National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

IS20

George C. Marshall Space Flight Center

Huntsville, Alabama 35812
The NASA STI Program...in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) 

Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA 

maintain this important role.

The NASA STI Program Office is operated by 

Langley Research Center, the lead center for 

NASA’s scientific and technical information. The 

NASA STI Program Office provides access to 

the NASA STI Database, the largest collection of 

aeronautical and space science STI in the world. 

The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional 

mechanism for disseminating the results of its 

research and development activities. These results 

are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report 

Series, which includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major significant 

phase of research that present the results of 

NASA programs and include extensive data 

or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations 

of significant scientific and technical data 

and information deemed to be of continuing 

reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peerreviewed formal professional papers but has less 

stringent limitations on manuscript length and 

extent of graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific 

and technical findings that are preliminary or of 

specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports, 

working papers, and bibliographies that contain 

minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive 

analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and 

technical findings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientific and technical conferences, 

symposia, seminars, or other meetings sponsored 

or cosponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, technical, 

or historical information from NASA programs, 

projects, and mission, often concerned with 

subjects having substantial public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. 

English-language translations of foreign 

scientific and technical material pertinent to 

NASA’s mission.

Specialized services that complement the STI 

Program Office’s diverse offerings include creating 

custom thesauri, building customized databases, 

organizing and publishing research results...even 

providing videos.

For more information about the NASA STI Program 

Office, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

<http://www.sti.nasa.gov>

• E-mail your question via the Internet to 

<help@sti.nasa.gov>

• Phone the NASA STI Help Desk at 

757–864–9658

• Write to:

NASA STI Information Desk

Mail Stop 148

NASA Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681–2199, USA
i

NASA/TP—2015–218207

Replacement of Hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225 

Solvent for Cleaning and Verification Sampling 

of NASA Propulsion Oxygen Systems 

Hardware, Ground Support Equipment, 

and Associated Test Systems 

H.D. Burns, M.A. Mitchell, and J.H. McMillian

Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

B.R. Farner

Stennis Space Center, Mississippi

S.A. Harper and S.F. Peralta

Johnson Space Center-White Sands Test Facility, New Mexico

N.M. Lowrey

Jacobs Technology, Inc./ Jacobs ESSSA Group, Huntsville, Alabama

H.R. Ross

A2 Research, Stennis Space Center, Mississippi

A. Juarez

Jacobs Technology, Inc./MEI Technologies, Johnson Space Center-White Sands

Test Facility, New Mexico

April 2015

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Marshall Space Flight Center • Huntsville, Alabama 35812
ii

Available from:

NASA STI Information Desk

Mail Stop 148

NASA Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681–2199, USA

757–864–9658

This report is also available in electronic form at

<http://www.sti.nasa.gov>

Acknowledgments

In addition to the authors, many engineers and technicians at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), Stennis 

Space Center (SSC), Johnson Space Center-White Sands Test Facility (JSC-WSTF), and Langley Research Center 

(LaRC) participated in the development and execution of this test program. The authors wish to acknowledge the 

following for significant contribution to this project:

• MSFC: Curtis Bahr (Jacobs Technology/Jacobs ESSSA Group), Eddie Davis, Timothy T. Gautney, Gary Glass 

(METTS), Gail Gordon, Bobby Graves, Mark Griffin (METTS), Judson M. Hudson (METTS), Richard J. Joye 

(METTS), Buford Moore (METTS), James E. Morgan (ERC Inc./ Jacobs ESSSA Group), Barry Morris, Jennifer 

Nye (METTS), Sandra D. Pearson, Scott Rohe, James L. Smith, Brannon Standridge, Stefanie L. Wallburg (METTS/

SERC), and Roger Welker (Jacobs Technology / Jacobs ESSSA Group)

• SSC: Randall R. Canady, Thomas R. Galloway, Dale Green (Jacobs Technology, Inc.), Erick Guttierrez (A2 Research), 

Marry Kerschbaum (A2 Research), Kenneth J. McCormick, Darrin Spansel (Lockheed Martin), and Taylor Davie 

(A2 Research)

• JSC-WSTF: Steve Bailey (Jacobs Technology), John Bouvet (Jacobs Technology), Horacio Perez (Jacobs Technology), Christina Pina-Arpin, and Joel M. Stoltzfus (Jacobs Technology) 

• LaRC: Brian J. Jensen, Michael D. Smiles, and Steven J. Gentz

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of test solvent and technical support by the following solvent 

suppliers:

Honeywell: Dr. Ryan Hulse, Jon T. Herdlein, Gary M. Knopek, Diana Mercier, and Jeff Beard

3M: Thomas J. Brodbeck, James W. Simmons, Karl Manske, and David Hesselroth

DuPont Vertrel® Specialty Products: Robert A. Lee

DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts: Ray Davenport and Rick L. Raessler

Solvay Fluorides LLC: Kenneth Neugebauer and Lisa Norton

AGC Chemicals Americas: Richard W. Lamp

TRADEMARKS

Trade names and trademarks are used in this report for identification only. This usage does not constitute an official 

endorsement, either expressed or implied, by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1

2. BACKGROUND AND TEST PLAN DEVELOPMENT .................................................. 3

2.1 NASA Use of Hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225 ............................................................... 3

2.2 Collaboration With the Department of Defense on Hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225

 Replacement ................................................................................................................. 3

2.3 Test Plan Development ................................................................................................. 4

3. SELECTION OF SOLVENT CANDIDATES ................................................................... 6

3.1 Identification of Promising Solvent Candidates ............................................................ 6

3.2 Solvent Selection Criteria ............................................................................................. 6

3.3 Solvents Selected as Test Candidates ............................................................................ 9

4. NONVOLATILE RESIDUE BACKGROUND IN NEAT CLEANING SOLVENTS ..... 11

4.1 Nonvolatile Residue Background Test Results .............................................................. 11

4.2 Compatibility With Fourier Transform Infrared Analysis of Nonvolatile Residue ....... 11

5. QUICK SCREEN SOLVENCY ......................................................................................... 12

5.1 Quick Screen Solvency Test Results .............................................................................. 12

5.2 Observations on Miscibility and Saturation .................................................................. 13

5.3 Observations on Odor .................................................................................................. 13

6. FIRST DOWN-SELECTION ............................................................................................ 14

6.1 Data Reviewed for the First Down-Selection ................................................................ 14

6.2 Solvents Selected for Further Testing ............................................................................ 14

7. METALS COMPATIBILITY ............................................................................................. 16

7.1 Metals Compatibility Tests ........................................................................................... 16

7.2 Metals Compatibility Test Results ................................................................................ 16

8. NONMETALS COMPATIBIITY ...................................................................................... 18

8.1 Nonmetals Compatibility Tests .................................................................................... 18

8.2 Nonmetals Compatibility Test Results .......................................................................... 19
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

9. INITIAL OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY TESTS ............................................................. 22

9.1 Oxygen Compatibility Test Methods ........................................................................ 22

9.2 Oxygen Compatibility Tests Performed Prior to the Second Down-Selection ........... 23

9.3 Oxygen Compatibility Tests Performed at Johnson Space Center-White

 Sands Test Facility .................................................................................................... 24

10. SECOND DOWN-SELECTION ..................................................................................... 26

10.1 Data Reviewed for the Second Down-Selection ........................................................ 26

10.2 Solvents Selected for Further Testing ........................................................................ 26

11. NONVOLATILE RESIDUE REMOVAL EFFICIENCY ............................................... 27

11.1 Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test Method .............................................. 27

11.2 Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test Results ............................................... 28

12. EXTENDED OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY TESTS AND ASSESSMENT ................... 32

12.1 Refinement of Liquid Oxygen Mechanical Impact Test for Volatile Liquids ............. 32

12.2 Heat of Combustion Tests ........................................................................................ 33

12.3 Oxygen Compatibility Analysis of Solvents .............................................................. 34

13. ON-SITE VENDOR DEMONSTRATIONS ................................................................... 35

13.1 Purpose of the On-Site Demonstrations ................................................................... 35

13.2 Honeywell Demonstrations ...................................................................................... 35

13.3 3M Demonstrations .................................................................................................. 37

14. FINAL DOWN-SELECTION ......................................................................................... 39

14.1 Data Evaluated for the Final Down-Selection .......................................................... 39

14.2 Final Selection .......................................................................................................... 40

15. COMPONENT LEVEL CLEANING AND IMPLEMENTATION 

ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................................................... 42

