testing (October 1984).
Canadian Society for Non-Destructive
Testing (July/August 1993): p 18-24.
TRW Incorporated. Surface Defect Detector
for Jet Engine Turbine Blades (highlights
Such Defect with Ultraviolet Emission
Capabilities). European Patent 48 568
(May 1982).
Readers are encouraged to consult this volumes glossary: glossary entries are detection probability of cracks in flat plates, 16-17, 18
not entered in this index. discontinuities, 352-353
etching, 191-192
fan blades, 158, 362
A fatigue cracks, 246
fluorescent compound chelation with, 397
abrasive blasting. See grit blasting
forgings, 147, 357
abrasive particle size and sieve apertures, 29
ingots, 356-357
abrasive precleaning, 167, 169-170
liquid penetrant testing, 128, 129, 352-358
absolute pressure, 28
mechanical processing effects on liquid penetrant testing, 184-193
absorption, of light. See light absorption
pistons, 144, 145
acceptance/rejection criteria
process induced versus laboratory induced cracks, 251
aerospace applications, 155-158, 385
self-developing liquid penetrant testing, 386-391
critical parts, 64
transparent surface layer test panels, 265-266
decision process, 283
ambient visible light intensity, 226
establishing, 63, 140-141, 154-158
American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) requirements, 423
heat source capsule welds, 411
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), 75, 80
Navy ships, 424
near ultraviolet exposure limits, 78
acid contamination, 104, 163, 165
American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) steel types
removal, 176
AISI 300 series, 350
acid precleaning, 167, 174, 175
AISI 300 or 300M, 190, 193-196, 198, 253, 293, 295, 298
activated carbon, for liquid penetrant recovery, 312-313
AISI 304, 288-292, 293, 296, 298, 299, 369
adhesion energy, 84
AISI 316, 299
aerosol cans. See spray cans
AISI 347, 295, 299
aerospace applications, 46
AISI 400 series, 350
acceptance/rejection criteria, 155, 156-157, 158
AISI 635, 293
automated equipment, 217-225
AISI 1018, 196, 253
cleaning restrictions, 170, 182
AISI 4130, 195-196, 253
custom designed dip stations, 208
AISI 4340, 190, 193-196, 252, 281
depth sensing capability liquid penetrants, 396-397
American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 80, 377
developerless, 386-391
ANSI/API 510, 376
fleet maintenance, 404-406
ANSI/ASNT CP-189, 13
fluorescent liquid penetrant cleaning, 181-183
American Petroleum Institute (API), ANSI/API 510, 376
heat source capsules for deep space missions, 407-412
American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT)
history of liquid penetrant testing, 23-26
ANSI/ASNT CP-189, 13, 377
importance of good eyesight for inspectors, 139
Central Certification Program, 13, 377
jet engine blade automatic testing system, 216
NDT Level III, 377
light alloy castings, 357-358
Recommended Practice No. SNT-TC-1A, 13, 376-377, 381-382
liquid oxygen systems, 393-395
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 63
low/high temperature liquid penetrants, 138
D 95, 110, 112-113, 381
open face honeycomb seals, 398-401
D 129, 300-301, 302
specifications, 380-385
D 516, 302
structural weldment crack enhancement, 402-403
D 808, 300, 303, 304
without developer, 386-391
D 1179, 304
Aerospace Industries Association of America (AIA)
D 1266, 302
AIA NAS 410, 13, 382
D 1552, 300-301
agitation cleaning, 167
D 2441, 300
AIA. See Aerospace Industries Association of America
D 2512, 41
aircraft component testing. See aerospace applications
E 165, 299, 302, 303, 304, 348, 423
aircraft structural integrity program, 404-406
E 433, 61, 154
air knife, 217, 224
E 1417, 100, 109, 183, 236, 348
air pollution control, 70
E 1135, laboratory fluorometer specified by, 111
AISI. See American Iron and Steel Institute
F 22-65, 408
Alburger, James, 20, 25
See also Liquid Penetrant Testing Bibliography
alkali contamination, 104, 163, 165
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), 63
removal, 176
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 247, 300, 348, 364-367, 375, 423
alkaline precleaning, 167, 174, 175
AMS. See SAE International
aluminum and alloys, 9, 344
analog signal processing, laser scanning system, 241-242
alloys, 122, 192, 352, 357
anodized aluminum test panels, 265-266
anodized test panels, 265-266
ANSI/API 510, 376
automotive parts, 425
