LIQUID PENETRANT TESTING

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Penetrant testing is a quick and reliable nondestructive test method used for detecting various
types of discontinuities which are opened to the surface of a material or part.

During normal operation, critical components of aircraft engines, airframes, missiles, space vehicles,
nuclear reactors, and other modern machinery, are often subjected to extreme loads and vibrations. In
time, these extreme loads and vibrations may cause a component to develop an intemuption in its normal
physical structure or configuration. This is called a DISCONTINUITY.. Although the discontinuity rnay not
affect the usefulness of a part when it occurs, or even alter the parts appearance to the naked eye (since
the discontinuity may be minute) repeated stresses or overloading may eventually cause that part to fail. It
can be seen therefore, that detection of small discontinuities before they progress into a DEFECT, which
is detrimental to part serviceability, is of vital importance to prevent loss of equipment and personnel.
Failure of the part may cause one of the following: r
~_':' ;0' ~~ ~ Q \
,>
.! '
1. Major Ref)air: "Down TIme" for major repair caused by part failure is expensive in ~\ i..:.-.-Jv /...,J.. \
terms 01 st time. f',' .
Q

.. !J;Z~'i5 :.s 2. Loss of Equipmegt: Total loss of equipment due to part failure is expensive in terms of
" ~,/ '? lost time and equipment.
) b" J 3. Loss of Personnel: Total loss of the equipment may result in the loss of operating. ~ VJ.:a5
'1:
( / '- ">"
personnel. c.:J \
J 0
PENETRANT INSPECTION CAPABILITIES
Penetrant inspection can detect open to the surface discontinuities, such as:
, '/- ~ ~6'~i':::'
'L! J. Cracks Laps •
';"'p,,":\J Porosity:s ...,J//' L';laks (hole through a wall)
-":'<' ./ er
Seams "( . PIts '--6> '.)
~ Unde=t/ r
Note: This is only a partial listing. A listing of all discontinuities caused by metal and non·metallic material
preparation, material forming, and material processing would be too unwieldy for this study guide.
Penetrant inspection can be used with reliable accuracy on the following nonabsorbent materials: .

1. Aluminum 7. Cast Iron . /,

. \. \».\-6;'~
S \ '>
2. Magnesium 8. Stainless Steel ~ "" ' \
3. Brass 9. Non·Magnetic Alloys ll"
4. Copper 1O. Ceramics 7J
5. TItanium 11. Hard Rubber
6. Bronze 12. Plastic

Caution: As some plastics, rubber, and synthetic products may be affected by oil, tests should be made
before penetrant inspecting such materials to avoid damaging the part under test.
 BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PENETRANT INSPECTION
-o,:.~ \ -~ l.:! \
The basic principle of penetrant inspection is capillary action. Capillary action is the action by which the
surface of a liquid, where it is in contact with a solid, is elevated or depres§ed. The materials, processes,
and procedures used in liquid penetrant testing are ail designed to facilitate capillarity and to make the
results of such action visible and capable of interpretation.

The forces of capillarity, or capillary action, may 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 the 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 1-1.

...... '·'An," LEVEL IN STRAW

WATER LEVEL IN GLASS

Figure 1-1 CAPILLARY ACTION

PT III BASIC
2
The basic objective of liquid penetrant inspection is to increase the visible contrast between the
9iscontinuity and its background. This is done by treating the whole object with an appropriate searching
liquid of high mobility and penetrating power (which enters the surface opening of the discontinuity), and
then encouraging the liquid to emerge from the discontinuity to reveal the flaw pattern to the inspecting
personnel under daylight conditions (visible dye penetrants) or, when exposed to black light (fluorescent
penetrants).

There are several methods by which the basic prinCiples of penetrant inspection can be administered. ·In .-
each method, however, there are certain general procedures which must be followed.

GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR PENETRANT INSPECTION

The following are general procedures for penetrant inspection:

, ((L~ ,,;s~
~ .,)- _
./ ~'..;.J \ . ~~~'/ /
~,'...)
WI">!
,A"~
(1"1
1.,;
1. Selection of the Appropriate Inspection Process: '-' I \
The appropriate inspection process shall be determined by the testing facilities, \' \ "