15.1 Objectives of the Component Level Cleaning and Implementation Assessments ...... 42

15.2 Marshall Space Flight Center End User Evaluations ................................................ 42

15.3 Stennis Space Center End User Evaluations ............................................................. 42

15.4 Laboratory Implementation Assessments ................................................................. 43

15.5 Follow-Up Investigation of L-14780 Residue ........................................................... 45
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

16. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................... 47

16.1 Conclusions of This Test Project .............................................................................. 47

16.2 Recommendations .................................................................................................... 48

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 51

APPENDIX A—TEST PLAN FOR SOLVENT REPLACEMENT FOR CLEANING 

AND VERIFICATION SAMPLING OF MSFC/SSC PROPULSION 

OXYGEN SYSTEMS HARDWARE, GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT, 

AND ASSOCIATED TEST SYSTEMS REVISION A, 7/26/2013 

APPENDIX B—SOLVENT SAFETY DATA SHEETS

APPENDIX C—TEST REPORTS FOR NONVOLATILE RESIDUE BACKGROUND 

IN SOLVENTS

APPENDIX D—QUICK SCREEN SOLVENCY TEST RESULTS 

APPENDIX E—METALS COMPATIBILITY DATA 

APPENDIX F—NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY TEST RESULTS 

APPENDIX G—INITIAL OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY TEST REPORTS 

APPENDIX H—NONVOLATILE RESIDUE CLEANING EFFECTIVENESS TEST DATA 

APPENDIX I—INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT INVESTIGATION, EXTENDED 

OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY TEST DATA, AND OXYGEN 

COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS 

APPENDIX J—REPORTS FROM ON-SITE VENDOR DEMONSTRATIONS 

APPENDIX K—COMPONENT LEVEL CLEANING ASSESSMENT REPORT 
vi

LIST OF FIGURES

 1. Solvent screening test results for cleaning efficiency—average percent

NVR removed for each solvent .................................................................................. 12

 2 Metal coupons suspended in a high-pressure-rated glass tube ................................... 17

 3. Coupons immersed in solvent and suspended in the vapor zone ................................ 17

 4. O-rings suspended in solvent, ready for insertion into a heated water bath ................ 18

 5. Configuration to flush a test panel for the NVR removal efficiency test ..................... 27

 6. Mineral oil removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent 

of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G .............. 29

 7. Mobil DTE25 hydraulic oil removal efficiency—percent removed by the test 

solvent of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse 

with AK-225G .......................................................................................................... 29

 8. MIL-PRF-83282 hydraulic fluid removal efficiency—percent removed 

by the test solvent of total removed (data from run 2). First rinse with 

test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G ................................................................... 29

 9. Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate removal efficiency—percent removed by the test

solvent of total removed (data from runs 2 and 3). First rinse with test solvent, 

second rinse with AK-225G ...................................................................................... 30

10. Synthetic sebum removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent 

of total removed (data from run 2). First rinse with test solvent, second rinse 

with AK-225G .......................................................................................................... 30

11. Krytox grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent 

of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G .............. 30

12. Crane grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent of total 

removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G ........................... 31

13. WD-40 grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent 

of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G .............. 31
vii

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

14. Christo-Lube grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test 

solvent of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse 

with AK-225G .......................................................................................................... 31

15. A Honeywell chemist demonstrating Solstice PF with an SSC Component 

Processing Facility technician .................................................................................... 36

16. A 3M chemist demonstrating L-14780 with an SSC Component Processing 

Facility technician ..................................................................................................... 38

17. Hydrocarbon leak detector ........................................................................................ 44
viii

LIST OF TABLES

 1. Solvent candidates selected for test ............................................................................ 10

 2. AK-225G test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals ................................. 20

 3. Solstice PF test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals ............................... 20

 4. L-14780 test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals ................................... 21

 5. Solvokane test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals ................................ 21

 6. Comparison of LOX mechanical impact ignition test results .................................... 24

 7. Comparison of AIT test results at JSC-WSTF and MSFC ....................................... 25

 8. Matrix of variables tested for the independent assessment ........................................ 32

 9. Heat of combustion for solvents versus common nonmetals 

used in oxygen service ................................................................................................ 34

10. Decision point parameters for the selection of a replacement for AK-225G ............. 39

11. Drying tests and test results ....................................................................................... 45
ix

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND SYMBOLS

AEL Acceptable Exposure Limit

AFRL Air Force Research Laboratory

AIT autogenous ignition temperature

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

BP boiling point

CAS Chemical Abstracts Service

CFC	 chlorofluorocarbon

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

DLA Defense Logistics Agency

DoD Department of Defense

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FEP	 fluorinated ethylene-propylene

FTIR Fourier transform infrared

GC/MS gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer

GN2 gaseous nitrogen

GOX gaseous oxygen

GSE ground support equipment

GWP Global Warming Potential

HCFC	 hydrochlorofluorocarbon

HFE	 hydrofluoroether
x

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND SYMBOLS (Continued)

HOC heat of combustion

IAT Independent Assessment Team

IR infrared

JSC-WSTF	 Johnson Space Center-White Sands Test Facility

Kb	 Kauri-butanol

LOX liquid oxygen

MAF Michoud Assembly Facility

MAPTIS Materials and Processes Technical Information System

M&P Materials and Processes

MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center

NESC NASA Engineering and Safety Center

NVR nonvolatile residue

OCA Oxygen Compatibility Assessment

OD outer diameter

ODS	 ozone-depleting substance

PCTFE	 polychlorotrifluoroethylene

PEEK polyether ether ketone

PF Performance Fluid

PFBI	 perfluorobutyl iodide

P&P pressurization and/or purge

PTFE	 polytetrafluoroethylene
xi

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND SYMBOLS (Continued) 

SDS Safety Data Sheet

SHE safety, health, and environmental

SNAP 	 Significant New Alternatives Policy

SSC Stennis Space Center

SSP Space Shuttle program

tDCE	 trans-1,2 dicholoroethylene

TIM Technical Interchange meeting

TL threshold limit

TP Technical Publication

USAF United States Air Force

VOC volatile organic compound
xii
1

TECHNICAL PUBLICATION

REPLACEMENT OF HYDROCHLOROFLUOROCARBON-225 SOLVENT 

FOR CLEANING AND VERIFICATION SAMPLING OF NASA 

PROPULSION OXYGEN SYSTEMS HARDWARE, GROUND 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT, AND ASSOCIATED TEST SYSTEMS

1. INTRODUCTION

Liquid oxygen (LOX) and gaseous oxygen (GOX) systems used in bipropellant propulsion 

systems require a high level of cleanliness. Systems to be wetted by GOX or LOX, and systems 

providing pressurization and/or purge (P&P) gases to these systems, must be clean, particularly of 

hydrocarbons and large (>800 μ) particles,1 to avoid the potential hazard of a reaction and subsequent fire or explosion. Solvents used to clean and verify the cleanliness of oxygen systems and 

supporting test hardware must be compatible with the materials of construction of these systems 

and effective at removing expected contaminants to the level required. When complete removal of 

residual cleaning solvent from the component or system cannot be verified with a high level of confidence, the solvent must also be minimally reactive with LOX/GOX at the system use conditions. 

Historically, chlorofluorcarbon-113 (CFC-113, Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) No. 76-13-1)

solvent was used for these applications. When CFC-113, a class I ozone-depleting substance (ODS) 

was banned in the 1990’s, hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225* (HCFC-225ca/cb (a dual isomer form), 

CAS No. 422-56-0 and CAS No. 507-55-1), a class II ODS, was selected by the Space Shuttle program 

(SSP) to replace CFC-113 for final cleaning and verification of oxygen systems hardware where a suitable non-ODS replacement could not be found2 (see footnote †). Beginning in 1999, the SSP moved 

from HCFC-225ca/cb to the single isomer HCFC-225cb‡ (CAS No. 507-55-1), a less toxic product.3

*Manufactured by Asahi Glass Company, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; supplied in North America by AGC Chemicals Americas, 

Exton, PA, under the product name Asahiklin AK-225. AK-225 is a blend of two isomers, 3,3-dichloro-1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225ca) (CAS No. 422-56-0), and 1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb) (CAS 

No. 507-55-1). References to HCFC-225 in this Technical Publication (TP) refer to any form of this chemical, as the ca 

or cb isomer or a blend of both isomers. AK-225 refers specifically to the Asahiklin ca/cb isomer blend.

