CLASS ROOM TRAINING HANDBOOK

LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2 PRINCIPLES
CHAPTER 3 EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS
CHAPTER 4 TECHNIQUES
CHAPTER 5 INTERPRETATION OF TEST RESULTS
CHAPTER 6 QUALITY CONTROL OF PENETRANT TEST MATERIALS

SA
CHAPTER 7 COMPARISON AND SELECTION OF NDT PROCESSES
CHAPTER 8 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS

MI

T
APPENDIX A- GLOSSARY

ND
APPENDIX B- MEASUREMENT CONVERSION CHARTS

KU

O-
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
PU
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph
SM
IP

100 GENERAL
CO
101 PU RPOSE
102 DESCRIPTION OF CONTENTS.
SA

1. Arrangement
2. Locators
MI

DT

103 INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS OF LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING.

KU

104 TESTING PHILOSOPHY

-N

105 PERSONNEL
PU

MO

106 TESTING CRITERIA.

107 TEST PROCEDURES.
IP

108 TEST OBJECTIVE.

S
CO

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
100 GENERAL
The complexity and expense of today's machines, equipment, and tools dictate the use of fabrication and testing
procedures that will ensure maximum reliability. Nondestructive testing (testing without destroying) provides many of
these procedures. Of the number of nondestructive testing procedures available, liquid penetrant testing of which this
hand-book is concerned is one of the most widely used.

101 PURPOSE
The purpose of this handbook is to provide the fundamental knowledge of liquid penetrant testing required by quality
assurance and test personnel to enable them to: 1) ascertain that the proper test technique, or combination of
techniques, is used to assure the quality of the finished product; 2)interpret, evaluate, and make a sound decision as to
the results of the test; and 3) recognize those areas of exhibiting doubtful test results that require either retest or
assistance in interpretation and evaluation.

1 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

102 DESCRIPTION OF CONTENTS

1. Arrangement
The material contained in this handbook is presented in a logical sequence and consists of:
a. Chapter 1: Introduction and testing philosophy.
b. Chapter 2: Liquid penetrant testing principles with description of procedures, applications, and capabilities.
c. Chapter 3: Equipment and materials.
d. Chapter 4: Testing techniques including selection of penetrant materials and processes.
e. Chapter 5. Interpretation of test results with description of indications and their characteristics.
f. Chapter 6: Quality control of penetrant materials.
g. Chapter 7: Comparison and selection of NDT processes as related to the five nondestructive testing methods.
h. Chapter 8: Safety precautions for fire and toxic hazards.
i. Appendix A: Glossary of terms relating to liquid penetrant testing.

SA
j. Appendix B: Measurement conversion charts (U.S. customary to International System (SI) units).

MI

T
2. Locators

ND
At the front of each chapter is a table of contents referencing the major paragraphs in that chapter. Also included is a

KU
list of figures and tables, where applicable.

O-
PU
103 INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS OF LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SM
Because of the basic characteristics of liquid penetrant testing, it is used to test a variety of both metallic and
IP

nonmetallic materials such as welds, forgings, castings, plastics, and ceramics, etc. Since liquid penetrant testing is
capable of economically revealing surface discontinuities (variations in material composition) in a variety of dissimilar
CO
materials, it is one of the most effective tools available to quality assurance personnel.
SA

104 TESTING PHILOSOPHY

MI

Nondestructive testing is used to assure maximum reliability of machines, equipment, and tools. To accomplish such
DT

reliability, test standards have been set and test results must meet these standards.
KU

-N

105 PERSONNEL
PU

MO

It is imperative that personnel responsible for liquid penetrant testing be trained and highly qualified with a technical
understanding of the test equipment and materials, the item under test (specimen), and the test procedures. Quality
assurance personnel must be equally qualified. To make optimum use of liquid penetrant testing, personnel conducting
IP

tests must continually keep abreast of new developments. There is no substitute for knowledge.
CO

106 TESTING CRITERIA

Modern manufacturing procedures dictate that faulty articles be discovered as early in the manufacturing process as
possible. This means that each item must be tested individually before it is required to perform in a subassembly and
that each subassembly be tested before it is required to perform in an assembly, etc. This building-block approach
requires that test processes be selected and test procedures be generated at the lowest level in the manufacturing
process in order that the highest reliability may be obtained with lowest cost.

107 TEST PROCEDURES

Approved procedures for liquid penetrant testing are formulated from analysis of the test specimen or article, review of
its past history, experience on like or similar specimens, and information available concerning discontinuities in similar
articles. It is the responsibility of personnel conducting or checking tests to ensure that test procedures are adequately
performed, and that the test objective is accomplished. Procedures found to be incorrect or inadequate must be brought
to the attention of responsible supervision for correction and incorporation into a revised procedure.

2 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

108 TEST OBJECTIVE

1. The objective of liquid penetrant testing is to ensure maximum reliability by providing a means of:
a. Obtaining a visual image related to a discontinuity on the surface of the specimen under test.
b. Disclosing the nature of the discontinuity without impairing the material.
c. Separating acceptable and unacceptable material in accordance with predetermined standards.

2. No test is successfully completed until an evaluation of the test results is made. Evaluation of test procedures and
results requires understanding of the test objective as well as knowledge of the material from which the test article is
made. It also requires knowledge of the manufacturing processes that were involved.

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

3 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

CHAPTER 2: PRINCIPLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph
200 GENERAL
201 PHYSICS
1. General
2. Application of Penetrant
3. Discontinuity Indications.
202 VISIBILITY OF INDICATIONS.
203 TEST PROCEDURE.
204 TEST PROCESSES.
1. Types of Dye.

SA
2. Processes
205 PROCESS SELECTION.

MI

T
206 CAP ABILITIES OF TEST.

ND
207 LIMITATIONS

KU
LIST OF FIGURES

O-
Figure Page
PU
2-1 Capillary Action.
2-2 Penetration of Surface Discontinuities.
SM
IP

2-3 Reversed Capillary Action.

CO
2-4 Sequence of Liquid Penetrant Tests.
2-5 Visible Dye and Fluorescent Penetrant Processes.
SA

2-6 Dual Sensitivity Penetrant Processes.

MI

DT

CHAPTER 2: PRINCIPLES
KU

200 GENERAL
-N

Liquid penetrant testing, a nondestructive means of locating and determining the severity of surface discontinuities in
PU

MO

materials, is based upon capillarity. Capillarity, or capillary attraction, is the action by which the surface of a liquid,
where it is in contact with a solid, is elevated or depressed. The materials, processes, and procedures used in liquid
penetrant testing are designed to facilitate capillarity and to make the results of such action visible and capable of
IP

interpretation.
CO

201 PHYSICS
1. General
The phenomenon of capillary action is one of the most important forces in nature. The rate and extent of the action
associated with capillarity depends upon such factors as forces of cohesion and adhesion, surface tension, and
viscosity. Capillarity can be observed when a plastic straw is inserted into a glass of water. When the straw is inserted,
the water molecules enter the straw and begin to attract other nearby molecules, pulling them up the straw by cohesion.
This process continues as the water rises higher and higher. The water continues to rise until the pull of surface tension
is equalized. Cohesive forces prevent the water from falling back down the straw. Capillary action as applied in
nondestructive testing is somewhat more complex, since various surface conditions hindering or assisting the action are
encountered. Liquid penetrants in nondestructive testing have low tension and high capillarity. Capillary action is
illustrated in Figure 2-1.

4 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

2. Application of Penetrant
In liquid penetrant testing, the liquid penetrant is applied to the surface of the specimen, and sufficient time is allowed
for penetration into surface discontinuities. (See Figure 2-2.) If the discontinuity is small or narrow, as in a crack or
pinhole, capillarity assists the penetration. When the opening is gross in nature, such as a tear, the liquid may be
trapped when poured over the specimen.

3. Discontinuity Indications
After sufficient time has passed for the penetrant to enter the surface discontinuities, the excess surface penetrant is
removed. The removal process clears the surface of the specimen but permits the penetrant in the discontinuities to
remain. Capillary action is again employed in the process. A developer -which acts as a blotter -is applied to the test
surface. (See Figure 2-3.) The blotting action of the developer draws the penetrant from the discontinuity and the
penetrant appears on the surface of the specimen as an indication. The size of the indication, because of the diffusion of
the penetrant in the developer, is usually larger than the discontinuity. There are also penetrants that provide sufficient
discontinuity indication without the use of a developer; the developer is not required.

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 2-3 penetration of Surface discontinuities

Figure 2-3. Reversed Capillary Action

5 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

202 VISIBILITY OF INDICATIONS

The ultimate success of liquid penetrant testing depends upon the visibility of indications. To ensure utmost visibility,
the liquid penetrant contains; either a colored dye easily seen in white light, or a fluorescent dye visible under black
(ultraviolet) light. The dyes are obtainable in a variety of colors.

203 TEST PROCEDURE

The sequence of the test procedure, basically the same for all penetrant tests, can be broken into six main steps. These
steps are illustrated in Figure 2-4, where it is shown that: 1) the surface of the specimen is first cleaned and allowed to
dry; 2) penetrant is applied to the test surface and allowed sufficient time to seep into openings; 3) the penetrant
remaining on the surface is removed without removing the penetrant from openings; 4)developer is applied to aid in
drawing the penetrant back to the surface; 5)the surface of the specimen is visually examined to locate penetrant
indications that have formed in the developer coating; and finally, 6) the test surface is again cleaned to remove
developer residue and any minute traces of penetrant. The main steps and additional sub steps required by the type of

SA
penetrant and process used are detailed in later chapters.

MI

T
204 TEST PROCESSES

ND
The penetrants used in liquid penetrant testing can be categorized by the type dye that they contain and the processing

KU
required removing them from test articles.

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 2-4. Sequence of Liquid Penetrant Tests

1. Types of Dye
Penetrants containing a visible color dye (usually red) are called visible dye, or color contrast, penetrants while those
penetrants containing a fluorescent dye are referred to as fluorescent penetrants. Penetrants containing a combination of
visible and fluorescent dyes are called dual sensitivity penetrants.

2. Processes
Processes employing penetrants that are self-emulsifying or removable with plain water are further classified as water-
washable processes. Processes where a separate emulsifier is used to make the penetrant water washable are referred to
as post-emulsified processes. And those processes in which the penetrant is removed by a solvent are identified as
solvent-removed processes. Figure 2-5 illustrates the processing sequence used with visible dye and fluorescent
penetrants; Figure 2-6 shows the processing sequence employed for dual sensitivity penetrants.

6 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP

Figure 2-5. Visible Dye and Fluorescent Penetrant process

CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 2-6. Dual Sensitivity Penetrant Processes

7 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

205 PROCESS SELECTION

Selection of the suitable penetrant type and process for a particular liquid penetrant test depends upon the sensitivity
required; the number of articles to be tested; surface condition of the material under test; configuration of the test
specimen; and availability of water, electricity, compressed air, suitable testing area, etc.

206 CAP ABILITIES OF TEST

Liquid penetrant testing is capable of locating discontinuities open to the surface in articles made of any nonporous
material. With penetrant tests, detectable discontinuities such as surface cracks, porosity, and "through" leaks can be
found. These may be caused by fatigue cracks, shrinkage porosity, cold shuts, grinding and heat-treat cracks, seams,
forging laps and bursts, as well as lack of bond between joined metals. Penetrant testing is successfully used on metals
such as aluminum, magnesium, brass, copper, cast iron, stainless steel, and titanium. It also can be used to test other
materials, including ceramics, plastics, molded rubber, powdered metal products, or glass. Since some plastics and
rubber compositions are adversely affected by oil, sample tests are accomplished prior to actual testing of these
materials to assure that the penetrant will not damage the material. Penetrant materials used in testing nickel alloys,

SA
certain stainless steels, and titanium must have a low sulfur and chlorine content. And materials used to test liquid
oxygen (LOX) system components must be LOX compatible.

MI

T
207 LIMITATIONS

ND
KU
The chief limitation of penetrant testing is that it can detect only those discontinuities that are open to the surface. It is
also limited by its inability to test materials that have excessively porous surfaces.