2.
dpr~:~~siing: If the material to be tested could be affected by oil, SUlphur or ch(Ori;e, .~ ~ \ 13'''-"". t.::'..I
av~iladble, the type and amount of parts to be tested, and the results anticiPated''',_a,.,n,~.. ,... \ . ' , \
<[\

tests shall be performed to ensure that the parts are not damaged, when placed
under penetrant inspection method test.
3. Pre-Cleaning: The part to be inspected shall be pre-cleaned in order to remove any
",....,
tr' " \,) "-" .)oJ...J
., \ I " ( .,
*'
contaminating material. - ~~, j ~ (.>-i-
CAUTION: Inadequate pre-cleaning is the source of most of the false indications encountered~ i! ;"'..l,
4. Pre-Drying: Parts which have been pre-cleaned shall be dried to remove all traces of .' . ,'_ \ ~.p
cleaning material. .5> W \ ~...>~....0 <...S'
5. Penetrant Application: Penetrant shall be applied 10 a part under test in a manner • ";"':P .ll \
appropriate to the type of part or facilities available. Sufficient d,:yell time shall be
allowed for optimum penetration. Figure 1-2. ) _ ,_0 }j
. .\:::. '

~ \.:..J:,' .0 \
~~\ \~c
Jl'"
*
/ .
\. ~ rJ-./
.-' ~~"~ : - J,\(.J:~'J'I'
r-- ,v--
;J) QY.:,J
.' 'r I""> •
. ::W)S" '~..\
~ , r..,;:Y A

\:;:;'", JS:: . ~ ~
/ '.. ~9.../(; ,'-
l ' ~/.vp
~,....11) \ tJ } ,,--?'
(-, ~j-f'~~

Figuro 1-2 PENETRANT APPLICATION AND DWELL TIME

PT III BASIC 3
 6. Penetrant Removal: Penetrant shall be removed from the surface of the part under test
in tile manner dictated by the type of penetrant used. Figure 1·3.

.\
, :\" I
IJ'

Figure 1·3 REMOVAL OF EXCESS SURFACE PENETRANT

7. Developer Application: Developer shall be applied to the part under test as appropriate
to the process being used and the configuration of the part under test. Sufficient dwell
time shall be allowed for optimum results. Figure 1-4.

Figure 1-4 DEVELOPER APPLICATION

PT III BASIC 4
 8. Inspection Interprelation: The part shall be inspected and the discontinuity interpreted
and evaluated to the applicable acceptance standard. Figure 1-5.

.'

Figure 1-5 INSPECTION AND INTERPRETATION OF INDICATIONS

9. Post-Cleaning: The developer shall be removed after inspection interpretation and

prior to returning the part to service.

PT IIJ BASIC 5
 PENETRANT SELECTION FACTORS
The proper selection of a penetrant to be used for penetrant inspection is dependent on many factors
such as JJenetrabi!~, visibility, particular type of discontinuity sought, configuration of part, surface
conditions, facilities and equipment available, etc. Selection of the proper penetrant, therefore, should
be based on penetrant sensitivity.

PENETRANT SENSITIVITY: Penetrant Sensitivity is herein defined as the ability of the penetrant, along
with compatible family items in its group, to effectively find discontinuities of the type sought under the· ,-
penetrant inspection circumstances involved. Using this definition, the penetrant most adaptable to the
majority of penetrant inspection conditions that will exist, is the proper penetrant.

COMPATIBILITY: Penetrant materials supplied by qualified producers are not compatible or

interchangeable for the purposes of penetrant inspection. Use only one manufacturer's group of
materials in an inspection line or portable inspection operation. This is known as a family group, and
intermixing of families is not permitted unless the "mixed family" has been previously qualified. 1.
~e'I,i\<.c. ..-J ~
PENETRANT MATERIALS . \ I"c
Penetrants: Penetrants are classified by Method and Type as fOllow~: ~ ) if
3-,"1 \ ,'.~ D tv-". G
Method A Fluorescent dye l0e\S'~o ~ . v,,:b,1 "j
Method B Visible d y e . - -"~ \
Type 1 Water·washable ~ J I/'Si~~~e..
Type 2 Post emulSifiable, lipophilic, or <.::Ji! \ 'i
Post emulsifiable, hydrophilic Q. ~-, ~ : / '"':,
Type 3 Solvent removable S~
Emulsifier: Emulsifiers are classified as either: r @
Hydrophilic An emulsifier that is water-soluble \.j \ ~ (V"
Lipophilic An emulsifier that is oil-soluble and not water-soluble )0)"
Solvent Remover: Solvent removers are classified as follows: <: ..(1'--0 \ . ~h
Halogenated " . . \,)(IJ\.I\.0··
Non-halogenated j-J cS Q \ t.: r
Developers: Developers are classified by form as follows: --- t sr
.")· S\ .------\1 \ "\
Dry powder ........' ~ y,)"(
Water soluble >....-- "
.Jr. "(V\\"
Water suspendible &'?:fp{.. \\)~.\o ),
Nonaqueous OIl- c '- 'i tNi'--''.]
Specific application (Le.Plastic film) iy R."~' \ ",OJ:.A
\,;,'ZD~ 5o,e J,
All penetrant materials are supplied in either bulk form or in small pressurized canisters. ' ¢t t\
r~:r\
SELECTION OF LIQUID PENETRANT TEST METHOD
When a specific liquid penetrant test method is not specified by the contract, the selection of a suitable
penetrant inspection process is made by the Level III who makes this decision based on seven basic
factors.
1. Requirements previously established by component drawings applicable documents on
material or parts to be placed under examination.
2. Type and size of discontinuity,t'?.Ee ~(Jte.ctfld. lh n;'II.u\)
3. SUrfi3G.e.c.QnQ.ltiQn()fparttobeex~flllr1,~d"", (W;tlt~) SvIW I T \ .