†HCFC-225 was authorized for use on the Space Shuttle External Tank by Change Order 60 to SE-S-0073 Revision F (ref. 2),

dated April 15, 1996. HCFC-225 was later authorized for use on the Space Shuttle Orbiter by Change Order 63, dated February 10, 1997.

‡Manufactured by Asahi Glass Company, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; supplied in North America by AGC Chemicals Americas, Exton, PA, under the product name Asahiklin AK-225G. AK-225G contains only the less toxic isomer (>99%) 

1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb) (CAS No. 507-55-1). AK-225 and AK-225G were approved 

for use on the SSP for cleaning and verification of propulsion oxygen systems. Purchase of AK-225 by NASA was discontinued when the less toxic form, AK-225G, was determined to be an acceptable alternative.
2

At that time, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) implemented HCFC-225cb for 

cleaning propulsion test hardware. In 2002, NASA Stennis Space Center (SSC) adopted HCFC225cb to perform final rinsing and verification of nonvolatile residue (NVR) cleanliness for oxygen 

test system hardware that could be cleaned by water-based processes. When referenced in this TP, 

HCFC-225 refers to both HCFC-225ca/cb and HCFC-225cb.

An inter-Center NASA test plan (app. A) was developed for evaluating solvents to be used 

for cleaning of propulsion oxygen systems and associated P&P systems, ground support equipment 

(GSE), and test systems at MSFC and SSC, and for sampling of these systems for verification of 

cleanliness. In this test program, Asahiklin AK-225G (app. B.1) (>99% HCFC-225cb) was used as 

the baseline solvent for comparison of cleaning efficiency and materials compatibility. The goal was 

to identify a single replacement solvent that meets or exceeds the performance of AK-225G in all 

rocket propulsion oxygen system applications at MSFC and SSC. 
3

2. BACKGROUND AND TEST PLAN DEVELOPMENT

2.1 NASA Use of Hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225

Prior to initiation of this project, the NASA Principal Center for Regulatory Risk Analysis 

and Communication group polled the NASA Centers to identify users of HCFC-225 (as HCFC225cb or as older stock of HCFC-225ca/cb) within the 2009–2011 timeframe, as well as users of 

stockpiled CFC-113. Three NASA locations—MSFC, MSFC-Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF), 

and SSC reported a high level of usage of HCFC-225 during this 3-year period, ranging from 3,600 

to 18,000+ kg (8,000 to 40,000+ lb). MAF is a manufacturing facility in New Orleans, LA, managed 

by MSFC. HCFC-225 was used at these facilities primarily for precision cleaning and verification of 

cleanliness of launch vehicle propulsion oxygen systems hardware, GSE, and associated test systems. 

HCFC-225 was used at MAF for processing Space Shuttle external tank hardware until the retirement of the SSP in 2011. Future need is anticipated for a replacement for HCFC-225 at MAF for 

processing oxygen system components for the next NASA launch vehicle, the Space Launch System. 

Two other NASA locations, Goddard Space Flight Center and Johnson Space Center-White 

Sands Test Facility (JSC-WSTF) reported low levels of HCFC-225 usage, less than 23 kg (50 lb) in 

this time period, primarily for laboratory operations.

2.2 Collaboration With the Department of Defense on Hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225 Replacement

During the timeframe that this project was being formulated, via communications with the 

U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)/NASA Joint Service Solvent Substitution Working Group, it 

was determined that NASA and DoD users shared a common interest in replacement of HCFC-225 

for cleaning oxygen systems. The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), Hazardous Minimization and 

Green Products Branch, funded a 2-year project for MSFC to identify and test two candidate solvents for replacement of HCFC-225.§

The candidate solvents tested in the DLA study were Honeywell SolsticeTM Performance 

Fluid (PF) (app. B.2) and 3M L-14780 Developmental Material (app. B.3). These solvents were compared to two baseline solvents, AK-225G and DuPontTM Capstone® 4-I¶ (app. B.4). Capstone 4-I, 

a chemical intermediate composed primarily of perfluorobutyl iodide (PFBI), was provided by 

DuPont as a substitute for DuPont Ikon Solvent P, a PFBI cleaning solvent approved by the U.S.

§Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request SC04001200481, Solvent Replacement for HCFC-225 for Cleaning Oxygen System Components, Final Report, August 26, 2014.

¶Earlier trade names used by DuPont for their family of PFBI-based products were Zonyl® and Ikon®. Capstone 4-I 

is marketed by DuPont only as a chemical intermediate. DuPont does not currently offer a product based on PFBI as 

a cleaning solvent.
4

 Air Force (USAF) as a replacement for HCFC-225 for hand-wipe cleaning of components for aviator’s breathing oxygen systems where HCFC-225 is prohibited or unavailable. Ikon Solvent P cleaning solvent was discontinued by DuPont. 

The tests performed for the DLA study were based on those reported in AFRL-ML-WPTR-2003-4040, The Wipe Solvent Program, the test program used to qualify Ikon Solvent P for 

USAF applications.4 The test methods used in the DLA study for NVR background, materials compatibility, and cleaning effectiveness were different than those used for this project and a smaller 

set of materials and contaminants were tested. Oxygen compatibility tests for the DLA study were 

performed at the MSFC Materials Combustion Research Facility. The tests for the DLA study were 

complimentary and provided very useful input to the test program reported here. 

The schedule for the DLA study overlapped the schedule for this test program, with an earlier 

required completion date. Data obtained during the performance of the DLA study were used to 

supplement and inform the down-selection process during the course of this project. 

2.3 Test Plan Development

2.3.1 Test Plan

The test plan (app. A) was developed jointly by a team of Materials and Processes (M&P) 

engineers, laboratory personnel, and end users from MSFC, SSC, and JSC-WSTF, and reviewed 

by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC). The solvent selection criteria described in 

ASTM G127, Standard Guide for the Selection of Cleaning Agents for Oxygen Systems,5 were referenced for the development of this test plan.The materials and contaminants specified in this plan 

were selected by an engineering team from MSFC and SSC using ASTM G127 and ASTM MNL36, 

Safe Use of Oxygen and Oxygen Systems,6 as a guide; considering historical and current propulsion 

system designs; and with input from users at MSFC and SSC propulsion test facilities and cleaning 

facilities regarding cleaning challenges with LOX/GOX systems encountered at their locations. Test 

reports from the 1990’s and 2000’s to qualify HCFC-225 as a replacement for CFC-113 were also 

reviewed to capture previous test methods where applicable.7–11 **

2.3.2 Assignment of Test Responsibilities

The test procedures, metals and nonmetals to be tested for compatibility, and contaminants 

to be tested to compare cleaning effectiveness of the solvent candidates were detailed in the test plan. 

The test program was managed by the MSFC M&P Laboratory Environmental Effects Branch, 

Contamination Control Team and, at the request of the Rocket Propulsion Test Program Manager, 

monitored by NESC representatives from MSFC, SSC, and Langley Research Center. Test responsibilities were assigned to laboratories at MSFC, SSC, and JSC-WSTF based on the availability of 

laboratory facilities and expertise as follows:

• NVR background in neat cleaning solvents by gravimetric and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) 

methods: SSC and MSFC.

**NASA Materials and Processes Technical Information System (MAPTIS) reports for material codes 01229 (AK-225) 

and 04619 (AK-225G)).
5

• Metals compatibility: SSC.

• Nonmetals compatibility: MSFC.

• Quick screen solvency: SSC.

• NVR removal efficiency: MSFC.

• Oxygen compatibility: JSC-WSTF.

• Component level cleaning tests (field cleaning): MSFC and SSC.

2.3.3 Test Sequence and Down-Selection Milestones

Tests were scheduled to provide data to support Technical Interchange meetings (TIMs) to 

narrow the list of candidates prior to the expenditure of funds on costly and time-consuming tests. 

At these TIMs, the engineering team reviewed the data gathered to date and selected the most promising candidates to proceed to the next phase of tests. Measurement of the NVR background of each 

cleaning solvent was performed prior to use, therefore this test was repeated several times during the 

course of the project when new lots of material were received from the supplier. The test sequence 

and down-selection milestones were as follows:

• Test phase 1: NVR background of neat solvent and quick screen solvency tests.

• First down-selection: Select three solvents to proceed to phase 2.

• Test phase 2: Metals compatibility, nonmetals compatibility tests, and initial oxygen compatibility 

tests.

