Introduction

Liquid penetrant testing ( PT ) is one of the oldest and simple NDT methods where its
earliest versions (using kerosene and oil mixture) dates back to the 19th century. This method
is used to reveal surface discontinuities by bleed out of a colored or fluorescent dye from the
flaw. The technique is based on the ability of a liquid to be drawn into a "clean" surface
discontinuity by capillary action. After a period of time called the "dwell time", excess
surface penetrant is removed and a developer applied. This acts as a blotter that draws the
penetrant from the discontinuity to reveal its presence.

The advantage that a liquid penetrant inspection offers over an unaided visual
inspection is that it makes defects easier to see for the inspector where that is done in two
ways:
1) It produces a flaw indication that is much larger and easier for the eye to detect
than the flaw itself. Many flaws are so small or narrow that they are undetectable by
the unaided eye.

2) It improves the detectability of a flaw due to the high level of contrast between the
indication and the background which helps to make the indication more easily seen

Liquid penetrant testing is one of the most widely used NDT methods. Its popularity
can be attributed to two main factors that is relative ease of use and its flexibility. It can be
used to inspect almost any material provided that its surface is not extremely rough or porous.
Materials that are commonly inspected using this method include metals, glass, many
ceramic materials, rubber and plastics. However, liquid penetrant testing can only be used to
inspect for flaws that break the surface of the sample (such as surface cracks, porosity, laps,
seams,lack of fusion )

The figure 1 below shown the process of liquid penetrant testing work.

Figure 1 : The process of liquid penetrant testing

Objective

1. To reveal surface discontinuities by bleeding out the colored florescent dye from the
flaw.
2. To find the location of the defect.
3. Understanding the type of defects.

Apparatus

1. Cleaner
2. Developer
3. Liquid Penetrant
4. Rags
5. Steel Wire Brush
6. Samples of crack

Figure 2: Cleaner , Developer and Penetrant

Procedures

1 Surface Preparation and pre-cleaning - Clean the sample surface using cleaner
and wipe it. The surface need to be free of oil, grease, water, or other
contaminants that may prevent penetrant from entering flaws.
2 Penetrant Application- The penetrant spray is applied to the inspected surface of
the part and waited about 10 minutes for the infiltration of the liquid penetrant to
the defects.
3 Penetrant Dwell- The penetrant is left on the surface for a sufficient time to allow
as much penetrant as possible to be drawn from or to seep into a defect
 4 Excess Penetrant Removal- Removed the excess penetrant on sample surface by
wipe using cleaner.
5 Developer Application- Applied a thin layer of developer on clean surface to
draw penetrant trapped in flaws.
6 Indication Development- Wait a 10 minutes to permit the extraction of the
trapped penetrant out of from surface flaws.
7 Inspection- Inspect the indicated crack under good lighting.
8 Clean Surface- Clean the surface to remove the developer. Repeat the same
method on others sample
Result

Circle area indicate for the defects, cracks and when the part examined it is seen that
they are concentrated around the holes and canal on the part.

Type Crack Result

1 Crack length ( experiment ) = 21mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central

1A Crack length ( experiment ) = 25mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central

Toe

1B Crack length ( experiment ) = 21mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central
2 Crack length ( experiment ) = 6mm
Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central
Root

4 Crack length ( experiment ) = 0mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central
Centreline

6A Crack length ( experiment ) = 23mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central
Surface
Porosity

9 Crack length ( experiment ) = 30mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central
Lack of
Root Fusion

14 Crack length ( experiment ) = 20.8mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central

Lamination
14A Crack length ( experiment ) = 16mm
Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central

21 Crack length ( experiment ) = 19mm

Crack length ( theoretical ) = 25mm
Defect location = Central

Centreline

Discussion and Conclusion

This experiment has shown that the liquid penetrant testing is easy to use. The defect
also easier to see because the defect indication has a high visual contrast. The penetrant
testing has high sensitivity because of small discontinuities can be detected. It also low cost
testing where the equipment for the testing is not too expensive.

This method only can detect surface breaking defect. For surface defect we can know
the length of the crack but it is hard to measure the depth of the crack if the crack is vertical
to the surface. That why for some crack sample we cant measure the crack length as it is
vertical to the surface. To apply this method the surface must be smooth. A rough surface can
affect the inspection sensitivity.

There are different in measurement of experiment with the theoretical maybe because
the procedure was not taken precisely. The dwell time must take at less 10 minutes. This is to
allow as much as possible the liquid penetrant to be drawn into the defect.