.. ... ."~}>\ "

~: ~~2f~.LJU~~t.!o.rn.oi.".~~.'~.'.~t.t~~e.e :.:~.;;;.i~:t_:~,',;r..... , P-;"v
'-',.(. '8
J~QV"
r: ~ ~
6. Facilities and equipment available.
7. Effectof the penetrant chemicals on material being examined . ..:1 ;:,,,-.f ;;r ,7' Rf'"'"
~'1/~ ~/ -\_ S~"r-lt'5 6
PT III BASIC
.:;) ~f/ \ .\-
 TABLE 1

ASME CODE CLASSIFICATION OF LIQUID PENETRANT METHODS AND TYPES

METHOD A -FLUORESCENT PENETRANTS

Type 1 Water Washable Penetrant (Procedure A-1)

Dry, Wet, or Nonaqueous Developer
Type 2 Post-emulsifiable Penetrant (Procedure A-2)
Lipophilic or Hydrophilic Emulsifier
Dry, Wet, or Nonaqueous Developer
Type 3 Solvent Removable Penetrant (Procedure A-3)
Solvent Remover/Cleaner
Dry, Wet, or Nonaqueous Developer

METHOD B--VISIBLE PENETRANTS

Type 1 Water Washable Penetrant (Procedure B-1)

Wet or Nonaqueous Developer
Type 2 Post-emulsifiable Penetrant (Procedure B-2)
Lipophilic or Hydrophilic Emulsifier
Wet or Nonaqueous Developer
Type 3 Solvent Removable Penetrant (Procedure B-3)
Solvent Remover/Cleaner
Wet or Nonaqueous Developer

PT III BASIC 7
 TABLE 1.a
MIL STD 6866 CLASSIFICATION OF LIQUID PENETRANT METHODS AND 1YPES

Type I Fluorescent Dye

Type II Visible Dye
Type III Dual mode (visible and fluorescent dye)

METHOD
Method A Water-washable
Method B Post emulsifiable, lipophilic
Method C Solvent removable
Method D Post emulsifiable, hydorphilic

SENSITIVI1Y
Level 1 Low
Level 2 Medium
Level 3 High
Level 4 Ultrahigh

DEVELOPERS
Fonna Dry powder
Fonnb Water soluble
Fonnc Water suspendable
Fonnd Nonaquesous
Fonne Specific application

SOLVENT REMOVERS
Class (1) Hologenated
Class (2) Non-halogenated
Class (3) Specific application

PT III BASIC 8
 METHOD A TYPE 1 INSPECTION PROCESS
The Method A Type 1 Penetrant Inspection process uses a water-washable fluorescent penetrant and a
dry, wet, or non-aqueous wet developer. The penetrant has self-emulsifying properties to make it water
removable.
/ ((j)
Method A Type 1 Process is generally used when: , J
cf ) );v y C9/
1. Examining large volume of parts. J " ' u :J:' \:0
2.
3,
Discontinuities are not wider than their depth.
Surfaces are very rough (i.e., sand castings, rough weldments). "')
d
.: I 7- Jr / " 2 . JJ/ ' (e,
/ ' '- ,'r, 0::l
4. Examining large areas. ,J, c" /::-0 J 2\- @J
5. Examining threads and keyways. ' I~ ',J! \ /'
6. The lowest fluorescent penetrant sensitivity is sufficient to detect the discontinuities / : ';'" (:::5
inherent to the part. ) r' f '\, ,/
7. Removal of excess penetrant may be difficult due to rough surfaces.
J
\ 'p. ),' R ' '. ' i
8. Sulphonates in emulsifying agents will not affect nickel bearing steels. -"',', \ //
J ~lp}"C .
TABLE 2 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF
METHOD A, TYPE 1 INSPECTION PROCESS
-€/JJ ) wIJJ"J-0{
1= \-:;" x IVl){\J'j~,l
. __.. ADVANTAGES DI,$ADVANTAGES
1. The use of fluorescence ensures good 1. Darkened area is required for
visibility of flaw indications. inspection
Process can be considered as a one-s~ep 2. Process is not reliable in finding
process and, therefore, fast and economical. scratches and shallow discontinuiJies.
, ---'-".,"-
3. Process can be used for detecting a wide 3. Penetrant can be affected by acids
rangQ.gf,discontinuities. and chromates.
4. Penetrant used can be easily washed off with 4. Process is not reliable on anodized
water. \ surfaces.
5. Process is easily adaptable to a large volume 1\" 5. Process is susceptible to over-
of small parts. 1 washing.
6. Process is excellent for rough surfaces, 6. Water contamination may destroy
keyways, and threads. usefulness of penetrant.
7. Process is relatively inexpensive. Not good for wide shallow
discontinuities (width greater than
\.