• Second down-selection: Select two solvents to proceed to phase 3.

• Test phase 3: NVR removal efficiency and oxygen compatibility tests.

• Final down-selection: Select one solvent to proceed to phase 4. If considered a viable alternative, 

then the solvent not selected was retained as a backup if any insurmountable issues arose during 

the final test phase.

• Test phase 4: Component level cleaning tests (field cleaning) and assessment of implementation 

requirements.

2.3.4 Additional Oxygen Compatibility Tests and Assessment

Initial results from the LOX mechanical impact tests performed at JSC-WSTF were found 

to be significantly different from those performed at MSFC for the DLA study following the same 

ASTM test method. As a result, an Independent Assessment Team (IAT) sponsored by the NESC 

was formed to investigate the test variables and conditions that could affect the results when testing 

the reactivity of liquids in LOX and to establish a modified test protocol for a subsequent set of tests 

that would provide a reliable reactivity ranking of the candidate solvents. Additional oxygen compatibility tests beyond the scope of the initial test plan were performed at MSFC and JSC-WSTF 

to support this independent assessment and provide final input for an oxygen compatibility analysis. Final LOX mechanical impact threshold ignition tests were performed at JSC-WSTF using the 

detailed test parameters recommended by the IAT. Heat of Combustion tests in accordance with 

ASTM D4809, Standard Test Method for Heat of Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels by 

Bomb Calorimeter (Precision Method),12 were also performed on the final two solvents and AK225G to provide comparative data to support the final oxygen compatibility analysis. 
6

3. SELECTION OF SOLVENT CANDIDATES

3.1 Identification of Promising Solvent Candidates

During the initial phase of the DLA study, the critical performance parameters were identified and a thorough survey of the cleaning solvent industry was performed to identify promising candidates for cleaning oxygen systems. This survey included a review of publications from the efforts 

to replace CFC-113 and qualify HCFC-225 in the 1990’s and 2000’s, analysis of all cleaning solvent 

data recorded in the MAPTIS Material Selection Database, an extensive internet search, and evaluation of alternatives to ODS solvents approved under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP). Solvent manufacturers and major blenders were 

contacted to identify new solvents that were in the developmental phase but could be made available 

for test. A summary of this search was presented at the 2012 International Workshop on Environment and Alternative Energy.13 

3.2 Solvent Selection Criteria

The solvent selection criteria fell into two general categories: safety, health, and environmental (SHE) characteristics and technical performance parameters. Subordinate to the SHE criteria 

and the technical performance requirements, business issues influencing cost and availability were 

also considered.

3.2.1 Safety, Health, and Environmental Characteristics

3.2.1.1 Unacceptable Safety, Health, and Environmental Characteristics. Solvents that were 

classified by the EPA as a class I or class II ODS or contained a constituent classified as a Hazardous Air Pollutant14 were not accepted as test candidates. In addition, chemicals classified as human 

carcinogens were not accepted for consideration. 

3.2.1.2 Safety and Industrial Health. Solvents that meet NASA criteria for oxygen compatibility are expected to be inherently safer for personnel from a flammability perspective. The toxicity 

of solvent candidates was evaluated based on Acceptable Exposure Limits (AELs), 8-hour timeweighted average or equivalent, as reported in the solvent Safety Data Sheet (SDS). Solvents with the 

highest AEL were the most preferred. Solvents with an AEL lower than 200 ppm were anticipated to 

require facility modifications or additional personal protective equipment for safe use.

3.2.1.3 Environmental. Solvents were preferred that were lower in volatile organic compound 

(VOC) content or VOC exempt as listed in the U.S. Federal Register15 and published EPA determinations, and lower in 100-Year Global Warming Potential (GWP) as published in assessment reports by 

the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.16 Solvents were also preferred based on expected 

ease of recapture, repurification, and reuse. 
7

3.2.1.4 Bio-Preferred Cleaning Solvents. Although spacecraft systems and launch support equipment are exempt from the requirements for federal procurement of bio-based 

cleaning agents,17 bio-based products as defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture BioPreferred program were considered during the search for candidate solvents. No bio-based products 

met the screening criteria for test candidates.

3.2.2 Technical Performance Criteria

Technical performance criteria included materials compatibility, cleaning effectiveness, and 

oxygen compatibility. Boiling point (BP) was also considered because solvents with high BPs (above 

65 oC (150 oF)) can be difficult to dry and solvents with BPs lower than common ambient temperatures may require pressurized storage and may evaporate too quickly for practical use.

3.2.2.1 Materials Compatibility. Materials compatibility was evaluated based on vendor 

information and published literature:

• Metals corrosion: Solvents must not be corrosive to metals used in the construction of oxygen 

system hardware and existing test systems. Aqueous cleaning products, known to be corrosive to 

many metals when inadequately rinsed and dried, were not considered as candidates to replace 

HCFC-225 due to the difficulty of cleaning large-scale propulsion test systems in the field without 

corrosion risks. 

• Compatibility with nonmetals: HCFC-225 and other halogenated solvents are known to be incompatible with some nonmetals. Current practice at MSFC and SSC is to remove most seals and 

other nonmetallic materials from oxygen system components prior to cleaning with halogenated 

solvents. Better compatibility with nonmetals used in oxygen systems is preferred but was not an 

initial selection criterion. 

3.2.2.2 Cleaning Effectiveness. The solvent used to clean oxygen systems must be capable of 

removing contaminants that pose a safety hazard to oxygen systems. This includes particulate, and 

hydrocarbon-based hydraulic fluids, oils, and greases (refs. 1, 5 (sec. 6), and 6 (chapter 9)). Silicone 

oils are also of concern, but are generally prohibited around NASA propulsion system hardware and 

thus were not included in the test program. Solvents are preferred that can also remove halogenated 

greases which are commonly used with oxygen systems due to their low reactivity. The solvent must 

be capable of removing NVR to below 1 mg/ 0.1 m2, (ref. 1 and footnote ††) the pass/fail criterion 

for most NASA LOX/GOX propulsion system components, when cleaning is performed by ambient 

temperature flush. Due to the large scale of launch vehicle components and test systems, cleaning 

methods that rely on mechanical action (e.g., ultrasonic agitation) and/or high temperatures are not 

practical in many cases. Ambient temperature flush was identified by the test team as the most challenging cleaning process for solvent performance at MSFC and SSC.

††NASA specifications historically stated requirements for NVR in mg/ft2. In later revisions, these units were changed to 

mg/0.1 m2 with the footnote: “For the purpose of this specification, 0.1 square meter=1 square foot” (ref. 18).
8

The Kauri-butanol (Kb) value as reported by the vendor, determined in accordance with 

ASTM D1133, Standard Test Method for Kauri-Butanol Value of Hydrocarbon Solvents,19 was 

used to estimate the cleaning power of the solvent. High Kb values indicate relatively strong solvency. While Kb value is a limited measure of solvent performance, a review of past test data showed 

that solvents with Kb <20 performed poorly at removing the soils of concern for oxygen systems. 

When a Kb value was not available, cleaning performance was estimated based on vendor literature 

and other published data. 

The wetting index has been used to estimate the ability of a cleaning agent to enter small orifices and lift particulate from surfaces. Solvents with a higher wetting index are expected to perform 

better at removal of particulate. The wetting index is calculated as follows:

Wetting index = (1,000 × density) / (surface tension × viscosity).

Solvents were preferred that had both a high Kb value and a high wetting index.

3.2.2.3 Oxygen Compatibility.

3.2.2.3.1 Flammability Data. Flammable cleaning agents inadvertently remaining within 

an oxygen system pose a significant fire hazard. When a flammable solvent is used with an oxygen 

system component, extreme care must be taken to assure that the component is thoroughly dried 

and all solvent is removed. Precautions such as bake-out and vacuum drying are often impractical, 

and inspection of large test systems to assure complete solvent removal may be difficult. Due to the 

potential consequences of a fire, solvents used for final cleaning and verification of NASA propulsion test systems must demonstrate very low reactivity in oxygen. Solvents that reported a flash point 

in air on the SDS were considered unacceptable. Solvents with no lower or upper explosion limit 

as reported on the SDS and solvents that demonstrated favorable performance on previous NASA 

oxygen compatibility tests were preferred as test candidates.