O-
PU
CHAPTER 3: EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS
SM
IP

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph
CO
300 GENERAL 3-3
SA

301 PRECLEANING AND POSTCLEANING EQUIPMENT.

1. General
MI

DT

2. Detergent Cleaning.
3. Vapor Degreasing.
KU

-N

4. Steam Cleaning.
5. Solvent Cleaning.
PU

MO

6. Ultrasonic Cleaning.
7. Rust and Surface Scale Removal.
IP

8. Paint Removal.
CO

9. Etching
10. Pre-cleaning Processes To Be Avoided.
302 S~ATIONARY PENETRANT TEST EQUIPMENT.
1. General
2. Stations
3. Auxiliary Equipment.
303 PORTABLE PENETRANT TEST EQUIPMENT.
1. General
2. Visible Dye Penetrant Kit.
3. Fluorescent Penetrant Kit.
304 BLACK LIGHT.

8 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

305 MATERIALS
1. General
2. Pre-cleaning and Post cleaning Materials.
3. Water-Washable Penetrants.
4. Post-Emulsification (Solvent Removable) Penetrants.
5. Emulsifiers
6. Solvent Removers (Cleaners)
7. Dry Developer.
8. Water-Based Wet Developers.
9. Nonaqueous Wet Developer.
10. Special-Purpose Penetrant Materials.

SA
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure

MI

T
3-1 Typical Small-Sized Test Equipment Employing Fluorescent Post-Emulsified Penetrant and Dry Developer

ND
3-2 Typical Medium-8ized Test Equipment Employing Fluorescent Water-Washable Penetrant and Wet Developer.

KU
3-3 Typical Large-8ized Test Equipment Employing Fluorescent Water-Washable Penetrant and Wet Developer.

O-
3-4 Typical Medium-8ized Test Equipment Employing Visible Dye Water-Washable Penetrant and Dry Developer.
PU
3-5 Typical Medium-8ized Test Equipment Employing Visible Dye Post-Emulsified Penetrant and Dry Developer.
3-6 Typical Hydrometer.
SM
IP

3-7 Typical Visible Dye Portable Kit.

CO
3-8 Typical Fluorescent Portable Kit.
3-9 Typical Portable Black Light.
SA

3-10 Penetrant Material Combinations and Usages.

MI

DT
KU

CHAPTER 3: EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS

-N

300 GENERAL
PU

MO

The specific equipment and materials used in any liquid penetrant test are determined by the inherent requirements of
the test procedure; the composition of the article under test; the size of the article; the frequency of like tests; and the
size and type of suspected discontinuities. This chapter discusses the equipment and materials required to perform the
IP

various penetrant tests and the required precleaning and postcleaning.

CO

301 PRECLEANING AND POSTCLEANING EQUIPMENT

1. General
Proper cleaning is essential to liquid penetrant testing for two reasons: 1) if the test article is not clean and dry,
penetrant testing is ineffective; and 2) if all traces of penetrant test materials are not removed after test, they may have a
harmful effect when the article is placed in service. The cleaning processes commonly used with penetrant testing are
discussed in the following paragraphs. The equipment and material routinely used with these processes are all that are
necessary for the cleaning required by penetrant testing.

2. Detergent Cleaning
Immersion tanks and detergent solutions are a common means of accomplishing the cleaning required by liquid
penetrant tests. The detergents wet, penetrate, emulsify and saponify (change to soap) various soils. The only special
equipment requirement imposed by penetrant test cleaning is the need for suitable rinsing and drying facilities. When
thoroughly rinsed and dried, detergent cleaning leaves a test surface that is both physically and chemically clean.

9 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

3. Vapor Degreasing
Cleaning by vapor degreasing is particularly effective in the removal of oil, grease, and similar organic contamination.
However, there are restrictions as to its use before and after liquid penetrant testing. Nickel alloys, certain stainless
steels, and titanium have an affinity for specific elements (e.g., sulfur or chlorine) and if exposed to them will become
structurally damaged. Degreasing must be limited to those materials that have been approved for this method of
cleaning.

4. Steam Cleaning
Steam cleaning equipment is particularly adaptable to the cleaning of large unwieldy articles not easily cleanable by
immersion. No special equipment is required for steam cleaning of articles destined for liquid penetrant testing.

5. Solvent Cleaning
Solvent cleaning may use tanks for immersion, or the solvent material may be used in a wipe-on and wipe-off
technique. Usually this cleaning process is used only when vapor degreasing, detergent cleaning, and steam cleaning

SA
equipment are not available.

MI

T
6. Ultrasonic Cleaning

ND
Ultrasonic agitation is often combined with solvent or detergent cleaning to improve cleaning efficiency and reduce

KU
cleaning time. The equipment is particularly useful in the cleaning of small articles.

O-
PU
7. Rust and Surface Scale Removal

SM
Any good commercially available acid or alkaline rust remover may be used for precleaning. Required equipment and
IP

procedures are as specified in the manufacturer's directions.

CO
8. Paint Removal
SA

Dissolving type "hot tank" paint strippers and bond release or solvent paint strippers may be used to remove paint in
precleaning. Required equipment and procedures are as specified in the manufacturer's directions.
MI

DT

9. Etching
KU

Articles that have been ground or machined often require etching to prepare them for liquid penetrant testing. This
-N

process uses an acid or an alkaline solution to open up grinding burrs and remove metal from surface discontinuities. If
an acid is used for etching, an alkaline solution is used as a neutralizing agent; if an alkali is used for etching, an acid is
PU

MO

used as a neutralizing agent. The etching and neutralizing processes use either tanks and immersion or wipe-on and
wipe-off equipment and materials.
IP

S
CO

10. Pre-cleaning Processes To Be Avoided

Blast (shot, sand, grit, or pressure), liquid honing, emery cloth, wire brushes and metal scrapers should not be
employed with liquid penetrant testing. These processes tend to close discontinuities by peening or cold working the
surface. On occasion a wire brush may be helpful in removing rust, surface scale, or paint but it is used only when no
other means of removal will suffice.

302 STATIONARY PENETRANT TEST EQUIPMENT

1. General
The stationary equipment used in liquid penetrant testing ranges from the simple to fully automatic systems and varies
in size, layout, and arrangement depending on the requirements of specific tests. The size of the equipment used is
largely dependent upon the size and types of articles to be tested. The layout of the equipment, i.e., whether a "U," "L,"
or straight line, is determined by the facilities available, the production rate, and the required ease of handling. The
number of stations is dependent on the process used.

10 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

2. Stations
Depending on the type penetrant and processing employed (see Figures 2-5 and 2-6) the liquid penetrant test facility
requires certain stations as shown in Figures 3-1 through 3-5. The required equipment components (stations) are
combined to suit the particular test process. In a typical testing facility for a post-emulsification process, the following
stations are required:

a. Pre-cleaning Station (usually remote from penetrant test station).

b. Penetrant Station (tank).
c. Drain Station (used with penetrant tank).
d. Emulsifier Station (tank).
e. Rinse Station (tank).
f. Developer Station (tank).
g. Dryer Station (usually an oven type).

SA
h. Inspection Station (enclosed booth or table with lighting facilities).
i. Post-cleaning Station (usually remote from penetrant test station).

MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 3-1 typical medium-Sized test Equipment Employing Fluorescent Post-Emulsified Penetrant and Dry developer

11 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP

Figure 3-2 Typical Small-Sized test Equipment Employing Fluorescent Water-Washable Penetrant and Wet developer
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 3-3. Typical Large-Sized Test Equipment Employing Fluorescent Water-Washable Penetrant and Wet
Developer

12 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP

Figure 3-4. Typical Medium-Sized Test Equipment Employing Visible Dye Water-Washable Penetrant and Dry
Developer
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 3-5. Typical Medium-Sized Test Equipment Employing Visible Dye Post-Emulsified Penetrant and Dry
Developer

13 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

3. Auxiliary Equipment
For the purpose of this handbook, auxiliary equipment is defined as the equipment located at penetrant test stations
(other than cleaning stations) required performing penetrant testing. The auxiliary equipment discussed may in some
instances be "built-in" at one or more of the test stations.

a. Pumps. Various pumps installed at the penetrant, emulsifier, rinse, and developer stations are used to agitate the
solutions, to pump drain-off material into the proper tank for reuse, and to power hand-held sprayers and applicators.
b. Sprayers and Applicators. Sprayers and applicators are frequently employed at the penetrant, emulsifier, rinse, and
developer stations. They decrease test time by permitting rapid and even application of penetrant materials and water
rinse. Both conventional and electrostatic sprayers are used.
c. White lights as well as black lights are installed as required to ensure adequate and correct lighting at all stations.
When fluorescent materials are used, black light is installed at both the rinse and inspection stations.
d. Timers. One or more 60-minute timers with alarm are used to control penetrant, emulsifier, developing, and drying
cycles.

SA
e. Thermostats and Thermometers. These items are required and used to control the temperature of the drying oven and
penetrant materials.

MI

T
f. Exhaust Fans. Exhaust fans are used when testing is performed in closed areas. The fans facilitate removal of fumes

ND
and dust.

KU
g. Hydrometers. The hydrometers used in liquid penetrant testing are floating type instruments. (See Figure 3-6.) They
are used to measure the specific gravity of water-based wet developers.

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

Figure 3-6. Typical Hydrometer

-N
PU

MO

303 PORTABLE PENETRANT TEST EQUIPMENT

IP

1. General
CO

It is possible to perform penetrant tests on a limited basis without stationary equipment. When testing is required at a
location remote from stationary equipment, or when only a small portion of a large specimen requires test, portable
liquid penetrant kits are used. Both fluorescent and visible dye penetrants are available in kits. The penetrant materials
are usually dispensed from pressurized spray cans or applied by brush.

2. Visible Dye Penetrant Kit

The visible dye penetrant test kit is light in weight and contains all the materials necessary for test. (See Figure 3-7.) It
consists of a metal box with at least the following:

a. Solvent cleaner or penetrant remover.

b. Visible dye penetrant.
c. Nonaqueous wet developer.
d. Wiping cloths and brushes.

14 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI
Figure 3-7. Typical Visible Dye Portable Kit

T
ND
KU
3. Fluorescent Penetrant Kit
The fluorescent penetrant kit combines portability with the high "see-ability" associated with fluorescent materials. The

O-
PU
kit holds all the essential materials required for test, including a black light. (See Figure 3-8.)The fluorescent kit
consists of a metal box with at least the following:
a. Portable black light and transformer. SM
IP

b. Solvent cleaner or penetrant remover.

CO
c. Fluorescent penetrant.
SA

d. Nonaqueous wet developer.

e. Dry powder developer.
MI

DT

f. Wiping cloths and brushes.

g. Hood to provide darkened area for viewing indications.
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 3-8. Typical Fluorescent Portable Kit

15 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

304 BLACK LIGHT

Black light equipment is required in fluorescent penetrant testing, since it supplies light of the correct wavelengths to
cause fluorescent materials to fluoresce. The equipment usually consists of a current regulating transformer, a mercury
arc bulb, and a filter (see Figure 3-9). The transformer is housed separately and the bulb and filter are contained in a
reflector lamp unit. For correct test results the lamp should produce an intensity of at least 800 microwatts per square
centimeter at the test surface. The deep red-purple filter is designed to pass only those wavelengths of light that will
activate the fluorescent material. It also filters out harmful ultraviolet radiation. Since dust, dirt, and oil greatly reduce
the intensity of the emitted light, the filter should be frequently cleaned. In use, the full intensity of the lamp is not
attained until the mercury arc is sufficiently heated. At least 5 minutes warm-up is required to reach the required arc
temperature. Since switching the lamp on and off shortens bulb life, once turned on the lamp is usually left on during
the entire test or work period. If the black light is switched off, it may take up to 10 minutes for the bulb to cool
sufficiently to reestablish an arc.