PT III BASIC 9
 METHOD A TYPE 2 INSPECTION PROCESS
The Method A Type 2 Penetrant Inspection process uses a post-emulsifiable fluorescent penetrant, a
lipophilic emulsifier, and a dry, wet, or non-aqueous wet developer. The materials used in this process are
very similar to that described for Method A Type 1 process, except that these penetrants are not self-
emulsifiable. A lipophilic or hydrophilic emulsifier is used to make the penetrant water washable.

METHOD A TYPE 2 INSPECTION PROCESSES ARE GENERALLY USED WHEN: , ~~(, 0 G

1. Examining large volume of parts. '. ! ~ .)' ( ~" <2" ~
2. A higher sensitivity than Method A, Type 1 is required or ,;/,J f.. '\ J' ')J.- ~~)
desired. !
Y././:.J-Y
J / .
. (,0.
~) ,
I
\A
~

3. The part is contaminated WITh acid or other chemicals that will harm/water-washable --6.'/ .1
penetrants. j; J?
4. Discontinuities are wider than their depth.
S. Variable, but controlled, sensitivities are necessary so that non-detrimental disccn-
tinuities can be disregarded while harrntul or detrimental disccntinuities are
detected.
6. Examining parts which may have disccntinuities contaminated WITh in-service soils.
7. Examining for stress, cracks or intergranular ccrrosion.
8. Examining for grinding cracks.
9. High visibility is required.

\I i ~,JJ,k ~j(J/.?l..,,~tl1/
TABLE 3 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF)<l .. \ 1- -t { \1'
METHOD A TYPE 2 INSPECTION PROCESS .-..-'/ IN 170\
----=---:---
~
----~~-
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
1. Fluorescence used in this process is more 1. Process is a two-step process, and
brilliant, thus ensuring greater visibility of therefore requires more time.
flaw indications. 2. Additional equipment is required for
2. High sensitivity for very fine disccntinuities. apptication of the emulsifier.
3. Good on wide shallow discontinuITies.
(width greater than depth)
\ 3. Not as good on parts with ccmplex
shapes (I.e. threads) as Type 1.
4. Process good for high volume production. 4. Additional material increases ccst
S. Process normally not affected by acids. 5. Emulsifier dwell time very critical.
6. Process not as susceptible to over-washing.

10
PTIII BASIC
 METHOD A TYPE 3 INSPECTION PROCESS
The Method A Type 3 Penetrant Inspection process uses a solvent-removable fluorescent penetrant, a
penetrant remover (solvent) and non-aqueous developer. The penetrant is not water-washable but is
removed instead with the solvent remover.

Method A Type 3 Inspection Process is generally used when:

1. Spot examination is required.
2. Water-rinsing method is not feasible because of part size, weight, surface
condition, no water available, no heat for drying, or field use.

TABLE 4 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF

METHOD A TYPE 3 INSPECTION PROCESS

ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
1. Process can be used for spot inspection 1. Use of solvent to remove penetrant
on large parts. prohibits inspecting large areas.
2. Process can be used when water-rinsing 2. Sensitivity can be reduced by the
methods are not feasibl~ application of excessive amounts
of remover.
r \U;\~( P,,4{~5;t,a
METHOD B TYPE 1 INSPECTION PROCESS
Method B Type 1 Penetrant Inspection process uses a water-washable visible dye penetrant and wet or
non-aqueous developer. The penetrant has self-emulsifying properties to make it water removable and is
of a brilliant red color.

Method B Type 1 Process is generally used when:

1. The lowest sensitivity is sufficient to detect the discontinuities inherent to the part.
2. Examining large volume of parts.
3. Discontinuities are not wider than their depth.
4. Surfaces are very rough (Le., sand castings, rough weldments, pitted areas).
5. Examining large areas.
6. Examining threads and keyways.
7. Removal of excess penetrant may be difficult due to rough surfaces.