3.2.2.3.2 Flammability of Solvent Blends. Many fluorinated solvents with low Kb values 

are blended with trans-1,2 dichloroethylene (tDCE), alcohols, or other solvents to boost cleaning 

power. Nonflammable fluorinated constituents suppress the flammability of tDCE and alcohols. To 

assure that the performance properties will remain stable over time, only true azeotropic blends were 

considered as candidates. Historical solvent flammability data in MAPTIS showed that all blends 

containing alcohol (e.g., methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, etc.) failed the ambient LOX mechanical 

impact ignition test. Therefore, solvents containing any alcohol were excluded. Also, MAPTIS data 

showed that solvent blends higher in tDCE content tended to fail LOX mechanical impact. While 

insufficient data were available to establish a tDCE threshold, blends containing more than 50% 

tDCE were considered highly unlikely to be compatible with LOX/GOX and were eliminated from 

the candidate list. 
9

3.2.3 Business Considerations

Should more than one solvent be found to perform acceptably, cost and availability could 

determine the final selection. Expected cost and availability were considered during the initial evaluation, but were secondary to the SHE and technical performance criteria.

3.3 Solvents Selected as Test Candidates

The following solvents were selected for this test program: 

• AGC Chemicals Americas (distributor for Asahi Glass Company, Japan): Asahiklin AE3000 (new 

product) (1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl ether (hydrofluoroether (HFE)-347pc-f2) 

(CAS No. 406-78-0)). Reference appendix B.5.

• AGC Chemicals Americas (distributor for Asahi Glass Company, Japan): Asahiklin AE3000AT 

(new product) (45% trans-1,2 dichloroethylene (CAS No. 156-60-5)/55% 1,1,2,2- tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl ether (HFE-347pc-f2) (CAS No. 406-78-0) azeotrope). Reference appendixB.6.

• E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company: Capstone 4-I, chemical intermediate (perfluorobutyl 

iodide (CAS No. 423-39-2), with other constituents). Reference appendix B.4.

• 3M: L-14780 Developmental Material‡‡ (22% trans-1,2 dichloroethylene (CAS No. 156-60-5)/

78% methyl perfluoropropyl ether (HFE-347mcc3) (CAS No. 375-03-1) azeotrope). Reference 

appendix B.3.

• Solvay Fluorides, LLC: Solkane® 365 mfc (new product) (1,1,1,3,3 pentafluorobutane (CAS No. 

406-58-6)). Reference appendix B.7.

• Solvay Fluorides LLC: Solvokane® (new product) (30% trans-dichloroethylene (CAS No. 156-

60-5)/ 70% HFC-365 mfc 1,1,1,3,3 pentafluorobutane (CAS No. 406-58-6) azeotrope). Reference 

appendix B.8.

• Honeywell: Solstice PF (new product) (trans-1-chloro-3,3,3,-trifluoropropene (HCFO-1233zd(E)) 

(CAS No. 102687-65-0)). Reference appendix B.2. 

• E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company: Vertrel® MCA (38% trans-dichloroethylene (CAS 

No. 156-60-5)/ 62% 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane azeotrope (HFC-43-10mee) (CAS No. 

138495-42-8)). Reference appendix B.9. This solvent contains a different stabilizer than some Vertrel MCA formulations previously tested by NASA.

‡‡3MTM does not currently market this blend of solvents. L-14780 Developmental Material is the 3M designation for the 

azeotropic blend of two commercially available products, 3M NovecTM 7000 (methyl perfluoropropyl ether) and trans-1,2 

dichloroethylene. This product also contains stabilizer chemicals in concentrations below 1%.
10

The selection criteria for these solvents are shown in table 1.

Table 1. Solvent candidates selected for test.

Single Component Kb ≥ 20

Expected to 

Pass LOX Test

BP > 38 °C

(100 °F) AEL-8hr ≥ 200

Safe With 

Metals VOC Exempt 100-Year GWP(1)

AGC AE3000 No Yes Yes No Yes Yes(2) Mid

DuPont Capstone 4-I Yes(3) Yes(4) Yes Yes (5) Unknown Unknown

Solvay Solkane 365 mfc No Unknown Yes Yes Yes Yes Mid

Honeywell Solstice PF Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes(2) Low

Azeotrope

AGC AE3000AT Yes Unknown Yes No Yes No(6) Mid

3M L-14780 Yes(3) Yes(4) No Yes Yes No(6) Mid

Solvay Solvokane Yes Unknown No Yes Yes No(6) Mid

DuPont Vertrel MCA Yes Unknown Yes Yes Yes No(6) High

Notes: 

 (1) For any component in the solvent: High is >1,000; mid is 10–1,000; low is <10.

 (2) When solvent candidate selection was made, the request for VOC exemption for this solvent was in progress. EPA approval of VOC exemption 

has since been received.

 (3) No Kb data available, but previous industry test data showed good cleaning performance.

 (4) Historical LOX mechanical impact test data showed this material to be LOX compatible.

 (5) A Boeing internal test report in support of the SSP indicated that this solvent might not be compatible with aluminum. 

 (6) This solvent blend contains trans-1,2 dichloroethylene which is not VOC exempt.

3.3.2 Solvents Tested

	 The suppliers provided solvent samples for this test program. AGC Chemicals Americas was

unable to obtain test samples of AE3000 and AE3000AT from Japan in time to meet the schedule requirements. The SHE characteristics and expected performance of AE3000 and AE3000AT were less favorable

than the other test candidates so this is not considered a significant omission. L-14780 and Vertrel MCA

had been previously tested as replacements for CFC-113. L-14780 had performed well in previous NASA

oxygen compatibility tests (test report 97-31610, JSC-WSTF). Vertrel MCA did not fully pass previous 

NASA oxygen compatibility tests7 (MAPTIS reports for material code 04091, Vertrel MCA), but was

used for 10+ years at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center as the first step in a two-step cleaning process. Vertrel MCA was used to clean the hardware, followed by a rinse with an oxygen-compatible solvent with

lower cleaning efficiency. This two-step process was identified as a fallback option for MSFC and SSC if

no solvent was found to be acceptable as a replacement for HCFC-225 in a single-step process. NASA had

not previously tested any of the other solvent candidates for cleaning propulsion oxygen systems.

3.3.3 Baseline Solvent 

	 Asahiklin AK-225G was used as the baseline solvent for this test program. At MSFC and SSC,

AK-225G solvent was supplied to the test labs from the production facilities. This solvent was drawn from

production stock and verified to meet the NVR requirements of ≤2 ppm. It may have been recycled and

distilled prior to delivery for test. 
11

4. NONVOLATILE RESIDUE BACKGROUND IN NEAT CLEANING SOLVENTS

4.1 Nonvolatile Residue Background Test Results

NVR residue reports from SSC and MSFC are shown in appendix C. The AK-225G that 

was supplied by MSFC and SSC production facilities and the Solstice PF were very low in NVR. 

The other solvents, except Capstone 4-I, were moderately low in NVR and varied between labs and 

between gravimetric and FTIR test methods. These were considered acceptable for further testing, 

but would require purification to meet the requirements for use as an NVR verification solvent. The 

differences in NVR results between labs and between test methods were noted for future investigation to determine whether these differences were due to lot-to-lot variability, solvent stability, NVR 

type, or other factors. The Capstone 4-I was the highest in NVR background. During these tests it 

was necessary to filter a large quantity of particulate from the Capstone 4-I. It was also noted that 

the Capstone 4-I had a very strong, objectionable odor. 

4.2 Compatibility With Fourier Transform Infrared Analysis of Nonvolatile Residue

A calibrated FTIR method (app. A, section 3.1.3) is used at MSFC and SSC propulsion test 

facilities for measurement of NVR in AK-225G for initial verification of solvent purity and for measurement of NVR in the solvent rinsed from a cleaned part to verify cleanliness. Ideally, the solvent 

rinse sample would be injected directly into the infrared (IR) liquid cell to measure NVR. CFC-113 

was used this way. AK-225G, however, produces IR peaks in the same wavelength range as the hydrocarbon contaminants being measured. When measuring the NVR in AK-225G, the residue is dried 

and then reconstituted in tetrachloroethylene for FTIR analysis. None of the solvent candidates 

were compatible with direct measurement in the IR cell. Furthermore, in some tests, the L-14780 

appeared to leave a trace constituent in the residue that may interfere with the FTIR analysis. This 

residue was suspected to be a stabilizer component of the L-14780, an issue identified for further 

investigation. 
12

5. QUICK SCREEN SOLVENCY

5.1 Quick Screen Solvency Test Results

As a quick way to evaluate the cleaning power of the candidate solvents, each candidate was 

challenged with a mixed batch of contaminants representative of cleaning challenges for propulsion oxygen system components. This is described in detail, and the results shown, in appendix D. 