ANSI/ASNT CP-189, 13, 377
controlled surface cavity test panels, 261-263
aqueous soluble developers. See water soluble developers
cracked comparator blocks, 122, 185-190, 247-251
aqueous suspendible developers. See water suspendible developers chelating liquid penetrant system, 396-397
arc welding, 171 chemical cleaning, 167
ASME. See American Society of Mechanical Engineers aircraft components, 181
ASTM. See American Society for Testing and Materials surfaces damaged by mechanical processing, 184
atomized spray application systems, 215 chemical oxygen demand (COD), 307
audits, nuclear power plants, 374 chinaware cracks, 337
austenitic stainless steel, 345 chlorides
liquid penetrant restrictions, 10 analysis methods, 302-303
liquid penetrant testing, 350 analysis specifications, 300-301
stress corrosion mechanism, 295-299 content restrictions, 41, 288
stress corrosion testing, 289-292 effects on stainless steels, 298
sulfide corrosion, 293 removal, 298
automated liquid penetrant test systems, 8, 35 stress corrosion effects, 289-292
aerospace applications, 217-225 chlorinated hydrocarbon cleaners, 171, 172, 173, 298-299
primary metals production applications, 348 Christmas tree, 144
production line systems, 208-209 chromate residue contamination, 104, 165
automotive part testing, 425-428 chromatography. See ion chromatography
chromic anodization treatment, 137
effect on crack indications in aluminum alloys, 188, 190
B clarifiers, 318, 319-320
clay tile, laminar cracks in, 330
balling up, wet developers, 116
clayware cracks, filtered particle testing, 327-341
bases, contamination by. See alkali contamination
discontinuities in unfired, 337
bearing shells, 62
prewetting, 335-336
Beer-Lambert law, 90
cleaning, 7, 8, 34
Betz, Carl E., 19-20
aerospace applications, 181-183, 383
bibliography, 453-482
contamination effects, 162-166
billets, 129
and diffuse liquid penetrant indications, 134
biodegradable liquid penetrants, 308
field preparation of parts, 65
biological oxygen demand (BOD), 307
importance of, 35
black light. See ultraviolet radiation
oil field down hole tubular parts, 419
bleedback, 155
postcleaning procedures, 178-180
bleedout, contamination and, 162
precautions, 168
blooms, 129
precleaning procedures, 167-177
blow holes, 62
procedures for various contamination types, 162-165
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, ASME, 247, 300, 348, 364-367, 375, 423
process flowsheet, 167
bomb turbidemetric sulfur test, 302
process selection, 168
bottom hole assembly, 419-420
surface contamination, 163, 164
Brady, Elliot, 24
surfaces damaged by mechanical processing, 184
braze bonds
See also postcleaning; precleaning; removal, liquid penetrants; removers
copper, 417
cleanliness, of processing area, 70
cracks in, 142-143
and surface contamination, 166
open face honeycomb seals, 398-401
clumping, of dry developers, 101
brightness discrimination, 14, 134
coating contamination, 104, 163, 164
reference conditions, 267-268
removal, 177
test panels for background brightness, 264-272
cobalt alloys, fatigue cracks, 279, 282
broad field microscopes, use in liquid penetrant testing, 14
cold discharge tubular fluorescent lamps, 234
brushing, 8, 35
cold shut, 147
buffing, 8, 35
cold working, 130, 169-170
builders, alkaline cleaners, 175
cracks, 143
color, liquid penetrants, 90-91
color blindness, 14, 96
C color contrast liquid penetrants. See visible liquid penetrant testing
candela, 29 color vision, 13-14
capillary pressure, liquid penetrants, 45, 84-86 comparators, comparator blocks and panels
carbide cutting tool testing, 143, 416-418 aluminum quench cracks, 122, 246-251
carbon, 330 controlled surface cavities, 261-263
surfactant adsorption onto, 312-313 liquid penetrant system monitor panel, 259-261
carbon contamination, 163, 164, 174 steel grinding cracks, 253
carbon matrix composite materials, filtered particle testing, 339-341 steel quench cracks, 252
carbon steel, 344 titanium stress corrosion cracking, 251-252
liquid penetrant testing, 350-351 composite carbon matrix materials, filtered particle testing, 339-341
postcleaning to prevent corrosion, 179-180 conical surface indentations, test panels with, 262-263
carcinogens, 76 contact angle, liquid penetrants, 84
care and maintenance. See maintenance contamination, 7, 8, 34
cascading dye process, 25 developers in use, 107-108