PT III BASIC
11
 TABLE S. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF
METHOD B TYPE 1 PROCESS

ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
1. No blacklight or darkened area required. 1. Process is not reliable in finding scratches.
2. Process can be considered as a one-step 2. Process is less sensITivity for fine .:

process and, therefore, fast and economical. discontinufties.

3. Process can be used for detecting a wide
range of discontinuities.
4. Penetrant used can be easily washed off
with water.
S. Process is easily adaptable to a large
volume of small parts.
6. Process is excellent for rough surfaces,
keyways, and threads.
7. Process is relatively inexpensive.
3. Penetrant can be affected by acids and
chromates.
4. Process is not reliable on anodized surfaces.
S. Process is susceptible to over-washing.
6. Water contamination may destroy usefulness
of penetrant.
7. Not good for wide shallow discontinuITies
(width greater than depth).

METHOD B, TYPE 2 INSPECTION PROCESS

Method B, Type 2 Penetrant Inspection process uses a post-emulsifiable visible dye penetrant, an
emulSifier, and a dry, wet or non-aqueous developer. The materials used in this process are very similar to
that described for Method A, Type II process, however. the genetrants are not self-emulsifiable. An
emulsifier is applied over the penetrant to make IT water washable.

Method B. Type 2 Inspection process is generally used when:

1. Examining large volume of parts.
2. A higher sensitivity than Method B. Type 1 is required or desired.
3. The part is contaminated WITh acid or other chemicals that will hann water-
washable penetrants.
4. Discontinuities are wider than their depth.
5. Examining parts which may have discontinutties that are contaminated with in-
service soils.
6. Examining finished surfaces and other general purpose examinations.

PT III BASIC
12
 TABLE 6 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF
METHOD B TYPE 2 INSPECTION PROCESS
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAG ES
1. No blacklight or darkened area required. 1. Process is a two-step process, and
2. High sensitivity for fine discontinuities. therefore requires more time.
3. Good on wide shallow discontinuities. 2. Additional equipment is required for •
(width greater than depth) application oi the emulsrrier.
4. Process good for high volume production. 3. Not as good on parts with complex
5. Process normally not affected by acids. shapes (Le. threads) as Type 1.
6. Process not as susceptible to overwashing. 4. Additional material increases cost.
5. Emulsffier dwell time very critical.

METHOD B, TYPE 3 INSPECTION PROCESS

The Method B, Type 3 Penetrant Inspection Process uses a solvent-removable visible dye penetrant, a
penetrant remover (solvent) and a dry, wet or non-aqueous developer. The penetrant is not water-
washable but is removed instead with the penetrant remover.

Method B, Type 3 Inspection Process is generally used when:

1. Spot examination is required.
2. Water-rinsing is not feasible because of part size, weight, surface condition, no
water available, or remote location.

TABLE 7 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF

METHOD B TYPE 3 INSPECTION PROCESS
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
1. Process can be used for spot inspection 1. Use of solvent to remove penetrant
on large parts. prohibits inspecting large areas.
2. Process can be used when water-rinsing 2. Sensitivity can be reduced by the
methods are not feasible. application of excessive amounts
3. No blackJight or darkened area required. of remover.
4. Process is highly portable. 3. Visibility of indications is limited.

As shown in the previous paragraphs, the test method is dependent upon the materials used. It should
be obvious that in order to achieve the desired results,the proper selection and use of materials is of vital
importance, and mandatory that the written procedure be followed to the letter.

PT III BASIC 13
 Figure 1 TYPICAL PENETRANT INSPECTION EQUIPMENT

ULTRA VIOLET
INSPECTION BOOTH LIGHTS

REST STATION

DRYER
( 7kpv.l)

DEVELOPER STATION

RINSE STATION

DRAIN STATION

CD
PENETRANT
STATION

4 HAND HOSE
P\J.MP FED

HAND HtlSE
WATER

ULTRA VIOLET
LIGHT

U IT
HAND HOSE
PUMP FED

NOTE:WHEN THE EQUIPMENT IS USED FOR A TYPE 2 INSPECTION PROCESS, THE EXTRA TANK
(SHOWN BY THE DASHED LINES) WILL BE USED FOR THE PENETRANT. IN THIS EVENT, THE TANK
IDENTIFIED ABOVE AS THE PENETRANT TANK WILL BE USED FOR THE EMULSIFIER. WHEN THIS
EQUIPMENT IS USED FOR THE TYPE 1, PROCESS, THE ADDITIONAL TANK IS NOT REQUIRED.