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO

Figure 3-9. Typical Portable Black Light

SA

305 MATERIALS
MI

DT

1. General
KU

The materials used in liquid penetrant testing include penetrants, emulsifiers, removers or cleaners, and developers.
-N

They are furnished in either liquid or powder form. The powders -except those used in the dry state are mixed with a
suitable liquid (usually water) prior to use. Most of the materials are available in pressurized spray cans as well as in
PU

MO

bulk quantities. Concentrations, usage, and maintenance are in accordance with the manufacturer's directions. Figure 3-
10 illustrates the different material combinations and usages.
IP

S
CO

2. Pre-cleaning and Postcleaning Materials

Except for LOX compatibility, and the chlorine-free requirement in the precleaning and postcleaning of nickel alloys,
certain stainless steels, and titanium, no special cleaning materials are required with liquid penetrant testing.

3. Water-Washable Penetrants
Water-washable penetrants are highly penetrating oily liquids containing an emulsifying agent that renders the oily
vehicle emulsifiable in water. The simplest to use but least sensitive of these penetrants are the visible dye or color
contrast penetrants. They contain a dye, usually a bright red but sometimes a special color such as blue that can be seen
under ordinary white (visible) light. Greatest "seeability" is obtained with fluorescent penetrants that are viewed under
black light. The color of fluorescence is usually a brilliant yellowish green. For special applications, there are
fluorescent penetrants that glow red or blue. The dual sensitivity penetrants contain a combination of visible and
fluorescent dyes. The visible color is usually a bright red and the fluorescent color a yellow to orange-red. They permit
gross discontinuities to be detected under visible light and questionable indications to be resolved under black light.

16 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT

Figure 3-10. Penetrant Material Combinations and Usages

KU

-N

4. Post-Emulsification (Solvent Removable) Penetrants

Post-emulsification penetrants have similar formulations to those of water-washable penetrants except they do not
PU

MO

contain the emulsifying agent and consequently are not soluble in water. These penetrants must be treated with a
separate emulsifier before they can be removed by a water rinse or wash. Or they can be removed using an approved
IP

solvent remover or cleaner. Post-emulsification penetrants are available as either visible dye or fluorescent penetrants.
S
CO

5. Emulsifiers
Emulsifiers when applied to a post-emulsification penetrant combine with the penetrant so as to make the resultant
mixture water washable. The emulsifier, usually dyed orange to contrast with the penetrant, may be either lipophilic -an
oil base, or hydrophilic -a detergent water base. The oil-based emulsifiers are usually employed as "contact"
emulsifiers, i.e., they begin emulsifying on contact with the penetrant. Emulsification stops when water is applied. The
hydrophilic or water-based emulsifiers also can be used as contact emulsifiers; but more often, the emulsifier is diluted
with water and sprayed under pressure. Hence the term "hydrophilic scrubber".

6. Solvent Removers (Cleaners)

Solvent removers or cleaners are used in conjunction with post-emulsification penetrants to remove excess penetrant
from test article surfaces. Example solvent removers include methylene chloride, isopropyl alcohol, naphtha, mineral
spirits (paint thinner) in addition to special formula, proprietary removers. In selecting a solvent remover, only those
materials approved by the penetrant manufacturer can be used.

17 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

7. Dry Developer
Dry developer is a fluffy chalk-like powder that is applied to dry test surfaces (after the removal of excess penetrant)
for the purpose of absorbing penetrant from discontinuities and enhancing the resultant penetrant indications. Of the
different developers available, dry developer is the most adaptable to rough surfaces and automatic processing. It's also
the easiest to remove. Sensitivity is about the same as that of the water-soluble developer described in the following
paragraph.

8. Water-Based Wet Developers

Water-based wet developers function similarly to dry developer except they are applied prior to drying the test
specimen. Two types of developer are available. In one, the developer particles are held in suspension in water and
require continuous agitation to keep the particles in suspension. In the other, the developer powder is dissolved in
water, forming a solution; once mixed they remain mixed. Of the two water-based wet developers, the water-soluble

SA
developer is the more sensitive.

MI
9. Nonaqueous Wet Developer

T
ND
Nonaqueous wet developer is a suspension of developer particles in a rapid-drying solvent. It is most often employed

KU
with solvent-removed processing, and like dry developer, is applied only to dry surfaces. Of all the developers, the
nonaqueous wet developer is the most sensitive in detecting fine discontinuities. The evaporation of the solvent carrier

O-
helps to draw the penetrant from discontinuities.
PU
10. Special-Purpose Penetrant Materials SM
IP

In addition to the conventional penetrants, emulsifiers, removers, and developers employed in liquid penetrant testing
CO
there are low sulfur and chlorine materials for testing nickel alloys, certain stainless steels, and titanium. Special-
purpose inert materials are available for testing articles that come in contact with liquid oxygen, rubber, or plastic.
SA

Food compatible materials are also available. There are high temperature penetrants for testing hot welds, etc., and
special penetrants for testing at low temperatures. There are supersensitive penetrants for detecting extremely fine
MI

DT

discontinuities, and penetrants that provide sufficient contrast and sensitivity without a developer. There are low-
energy emulsifiers and inhibited-solvent removers to slow down emulsification and the removal of excess penetrant.
KU

There are also wax and plastic film developers that absorb and fix penetrant indications to provide permanent records.
-N

The selection and usage of these materials is largely dependent on the particular process used and the controlling
specifications or standards.
PU

MO

CHAPTER 4: TECHNIQUES
IP

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CO

Paragraph
400 GENERAL
401 SURFACE PREPARATION.
1. General
2. Detergent Cleaning.
3. Vapor Degreasing.
4. Steam Cleaning.
5. Ultrasonic Cleaning.
6. Rust and Surface Scale Removal.
7. Paint Removal.
8. Etching

18 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

402 APPLICATION OF PENETRANTS.

1. General
2. Spraying
3. Swabbing or Brushing.
4. Immersion
5. Penetration (Dwell) Time.
403 APPLICATION OF EMULSIFIER.
404 REMOV AL OF PENETRANTS.
1. General
2. Water-Washable Process.
3. Post-Emulsified Process.
4. Solvent-Removed Process.

SA
5. Visual Inspection
405 APPLICATION OF DEVELOPER.

MI

T
1. General

ND
2. Dry Developer.

KU
3. Nonaqueous Wet Developer.

O-
4. Water-Based Wet Developer.
PU
406 DRYING
407 PENETRANT TESTING PROCESSES.
SM
IP

1. General
CO
2. Water-Washable Fluorescent Penetrant Test.
3. Post-Emulsified Fluorescent Penetrant Test.
SA

4. Solvent-Removed Fluorescent Penetrant Test.

5. Visible Dye Penetrant Tests.
MI

DT

6. Dual Sensitivity Penetrant Tests.

KU

408 OXYGEN COMPATIBLE PENETRANTS.

-N

409 LEAK-THROUGH TECHNIQUE.

PU

MO

410 FIXING AND RECORDING INDICATIONS.

IP

Figure Page
S

4-1 Water-Washable and Solvent-Removed Processes.

CO

4-2 Post-Emulsified Process

4-3 Leak-Through Test
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
4-1 Liquid Penetrant Application Terminology
4-2 Typical Minimum Penetration Times.
4-3 Process Selection Guide.
4-4 Characteristics of Water-Washable Fluorescent Penetrant Tests.
4-5 Characteristics of Post-Emulsified Fluorescent Penetrant Tests.
4-6 Characteristics of Solvent-Removed Fluorescent Penetrant Test.

19 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

CHAPTER 4: TECHNIQUES

400 GENERAL
The techniques discussed in this chapter are based on typical liquid penetrant testing procedures used throughout
industry. Included are techniques involving the use of visible dye, fluorescent and dual sensitivity penetrants; and
water-washable, post-emulsified, and solvent-removed processing. Also included are discussions on the fixing and
recording of indications.

401 SURFACE PREPARATION

1. General
The effectiveness of liquid penetrant testing is based upon the ability of the penetrant to enter surface discontinuities.
The article to be tested must be clean and free from foreign matter. All paint, carbon, oil, varnish, oxide, plating, water,
dirt, and similar coatings must be removed prior to the application of penetrant. The cleaning technique used is, in each
case, determined by the composition of the article under test and the type of soil to be removed. Any cleaning process

SA
that leaves the surface of the article clean and dry, that does not harm the article, and that does not use materials that
are incompatible with the penetrant materials, is acceptable. Following the test, post cleaning is employed to remove

MI

T
the residue of penetrant materials. Postcleaning is particularly important when test articles are destined for use in an

ND
oxygen environment. Though many specimens will receive further processing, such as etching or special cleaning prior

KU
to use, the cleanliness of any specimen after completion of a penetrant test is the responsibility of test personnel.

O-
PU
2. Detergent Cleaning

SM
Detergent cleaning may be used to clean almost any specimen. Since the cleaners may be either acid or alkaline in
IP

nature, however, precautions must be taken to ensure that the selected detergent is noncorrosive to the specimen being
cleaned. Detergent cleaning is most effective when it is a hot process accomplished in a washing machine, though it
CO
may also be used with scrub, rinse, and wipe techniques. After detergent cleaning, the specimen is carefully rinsed and
dried. The drying process should be of sufficient time duration that all moisture is driven from the discontinuities.
SA

3. Vapor Degreasing
MI

DT

Vapor de greasing is also an effective means of precleaning. The process not only thoroughly cleans; it heats the article
KU

so that after cleaning no moisture remains in discontinuities. Vapor degreasing is the preferred method for removing
-N

organic soils such as oil and grease and should be used whenever practicable. The only precaution required in the use
of the process is that caused by the need of using only those degreasing materials that are not harmful to the specimen
PU

MO

being cleaned.
IP

4. Steam Cleaning
S

Steam cleaning is an excellent method of cleaning usually employed to clean large articles, or portions of large articles,
CO

that cannot conveniently be vapor degreased or washed with detergents. Routine steam cleaning procedures usually
suffice for penetrant precleaning. As with any cleaning process involving water, the specimen must be thoroughly dried
after the cleaning process is completed.

5. Ultrasonic Cleaning
Ultrasonic cleaning is often combined with a solvent or detergent bath to improve cleaning efficiency and reduce
cleaning time. The method works best with water and detergent cleaning when contaminants to be removed are
inorganic and with solvents when contaminants are organic. Following cleaning, it is recommended that test articles be
heated to aid the evaporation of cleaning fluids.

6. Rust and Surface Scale Removal

Rust removers (descaling solutions, either alkaline or acid), pickling solutions (acid), and sometimes wire brushing are
used to remove rust and surface scale. Wire brushing is accomplished with a minimum of pressure to avoid closing
surface discontinuities or filling them with smeared metal. Descaling solutions are chosen so that they are noncorrosive

20 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

to the article being cleaned. Regardless of the method selected for rust and scale removal, after the process is
completed the specimen must be clean, dry, and so treated that surface discontinuities are not clogged, filled, or
contaminated.

7. Paint Removal
Any method of paint removal that does not harm the test article is satisfactory. Chemical means such as solvent
stripping and dissolving type hot-tank stripping are preferred since any mechanical removal process may adversely
affect the surface of the specimen.

8. Etching
Etching is normally required on soft metallic materials (such as aluminum and magnesium) and materials that tend to
smear (such as titanium), and which have been mechanically processed by machining, grinding, or similar procedure.
The etching is accomplished with either an acid or an alkaline solution, which is then neutralized. After neutralization,
the article must be water washed and dried, or otherwise cleaned, to remove all traces of the etching and neutralizing

SA
agents.

MI

T
402 APPLICATION OF PENETRANTS

ND
1. General

KU
Penetrants are applied by spraying, swabbing, brushing, or dipping (immersion). The area under test is covered with

O-
penetrant and the penetrant is allowed to remain for a predetermined amount of time called "dwell time." The means of
PU
application and the length of dwell are determined by the test article, the type discontinuities to be detected, the

SM
penetrant used, and temperature. The terminology used in penetrant application is listed in Table 4-1.
IP

Table 4-1 Liquid Penetrant Application Terminology

CO

Technique Soak Time Dwell Time Penetration

SA

Time
Immersion Period Article Draining Soak Time Plus
MI

DT

is in Bath
Dwell time
KU

-N

All others Time

Penetrant
PU

MO

Remains on
article
IP

S
CO

2. Spraying
Spraying of penetrant when accomplished at the penetrant tank of stationary equipment refers to the use of a hose and
nozzle through which penetrant is circulated by a low pressure pump -usually the same pump that agitates the penetrant
solution in the tank. The penetrant is flowed on the specimen so that all of the test area is covered. No particular
precautions except those of cleanliness and neatness need be observed in this flow-on process. Spraying also is used to
define the application of penetrant from pressurized spray cans. Again the penetrant is applied so that all of the test area
is covered, but personnel must make allowances for the pressure remaining in the can and the distance the can is held
from the specimen. Usually, pressurized spray cans are used in areas where fans or blowers remove fumes, or in open
areas where spot testing (testing a small area of a large specimen) is taking place.

