Production Machining

NOV 2018

Production Machining - Your access to the precision machining industrial buyer.

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 41 of 51

CLENING TECH BRIEF 40 PRODUCTION MCHINING :: NOVEMBER 2018 ® Clean Parts. Tel. 716.763.4343 ■ ■ Clean Lines ■ Passivation Lines ■ Aqueous Chemistries ■ Data Management mono-solvents, reducing the cleaning cycle time by as much as 75 percent and increasing productivity. With many regulatory organizations such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considering measures to reduce and restrict the uses of substances containing nPB, PERC and TCE, such as mono-solvents, because of safety concerns, azeotropic cleaners are becoming known as a viable replacement. Because they can be blended, chemicals such as nPB can be eliminated, giving them much better toxicity pro‚les. Although azeotropes cost more per pound than mono- solvents, they are still competitive, and the fact that they are comprised of safer, more stable chemistries outweighs any cost implications. Additionally, training and process optimization can make cleaning with azeotropes more eƒcient and cost-e„ective than mono-solvent cleaning. Co-Solvent/Bi-Solvent Degreasing Co-Solvents/bi-solvents are the most complex, but also the most powerful cleaner available for a vapor degreaser. †ese systems use a non-volatile cleaner in combina- tion with a volatile rinsing solution. Most of the cleaning is done in the non-volatile cleaner, which is then rinsed o„ by the volatile ˆuid. †e bene‚t of these systems is that the non-volatile cleaner can be adjusted and modi‚ed to ‚t the speci‚c cleaning requirements. Occasionally, a contami- nation cannot be managed by a mono-solvent or azeotrope because of material compatibility issues, throughput problems or environmental regulations. A co-solvent may provide the required cleaning power without the use of ingredients under regulatory restriction or solvent-sensitivity issues. It can be formulated to be non-chlorinated or free of volatile organic compounds, for example. †ere are a few downsides to co-solvent cleaning, however, the most obvious being the requirement for a separate cleaning tank. †is solvent cannot be used in a one-sump vapor degreaser or with vapor-only cleaning, and the extra cleaning cycle results in a reduction in throughput. Another disadvantage to this chemistry is that it requires monitoring to ensure the concentrations of each component are correct. †is necessitates extra training to guarantee that the correct additions are made to the system when necessary. What a co-solvent system can give the user in return is the ability to remove diƒcult soils, which often requires high temperatures. It delivers almost the same convenience and speed as traditional solvent cleaning, but increases this

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Production Machining - NOV 2018