PT III BASIC 14
 PENETRANT INSPECTION KITS.
Penetrant inspection is practical for field use, because these materials are supplied in the form of portable
kits. Both Fluorescent and Visible Dye Penetrant inspection kits are available, but it is essential that only
the complete family of penetrant inspection materials be employed for these field kit inspection
operations.

PORTABLE VISIBLE DYE PENETRANT KITS. Portable Visible Dye Penetrant Kits are available for field
inspection. A typical Visible Dye Penetrant Kit is illustrated in Figure 2.

A VISIBLE DYE PENETRANT KIT usually contains:

1. Spray cans of cleaning or removal fluid.
2. Spray cans of visible dye penetrant.
3. Spray cans of nonaqueous developer.
4. Wiping cloths and brushes.

"'-'--
=

BRUSH AND WIPES

PENETRANT

DEVELOPER

Figure 2 Portable Visible Dye Penetrant Kit

PT III BASIC 15
PORTABLE FLUORESCENT DYE PENETRANT KITS, Portable Fluorescent Dye Penetrant Kits are
available for field inspection, A typical Fluorescent Dye Penetrant Inspection Kit is illustrated in Figure 3,

A FLUORESCENT DYE PENETRANT KIT usually contains:

1, A portable black light and transfonner.
2, Spray cans of cleaning or removal fluid,
3, Spray cans of fluorescent dye penetrant
4, Spray cans of nonaqueous developer.
5, Wiping cloths and brushes,

CLEANER
PENETRANT

DEVELOPER

BLACK LIGHT

Figure 3 Portable Fluorescent Dye Penetrant Kit

PT III BASIC 16
In summary, leI's consider the advantages and limitations of the liquid penetrant test method,

ADVANTAGES OF PENETRANT TESTING

Materials are relatively inexpensive

Some methods are relatively fast ..
Sensitive: can detect discontinuities ,001" or greater.
Versatile: can be used on any non-porous, non-absorbent material.

LIMITATIONS OF PENETRANT TESTING

Some methods are time consuming and therefore expensive,

Can only detect discontinuities open to the surface.
,/" Surface of part should be 60 to 125 degrees F.
Cannot be used on very rough surfaces.,----_&;>
Procedure can be messy,
May require good ventilation,
No easy penmanent record,

PT III BASIC 17
 LEARNING MODULE 4

INTERPRETATION AND EVALUATION OF INDICATIONS

This learning module describes the interpretation and evaluation phases of NOT, disconlinuijy
characteristics, and the classifications of indications and discontinuities.

THE INSPECTOR/EXAMINER'
Since correct evaluation of a discontinuity depends on accurate interpretation the inspector is the key in
the inspection process. The success and reliability of any NOT depends upon the thoroughness with
which the inspector conducts the examination from the initial step all the way through to the final
interpretation of the indications. The inspector must carefully follow the procedure, search out indications
and then decide the seriousness of discontinuities found to determine the disposition of parts according
to the severity of the flaw indications. Remember poor processing can be worse than no inspection,
because, IT improper processing yields no indications for the inspector to interpret the part would be
considered acceptable whether it is or not. In some cases, the inspector may perform only the inspection
phase of the process. At other times, the inspector may perform all phases of the process. In either case,
the success and reliability of the inspection depends on the thoroughness of the inspector, and proper
processing of the part.
r
!

• The" inspector" as used in ihis leaming module is referred to as the "examiner" in the ASME Code.

PERSONNEL QUALIFICAllON
The personnel performing the liquid penetrant test must be qualified and certified in accordance with SNT-
TC-1A A review of the company's "Written Practice" would be necessary to determine the specific
requiremenls for qualtlicetion to any level of competency as recommended by SNT-TC-1A

"':-.---
TERMINOLOGY
Quite often inspectors will confuse the various terms used and wm use them incorrectly. Therefore, it is
important that the inspector have a clear understanding of the terms relating to liquid penetrant testing.

INDICATION: a response, or evidence of a response, that requires interpretation to determine its

significance.

DISCONTINUITY: a broad term relating to a condition that is foreign to the normal structure of a material. A
discontinuity mayor may not be detrimental to the intended service life of a part and must therefore be
evaluated.

Hellier Associates, Inc. 1

PTMod4 <OJ 1989
 DEFECT: a term applied to a discontinuity which may be detrimental to the intended service life of a part,
and exceeds the limits of the applicable acceptance criteria.

INTERPRETATION: the action performed by the inspector in determining the cause of an indication.

EVALUATION: the action performed by the inspector in comparing the magnitude and severity of an
indication to a predetermined acceptance criteria in order to determine acceptance or rejection of the part.