The contaminant mix was prepared by dissolving 0.5240 gram (g) of equal parts of the following 

contaminants in 100 mL of AK-225G:

• 0.1023 g of mineral oil—pharmaceutical grade—mixed aliphatic.

• 0.1018 g of MIL-PRF-83282D20—ester-based hydraulic fluid.

• 0.1025 g of Di-2-ethylhexylsebacate (gauge calibration oil), MONOPLEX® DOS.

• 0.1112 g of WD-40® (medium-heavy hydrocarbons).

• 0.1062 g of Krytox® GPL103 (fluorocarbon lubricant for oxygen systems).

Aluminum weighing pans were doped with the contaminant mix, dried, weighed, and then 

cleaned by flushing with 100 mL of the test solvent in three steps: 30 mL, 30 mL, and then 40 mL. 

The solvent flush was collected in a clean beaker that was then dried and weighed to determine NVR 

removed. Each solvent was tested 10 times and the results were averaged. The NVR cleaning efficiency (%) is reported as:

Percent cleaning efficiency = (mg of NVR removed/mg of NVR applied) × 100.

The average cleaning efficiency results are shown in figure 1. 

100

95

90

85

AK225G Solvokane Solstice PF Vertrel MCA Capstone 4-I L14780 Solkane 365mfc

99.1 98.3

97.6 97.5 97.4

87.3

97.0

F11516

Figure 1. Solvent screening test results for cleaning efficiency—average

percent NVR removed for each solvent.
13

5.2 Observations on Miscibility and Saturation

During the quick look screening tests at SSC and cleaning efficiency tests performed at 

MSFC for the DLA study, it was noted that some contaminants in high doses tended to separate 

from several candidate solvents. The substance solubility (e.g., hydraulic fluid) in a solvent can be 

measured as the saturation concentration or by the substance miscibility with the solvent. The miscibility of various contaminants in the candidate solvents was investigated further during the quick 

look screening tests. These miscibility tests are also shown in appendix D. It was noted that Solstice 

PF and AK-225G showed a significantly higher saturation capacity than the other test candidates for 

the contaminants tested. The contaminants tested were:

• MIL-PRF-83282D20 hydraulic fluid.

• RP1 petroleum-based rocket propellant.

• Heavy-weight (85–140 W), petroleum-based gear oil.

5.3 Observations on Odor

During the quick look screening tests, the SSC laboratory chemists were asked to provide general user feedback on the candidate solvents. The solvents were scored on a scale of 1 to 10 on odor 

strength, 1 being most favorable. AK-225G, Solstice PF, and L-14780 scored 5 or below. Solkane 

365 mfc scored a 9 and Capstone 4-I, Vertrel MCA, and Solvokane scored a 10. Only the odor of the 

Capstone 4-I was considered to be highly objectionable. 
14

6. FIRST DOWN-SELECTION

6.1 Data Reviewed for the First Down-Selection

At the September 2013 TIM at SSC, the initial down-selection was performed to narrow the 

test set to three candidates. Data from NVR background tests and the quick screen solvency test 

were reviewed and initial observations were shared regarding solvent odor, contaminant saturation 

capacity, and evaporative characteristics. Data obtained to date from the parallel DLA study on 

Solstice PF, L-14780, and Capstone 4-I were also shared. These data included cleaning effectiveness 

tests, metals corrosion tests at ambient temperature, and initial LOX mechanical impact and autogenous ignition temperature (AIT) tests. MSFC reported that these three solvents performed well in 

the cleaning tests and the oxygen compatibility tests, but that Capstone 4-I was highly contaminated 

with particulate, was corrosive to the metals tested, and appeared to be unstable, rapidly changing 

color during test activities.

6.2 Solvents Selected for Further Testing

Solstice PF, Solvokane, and L-14780 were selected for further testing. All three solvents performed well in the quick screen solvency test and demonstrated other favorable characteristics. The 

cleaning performance of Solkane 365 mfc was significantly lower than the other candidates and it 

was determined that this solvent would not be acceptable for removing hydrocarbon contaminants to 

the low levels required for oxygen systems. It was also decided at this point that sufficient data were 

already available on Vertrel MCA to support future consideration as a fallback option should the 

three solvents selected for further testing fail to meet performance requirements. 

6.2.1 Factors Supporting Continued Evaluation of Solstice Performance Fluid

Solstice PF demonstrated good cleaning efficiency (>97%) and had the most favorable SHE 

profile. Based on MSFC oxygen compatibility test data from the DLA study, it was expected to pass 

oxygen compatibility tests to be performed at JSC-WSTF. It was also observed during initial handling of Solstice PF, that despite the low boiling point of 19 °C (66 °F), the solvent did not rapidly 

boil away and could be used for cleaning processes similarly to AK-225G and other higher boiling 

point solvents. 

6.2.2 Factors Supporting Continued Evaluation of L-14780

L-14780 demonstrated good cleaning efficiency (>97%). Based on historical test data from 

JSC-WSTF and MSFC oxygen compatibility test data from the DLA study, it was expected to again 

pass the oxygen compatibility tests to be performed at JSC-WSTF. The environmental data on this 

material were not as favorable as Solstice PF, but were more favorable than other candidates that 

were higher in VOC content and GWP. 
15

6.2.3 Factors Supporting Continued Evaluation of Solvokane

Solvokane demonstrated good cleaning efficiency (>98%). Although the Solkane 365 mfc 

component is relatively high in GWP, it was the least toxic constituent of the azeotropes evaluated. 

No data were available at this point on oxygen compatibility.
16

7. METALS COMPATIBILITY

7.1 Metals Compatibility Tests

The corrosiveness of Solstice PF, L-14780, and Solvokane on metals was evaluated under conditions of total immersion in accordance with ASTM F483-09, Standard Practice for Total Immersion Corrosion Test for Aircraft Maintenance Chemicals,21 and in solvent vapor for comparison. 

AK-225G was also included in this test set for comparison. 

Six test coupons of each metal were weighed and suspended, three immersed in boiling solvent and three in the vapor region above the solvent, within a high-pressure borosilicate tube. One 

coupon of each metal was weighed and retained as a control. See figures 2 and 3. The solvent was 

maintained at the boiling point using a constant temperature water bath. Test coupons were exposed 

for 24 hours, removed for inspection and weighing, and returned to the solvent for an additional 

144 hours. Thirteen ferrous and nonferrous alloys were tested:

 (1) 304L stainless steel.

 (2) A-286 PH stainless steel.

 (3) 17-4 PH stainless steel.

 (4) 440C stainless steel.

 (5) 4140 low alloy carbon steel.

 (6) Tin-bronze.

 (7) Brass—Admiralty brass CDA 443 (Copper Development Association).

 (8) Cobalt-chromium-nickel alloy—Elgiloy® (Elgiloy Specialty Metals).

 (9) 2219-T6 aluminum.

(10) 6061-T6 aluminum.

(11) 2195-T8 aluminum-lithium (plate stock).

(12) InconelTM 718 nickel alloy (Specialty Metals Corp.).

(13) MonelTM 400 nickel alloy (Specialty Metals Corp.).

7.2 Metals Compatibility Test Results

Test details, tables of the test results, and images of the metal coupons after exposure are 

shown in appendix E. No visual change was observed in any of the metal coupons immediately after 

exposure and no significant weight changes were observed. However, 4 weeks after completion of 

solvent exposure, discoloration consistent with corrosion was observed on the three specimens of 

4140 low alloy carbon steel that had been immersed in the L-14780. This test was repeated later in 

the program and corrosion of 4140 carbon steel exposed to L-14780 was confirmed. The relationship 

between this observed corrosion and the individual components in L-14780, including the stabilizers, 

has not been determined.
17

Figure 2. Metal coupons suspended in a high-pressure-rated glass tube.

Figure 3. Coupons immersed in solvent and suspended in the vapor zone.
18

8. NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY

8.1 Nonmetals Compatibility Tests

The compatibility of the solvent with nonmetals was evaluated under conditions of total 

immersion at the boil temperature of the solvent. This test method was similar to the ASTM F483-

09 test21 for metals compatibility, but exposure duration was much shorter. Exposure to the baseline AK-225G solvent was included in the test matrix for comparison. AK-225G is not compatible 

with several nonmetallic materials used in oxygen systems and no halogenated cleaning solvent is 

expected to be compatible with all nonmetals.