3. Swabbing or Brushing

21 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Penetrants may be applied by swabbing with rags or cotton waste, or by brushing. Either method is acceptable when
spray or dip equipment is not available. Usually, swabbing or brushing is used when testing a small, specific area of the
specimen.
4. Immersion
The best procedure for applying penetrant is to immerse the test article or specimen into a tank of penetrant. Small
specimens are placed in an open wire basket for dipping; large specimens are handled by hand or, if required, by cranes
and suitable clamping devices. This method is impractical when dealing with large articles or assemblies, and is
wasteful when only small areas of a large specimen are to be tested. It is, however, the most thorough, and certain,
means of applying penetrant and is used whenever possible.

5. Penetration (Dwell) Time

The period of time during which the penetrant is permitted to remain on the specimen is a vital part of the test. This
time, known as dwell time, is directly related to the size and shape of the discontinuities anticipated, since the
dimensions of the discontinuities determine the rapidity with which penetration occurs. Tight crack like discontinuities

SA
may require in excess of 30 minutes for penetration to an extent that an adequate indication can be expected. Gross
discontinuities may be suitably penetrated in 3 to 5 minutes. Dwell time in each instance is determined by the
anticipated discontinuities and the penetrant manufacturer's recommendations. Typical minimum penetration times are

MI

T
shown in Table 4-2.

ND
KU
a. Heating the test specimen accelerates penetration and shortens dwell time. The practice, however, is generally not
recommended since heating may cause evaporation of penetrant and thereby reduce sensitivity.

O-
b. Ambient temperature and humidity also affect penetration time. Generally, the higher the ambient temperature, the
PU
shorter the dwell time required. Too high a temperature or too Iowa humidity, however, causes the penetrant to dry too

SM
rapidly and testing becomes difficult if not impossible. For liquid penetrant testing to be reliable, the penetrant must
IP

remain wet. This sometimes requires the rewetting of test surfaces. If the penetrant has been allowed to dry, the test
must be started over beginning with surface preparation.
CO
SA

403 APPLICATION OF EMULSIFIER

When post-emulsification penetrants are used, an emulsifier must be applied to the penetrant to make it removable by
MI

DT

water rinse. Emulsifier is applied by any of the means used to apply penetrant except brushing but dipping is preferred.
The amount of time that the emulsifier is permitted to remain (dwell) prior to the removal process is usually in the
KU

range of 1 to 3 minutes, and seldom exceeds 5 minutes. The exact emulsification dwell time must be determined by
-N

experiment.
PU

MO

404 REMOVAL OF PENETRANTS

1. General
IP

Following application of the penetrant and elapse of sufficient time for penetration, the penetrant is removed from the
CO

surface of the specimen. This operation is meant to remove the penetrant from the surface without disturbing any
penetrant that has entered a discontinuity. Complete removal of the surface penetrant is effected to ensure against
formation of nonrelevant indications.

2. Water-Washable Process
The penetrants employed in the water-washable process have their own built-in emulsifier. The penetrant is soluble in
water and removal is usually accomplished by a water rinse. Care is taken in applying the rinse to ensure that the spray
volume and force does not wash the penetrant from discontinuities. Thirty to fifty pounds per square inch maximum
pressure (205 to 345 kPa) is considered a safe pressure for the water rinse. The rinse is applied through the use of an
adjustable spray nozzle held so that the spray reaches the surface plane of the specimen at an angle of 45 degrees.

22 of 53
 IP
PU
CO KU
S MO
MI
SA
-N IP

23 of 53
DT PU
CO KU
SM MI
SA
LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

O-
ND
T
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

3. Post-Emulsified Process
The penetrants employed in the post-emulsified process do not contain an emulsifying agent. The penetrant is not
soluble in water. Removal is in most instances a two-step process. The emulsifier, usually lipophilic (an oil base), is
applied as described in paragraph 403 and, after suitable dwell time, the resultant penetrant-em4lsifier mixture is
removed by water rinse as described in paragraph 404.2. Sometimes a hydrophilic (water base) emulsifier is diluted to
the point that simple contact with penetrant does not make the penetrant water washable. Application must be
accompanied by some form of mechanical agitation or scrubbing. Hence the term "hydrophilic scrubber." Usually, the
emulsifier is added to the water rinse and sprayed under pressure. By controlling solution strength and the duration of
spray, the amount of penetrant removed is controlled.

4. Solvent-Removed Process
Post-emulsification type penetrants are also employed in the solvent-removed process. The penetrant remover is a
solvent designated by the penetrant manufacturer. Prior to the use of the solvent, excess penetrant is wiped off; the
specimen is then cleaned with clean, lint-free towels dampened with solvent. The solvent is never applied directly to

SA
the specimen since it might wash out or dilute the penetrant in a discontinuity.

MI
5. Visual Inspection

T
ND
Excess surface penetrant can result in the formation of nonrelevant indications that could obscure or hide true

KU
discontinuity indications. When fluorescent penetrants are used, it is necessary to observe the specimen under black
light during the penetrant removal operation to ensure complete removal of excess penetrant. For visible dye

O-
penetrants, the absence of penetrant (red) traces on the wiping materials ensures complete penetrant removal.
PU
405 APPLICATION OF DEVELOPER SM
IP

1. General
CO
As mentioned in previous chapters, some penetrants provide sufficient discontinuity indications without a developer.
SA

They are self-developing. But generally, when maximum sensitivity is desired, a developer is required. The developer
assists in the detection of penetrant retained in discontinuities by aiding in the capillary bleed-out process (the
developer acts as a blotting agent), and by accentuating the presence of penetrant in a discontinuity. Developer
MI

DT

accentuates the presence of a discontinuity because it causes the penetrant from the discontinuity to spread out over a
greater area. It also serves as a color contrast background for the visible dye used in the visible dye processes and for
KU

the fluorescent material used in the fluorescent processes. Developer is available in both dry and liquid forms and the
-N

selection of developer is in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendation for the type penetrant used. When a
dry or nonaqueous wet developer is used, the specimen must be completely dry before the developer is applied. When a
PU

MO

water-based wet developer is used, it is applied immediately after penetrant removal is accomplished and prior to the
drying operation.
IP

S
CO

2. Dry Developer
Dry developer, being a loose, fluffy talcose powder with high absorbent properties, is applied to a specimen by dusting,
blowing, or dipping the specimen. The application is usually accomplished in a booth with a blower or fan arrangement
that removes loose powder from the atmosphere. No preparation of the powder is necessary and the only requirement is
that it be evenly distributed over the test surface, which must be completely dry.

3. Nonaqueous Wet Developer

Nonaqueous wet developer is a suspension of absorptive white powder in a solvent vehicle. It is usually applied by
spraying from a pressurized spray can or other spraying device such as a paint spray gun. When used in bulk form, care
must be exercised to keep the powder thoroughly mixed in the solvent. The developer is applied so as to form a thin
white coating on the specimen without soaking the test surface. When properly mixed and applied, nonaqueous wet
developer is the most sensitive of all the developers in detecting fine discontinuities.

24 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

4. Water-Based Wet Developer

Water-based wet developer may be either a suspension of absorptive white powder in water, or a water-soluble
absorptive white powder mixed with water. The suspension type requires mild agitation prior to and during use to keep
the powder particles in suspension; the water-soluble developer does not. The water-soluble powder, once mixed with
the water, remains in solution. After excess penetrant is removed from the specimen, and while it is still wet, wet
developer is applied by either dip (immersion), flow-on, or spray techniques. These fast and effective methods of
application, combined with the time saved by applying developer to the wet specimen, make water-based wet
developer well suited for use in rapid, production line testing. Wet developer is applied so as to form a smooth, even
coating, and particular care is taken to avoid concentrations of developer in dished or hollowed areas of the specimen.
Such concentrations of developer mask penetrant indications and are to be avoided.

406 DRYING
When dry or nonaqueous wet developer is used, the specimen is dried after removal of excess penetrant and prior to
application of the developer. When water-based wet developer is used, the specimen is dried after the developer has

SA
been applied. Any means of drying that does not interfere with the test process by overheating, or by contamination of
materials, is acceptable, but controlled drying at even regulated temperatures is preferred. A thermostat controlled dryer
with a temperature range up to 225°F (107°C) is usually employed in stationary test installations. Required drying time

MI

T
is determined by the size and shape of the specimen, and by the nature of its suspected discontinuities. It should be of

ND
sufficient duration to dry the surface of the specimen without affecting the penetrant in the discontinuities.

KU

O-
407 PENETRANT TESTING PROCESSES
PU
1. General
SM
The different processes employed in liquid penetrant testing are identified by the method of penetrant removal used
IP

(water-washable, post-emulsified, or solvent-removed) and the type of dye (visible dye (color contrast), fluorescent, or
dual sensitivity). The basic steps involved are illustrated in Figures 4-1 and 4-2 while step-by-step procedures are
CO
contained in the following paragraphs. Table 4-3 lists the preferred processes for various penetrant test problems.
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 4-1. Water-Washable and Solvent-Removed Processes

25 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

2. Water-Washable Fluorescent Penetrant Test

The characteristic advantages and disadvantages of water-washable fluorescent penetrant tests are listed in Table 4-4.
a. Penetrant Application. Either immersion, flow-on, spray, or brushing technique is used to apply the penetrant to the
precleaned, dry specimen. The penetrant is applied evenly over the entire test area.
b. Dwell Time. The penetrant is left on the specimen for the required length of dwell time. A broad guide to correct
dwell time is contained in Table 4-2 but the specimen size, composition, and discontinuities, and the temperature of the
specimen and the test area all affect required dwell time.

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 4-2 Post-Emulsified process

26 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Table 4-3. Process Selection Guide

Testing Problem Preferred Process Remarks
High Production of Many Water Washable Small Articles Handled
Small Articles Required in Baskets

High Production of Large Post Emulsified Large Forgings, extrusions, etc.

Individual Articles

Highest Sensitivity to Brightest Indication Most

Post Emulsified
Fine Discontinuities Sensitive

Shallow Discontinuities Depth of Emulsification Can be

Post Emulsified Controlled

SA
Scratches, etc., Must be
Detected

MI

T
Articles Having a Rough

ND
KU
Surface Water Washable

O-
PU
Articles Having Threads Water Washable Post Emulsified Penetrant Might
Lodge in Corners
and Keyways
SM
IP

Choice Depends Upon Production

Articles Having Medium Water Washable
CO
and sensitivity Requirements
Rough Surfaces or
SA

Post Emulsified
MI

DT

Spot Testing of Local Solvent Removed

Areas Desired
KU

-N

Portable Equipment Solvent Removed

PU

MO

Necessary
IP

Water and Electricity Solvent Removed

S

not Available
CO

Anodized Articles, cracked after 1.Solvent Removed Order of Preference Indicated

Anodizing, to be Tested 2. Post Emulsified
3. Water Washable

Repeated Application of Process is Solvent Removed Five or Six Repeats should be the
Desired
Limit

Leak Detection Water Washable

or
Post Emulsified

27 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Table 4-4. Characteristics of Water-Washable Fluorescent

Advantages Disadvantages
Fluorescence Ensures Visibility Requires Darkened Area for Inspection
Easily Washed with Water Not Reliable for Detecting Scratches and
Good for Volume Testing of Similar Shallow Surface Discontinuities
Small Specimens Not reliable on Reruns of Specimens
Good on Rough Surfaces Not Reliable on Anodized Surfaces
Good on Keyways and Threads Acids and Chromates Affect Sensitivity
Good on Wide Range of Easily Over-washed
Discontinuities Penetrant Subject to Water Contamination
Fast, Single Step Process
Relatively Inexpensive

SA
Available in Lox Compatible Form

MI

T
c. Penetrant Removal. Excess penetrant (all penetrant except that in discontinuities) is washed from the specimen after

ND
dwell time has elapsed. Water at 60 to 110°F (16 to 43°C) and a pressure not exceeding 50 psi (345 kPa) is applied

KU
from a spray nozzle. The nozzle is held so that the water strikes the surface of the specimen at an angle of
approximately 45 degrees. Care is taken to avoid over-washing, which causes washout of penetrant from

O-
discontinuities. The wash process is accomplished under black light so that the operator can observe when the excess
PU
penetrant is completely removed.