RECOGNITION OF TYPES OF INDICATIONS

It must be recognized that aU indications are not caused by discontinuities. Some indications are the result
of faulty processing of the part, while other indications are the result of part design. The penetrant
inspector must be able to recognize the various indications that might appear. Penetrant indications will
fall into one of three categories:

1. False Indications
2. Nonrelevant Indications
3. True or Valid Indications

Usually there are specifIC differences between all three and a well-trained inspector should be able to
determine into which of the three categories an indication is to be classified. Qualified inspectors, using
acceptable procedures and codes, can usually determine the cause and category of the penetrant
indication.

FALSE INDICATIONS
In nondestructive testing, an indication that may be interpreted erroneously as a discontinuity is
considered a false indication. In all NOT disciplines, false indications can become major problems in the
.. .inspection process. Usually a thorough knowledge of the manufacturing processes involved, the NDT
process, and previous experience of the inspector is necessary to readily and accurately classity a false
indication.

The most common causes of false indications are the improper or inadequate precleaning of the part, and
the improper or inadequate removal of the excess surface penetrant. If aU the surface penetrant is not
completely removed in the removal process, the remaining penetrant may produce false indications. This
is true for both the fluorescent and visible penetrant methods. The use of the black light during the
removal of fluorescent penetrants is very helpful in determining that adequate removal has been aChieved.

Hellier Associates, Inc.

2
PTMod4 © 1989
 A properly cleaned part would show only a very faint, or no pink background if visible penetrants were
used, or only very faint, or no areas of background fluorescence when fluorescent penetrants are used.
False indications due to incomplete washing are usually easy to identify, since the penetrant will be in
broad areas rather than in the sharp patterns found in the true indications.

The danger of peony cleaned parts, which produce the false indications, lies in the fact that there may be
actual discontinuities in the improperly cleaned areas which would be masked by the false indications. If
false indications interfere with interpretation of true indications found on the parts complete reprocessing
of the parts would be required.

NON-RELEVANT INDICATIONS
Non-relevant indications are true indications produced by uncontrolled test conditions. However, the
conditions causing them are present by design or accident, or other features of the part having no relation
to the damaging flaws being sought The tenn signifies that such an indication has no relation to
discontinuities that might constitute defects.

NON-RELEVANT INDICATIONS DUE TO FILLETS, THREADS, AND KEYWAYS: Sharp fillets, threads,
and keyways will often retain penetrant at their base and produce indications despite a good removal
r- technique. This is parficularfy true when pest emulsified penetrants are employed. Because heat-treating
or fatigue cracks often do occur at such locations it is essential that the inspector check these locations
very carefully.

NON-RELEVANT INDICATIONS DUE TO PRESS-FIT: Another condition which may create non-relevant
indications is when parts are press-fitted into each other. If a wheel is preSS-frtled onto a shaft, penetrant
will show an indication at the fit line. This is perfectly nonnal since the two parts are not welded together.
The only problem with such indications is that penetrant from the press frt may bleed out and mask a true
. d.iSQontinuity.

©D:.1lW11@1N1: Where penetrant bleed out may mask discontinuities on press-fit parts, the time between
application of developer and inspection should be held to a minimum to prevent excessive bleed out

Hellier ASSOCiates, Inc.

3
PTMod4 © 1989
 TRUE INDICATIONS
The last classification of indications is the group of which we are most interested and is called the true
indication which is caused by a discontinuity.

True indications can be further classified into four major groups. They are: inherent, primary processing,
secondary processing, and service discontinuities. These are covered in detait in another module.
Three basic questions must be answered to facilitate proper interpretation of the flaw indications:

1. What type of discontinuity would cause the indications?

2. What is the extent of this discontinuity?
3. What effect will this discontinuity have on the anticipated service of the part?

NOTE: The answers to the first two questions are the prime responsibility of the inspector. The answer to
the third question, unless specific acceptance criteria are specified, usually requires special assistance.

SPECIFIC TYPES OF DISCONTINUITIES

.
Generally speaking. we can divide discontinuities into five basic types. These are:

; 1. Fine. Tight Surface Cracks. Such cracks may be shallow or deep. but their most
Significant characteristics is their very small and tight surface opening. Deep
cracks of this type. once well penetrated. may provide a reservOir of penetrant. and
therefore, may be easier to show than shallow cracks.
2. Broad, Open Surface Discontinuities. Discontinuities of this type may be shallOW
or relatively deep. Their signilicant characteristic is their width which tends to
permit penetrants to be removed from the discontinuity. espeCially when water
spray removal techniques are employed. Care must be taken to ensure this does not
occur.
3. Porosity. Generally speaking. porosity is a discontinuity having a cavity below
the surface which is connected to the surface by a very small channel. Porosity is
typically found in castings and welds and is sometimes referred to as gas holes.
4. Shrinkage: Miero or sponge shrinkage in castings which is opened to the surface
by machining and etching may be hard to differentiate from cracks. Much care
must be used in evaluating this type of indication.
S. Leaks or Through Cracks. Discontinuities of this type are cracks or openings
Which pass from one surface to another.