Three test specimens of each nonmetal, formed as O-rings or gaskets with a hole for hanging, 

were dried in a desiccator for 24 hours, weighed, measured for outer diameter (OD) in two directions, 

and immersed in boiling solvent within a high-pressure borosilicate tube for 15 minutes. See figure 4. 

Elastomers were measured for hardness in accordance with ASTM D2240, Standard Test Method 

for Rubber Property—Durometer Hardness Type A (Shore A durometer) at the point of maximum 

thickness prior to immersion.22 One specimen of each material was weighed and retained as a control. The solvent was maintained at the boiling point using a constant temperature water bath. After 

immersion, the specimens were removed to the desiccator for 30 minutes and then weighed, measured, and inspected for evidence of deterioration. Specimens exhibiting a change in weight or linear 

swell of >1% from the initial readings were returned to the desiccator for 24 hours and then remeasured. Specimens continuing to exhibit a change in weight or linear swell of >1% from the initial 

readings were returned to the desiccator for an additional 6 days (7 days after immersion, total) and 

then remeasured.

Figure 4. O-rings suspended in solvent, ready for insertion into a heated water bath.
19

Nine nonmetals—six nonelastomers and three elastomers—were tested:

• Nonelastomers:

(1) PTFE—Algoflon® E2 (Solvay Solexis).

(2) Fluorinated ethylene-propylene (FEP) copolymer—FEP Teflon® (DuPont).

(3) Polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE)—Kel-F® 81 (3M).

(4) Aromatic polyimide—Vespel® SP21 (DuPont).

(5) Polyether ether ketone (PEEK)—Ketron® PEEK (Quadrant Engineering Plastic Products).

(6) PTFE with silica fiber—Gylon® style 3502 for oxygen service (Garlock).

• Elastomers:

(1)  FKM poly(hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride) elastomer, FKM compound

V0747-75 (Parker Hannafin) (equivalent to Viton A (DuPont)).

(2) FFKM poly(tetrafluoropropylene-co-perfluoromethylvinyl ether) elastomer, Kalrez® 

(DuPont). 

(3) NBR poly(acrylonitrile-co-butadiene) rubber (Buna N)—Mil-G-21569B class I.23

8.2 Nonmetals CompatibilityTest Results

Test results for AK-225G, Solstice PF, L-14780, and Solvokane with the listed nonmetals 

are shown in appendix F. Weight gain and linear swell recorded for each nonmetal with each of the 

four solvents are shown in tables 2–5, using the following colors for visual comparison of the relative 

compatibility of these materials:

• Red = Post test gain >10% or gain after 7 days >5% or weight loss >5%.

• Yellow = Post test gain >5% or gain after 7 days >3% or weight loss >2%.

• Green = Post test gain <5% and gain after 7 days <3% and weight loss <2%.

The three candidate solvents performed equal to or better than AK-225G in these nonmetal 

compatibility tests. Current cleaning protocols at MSFC and SSC that require removal of incompatible nonmetallic components prior to cleaning with AK-225G will be acceptable when using any of 

the three alternate candidates. Although a red, yellow, or green cell is an indication of the degree of 

incompatibility, the decision whether or not to expose each of these nonmetals to a particular solvent 

should be determined by the user of that nonmetal.
20

Table 2. AK-225G test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals.

Material

Weight Gain

(%)

Linear Swell

(%)

Post Test After 

24 Hours

After 

7 Days Post Test After 24 Hours

After 

7 Days

FKM (V0747-75)

(Note 1)

12.6 7.8 5.5 5.0 3.0 2.7

16.0 9.4 6.7 4.9 3.6 3.7

FFKM (Kalrez) 14.5 7.7 5.0 4.0 2.7 1.7

NBR (Buna-N) 14.7 6.6 3.0 1.4 –1.5 –2.1

PTFE Algoflon 0.2 – – 1.1 0.4 –

FEP Teflon 0.5 – – –1.2 –0.5 –

PCTFE (Kel-F) 0.2 – – 0.5 – –

Vespel 21 0.0 – – –0.2 – –

PEEK 0.0 – – 0.9 – –

Gylon 0.2 – – (Note 2) – –

Note 1: Test for FKM (VO747-75) compatibility with AK-225G was performed twice. 

Note 2: Linear swell measurements for Gylon not valid. The process to cut Gylon from sheet results in an irregular outer edge.

Table 3. Solstice PF test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals.

Material

Weight Gain

(%)

Linear Swell

(%)

Post Test

After 

24 Hours

After 

7 Days Post Test

After 

24 Hours

After 

7 Days

FKM (V0747-75) 12.4 6.2 3.6 4.6 2.3 0.4

FFKM (Kalrez) 4.2 2.1 1.3 1.1 –0.4 1.8

NBR (Buna-N) 5.6 1.6 0.0 0.6 –0.5 –0.1

PTFE Algoflon 0.2 – – 0.5 – –

FEP Teflon 0.3 – – –0.2 – –

PCTFE (Kel-F) 0.1 – – 0.7 – –

Vespel 21 0.0 0.0 – –0.4 0.1 –

PEEK 0.0 – – 0.9 – –

Gylon 0.0 – – (Note 1) – –

Note 1: Linear swell measurements for Gylon not valid. The process to cut Gylon from sheet results in an irregular outer edge.
21

Table 4. L-14780 test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals.

Material

Weight Gain

(%)

Linear Swell

(%)

Post Test

After 

24 Hours

After 

7 Days Post Test

After 

24 Hours

After 

7 Days

FKM (V0747-75) 5.9 3.6 2.6 1.8 1.0 0.7

FFKM (Kalrez) 6.0 3.6 2.5 2.9 1.9 1.4

NBR (Buna-N) 6.3 1.7 –0.3 2.0 0.6 0.4

PTFE Algoflon 0.1 – – 0.0 – –

FEP Teflon 0.3 – – –0.2 – –

PCTFE (Kel-F) 0.0 – – –0.1 – –

Vespel 21 0.1 – – 0.0 – –

PEEK 0.1 – – 0.2 – –

Gylon 0.1 – – (Note 1) – –

Note 1: Linear swell measurements for Gylon not valid. The process to cut Gylon from sheet results in an irregular outer edge. 

Table 5. Solvokane test results for solvent compatibility with nonmetals.

.

Material

Weight Gain

(%)

Linear Swell

(%)

Post Test

After 

24 Hours

After 

7 Days Post Test

After 

24 Hours

After 

7 Days

FKM (V0747-75) 17.8 9.3 6.0 8.3 4.8 3.0

FFKM (Kalrez) 1.7 1.1 0.7 0.4 2.4 –1.0

NBR (Buna-N) 12.9 4.0 0.7 2.9 0.6 –0.3

PTFE Algoflon 0.1 – – 1.1 – –

FEP Teflon 0.1 – – –0.4 – –

PCTFE (Kel-F) 0.0 – – 0.2 – –

Vespel 21 0.3 – – –0.1 – –

PEEK 0.1 – – –0.1 – –

Gylon 0.0 – – (Note 1) – –

Note 1: Linear swell measurements for Gylon not valid. The process to cut Gylon from sheet results in an irregular outer edge.
22

9. INITIAL OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY TESTS

9.1 Oxygen Compatibility Test Methods

The test methods specified in the test plan for oxygen compatibility were selected to parallel 

tests performed in the past by NASA for replacement of ODS solvents for cleaning oxygen systems. 

Two tests were performed to evaluate the ignition sensitivity in LOX/GOX. These tests had been 

performed at MSFC for the DLA study; those test reports are shown in appendix G.1.

9.1.1 Ambient Liquid Oxygen Mechanical Impact Test Method

Each solvent was tested in accordance with ASTM G86-98a (Reapproved 2011), Standard 

Test Method for Determining Ignition Sensitivity of Materials to Mechanical Impact in Ambient 

Liquid Oxygen and Pressurized Liquid and Gaseous Oxygen Environments, section 4.2, Ambient 

LOX Impact Test,24 at 98 J (72 ft-lb) impact energy. This test is referred to as the LOX mechanical 

impact test. This test method is specified in NASA-STD-6001, Flammability, Offgassing, and Compatibility Requirements and Test Procedures, as test 13A.25

Solvent was transferred to a small sample cup (referred to as the ‘grease cup’) to obtain 

a sample thickness (depth) of 1.27±0.13 mm (0.050±0.005 inch). The solvent in the grease cup was 

frozen on a chill bar (JSC-WSTF) or cold box (MSFC) using liquid nitrogen. The grease cup with 

solid solvent was placed into a one-piece sample cup and the cup was filled with LOX. This LOXfilled sample cup containing the grease cup with frozen solvent was then placed into the base of the 

prechilled impact tester, the striker pin was placed, and the impact was performed in accordance with 

ASTM G86-98a.24 The pass criteria, as in previous NASA tests, was no reactions in 20 impacts or 

not more than 1 reaction in 60 impacts. Specimens that did not pass at 98J (72 ft-lb) impact force 

were tested at progressively lower impact energies until no reactions were observed.