SM
IP

d. Drying. Upon completion of the wash process the specimen is dried prior to the application of either dry or
CO
nonaqueous wet developer. If water-based wet developer is used, it is applied to the still damp specimen immediately
after the penetrant removal wash. Drying is best accomplished in a thermostat-controlled oven at a temperature
SA

between 150 and 225°F (66 to 107°C). Drying time is determined by the size and composition of the specimen, and
visual observation usually fixes the length of the drying cycle. Excessive heat or too long a drying time tends to bake
MI

the penetrant out of discontinuities.

DT
KU

e. Developer Application. When the drying process is complete the specimen is ready for the application of either dry
-N

or non-aqueous wet developer. When water-based wet developer is used, it is applied to the wet specimen immediately
PU

after excess penetrant is removed.

MO

(1) Dry developer is applied to the specimen by brushing with a soft brush, by use of a powder gun, or by dipping the
specimen in a tank of the developer, and removing excess powder with a low pressure air flow.
IP

(2) Nonaqueous wet developer is applied by spraying. It is applied sparingly so that a thin coating covers all of the
CO

specimen test area. When using nonaqueous wet developer the specimen is to be cool enough to prevent too rapid
evaporation of the developer vehicle.
(3) Water-based wet developer is applied to the specimen as it comes from the wash cycle, either by immersion or
flow-on. The developer is applied so as to form a smooth even coating over the entire test area. After the
developer is applied, the specimen is dried as described in paragraph 407.2.d.

f. Inspection. After sufficient time has passed for developer action to bring the penetrant from discontinuities as
indications, the specimen is ready for inspection under black light. The interpretation of various indications discovered
during inspection is discussed in Chapter 5. The efficiency of the inspection operation is controlled by the variables of
the human eye. These variables are further complicated by the average person's lack of understanding of eye fatigue
and of the time required for the iris of the eye to dilate to a point of maximum vision in the darkness of the black light
inspection booth. For maximum visual efficiency the operator must:
(1) Let eyes become accustomed to the darkness by entering the darkened area (booth) at least 5 minutes prior to
examining the specimen under the black light.

28 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

(2) Avoid looking directly into the black light source since the eyeball contains a fluid that fluoresces if black light
shines directly into the eye.
3. Post-Emulsified Fluorescent Penetrant Test
The characteristic advantages and disadvantages of post-emulsified fluorescent penetrant tests are listed in Table 4-5.
This process is identical with that of the water-washable fluorescent penetrant test except for the inclusion of an
emulsification step after the completion of penetrant dwell time and before penetrant removal.

Table 4-5. Characteristics of Post-Emulsified Fluorescent

Advantages Disadvantages
Fluorescence Ensures Visibility Requires Darkened Area for Inspection
High Sensitivity for Very Fine Two Step Process
Discontinuities Equipment Required for Emulsifier
Good on Wide Shallow Application

SA
Discontinuities Difficult to Remove Penetrant from
Easily Washed with Water After Threads, Keyways, Blind Holes and Rough
Emulsification Surfaces

MI

T
Short Penetration Time

ND
Cannot be Easily Over-washed

KU

O-
a. Penetrant Application. See paragraph 407.2.a.
PU
b. Dwell Time. See paragraph 407.2.b.

SM
c. Emulsifier Application. After the elapse of sufficient dwell time, emulsifier is applied to the penetrant coated
IP

specimen. Immersion, flow-on, or spray technique is used to apply the emulsifier in an even coating. The particular
technique employed is determined by the number and size of the specimens under test.
CO

d. Emulsifier Dwell Time. The length of time the emulsifier is left to dwell before commencing the penetrant removal
SA

cycle is determined by the emulsifier used and the type discontinuities suspected. Detection of shallow, wide dents,
machine marks, and nicks requires a minimum emulsification time. Detection of fine, light cracks requires
MI

emulsification time of sufficient duration that superficial discontinuities are washed clean during the penetrant removal,
DT

but the time is not to be so long that the penetrant in the cracks is affected. One to 3 minutes emulsification dwell time
is usually required, though rough surfaced articles may require 5 minutes or more. Actual time must be determined by
KU

-N

experiment.
e. Penetrant Removal. See paragraph 407.2.c.
PU

MO

f. Drying. See paragraph 407.2.d.

g. Developer Application. See paragraph 407.2.e.
IP

h. Inspection. See paragraph 407.2.f.

CO

4. Solvent-Removed Fluorescent Penetrant Test

The characteristic advantages and disadvantages of solvent-removed fluorescent penetrant tests are listed in Table 4-6.

Table 4-6. Characteristics of Solvent-Removed Fluorescent

Advantages Disadvantages
Fluorescence Ensures Visibility Requires Darkened Area for Inspection
Portability Flammable Materials
No Water Required Removal of Excess Surface Penetrant is
Good On Anodized Specimens Time Consuming
Good For Spot Checking Materials Cannot be Used in Open Tanks
Specimens Can be Rerun Difficult to use on Rough Surfaces Such
as Cast Magnesium

29 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

a. Penetrant Application. Solvent-removed penetrant may be applied by brush-on technique but is more often applied
by use of a spray gun or pressurized spray can. With any application process, correct application covers the test surface
with an even coat of penetrant. When a spray gun or pressurized can is used, the gun or can is held approximately 12
inches (30 cm) from the specimen and moved slowly from side to side until the specimen is evenly coated.
b. Dwell Time. See paragraph 407.2.b.
c. Penetrant Removal. Excess penetrant is removed from the specimen, after suitable dwell time has elapsed, by wiping
with absorbent, lint-free towels. After the bulk of the excess penetrant is wiped off, clean, lint-free towels are
moistened with the companion solvent of the penetrant (solvent specified by the penetrant manufacturer) and the
specimen is wiped clean. Solvent is never applied directly to the specimen. The removal process is accomplished under
black light so the operator can observe that all excess penetrant is removed.
d. Developer Application. Usually only dry or nonaqueous wet developer is used with solvent removed penetrants. A
thin coating of developer is either dusted or sprayed on the test area of the specimen.
e. Inspection. See paragraph 407.2.f.

SA
5. Visible Dye Penetrant Tests
The characteristic advantages and disadvantages of visible dye penetrants are the same as those listed in Tables 4-4, 4-

MI

T
5, and 4-6 for their fluorescent counterparts, except that visible dye penetrants are less sensitive, not as brilliantly

ND
visible, and do not require the use of black light.

KU
a. Water-Washable Visible Dye Penetrant Test. Procedures for use of water-washable visible dye penetrants are
identical with those listed in paragraphs 407.2.a through f, except there is no black light requirement.

O-
PU
b. Post-Emulsified Visible Dye Penetrant Test. Procedures for use of post-emulsified visible dye penetrants are
identical with those listed in paragraphs 407.3.a through h, except there is no black light requirement.
SM
IP

c. Solvent Removed Visible Dye Penetrant Test. Procedures for use of solvent removed visible dye penetrants are
identical with those listed in paragraphs 407.4.a through e, except that there is no black light requirement.
CO
SA

6. Dual Sensitivity Penetrant Tests

Dual sensitivity penetrant test procedures are identical to those listed in paragraphs 407.2.a through f, except that
MI

indications can be viewed under visible light as well as black light. The advantage in using a dual sensitivity penetrant
DT

is that it provides two different levels of sensitivity in one test. Gross discontinuities can be located under visible light,
KU

and examinations for fine cracks, porosity, and penetrant residue carried out under black light.
-N

408 OXYGEN COMPATIBLE PENETRANTS

PU

MO

There is no basic difference in the techniques used with liquid and gaseous oxygen compatible penetrant materials and
those used with other penetrant materials, except for the special precautions required to avoid contamination of the test
IP

materials.
CO

409 LEAK-THROUGH TECHNIQUE

Frequently, articles are so designed that the penetrant solution may be poured into them and the outer surface examined
for evidence of leak-through. Use of liquid penetrant in this manner detects leaks only, and little or no knowledge
concerning other quality characteristics of the specimen is obtained. The leak-through technique is well suited for
finding leaks in such articles as tanks, piping, tubing, and hollow castings. Figure 4-3 illustrates the liquid penetrant
leak-through test as used on a large plate section.

30 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Figure 4-3. Leak-Through Test

SA
410 FIXING AND RECORDING INDICATIONS
Liquid penetrant testing increasingly involves the fixing and recording of indications for use in test reports and
inspection records. Toward this end, both black-and-white and color film are used, with the self-developing films

MI

T
providing the ultimate in convenience. In addition to photographs, there are special wax and plastic film developers

ND
that absorb and fix penetrant indications to provide permanent records. Indications are sometimes fixed using a

KU
"strippable" lacquer. Several coats of lacquer are applied over the indication and allowed to dry. The coating is then
lifted, bringing the indication with it. Another method consists of spraying the indication with a "fixer," and when

O-
PU
dries, lifting the indication with a piece of transparent tape. The tape, with the indication, is then transferred to the
appropriate test document. In the recording of indications, however, it must be remembered that time is of the essence.
SM
Delays will cause indications to become blurred and distorted through the continued bleeding of penetrant. As a result,
IP

indications will not be representative of the discontinuities from which they came. The fixing and recording of
CO
indications should be accomplished as soon as possible following the required development time.
SA

CHAPTER 5: INTERPRETATION OF TEST RESULTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
MI

DT

Paragraph
KU

500 GENERAL
-N

501 INDICATIONS
PU

MO

1. General
2. Development Time.
IP

3. False Indications.
S

4. Nonrelevant Indications.
CO

5. True Indications.
502 CATEGORIES OF TRUE INDICATIONS.
1. General
2. Continuous Line
3. Intermittent Line
4. Round
5. Small Dots
6. Diffused or Weak
503 DISCONTINUITY DEPTH DETERMINATION
504 TYPICAL INDICATIONS

31 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
5-1 Typical False Indications.
5-2 Typical True Indications.
5-3 Fluorescent Streaks and Patches Due to Incomplete Wash.
5-4 Nonrelevant Fluorescent Indications Due to Rough Surfaces and Poor Wash.
5-5 Visible Dye Indications of Surface Bursts in Steel Forging.
5-6 Visible Dye Indication of Forging Lap
5-7 Visible Dye Indication of Lamination.
5-8 Visible Dye Indications of Weldment Shrink Cracks.
5-9 Visible Dye Indications of Cracks in Aluminum Forging
5-10 Visible Dye Indications of Unhealed Porosity in Aluminum Plate.

SA
5-11 Fluorescent Indications of Porosity in Machined Aluminum Plate
5-12 Fluorescent Indications of Blow Holes and Random Porosity in Aluminum Casting.

MI

T
5-13 Fluorescent Indications of Tears in Stretch Formed Aluminum Angle.

ND
5-14 Fluorescent Indications of Radius Cracks in Machined Steel Fitting.

KU
5-15 Fluorescent Indications of Thermal Cracks, Porosity and Seams in Unglazed Ceramic Coil-Form.

O-
5-16 Fluorescent Indications of Crater Cracks and Pores in Stainless Steel Weld.
PU
5-17 Fluorescent Indications of Cracks Produced in Hard- Fired Unglazed Ceramic Rod

SM
5-18 Fluorescent Indications of Shrinkage Cracks in Unfinished Coupling Castings.
IP

5-19 Fluorescent Indications of Surface Porosity in Magnesium Sand Casting.