Hellier Associates, Inc.

4
PTMod4 © 1989
 FLAW INDICATION CATEGORIES
There are five basic types of indications which may be seen by the inspector. These indication types
caused by the discontinuities listed in the above paragraph are as follows:
1. Continuous linear indications
2. Intermittent linear indications
3. Rounded indications
4. Small dot indications
5. Diffuse or weak indications
It is possible to examine an indication of a discontinuity and determine ijs cause as well as its extent. such
an appraisal can be made if something is known about the manufacturing processes or the operational use
to which the part has been subjected. The extent of the indications, or accumulation of penetrant, will
show the extent of the discontinuity.

The vividness of the visible dye penetrant on the contrasting white developer or the brilliance of the
fluorescent dye penetrant will give some indication of the discontinuity's depth. Deep,discontinuities will
hold penetrant and therefore, will be broader and more brilliant. Very fine discontinuities can hold only
small amounts of penetrant and will therefore appear as fine lines.

In many instances, more accurate flaw evaluation may be obtained by removing the indications and
( reapplying nonaqueous wet developer so that the rate and amount of penetrant bleed out can be closely
observed to facilitate the interpretation of the flaw discontinuity.

CONTINUOUS UNEAR INDICATIONS

Cracks, cold shuts, and forging laps usually show as a continuous line indication. A crack will appear as a
sharp or faint-jagged line, straight line or intermittent line, while cold shuts will usually appear as smooth,
straight, narrow lines. Scratches and die marks will also appear as straight lines, but the bottom of the
di.s92ntinuity is usually visible.

/
~
CONTI NUOUS LINEAR INDICATIONS

Hellier Associates, Inc. 5

PTMod4 © 1989
 INTERMITTENT LINEAR INDICATlONS
The same discontinuities that appear as straight lines may also appear as linear intermittent indications.
This cond~ion is caused by the discontinu~ being partially closed at the surface due to metal working
such as machining forging, extruding, peening, grinding, etc. As an illustration, grinding cracks are
caused by local overheating of the surface being ground, but these cracks may be partially closed by the
plastic flow of the metal over the crack caused by the high shear forces produced on the surface of the
metal. Grinding cracks can show as a craze pattem made up of a network of very fine cracks.

"\
./ \...

INTERMITTENT LI NEAR INDICATIONS

ROUNDED INDICATlONS
Rounded indications generally indicate poros~ caused by gas holes or pin holes or a generally porous
material depending on the extent of the indication. Deep crater cracks in welds frequently show up as
rounded indications, since there is a large amount of dye penetrant entrapped.
The indications may appear rounded because of the volume of penetrant entrapped, aHhough the actual
defects may be irregular in outline.

"',.--
•••••
...

~OUINDED INDICATIONS

Hellier Associates, Inc. 6

PTMod4 <e 1989
 SMALL DOT INDICATIONS
Discontinuities of this nature result from a porous condition of the material. Such indications may denote
small pin holes, excessively coarse grains in a casting, or may be caused by micro-shrinkage or certain cast
alloys. A series of aligned dots might result from a very tight crack.

NOTE: Intermittent dot indications, or even a generally heavy background may also result from surface
corrosion pitting, general intergranular surface corrosion or even an excessively rough surface. This type
of indication may obscure indications from genuine cracks.

:-'

'.'
.,,",' , .

SHALL DOT INDICATIONS

DIFFUSE OR WEAK INDICATIONS

This condition may be caused by a porous surface, insufficient cleaning, incomplete removal of dye
penetrant or excess developer. Weak indications extending over a wide area should be viewed with
suspicion. When this condition is encountered, the part should be completely reprocessed.

--
-..

DIFFUSE O~ ....EA.K INDICATIONS

Hellier Associates, Inc.

7
PTMod4 © 1989
 FATIGUE OR SERVICE CRACKS
Fatigue cracks or sharp shallow cracks developed while the part is in service are extremely dangerous and
represent an eventual part failure. Care must be taken to detect these discontinuities.

F ATIGUE OR SERY ICE CRACKS

""-

Hellier Associates, Inc. 8

PTMcxi4 © 1989