cast aluminum alloys, 352-358 effects on liquid penetrant indications, 137
castings, 47 and emulsifier effectiveness, 88
excessive bleedout indications, 60 emulsifiers and removers in use, 106
fluorescent liquid penetrant testing, 344-349, 351 emulsifier tanks, 53-54
liquid penetrant indications, 134 liquid penetrants in storage, 101
mechanized conveyorized test system, 210-212 liquid penetrants in use, 103-104
sources of discontinuities, 128-129 precleaning, 167-177
cast irons, liquid penetrant testing, 350, 351 prior liquid penetrant testing residues, 165
cataracts, and fluorescent liquid penetrant indication viewing, 96 types, effects, and removal procedures, 162-165
Central Certification Program, American Society for Nondestructive Testing See also specific contaminants
(ASNT), 13, 377 contrast, 40
centrifugation, for liquid penetrant removal from waste water, 311 eye sensitivity to, 228
ceramics, 9, 35 fluorescent liquid penetrants, 60, 61, 91, 95, 237, 269-271, 272
filtered particle testing, 326-341 visible dye liquid penetrants, 59, 61, 90, 95, 429, 430
porosity, 150 conveyorized liquid penetrant test system, 209-212
ceramoplastics, 430 copper
cermets, 35 alloys, 9
filtered particle testing, 330 brazing, 417
certification, of liquid penetrant testing personnel, 13, 375-377
Index 485
pollution from, 318 fire alarms, 69
in postcleaning, 179 fired ceramic materials, 330
principles of application, 48-54 fire extinguishers, 69
washability break, 113 fire hazards, 72-73, 75
wetting and detergent properties, 36 flammability, 75
See also lipophilic emulsifiers; hydrophilic emulsifiers liquid penetrants, 72-73
emulsion postcleaning, 179 flash point, 72, 75
emulsion precleaning, 176 common solvents, 173
EN 473, 13 and spot dry time, 87
engine varnish contamination, 163, 164 fleet maintenance applications, aircraft, 404-406
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 70, 71 flooding, 207
equipment, for liquid penetrant testing. See liquid penetrant testing floodlights, 226
equipment fluorescent brightness, 268-272
erythemal ultraviolet radiation, 77, 78 background test panels, 264-268
etching, 7, 8, 167 contrast curves, 271, 272
aluminum, 191-193 measurement, 111-112
primary metal production applications, 345 fluorescent compounds, chelation with aluminum, 397
steel, 195-196 fluorescent liquid penetrant testing, 36
surface removal necessary to restore liquid penetrant indications, 190 advantages, 46
titanium, 198, 199 aircraft components, 181-183, 405-406
eutectic melting, 353 aluminum alloys, 355, 356-357
eutrophication, 319 automotive parts, 425-428
evaporation, liquid penetrants, 104 basic processes, 42-46
explosion hazards, 75 brazed ring seals, 401
explosive limits, 75 brightness, 39
exposure limits, 74-75 color, 90-91
ultraviolet radiation, 78-79 contrast, 60, 61, 91, 95, 237, 269-271
extrusion discontinuities, 130, 148 contrast ratio, 237
eyes, 13-14, 39 dark adaptation, need for adequate, 229-230
brightness discrimination, 14, 134 depth sensing capabilities, 396-397
cataracts, 96 developers with, 92-94
contrast sensitivity, 228 development of, 20-22
fatigue, 71 field techniques, 66
fluorescence of eyeball, 61, 79-80, 230 filtered particle test media, 331-332, 335
relative luminosity efficiency curves, 229 light sources for, 226-238
response to ultraviolet radiation, 227-228 mechanized scanners, 239-243
response to various light wavelengths, 228 optical pattern recognition, 242-243
response to white and colored light, 228-229 plastics, 430
vision threshold, 228 portable kits, 202
and vitamin A deficiency, 139 precision investment castings, 344-349
reapplication, 336
selection, 46-47
F self-developing, 392-393
sensitivity, 39
fail safe aircraft design, 405
ultraviolet level selection, 236
failure, rising costs of, 3-4
ultraviolet measurement, 234-236
far ultraviolet radiation. See ultraviolet radiation
viewing indications, 45-46, 59, 95-96
false indications, 151-152, 162
welds in heat source capsules, 409
fatigue cracks
white light interference, 226-227, 236-237
aircraft structures, 131, 404
See also ultraviolet radiation; ultraviolet lamps
aluminum alloys, 246
fluorescent liquid penetrant light trap, 93, 94
cobalt alloys, 279, 282
fluorescent tubes, 226
low cycle specimens, 246-247
ultraviolet radiation sources, 234
metal comparator block specimens, 246-253