CO

CHAPTER 5: INTERPRETATION OF TEST RESULTS

SA

500 GENERAL
The terms "interpretation" and "evaluation" are often confused by testing personnel. Actually, the terms refer to two
MI

DT

entirely different steps in the testing process. To interpret an indication means to decide what condition caused it. It
may be a crack, porosity, lack of bond, or merely penetrant remaining on the surface due to some nonrelevant cause.
KU

-N

Evaluation follows interpretation. If a discontinuity exists, its effect on the usefulness of the article requires evaluation,
i.e. the article is either accepted as is, reworked, or scrapped. The success and reliability of the interpretation and
PU

MO

evaluation of liquid penetrant test indications depend upon the thoroughness of the process. The liquid penetrant test is
not a method by which a specimen is processed through a machine that separates the good article from the bad. Testing
personnel are required to carefully process each specimen, interpret indications, evaluate the seriousness of
IP

discontinuities, and determine disposition.

CO

501 INDICATIONS
1. General
Since penetrant can only indicate surface discontinuities, an indication is caused by a discontinuity in the surface, or by
penetrant remaining on the surface from some nonrelevant cause. Proper interpretation, however, requires familiarity
with the manufacturing processes, the types of discontinuities likely to occur, and their appearance. It requires a
knowledge of how different materials fail and where. It requires the careful control of development time. The effects of
these variables are discussed in the following paragraphs.

2. Development Time
Proper development time is very important in the interpretation of indications. This is the time allowed between the
application of developer and the actual viewing of indications. If too little time is allowed, indications may not have
time to develop. Too much time will cause indications to become blurred or distorted. The correct time depends on the
developer used. With water-based (aqueous) developers, the time in the drying oven is usually sufficient. With a dry or

32 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

nonaqueous wet developer, the accepted norm is 7 to 30 minutes. (A "rule of thumb" is to use a time equal to one-half
the penetration dwell time used.)

3. False Indications
The most common source of false indications is poor washing of water-washable and post-emulsified penetrants. The
use of black light during the washing process, when using fluorescent penetrant, is very important. The operator can
easily tell whether a good rinse is obtained or whether patches of fluorescence remain on the specimen. With penetrants
requiring solvent removal, the removal process is much more likely to be thorough. To guard against confusion
resulting from fluorescent or color spots other than true indications, care is taken so that no outside contamination
occurs. Typical sources of contamination are:
a. Penetrant on hands of operator.
b. Contamination of wet or dry developer.
c. Penetrant rubbing off of an indication on one specimen to a clean portion of the surface of another specimen.
d. Penetrant spots on the inspection table.

SA
(1) To avoid contamination, its causes are eliminated or guarded against. Process tanks and inspection areas
are kept clean; only lint-free wiping cloths or rags are used; and specimens are kept free of fingerprints

MI

T
and tool marks.

ND
(2) Figure 5-1 illustrates some of the more common types of false indications, caused by certain handling or

KU
cleaning processes.

O-
PU
4. Nonrelevant Indications
SM
Outside the realm of truly false indications there is a category of non-relevant indications, which testing personnel can
IP

recognize. These are true indications in the sense that they are caused by surface discontinuities, but the discontinuities
are there by design and are in no way a true discontinuity. Most of such nonrelevant indications are easy to recognize
CO
since they are related directly to some feature of the assembly that accounts for their presence. Nonrelevant indications
SA

include those that appear on articles that are press-fitted, keyed, splined, riveted, or spot welded together and those
appearing on castings as a result of loosely adherent scale or a rough surface due to burned-in sand. Such nonrelevant
indications, however, must be carefully examined since they may interfere with correct interpretation.
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 5-1. Typical False Indications

5. True Indications
True indications are those caused by a discontinuity. The interpretation of an indication as true is a matter of observing
the indication, eliminating the possibility of it being a false indication, and then further determining that it is not a
nonrelevant indication. Any true indication immediately becomes subject to evaluation as to its cause (type of

33 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

discontinuity) and the effect of the indicated discontinuity on the service life of the specimen. There are no hard and
fast rules that lay down sure methods of determining whether an indication is true. Such definite appraisals require
knowledge of the fabrication processes used in creating the article or, in the case of a used article, knowledge of its
operational use and the stresses to which it has been subjected.

12 CATEGORIES OF TRUE INDICATIONS

1.General
Discontinuity indications vary widely in appearance but for each indication two interpretive questions must be
answered: 1) what type of discontinuity caused the indication, and 2) what is the extent of the discontinuity as
evidenced by the extent of the indication. Each indication also requires an answer to the evaluation question: what
effect will the indicated discontinuity have on the service life of the article. The answers to the interpretive questions
are obtained by observing the indication and identifying the discontinuity from the characteristic appearance of the
indication. The answer to the evaluation question is based on a certain knowledge of the seriousness of the
discontinuity and complete understanding of the ultimate use of the article. True indications logically fall into five

SA
categories: continuous line; intermittent line; rounded; small dots; and diffused or weak. Figure 5-2 illustrates typical
true indications.

MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO

Figure 5-2. Typical True Indications

2. Continuous Line
IP

Continuous line indications are caused by cracks, cold shuts, forging laps, scratches, or die marks. Cracks usually
CO

appear as jagged lines; cold shuts as smooth, narrow, straight lines; and forging laps as smooth, wavy lines. Scratches
and die marks appear in a variety of linear patterns but are readily recognizable when all penetrant traces are removed,
since the bottom of the discontinuity is usually visible.

3. Intermittent Line
The same discontinuities that cause continuous line indications may, under different circumstances, cause intermittent
line indications. When an article is worked by grinding, peening, forging, machining, etc., portions of the
discontinuities in the surface of the article may be closed by the metal working process. When this occurs, the
discontinuities will appear as intermittent lines.
4. Round
Round indications usually are caused by porosity. The porosity may be the result of gas holes, pin holes, or the
generally porous makeup of the article. Deep cracks may also appear as round indications since they trap a large
amount of penetrant that spreads when the developer is applied. Any round indication that appears singly in an isolated
position usually indicates a discontinuity of depth that mayor may not be round.

34 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

5. Small Dots
Small dot indications result from discontinuities caused by pin holes, by the porous nature of the article, or by
excessively coarse grains being used in producing a casting. They may also be the result of cast alloy micro-shrinkage.

6. Diffused or Weak
Diffused or weak indications are particularly difficult to interpret. Weak indications appearing over a large area are
always suspect and when they appear the article is to be thoroughly cleaned and retested. Other weak or diffused
indications may be caused by surface porosity but more often are the result of insufficient cleaning, incomplete
penetrant removal, or excessive developer.

503 DISCONTINUITY DEPTH DETERMINATION

The vividness of a visible dye indication or the brilliance of a fluorescent indication can sometimes be used as a
measure of depth. The greater the depth of a discontinuity the more penetrant it holds and the larger and brighter the
indication. Shallow discontinuities entrap only small amounts of penetrant and appear as fine line indications of

SA
relatively low brilliance. When evaluation requires more accurate knowledge of the depth of a discontinuity it is often
obtained by removing the surface indication and reapplying developer. The subsequent amount and rate of penetrant

MI

T
bleed-out is proportionate to the depth of the discontinuity.

ND
KU
504 TYPICAL INDICATIONS

O-
Figures 5-3 through 5-19 illustrate typical liquid penetrant indications found in liquid penetrant testing.
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 5-3. Fluorescent Streaks and Patches Due to Incomplete Wash

35 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP

Figure 5-4 Nonrelevant Fluorescent Indications Due to Rough Surfaces and Poor wash
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 5-5 Visible Dye Indications of Surface Bursts in Steel Forging

36 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Figure 5-6 Visible Dye Indication of Forging Lap

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT

Figure 5-7 Visible Dye Indication of Lamination

KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 5-8 Visible Dye Indications of Weldment Shrink Cracks

37 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Figure 5-9 visible Dye Indications of cracks in Aluminum Forging

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

Figure 5-10 Visible Dye indications of Unheaded porosity in Aluminum plate

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure -5-11 Fluorescent Indications of Porosity in Machined Aluminum Plate

38 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
Figure 5-12 Fluorescent Indications of Blow Holes and Random Porosity in Al Casting
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 5-13 Fluorescent Indications of Tears in Stretch formed Al Angle

39 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
Figure 5-14 Fluorescent Indications of radius Cracks in machining Steel Fitting

MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 5-15 Fluorescent Indications of Thermal Cracks, Porosity and seams in unglazed ceramic coil-form

40 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU
Figure 5-16 Fluorescent Indications of crater Cracks and pores in Stainless steel weld

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

41 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Figure 5-17 Fluorescent Indications of Cracks in hard-fired unglazed ceramic rod

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

Figure 5-18 Fluorescent Indications of shrinkage Cracks in unfinished coupling castings

S
CO

42 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
SA
MI

DT
KU

-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

Figure 5-19 Fluorescent Indications of surface porosity in Mg sang casting

43 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

CHAPTER 6: QUALITY CONTROL OF PENETRANT TEST MATERIALS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paragraph
600 GENERAL
601 TEST MATERIAL CONTROL SAMPLES
602 TEST BLOCKS
1. General
2. Aluminum Test Blocks.
3. Ceramic Test Blocks.
4. Anodized/Plated Test Panels.

SA
5. Aluminum Test Panels.
6. Steel Test Panels.

MI

T
7. Glass Plates.

ND
603 PENETRANT TESTS.

KU
1. General

O-
2. Sensitivity Test.
PU
3. Water Washability Test.
4. Water Content Test.
SM
IP

5. Fluorescent Brightness Test.

CO
604 EMULSIFIER TESTS.
1. General
SA

2. Sensitivity Test.
3. Water Washability Test.
MI

DT

4. Water Content Test.

KU

5. Contamination Test.
-N

605 DEVELOPER TESTS

PU

MO

1. Dry Developer.
2. Wet Developer.
IP

LIST OF FIGURES
CO

Figure
6-1 Heating and Quenching of Aluminum Test Block.
6-2 Fluorescent Indications of Stress Cracks in Chrome
Nickel Test Panels.

CHAPTER 6: QUALITY CONTROL OF PENETRANT TEST MATERIALS

600 GENERAL
The reliability of any penetrant test is determined in large part by the condition (utility) of the materials used. Even the
best procedures are worthless if test materials are faulty. To ensure the satisfactory condition of penetrant test
materials, various quality control tests are employed. This chapter discusses primarily the "in-service" checks used to
test penetrant materials held in open tanks and subject to contamination or evaporation. Each of the quality control tests
mentioned herein is based on the assumption that care, handling, and use of the materials are strictly in accordance with
manufacturers' recommendations.

44 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Many additional quality control procedures such as the determination of sulfur and chlorine content, liquid oxygen
compatibility, temperature stability, water tolerance, viscosity, flash point, toxicity, tank or shelf life, and developer
precipitation rates are described in the various controlling specifications and standards. These procedures however are
primarily of interest to the manufacturer or laboratory technician rather than the individual performing or monitoring
penetrant tests. Quality control procedures are also readily available from manufacturers and various technical societies
such as the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).

601 TEST MATERIAL CONTROL SAMPLES

Since many of the tests used in the control of penetrant materials are comparison tests in which "used" materials are
compared with "new" materials, control samples are taken at the time the materials are received from the supplier.
These samples are kept in sealed containers and stored where they are not subject to deterioration from heat, light, or
evaporation. They are held to be used later in performing comparison tests. The procedures for taking the samples and
their renewal are detailed in the controlling specifications and standards.