fluorine, analysis methods, 304-305
prevention, 131-132
fluorometers, 111-112
in service, 144-145
flying spot fluorescent liquid penetrant laser scanning, 240-242, 243
sources, 131
foamed hydrophilic emulsifiers, 215
steel, 246, 281
footcandle, 235
titanium alloys, 246, 247, 280
forging laps, 130, 147
Federal Occupational Safety and Health Act, 72
forgings, 47, 134, 136, 138
ferrous metals, 8, 350-351
cracks, 138, 143
See also steel
sources of discontinuities, 129-130
field techniques, 7, 9, 10, 65-68
formula racing cars. See racing cars
military aircraft inspection, 406
fossil fuel power plants, 362
nuclear power plants, psychology of, 374
foundry applications, 344-349
precautions, 65
light alloys, 352-358
precleaning process selection, 168
fracture critical components, 283
pressurized solvent spray cans, 172-173
fractured glass step wedge test panels, 266-271
safety considerations, 73
fugitive dye technique, 25
See also portable liquid penetrant kits
fusion weld cracks, 142
filled cracks, 104, 163-164
future usefulness, and nondestructive testing, 2
film type developers, 58
filtered particle testing
applications, 327
carbon matrix composite materials, 339-341
G
design and selection, 331-332 gage pressure, 28
differential absorption in, 329 gamma values, 269
equipment, 333-334 gas holes, 149
indication interpretation, 337-338 gears, 60
media, 326-327, 329, 331-332 glass, 35
mechanism of operation, 328-330 cracks, 146
prewetting, 327, 335-336 fractured glass step wedge test panels, 266-271
principles, 326-327 glass bonded mica, 430
filtration, for liquid penetrant removal from waste water, 310-311 glossary, 433-451
fingerprint contamination, 165 graphite, 330
removal, 177
Index 487
postcleaning, 179 prior testing residues, 165
postemulsification process, 43 process selection, 9-11, 46-47
water contamination test, 112-113 productivity, 15, 18
water tolerance, 109 quality control tests, 118-122
liquid oxygen (LOX) systems, 40-41 reasons for selecting, 8, 9, 11, 35
aerospace applications, 392-395 reliability, 18
postcleaning restrictions, 178 repetitive testing standards, 141
liquid penetrant, color contrast. See visible liquid penetrant testing sensitivity, 8, 35, 39
liquid penetrant, fluorescent. See fluorescent liquid penetrant testing signal-to-noise ratio, 48, 282-283
liquid penetrant, solvent removable. See solvent removable liquid penetrants surface conditions interfering with, 162
liquid penetrant, visible dye. See visible liquid penetrant testing test object preparation, 162
liquid penetrant incoming testing, aerospace industry, 358 waste pollution control, 306-313
liquid penetrant indications See also field techniques; liquid penetrant indications; specific applications
acceptance standards, 140-141 and materials
appearance, 133-134 liquid penetrant testing applications. See aerospace applications; nuclear
classification by discontinuity, 127 power plants; primary metals production
crack geometry effects on brightness, 266 liquid penetrant testing equipment, 202-216
cracks, 142-146 aerospace automated applications, 217-225
ensuring inspector knowledge of, 15 automated production line system, 208-209
evaluation, 126-132, 133 high volume, 8, 35, 202, 208
evaluation specifications, 63-64, 154-158 lighting equipment, 226-238
faulty technique effects, 138 maintenance, 69-70
field techniques, 66, 67 mechanized conveyorized, 209-212
filtered particle testing, 337-338 mechanized scanners, 239-243
importance of excess liquid penetrant removal, 48 portable, 202
inadequate, possible causes, 141 primary metal production applications, 347-348
interpretation, 42-43, 61-63, 126, 133-135 quality control tests, 118-122
laminar discontinuities, 147-148 selection, 209
mechanism of formation, 133 specialized, 202, 208
mechanized scanners, 239-243 stationary, 202-208
nonrelevant and false, 46, 151-152, 162, 338, 424 low carbon alloy steels, 350
persistence, 135 lower explosive limit (LEL), 75
primary metal production applications, 347, 355-356 low temperature liquid penetrants, 41
processing effects influencing, 136-139 LOX systems. See liquid oxygen (LOX) systems
recognition training, 153 lubricant contamination, 163
surface condition effects, 137 luminance, 29
time to develop, 135 luminous flux, 29
variables affecting, 137-139 luminous intensity, 27, 29