SA
602 TEST BLOCKS

MI

T
1. General

ND
The use of test blocks, plates, or panels is often specified in the performance of test procedures used in testing penetrant

KU
materials. Depending on the particular test, the materials used in the manufacture of test blocks include aluminum,
steel, nickel, glass, and ceramic. Some of the blocks are designed primarily for checking penetrant or "system"

O-
PU
sensitivity and performing comparison tests, etc., while others are designed specifically for testing penetrant or
emulsifier washability. All, however, e prepared to rigid specifications as detailed in the following paragraphs.
SM
IP

2. Aluminum Test Blocks

CO
Aluminum test blocks measure 2 by 3 inches (50 by 75 mm) and are cut from 5/l6-inch thick (8-mm) bare 2024-T3
SA

aluminum alloy plate, with the 3-inch dimension in the direction of rolling. The blocks are heated nonuniformly and
water quenched so as to produce thermal cracks. This is accomplished by supporting the block in a frame and heating it
with the flame of a gas burner or torch in the center on the underside of the block. The flame remains centered and does
MI

DT

not move in any direction during the heating process. A 950 to 980°F (510 to 527°C) Tempilstik, Tempilac, or
equivalent, is applied to an area the size of a penny on the top side and directly in the center of the block. The heat of
KU

the torch or burner is adjusted so that the block is heated approximately 4 minutes before the Tempilstik or Tempilac
-N

melts, after which the block is immediately quenched in cold water (see Figure 6-1). The same operation is then
PU

repeated on the other side of the block. A groove approximately l/16-inch by l/16-inch deep (1.5 by 1.5 mm) is cut in
MO

the 2-inch direction across the center of the heat-affected zone on both sides of the block. This forms two specimen
areas on each side of the block and permits the side-by-side application and comparison of two penetrants without
IP

cross-contamination. This type of block is widely used for comparing the performance of penetrants under actual
S

crack-finding usage.
CO

45 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

SA
MI

T
ND
KU
Figure 6-1 Heating and Quenching of Aluminum test block

O-
PU
a. Preparation for Use. Prior to use, aluminum test blocks are scrubbed with a bristle brush and liquid solvent, followed
by vapor degreasing.
SM
IP

b. Preparation for Reuse. After a test block has been used it is cleaned prior to reuse. The block is heated slowly with a
CO

gas burner to 8000F (4260C) as determined by an 8000F Tempilstik, or equivalent, after which the block is quenched
SA

in cold water. It is then heated to approximately 2250F (1070C) for 15 minutes to drive off any moisture in the cracks,
and is allowed to cool to room temperature.
MI

DT

3. Ceramic Test Blocks

KU

Ceramic test blocks are flat circular disks of unglazed ceramic that, although quite solid and impervious to liquids, have
-N

micro-pit surfaces that entrap liquid penetrants. Inasmuch as the micro-pit structure provides a range of pore sizes, a
PU

MO

performance comparison can be made of two or more penetrants merely by noting the number or distribution of
porosity indications and their brightness in a side-by-side comparison test. Indications appear as a large number of
microscopic specks of fluorescence or color, the number increasing as the sensitivity of the penetrant increases.
IP

S
CO

a. Preparation for Use. The ceramic block is removed from its container (a shallow jar containing alcohol) using a pair
of tweezers, or equivalent, to avoid touching with the fingers. The block is then wiped with a soft absorbent tissue, and
allowed to dry 2 to 5 minutes.
b. Usage. Using a small applicator, a drop of each penetrant to be tested is applied to the flat surface of the test block.
Immediately following application, the penetrants are blotted with a piece of soft tissue by pressing the tissue against
the block using a glass platen or other flat object. This prevents the evaporation of the volatile materials in the
penetrants from altering indications. The tissue and cover also hold the penetrants in proper contact with the test block
and prevent excessive bleeding and possible cross-contamination. Following the required dwell period (usually 10
minutes), the penetrants are processed in accordance with the penetrant manufacturer's recommendations. A developer,
however, is not used. In making visual comparisons, both the number of indications observed and the brightness of
indications are noted.
c. Cleaning after Use. After use, the ceramic block is placed on edge in alcohol and soaked for several hours or until
the penetrant entrapments diffuse into the alcohol. The block is then returned to its storage container, covered with
fresh
alcohol, and sealed until again needed.

46 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

4. Anodized/Plated Test Panels

Stress-cracked anodized aluminum and chrome-plated nickel test panels are frequently employed in determining
penetrant sensitivity and washability. The panels are classified according to the size cracks they contain. The grades
are; coarse, medium, and fine. The coarse panels provide a low sensitivity level; the medium panels, a medium
sensitivity; and the fine panels, a high sensitivity. The panel used depends on the level of sensitivity desired (see Figure
6-2).

SA
MI

T
ND
KU

O-
PU

SM
IP
CO
COARSE CRACKS MEDIUM CRACKS FINE CRACKS
SA

Figure 6-2. Fluorescent Indications of Stress Cracks in Chrome Nickel Test Panels
a. Preparation for Use. Panel surfaces are scrubbed using moderate pressure and a cloth dampened with emulsifier or
MI

concentrated soap solution, and followed with a thorough rinsing using a water spray. Following rinsing, the panel is
DT

oven dried at 80 to 100°C for 3 to 5 minutes to drive off any moisture remaining in cracks. The panel is then dipped in
KU

acetone and agitated for a minute or so, removed, and again oven dried at 60 to 800C for approximately one minute.
-N
PU

MO

b. A line is usually drawn along the centerline of the panel and parallel to the lengthwise dimension using a wax pencil
or narrow vinyl tape. This forms two specimen areas and permits the side-by-side application and comparison of
penetrant materials without cross-contamination.
IP

S
CO

5. Aluminum Test Panels

Aluminum test plates or panels are used in testing the washability of water-washable visible dye penetrants. The panels
may be of any convenient size, 2 by 4 inches (50 by 100 mm) or larger, and are cut from clad aluminum alloy. The test
surfaces are used in the ''as-rolled'' condition. Prior to use, the panel is degreased, after which it is heated to
approximately 2250F (1070C), then cooled to room temperature in a dessicator.

6. Steel Test Panels

Steel test plates or panels are used in testing the washability of water-washable fluorescent penetrants, and visible dye
or fluorescent penetrants involving the use of an emulsifier or solvent remover. The panels are prepared from annealed
type 301 or 302 stainless steel and measure 2 by 4 inches (50 by 100 mm) or larger. Each is sandblasted on one side
with 100 mesh average size grit, using 60 pounds air pressure (414 kPa), with the gun held approximately 18 inches
(457 mm) from the surface. The sandblasting is continued until a uniform matte surface is obtained. It is the
sandblasted surface that is used in performing tests.
a. Preparation for Use. Prior to use, the panels are cleaned by vapor degreasing, heated to 2250F (1070C), and then
allowed to cool to room temperature in a desiccator.

47 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

b. Cleaning for Reuse. After each use, the panels are vapor degreased and resandblasted.
7. Glass Plates
One-quarter-inch thick (6 mm) glass plates (black for fluorescent penetrants and clear for visible dye penetrants) are
also used to test the washability of penetrants. They are fabricated by sandblasting sheets of glass using 100-mesh
average size grit at 60 psi air pressure (414 kPa), so as to provide a uniform matte surface.

603 PENETRANT TESTS

1. General
The "in-service" quality of the penetrants used in liquid penetrant testing is determined by a check of penetrant
sensitivity, water content, contamination, and washability. The tendency toward fading of the penetrant dyes is also
checked by a simple comparison test. The tests described in the following paragraphs are typical of those performed on
"used" or questionable penetrants. As a general rule the tests referenced in it paragraphs 603.4 and 603.5 would be
performed by laboratory technicians in a laboratory and not by the liquid penetrant testing specialist.

SA
2. Sensitivity Test

MI
When performing the sensitivity test, the penetrant to be tested is applied to one half of the test block (Para. 602.2,

T
602.3, or 602.4) and the new or reference penetrant (Para. 601) is applied to the remaining half. The processing used -

ND
including dwell time, emulsification or removal, and developing -is that recommended by the penetrant manufacturer.

KU
The indications are then visually compared under the appropriate lighting (normal or white light for visible dye
indications and black light for fluorescent indications). If a noticeable difference exists in the sensitivity or brightness

O-
PU
of indications (as determined by visual observation), the penetrant is discarded. Likewise, if the penetrant is off-color
or shows evidence of contamination from dirt or lint, it is discarded.
SM
IP

Coincidently with the visual examination of fluorescent indications, the black light source used to view indications
must have an intensity of at least 800 microwatts per square centimeter at the test surface.
CO
SA

3. Water Washability Test

To achieve maximum contrast between indications and background, excess surface penetrant must be readily
MI

removable. ill the water washability test, the washability performance of the penetrant being tested is compared to that
DT

of the reference penetrant (Para. 601). The penetrants are applied to separate test panels (Para. 602.5, 602.6, or 602.7).
KU

After normal dwell and draining periods, and emulsification (if applicable), the penetrants are washed from the panels
-N

using a uniform water spray. If washing is found to be difficult, or retention of background dye is noticeably different
from that of the reference penetrant, the penetrant is discarded.
PU

MO

4. Water Content Test

IP

Water content of a penetrant is best determined by the test described in ASTM Standard D-95. One hundred milliliters
(ml) of the penetrant is placed in a boiling flask with a similar quantity of moisture-free xylene. The flask is connected
CO

to a reflux condenser so that the condensate drops into a 25-ml graduated tube where the water settles out. When no
more water is being gathered in the graduated tube (usually after a period of an hour) the boiling process is terminated.
After cooling, the volume of water in the graduated tube is read. The volume in milliliters is the percent of water by
volume present in the penetrant.
The penetrant is also examined for evidence of gelling, separating, clouding, coagulating, or floating of water on the
penetrant surface. If any of these conditions exist, or the percent of water exceeds specification requirements, the
penetrant is discarded.

5. Fluorescent Brightness Test

The fluorescent brightness test is usually performed with a modified photofluorometer. In this test, a small amount of
the penetrant to be tested and the reference penetrant (Para. 601) are diluted with a nonfluorescent highly volatile
solvent such as methylene chloride. Test papers, cut to fit the sample holder of the photofluorometer, are then dipped
into the solutions, withdrawn, and allowed to air dry. Following drying, the samples are placed in a preheated oven at
225°F (107°C) for 5 minutes. Five samples are prepared of the penetrant being tested and six of the reference penetrant
(the extra reference penetrant sample is used as the master for setting up the photofluorometer). The samples are then

48 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

alternately read on the photofluorometer and the results compared. If the fluorescent brightness of the penetrant being
tested should drop below 85% of the reference penetrant, the penetrant is discarded.

604 EMULSIFIER TESTS

1. General
Emulsifiers are usually tested for their sensitivity, washability, water content, and the amount of contamination from
penetrants. As a general rule the tests referenced in paragraphs 604.4 and 604.5 would be performed by laboratory
technicians and not by the liquid penetrant testing specialist.

2. Sensitivity Test
The emulsifier sensitivity test is identical to that used for penetrants and described in paragraph 603.2.

3. Water Washability Test

SA
The water washability test is identical to the test used for penetrants and described in paragraph 603.3.

MI

T
4. Water Content Test

ND
The water content test is identical to the test used for penetrants and described in paragraph 603.4.

KU

O-
5. Contamination Test
PU
The principal contaminant of emulsifiers held in open tanks is penetrant. To limit this contamination, a fluorescence
SM
test is periodically performed. In this test, two blends of emulsifier and penetrant are prepared. The first blend consists
IP

of 75% new emulsifier and 25% new penetrant (Para. 601). The second blend consists of the same percentages of used
emulsifier and penetrant. The samples are applied to separate test panels (Para. 602.6) and permitted to drain at a 45-
CO

degree angle for 15 minutes.

SA

The "used" penetrant-emulsifier test panel is then dipped momentarily in the emulsifier being tested; the reference
panel is dipped in the reference emulsifier. The dwell period used will depend on the emulsifier but it usually ranges
MI

from 3 to 30 seconds. Then, using a special spray apparatus and a 20-grain hard water solution and 5 pounds air
DT

pressure (34 kPa), the panels are rinsed for 30 seconds with the spray nozzle held 90 degrees to the surface and 12
KU

inches (305 mm) away.