viewing, 42, 45-46, 59-61, 95-96
liquid penetrants
biodegradable, 308 M
care and maintenance in storage, 100-102
machines, increased demand on, 3
care and maintenance in use, 103-105
machining, 8, 35, 184
classification by dye type, 36
etching of aluminum after, 192-193
classification by removal method, 36-37
machining cracks, 143
color, 90-91
magnesium, 9, 134, 344
disposal, 216
microshrinkage in, 150
dual mode, 36, 46
open wheel racing cars, 145, 427-428
evaporation, 104
postcleaning to prevent corrosion, 179-180
heat effects, 105
magnetic particle testing, 19
light absorption of films, 91
fossil fuel power plants, 362
liquid oxygen applications, 392
liquid penetrant testing contrasted for nuclear power applications, 365
major requirements of, 39-40
residue removal, 169
material hazards, 71-73
magnification, use in liquid penetrant testing, 14
physical properties, 40, 84-86
maintenance
prewash concept, 314-315
developers, 107-108
qualified/approved, 38-39
emulsifiers, 106
quality control tests for, 109-117
liquid penetrants in storage, 100-102
removal. See removal, liquid penetrants
liquid penetrants in use, 103-105
selection, 46-47
liquid penetrant test systems, 69-70
slow solubility, 321
removers, 106
special application requirements, 40-41
ultraviolet lamps, 237-238
waste treatment by adsorption, 311, 312-313
malleable iron castings, 351
wetting and detergent properties, 36
marine applications, 421-424
See also fluorescent liquid penetrant testing; visible liquid penetrant
martensitic stainless steel, 345
testing; water washable liquid penetrants; postemulsifiable liquid
liquid penetrant testing, 350
penetrants
mass units, 27
liquid penetrant system monitor panel, 259-261, 316-317
material hazards, 71-73
liquid penetrant testing
material safety data sheets (MSDS), 73-76
basic process, 7-8, 34, 42-46
mechanical processing
bibliography, 453-482
cracks from, 143
cleanliness of processing area, 70, 166
and liquid penetrant testing indications, 8, 35, 136-139, 184-199
closed loop system, 320-322
and surface contamination, 164
disadvantages and limitations, 8-9, 35-36
See also specific operations, i.e., shot peening
glossary, 433-451
mechanical working, 8, 35
history, 19-26
mechanized conveyorized liquid penetrant test system, 209-212
human performance, 282-284
mechanized scanning
key individuals in development of, 19-26
for fluorescent liquid penetrant testing, 239-243
labor intensiveness, 9, 12
nuclear power plant piping, 373
with leak testing, 7-8, 35, 67-68, 141, 150
mental qualifications, of liquid penetrant testing personnel, 14-15
lighting, 226-238
mercury, 41
management interest and, 12
mercury vapor arc ultraviolet sources, 13, 230-233
management of, 7-11
radiation intensity variation with distance, 233
materials inspectable, 9, 34-35
various commercial, 232
personnel selection and qualification, 12-18
mesh measurement of grit coarseness, 29, 185-190, 193, 198, 329, 330
Index 489
waste water clarification, 318 rounded indications
posttreatment, of liquid penetrant rinsings, 309-311 acceptance/rejection criteria, aerospace applications, 385
potassium compounds, 41 interpretation, 134
cleaning compound restrictions, 170 rust contamination, 163, 164
powdered metal products, 35 removal, 174
precleaning, 7, 34, 162
aircraft components, 181-183
primary metal production applications, 345 S
procedures, 167-177
SAE International (formerly Society of Automotive Engineers [SAE]), 63
pressure units, 28
AMS 2644, 39, 100, 120, 183, 246, 247, 248, 348, 350, 380, 381, 384,
prewash concept, 314-315
388, 408
prewetting, filtered particle testing, 327, 335-336
AMS 6419, 253
primary metals production
AMS 5608D, 282
cracks, 143
AMS 5850, 398
discontinuity sources, 127-132
See also Liquid Penetrant Testing Bibliography
ferrous metals, 350-351
safety. See health and safety hazards
foundry applications, 344-349, 352-358
safety factor, 3
light alloy foundry applications, 352-358
salt bath descaling/deoxidizing, 167, 175-176
probability of detection curve, 276
sampling, 2
processing discontinuities, 127
liquid penetrant materials, 110
production line liquid penetrant testing systems, 208-209
sand blasting. See grit blasting
productivity, of liquid penetrant testing, 15, 18
sanding, 8, 35, 184
pulling apart, wet developers, 116
effect on crack indications in aluminum alloys, 185, 186, 187
Purkinje shift, 230