-N

Following the rinse, the panels are dried in a warm air dryer, after which (if applicable) the appropriate developer is
applied. The panels are then compared under black light. Should the residual fluorescence of the used penetrant-
PU

MO

emulsifier combination noticeably exceed that of the reference sample (by visual observation), the emulsifier is
discarded.
IP

S
CO

605 DEVELOPER TESTS

1. Dry Developer
Dry developers used in open tanks are usually tested only by observation. Since they are not hydroscopic, they do not
absorb moisture from the air, and are relatively trouble-free if they do not come in contact with water. Any dry
developer that is found lumpy or caked instead of light and fluffy, or that shows any other sign of having been wet, is
discarded. Additionally the developer is visually examined for dirt. It is also checked under black light for fluorescent
dye contamination. Should either condition exist, the developer is discarded.
2. Wet Developer
Wet (aqueous) developers are usually tested only for proper density and possible contamination from dirt or penetrant.
Specific gravity is measured with a hydrometer (see Figure 3-6). If reading differs from specification requirements
(usually 1.020 to 1.028), either powder or vehicle is added to the developer in sufficient quantities to bring the density
within acceptable limits. As a general rule this test would be performed by laboratory technicians and not by the liquid
penetrant testing specialist. Additionally, a small sample of the developer is taken from the tank and visually examined
for dirt. It is also checked for fluorescent dye contamination under black light. If either condition is in evidence, the
developer is discarded.

49 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY
Angstrom Unit A unit of length equal to 10-8cm and used to express wavelengths of light; i.e., electromagnetic
radiation.
Aqueous Developer See Wet Developer
Background The surface upon which an indication is viewed. It may be the natural surface of the test article, or it may
be the developer coating on the surface. This background may contain traces of unremoved penetrant (fluorescent or
visible), which if present, can interfere with the visibility of indications.
Background Fluorescence Fluorescent residues observed over the general surface of the test article during fluorescent
penetrant inspection.
Bath Term used colloquially to designate the liquid penetrant inspection materials into which test articles are immersed
during inspection process.
Black Light Light radiation in the near ultraviolet range of wavelengths (3200 to 4000 angstroms), just shorter than
visible light.

SA
Black Light Filter A filter that transmits black light while suppressing visible light and harmful ultraviolet radiation.

MI
Bleed out The action of the entrapped penetrant in spreading out from surface discontinuities to form an indication.

T
Blotting The action of the developer in soaking up penetrant from a surface discontinuity, so as to cause maximum

ND
KU
bleed out of penetrant for increased contrast and sensitivity.
Capillary Action The tendency of liquids to penetrate or migrate into small openings, such as cracks, pits, or fissures.

O-
PU
Carrier Fluid A fluid in which liquid penetrant inspection materials are dissolved or suspended.
Clean Free of interfering solid or liquid contamination.
SM
IP

Color Contrast Penetrant See Visible Dye Penetrant.

Comparative Test Block An intentionally cracked metal block having two separate but adjacent areas for the
CO
application of different penetrants so that a direct comparison of their relative effectiveness can be obtained. Can also
SA

be used to evaluate penetrant test techniques and test conditions.

Contact Emulsifier An emulsifier that begins emulsifying penetrant upon simple contact with the penetrant. Usually
oil based (lipophilic).
MI

DT

Contrast The difference in visibility (brightness or coloration) between an indication and the surrounding surface.
KU

Dark Adaptation The adjustment of the eyes when one passes from a bright to a darkened area.
-N

Defect A discontinuity that interferes with the usefulness of an article. A fault in any material or part that is detrimental
PU

to its serviceability.
MO

Detergent Remover A penetrant remover that is a solution of a detergent in water. Also see Hydrophilic Emulsifier.
Developer A material that is applied to the test article surface after excess penetrant has been removed and that is
IP

designed to enhance the penetrant bleed out to form indications. The developer may be a fine powder, a solution that
CO

dries to a fine powder, or a suspension (in solvent, water, alcohol, etc.) that dries leaving an absorptive film on the test
surface.
Developing Time The time between the application of the developer and the examination of the test article for
indications. The elapsed time necessary for the applied developer to bring out indications from penetrant entrapments.
Also called Development Time.
Discontinuity An interruption in the normal physical structure or configuration of an article, such as cracks, forging
laps, seams, inclusions, porosity, etc. A discontinuity mayor may not affect the usefulness of the part.
Dragout The carryout or loss of penetrant materials as a result of their adherence to the articles being processed.
Drain Time That portion of the penetrant inspection process during which the excess penetrant, emulsifier, detergent
remover, or developer is allowed to drain from the test article.
Dry Developer A fine dry powder developer that does not employ a carrier fluid.
Drying Oven An oven used for drying rinse water from test articles.
Drying Time The time allotted for a rinsed test article to dry.
Dual Sensitivity Penetrant A penetrant that contains a combination of visible and fluorescent dyes.

50 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Dwell Time The total time that the penetrant or emulsifier is in contact with the test surface, including the time
required for application and the drain time. Also see Emulsification Time.
Electrostatic Spraying A technique of spraying wherein the material being sprayed is given a high electrical charge,
while the test article is grounded.
Emulsification Time The period of time that an emulsifier is permitted to combine with the penetrant prior to removal.
Also called Emulsifier Dwell Time.
Emulsifier A liquid that combines with an oily penetrant to make the penetrant water washable. Also see Hydrophilic-
Emulsifier and Lipophilic Emulsifier.
Evaluation The process of determining the severity of the condition after the indication has been interpreted.
Evaluation leads to determining whether the article is acceptable, salvageable, or rejectable.
False Indication An indication due to improper processing. Distinct from nonrelevant indication.
Family The complete series of materials necessary to perform a specific process of liquid penetrant inspection.
Flash Point The lowest temperature at which a volatile flammable liquid will give off enough vapor to make a
combustible explosive mixture in the air space surrounding the liquid surface.

SA
Flaw See Defect.

MI
Fluorescence The emission of visible radiation by a substance as the result of, and only during, the absorption of black

T
light radiation.

ND
KU
Fluorescent Penetrant An inspection penetrant that is characterized by its ability to fluoresce when excited by black
light.

O-
Hydrophilic Emulsifier A water-based agent that, when applied to an oily penetrant, renders the penetrant water
PU
washable. Can be used as a Contact Emulsifier, but more often the emulsifier is added to the water rinse and
SM
accompanied by some form of mechanical agitation or scrubbing to remove excess penetrant. Sometimes called a
IP

Hydrophilic Scrubber.
Indication That which marks the presence of a discontinuity, as the result of detectable bleed out of penetrant from the
CO
discontinuity.
SA

Inspection The visual examination of a test article after completion of the penetrant processing steps.
Interpretation The determination of the significance of indications from the standpoint of whether they are relevant or
MI

DT

nonrelevant.
Leak Testing A technique of liquid penetrant testing in which the penetrant is applied to one side of the surface, while
KU

the other side is inspected for indications that would indicate a through-leak or void.
-N

Lipophilic Emulsifier An oil-based agent that, when applied to an oily penetrant, renders the penetrant water
PU

MO

washable. Usually applied as a Contact Emulsifier.

Nonaqueous Wet Developer A developer in which the developing powder is applied as a suspension in a quick-drying
solvent. Also called Solvent Developer.
IP

Nonfluorescent Penetrant See Visible Dye Penetrant. Nonrelevant Indication An indication that is not or cannot be
CO

associated with a discontinuity.

Penetrability The property of a penetrant that causes it to find its way into very fine openings, such as cracks.
Penetrant A liquid (sometimes gas) capable of entering discontinuities open to the surface, and which is adapted to the
inspection process by being made highly visible in small traces. Fluorescent penetrants fluoresce brightly under black
light while the visible penetrants are intensely colored to be noticeable under visible light.
Penetration Time See Dwell Time.
Post-Emulsification A penetrant removal technique employing a separate emulsifier.
Post-Emulsification Penetrant A penetrant that requires the application of a separate emulsifier to render the surface
penetrant water washable. Also can be removed by applying a solvent remover.
Precleaning The removal of surface contaminants or smeared metal from the test article so that they cannot interfere
with the penetrant inspection process.
Quenching of Fluorescence The extinction of fluorescence by causes other than removal of black light (the exciting
radiation).

51 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

Rinse The process of removing liquid penetrant inspection materials from the surface of an article by washing or
flooding with another liquid usually water. Also called wash
Seeability The characteristic of an indication that enables the observer to see it against the conditions of background,
outside light, etc.
Self-Emulsifiable See Water Washable.
Sensitivity The ability of the penetrant process to detect surface discontinuities.
Solvent Developer See Nonaqueous Wet Developer.
Solvent Removed A penetrant removal technique wherein the excess penetrant is washed or wiped from the test
surface with a solvent remover.
Solvent Remover A volatile liquid used to remove excess surface penetrant from the test article. Sometimes called
Penetrant Remover.
Surface Tension That property of liquids which, due to molecular forces, tends to bring the contained volume into a
form having the least superficial area.

SA
Viscosity The state or degree of being viscous. The resistance of a fluid to the motion of its particles.
Visible Dye Penetrant An inspection penetrant that is characterized by its intense visible color -usually red. Also

MI
called Color Contrast or Nonfluorescent Penetrant.

T
Wash See Rinse.

ND
KU
Water-Soluble Developer A developer in which the developer powder is dissolved in a water carrier to form a
solution. Not a suspension.

O-
PU
Water-Suspended Particle Developer A developer in which the developer particles are mixed with water to form a
suspension.
SM
Water-Wash A penetrant removal technique wherein excess penetrant is washed or flushed from the test surface with
IP

water.
CO
Water-Washable Penetrant A type of penetrant that contains its own emulsifier, making it water washable.
SA

Water Tolerance The amount of water that a penetrant, emulsifier, or wet developer can absorb before its
effectiveness is impaired.
Wet Developer A developer in which the developer powder is applied as a suspension or solution in a liquid -usually
MI

DT

water or alcohol.
KU

Wetting Ability The ability of a liquid to spread out spontaneously and adhere to solid surfaces.
-N
PU

MO
IP

S
CO

APPENDIX B
MEASUREMENT CONVERSION CHARTS
U.S. CUSTOMARY TO INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM (SI) UNITS
Inch to Millimeter Conversions
Inch Millimeter Inch Millimeter Inch Millimeter Inch Millimeter
1 25.4 26 660.4 51 1295.4 76 1930.4
2 50.8 27 685.8 52 1320.8 77 1955.8
3 76.2 28 711.2 53 1346.2 78 1981.2

52 of 53
 LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

4 101.6 29 736.6 54 1371.6 79 2006.6

5 127.0 30 762.0 55 1397.0 80 2032.0
6 152.4 31 787.4 56 1422.4 81 2057.4
7 177.8 32 812.8 57 1447.8 82 2082.8
8 203.2 33 838.2 58 1473.2 83 2108.2
9 228.6 34 863.6 59 1498.6 84 2133.6
10 254.0 35 889.0 60 1524.0 85 2159.0
11 279.4 36 914.4 61 1549.4 86 2184.4
12 304.8 37 939.8 62 1574.8 87 2209.8
13 330.2 38 965.2 63 1600.2 88 2235.2
14 355.6 39 990.6 64 1625.6 89 2260.6
15 381.0 40 1016.0 65 1651.0 90 2286.0

SA
16 406.4 41 1041.4 66 1676.4 91 2311.4
17 431.8 42 1066.8 67 1701.8 92 2336.8

MI

T
18 457.2 43 1092.2 68 1727.2 93 2362.2

ND
19 482.6 44 1117.6 69 1752.6 94 2387.6

KU
20 508.0 45 1143.0 70 1778.0 95 2413.0

O-
21 533.4 46 1168.4 71 1803.4 96 2438.4
PU
22 558.8 47 1193.8 72 1828.8 97 2463.8
23 584.2 48 1219.2 73 SM
1854.2 98 2489.2
IP

24 609.6 49 1244.6 74 1879.6 99 2514.6

CO
25 635.0 50 1270.0 75 1905.0 100 2540.0
SA

Common Fractions to Millimeter Conversions

MI

DT

Inch Millimeters
KU

-N

1/64 0.397
1/32 0.794
PU

MO

1/16 1.588
1/8 3.175
IP

1/4 6.350
CO

1/2 12.700
1 25.400

53 of 53