etching of aluminum after, 191, 192, 193, 194
etching of steel after, 195-196
etching of titanium after, 198
Q sandwich braze, 416
qualification, of liquid penetrant testing personnel. See personnel qualification sanitary ware, filtered particle testing, 327, 331, 332
quality assurance, nuclear power plants, 374-376 scale contamination, 163, 164
quality control removal, 174
liquid penetrants, 109-117 scattering, of light. See light scattering
precleaning aircraft components, 183 scotopic vision, 229
test systems and procedures, 118-122 sealants, aircraft structures, 405
quenching cracks, 130 seals
aluminum comparator blocks, 122, 247-251 nuclear power plants, 366
steel comparator blocks, 252 open face honeycomb seals, 398-401
seams, 147-148
welded, leak testing, 149, 150
R selenium cell photoelectric meters, 235
self-contained liquid penetrant test units, 203-205
racing cars, in service liquid penetrant testing, 426-428
self-developing liquid penetrants, 392-393
radiography, light alloy castings, 354
for heat source capsules for deep space missions, 407-409
radiometers, 235
performance, 386-391
reactive materials, 75-76
sensitivity level, 39
recognition training, liquid penetrant inspectors, 153
service discontinuities, 127
Recommended Practice No. SNT-TC-1A, American Society for Nondestructive
service expectations, of test parts, 10
Testing (ASNT), 13, 376-377, 381-382
settling out, developers, 117
red eyeglasses, 14, 230
Shannon, John Pop, 20
red visible indications, 36, 47, 95
sheet metal, 129, 344
reference brightness conditions, 267-268
cracks, 143
reference panels. See test panels
shims, 416
refractomer test, for hydrophilic emulsifier concentration control, 114
shipbuilding applications, 421-424
refractory materials, 330
short wave ultraviolet radiation, 77
refrigerant-113 (trichlorotrifluoroethane), 298-299
shot peening, 8, 29, 35, 184
rejection criteria. See acceptance/rejection criteria
effect on crack indications in aluminum alloys, 187, 188
removal, liquid penetrants, 34, 87-89
etching of steel after, 195-196, 197
aerospace applications, 383-384
etching of titanium after, 198
avoiding overremoval, 51
shrinkage cavities, 149-150
and diffuse liquid penetrant indications, 134
shrinkage discontinuities, 128-129
liquid penetrant classification by removal method, 36-37
automotive parts, 427
oil field down hole tubular parts, 420
light alloy castings, 353
purpose and control of, 48
SI multipliers, 27-28
reprocessing parts after inadequate, 53
SI system, 27-29
and signal-to-noise ratio of testing, 48
base units, 27
tests for effectiveness, 119-120
conversions to, 28
See also cleaning; water washable liquid penetrants; postemulsifiable liquid
derived units, 27
penetrants
silver solder, 417
removers, 38, 44-45
signal-to-noise ratio, of liquid penetrant testing, 48, 282-283
care and maintenance in storage, 101-102
silicon carbide, 339
care and maintenance in use, 106
slow solubility liquid penetrants, 321
comparison evaluation, 258
small dot liquid penetrant indications, 134
field precautions, 73
Smith Sparling, Rebecca, 24, 25
liquid oxygen applications, 394-395
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). See SAE International
spray application of foamed hydrophilic, 215
Sockman, Loy, 24-25
tests for contamination by, 114-115
sodium compounds, 41
water recycling, 216
cleaning compound restrictions, 170
resin contamination, 35
soft metals. See aluminum and alloys; titanium and alloys
reverse osmosis, for liquid penetrant removal from waste water, 309-310
soil contamination, 34, 163, 164
rhodopsin, 14, 229
precleaning, 169, 174
rolled products, 129, 130
solder, silver, 417
rough surfaces
solvent based lacquer developers, 93
background fluorescence caused by, 61
liquid penetrant comparators, 264
Index 491
ultraviolet lamps, 13, 230-238 washability break, 113
care and maintenance, 70, 237-238 washing
for filtered particle testing, 333 aerospace applications, 384
in mechanized conveyorized system, 211 primary metal production applications, 345
in multicomponent test units, 207 wash stations
physiological effects of, 238 in automated aerospace systems, 218, 223, 224
placement, 61 in mechanized conveyorized system, 210
portable, 202 in multicomponent test unit, 206, 207
reflected radiation from, 79 in self-contained test unit, 203-204
safety considerations, 76-77 spray rinsing equipment, 216
in self-contained test units, 205 waste pollution, 306-313
ultraviolet radiation, 77, 78 waste water clarification, 315, 318-322
effect on inspector performance, 278 waste water recycling. See water recycling
effects on eye, 61 waste water treatment, 306-313
exposure limits, 78-79 water contamination, 34, 163, 165
eye response, 79-80, 227-228 in emulsifiers, 106
filters, 112 emulsifier tanks, 54
hazards, 78-80 in postemulsifiable liquid penetrants, 103
intensity required versus ambient visible light, 95-96 removal, 176-177
near ultraviolet radiation (ultraviolet-A radiation). See ultraviolet radiation test for in lipophilic emulsifiers, 112-113
measuring, 77-78, 234-235 water tolerance of liquid penetrants, 109
measurement instruments, 235-236 in water washable liquid penetrants, 103
scattering by fluorescent liquid penetrants, 93-94 water content measurements, 110
ultraviolet-A radiation (near ultraviolet radiation). See ultraviolet radiation water immiscible solvent removers, 311-312
ultraviolet-B radiation, 77, 78 water pollution
ultraviolet-C radiation, 77 avoidance, 307-308
ultraviolet radiation mechanized scanning systems, 239-242 emulsifiers, 88, 89
United States Air Force (USAF) specifications water recycling, 311, 312
QPL-25135, 38 hydrophilic remover systems, 216
QPL-AMS-2644, 38-39, 246 and prewash concept, 314-317
United States Coast Guard (USCG) requirements, 423 water soluble developers (aqueous soluble developers), 38, 55, 93
United States Navy (USN) specifications, 422-423 advantages and disadvantages, 58
NAVSEA 250-1500-1, 100 aerospace applications, 384-385
NAVSEA Technical Publications, 422 application techniques, 57
NAVSHIPS 250-1500-1, 422 care and maintenance, 107
Unites States Auto Club, 427 control and maintenance of baths, 115-116
units, 27-29 postcleaning, 180
upper explosive limit (UEL), 75 storage, 101
water suspendible developers (aqueous suspendible developers), 38, 55, 93
advantages and disadvantages, 57-58
V aerospace applications, 385
application techniques, 57
valve bodies, 134, 362
care and maintenance, 107
valves, fatigue cracks, 145
control and maintenance of baths, 115-116
vapor arc lamps, 226
postcleaning, 180
See also mercury vapor arc ultraviolet sources
storage, 101
vapor blasting, effect on crack indications in aluminum alloys, 187, 189
water washable liquid penetrants, 36, 87
vapor degreasing, 87, 167, 170-171
basic process, 42-43, 48-51
aircraft components, 182
care and maintenance in use, 103
vapor density, 75
development of, 23, 24
varnish contamination, 163, 164
postcleaning, 179
removal, 174
primary metal production applications, 345
ventilation, 76
waste water clarification, 318
viewing indications, 42
water tolerance of, 109
fluorescent liquid penetrants, 45-46, 59, 95-96
weld discontinuities, 46
visible liquid penetrants, 45, 59, 95
welded seams, leak testing, 149, 150
viscosity, liquid penetrants, 45, 85, 86
weld residue contamination, 164
viscosity units, 28
welds
visible liquid penetrant testing (color contrast liquid penetrant testing), 36
aerospace structural weldment crack enhancement, 402-403
advantages, 46
crack indications, 142
basic processes, 42-46
in heat source capsules, 409-412
brazed ring seals, 401
nuclear power plants, 366, 369, 370-371, 372
color, 90-91
residual stresses, 362
contrast, 59, 61, 90, 95
sources of discontinuities, 129-130
development of, 22, 23-25
wetting
field techniques, 67
developers, 116
light sources for, 226
liquid penetrants, 40, 84-85
plastics, 430
white light illumination
selection, 47
eye response to, 228-229
viewing indications, 45, 59, 95
interference with fluorescent liquid penetrant testing, 226-227, 236-237
vision acuity, 13-14, 96
sources, 226
and object brightness, 229
wipe-and-watch technique, 347
See also eyes
wire brushing, 170
vision acuity examinations, 13
work rolls, steel rolling mills, 350-351
vision threshold, 228
visual examination. See inspection and viewing indications
vitamin A deficiency, 139
volatility, liquid penetrants, 40, 86
X
and safety, 75 X-ray fluoroscopic incoming testing, aerospace industry, 358
volume units, 28
Z
W Ziegfield, Flo, 20
wall thinning, 2
Ward, R.A., 22, 23
Figure Sources
Chapter 4
Chapter 15
Figures 1-2, 5, 7, 9 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Toolworks, Glenview, IL.
Figure 1 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 3-4, 6 Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Figure 2-3 International Pipe Inspectors Association, Houston, TX.
Figure 8 Met-L-Chek, Santa Monica, CA.
Figure 4 Chrysler Corporation, Detroit, MI.
Figure 5 Gregory F. Monks, QC Technologies, Incorporated, Noblesville, IN.
Chapter 5 Figure 6 Dennis G. Hunley, Quality Assurance Corporation, Indianapolis, IN.
Figures 1-6, 8, 12-15, 18-25 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Toolworks,
Glenview, IL.
Figures 7, 26 Allied Signal Aerospace Company [formerly AiResearch
Manufacturing Division, Garrett Corporation], Los Angeles, CA.
Figure 16-17 Turbodyne Technologies, Incorporated, Woodland Hills, CA.
Chapter 6
Figures 2-11 Boeing Company, Long Beach, CA.
Figures 12-25 Boeing Company, St. Louis, MO.
Chapter 7
Figures 1-4f, 4h, 6-8a, 25-26, 31, 34, 36-43 Magnaflux Division of Illinois
Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 8b, 8c Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Figures 9-15 Boeing Company, St. Louis, MO.
Figure 17-24 Northrop Grumman Corporation, Los Angeles, CA.
Figures 33, 35a-35b Spectronics Corporation, Westbury, NY.
Figures 35c Ely Chemical Company, Aurora, IL.
Chapter 8
Figures 2-4 Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Figures 5-7, 9-12 Boeing Company, St. Louis, MO.
Figure 13 Turco Products, Incorporated, Long Beach, CA.
Chapter 9
Figures 1-7 D&W Enterprises, Limited, Littleton, CO.
Chapter 10
Figures 1-6 Westinghouse Hanford, Hanford, WA.
Figure 7 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 8-10 Sherwin Incorporated, South Gate, CA.
Chapter 11
Figures 1-13 Magnaflux Division of Illinois Tool Works, Glenview, IL.
Figures 14-15 Robert L. Crane, Air Force Research Laboratory,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
493
Movie Sources
Chapter 2 Chapter 12
Movie. Bleeding suggests discontinuity severity Hellier Associates, Movie. Rejectable discontinuity Hellier Associates, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Incorporated, Niantic, CT. Movie. Porosity in casting American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Movie. Fluorescent liquid penetrant Hellier Associates, Incorporated, Columbus, OH.
Niantic, CT. Movie. Fluorescent bleedout reveals shrinkage ASM International, Materials
Movie. Liquid penetrant seeps into discontinuity ASM International, Park, OH.
Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Solvent removes excess liquid penetrant from part surface ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Nonaqueous wet developer enhances visible dye contrast ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Hydrophilic prerinse Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Dip in hydrophilic emulsifier; dwell Howmet Castings,
Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Water wash Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Developer application Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Viewing of developed indications Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Developer is applied American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Wipe part American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Visible red dye liquid penetrant bleeds out American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. Indication in root pass of weld Hellier Associates, Incorporated,
Niantic, CT.
Movie. Water wash Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Developer application Howmet Castings, Whitehall, MI.
Movie. Nonaqueous wet developer enhances visible dye contrast ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Shake the spray can Hellier Associated, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Movie. Nonaqueous wet developer enhances visible dye contrast ASM
International, Materials Park, OH.
Chapter 3
Movie. Visible red dye liquid penetrant bleeds out American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Chapter 5
Movie. Fluorescent bleedout reveals shrinkage ASM International,
Incorporated, Materials Park, OH.
Movie. Quenching cracks Hellier Associate, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Movie. Linear discontinuity American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Open and partially open cracks American Society for Nondestructive
Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. Pitting and porosity American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Porosity in casting American Society for Nondestructive Testing,
Columbus, OH.
Movie. Process control can mask discontinuities American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. False indications Hellier Associates, Incorporated, Niantic, CT.
Movie. Nonrelevant indications can mask relevant ones American Society
for Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
Movie. Nonrelevant indication from part geometry American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH.
494