9.1.2 Autogenous Ignition Temperature Test Method 

Each solvent was tested in accordance with ASTM G72-09, Standard Test Method for Autogenous Ignition Temperature of Liquids and Solids in a High Pressure Oxygen-Enriched Environment, modified for testing of volatile liquids.26 Tests were performed at 0.34 MPa (50 psia) and 

13.8 MPa (2,000 psia) based on previous solvent tests performed by NASA in a joint program with 

the U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command7 and for the USAF.27

9.1.2.1 Sample Handling for Volatile Liquids. ASTM G72-09 does not contain specific instructions for handling volatile liquids to assure that sufficient material is present to obtain valid data 

after purging the test chamber with oxygen.26 Previous AIT test reports for solvents from the 1990’s 

did not specify how the sample was handled to prevent excessive loss. During AIT tests performed 

by MSFC for the DLA study, the solvent and sample tubes were chilled with an ice bath to reduce 
23

loss prior to test. For these tests of Solstice PF, the sample tubes were filled with 0.50 g of solvent 

rather than 0.20±0.03 g as specified in ASTM G72-09 to assure that sufficient solvent would be present in liquid form after purging of the test chamber with oxygen to achieve an oxygen concentration 

>99%. During development of the test plan, JSC-WSTF recommended elimination of the purging 

step rather than using a larger sample size. 

During the performance of the initial AIT tests at JSC-WSTF, due to the failure of several of 

the solvent samples to react up to the temperature threshold limit (TL) of the test apparatus (427 oC 

(800 oF)), concerns were raised that the test results may not be valid. JSC-WSTF performed several 

additional tests to investigate the effects of greater fuel quantity (sample weight), greater pressures 

than 0.34 MPa (50 psia) for the low pressure test, sample temperature, and test chamber purging. 

The results of this investigation are described in appendix G.2. 

As a result of these investigations, NASA proposed changes to ASTM G72-09 to improve 

repeatability when testing volatile liquids. This proposal was submitted to ASTM committee G04 on 

Compatibility and Sensitivity of Materials in Oxygen-Enriched Atmospheres, the governing committee for this standard. The following changes were recommended :

(1) Solid or nonvolatile liquid sample weight should be 0.20±0.03 g.

(2) For volatile liquids such as cleaning solvents, a larger sample weight up to 1.00±0.10 g 

may be required to obtain a valid AIT result. It is good practice to prechill volatile liquids with boiling points near or below room temperature using an ice bath to prevent excessive loss of solvent prior 

to test. It is recommended a final weight be taken immediately before test to verify quantity present. 

(3) Note: A lab may choose to incrementally approach the sample size of 1.00±0.10 g, evaluating pressure spikes and system safety limits as sample size increments are increased.

(4) Note:  A nonignition at maximum temperature when testing at lower pressures (<6.9 MPa 

(<1,000 psia)) may indicate an insufficient oxidizer to fuel ratio. When testing at lower pressures, if 

obtaining a nonignition at maximum temperature, it is recommended that testing be performed at 

higher pressures until an AIT is obtained. If suspected, testing at the standard 10.3 MPa (1,500 psia) or 

higher and increased sample mass (suggested 1.00±0.10 g) is recommended to confirm an unreactive 

material.

9.2 Oxygen Compatibility Tests Performed Prior to the Second Down-Selection

Test results on Solstice PF, L-14780, and Solvokane for LOX mechanical impact performed 

by MSFC for the DLA study indicated that Solvokane was significantly more reactive than Solstice 

PF or L-14780 (app. G.1.) AIT tests for Solvokane were not completed at MSFC prior to the TIM 

for the second down-selection. Data to date on materials compatibility and cleaning effectiveness 

were very similar for the three remaining solvent candidates, therefore additional oxygen test data 

were required as a discriminator. The oxygen compatibility tests specified in the test plan to be performed at JSC-WSTF were expedited to provide additional information prior to the second downselection milestone. 
24

9.3 Oxygen Compatibility Tests Performed at Johnson Space Center-White Sands Test Facility

The results of the oxygen compatibility tests performed by JSC-WSTF prior to the second 

down-selection are shown in appendix G.2. 

9.3.1 Initial Liquid Oxygen Mechanical Impact Ignition Test Results

None of the three solvents—Solstice, L-14780, or Solvokane—tested for LOX mechanical 

impact at JSC-WSTF, passed the screening criteria at 98 J (72 ft-lb) impact energy. Each solvent was 

tested at lower impact energies to determine ignition threshold. In addition, JSC-WSTF tested each 

solvent for LOX mechanical impact at 98 J (72 ft-lb) impact energy in variable pressure accordance 

with ASTM G86-98a24 (NASA-STD-6001 Test 13B).25 The results of the LOX mechanical impact 

tests performed at JSC-WSTF, and performed by MSFC for the DLA study, prior to the second 

down-selection are shown in table 6.

Table 6. Comparison of LOX mechanical impact ignition test results.

Solvent

JSC-WSTF MSFC (DLA Study)

Test 13A

Ambient LOX 

Impact at 98 J 

(72 ft-lb)

Test 13A 

LOX Impact Threshold 

for 0/20 Reactions(1)

Test 13B 

Pressure Threshold 

for No Reactions 

at 98 J (72 ft-lb)

Test 13A 

Ambient LOX 

Impact at 98 J 

(72 ft-lb)

Test 13A 

LOX Impact 

Threshold(2)

Solstice PF Fail 20 J (15 ft-lb) 52 MPa (7,500 psi) Pass – 0/20 98 J (72 ft-lb)

L-14780 Fail 54 J (40 ft-lb) 52 MPa (7,500 psi) Pass – 0/20 98 J (72 ft-lb)

Solvokane Fail <14 J (10 ft-lb)(3) <3.5 MPa (500 psi)(3) Fail – 2/6 74 J (54.6 ft-lb)

Notes: 

 (1) Energy Threshold Screening Method in accordance with ASTM G86-98a.24

 (2) Determined by the Bruceton sensitivity test method.

 (3) Lower limit of the test apparatus. Threshold could not be determined.

The significant discrepancy in reaction thresholds observed in the ambient LOX mechanical 

impact tests at JSC-WSTF and MSFC was unexpected. While it was apparent that Solvokane was 

the most reactive, these data did not provide confidence to distinguish between the reactivity of Solstice PF and L-14780. An IAT sponsored by the NESC was formed to investigate the test variables 

and conditions that could affect the test results when testing the reactivity of liquids in LOX and to 

establish a modified test protocol for a subsequent set of tests that would provide a reliable reactivity 

ranking of the candidate solvents. See section 12 and appendix I for additional detail. 

9.3.2 Autogenous Ignition Temperature Test Results

The results of the AIT tests performed by JSC-WSTF are shown in appendix G.2 (shown in 

°F for comparison to historic test data). AIT test results obtained at MSFC for the DLA study were 

available for Solstice PF and L-14780 prior to the first down-selection (app. G.1). AIT results, when 

a reaction was observed below the TL of the apparatus, are compared in table 7. At JSC-WSTF, the 

sample size was 1,000 mg. At MSFC, the sample size for Solstice PF was 500 mg; for L-14780 the 

sample size was 200 to 230 mg. 
25

Table 7. Comparison of AIT test results at JSC-WSTF and MSFC.

Solvent

Low Pressure (Note 1) 13.8 MPa (2,000 psia)

JSC-WSTF MSFC (DLA study) JSC-WSTF MSFC (DLA Study)

Avg °F

Std 

Dev Avg °F

Std 

Dev Avg °F

Std 

Dev Avg °F

Std 

Dev

AK-225G 528 @ 0.48 MPa 

(70 psia)

 5 – – 446 – – –

AK-225 (Note 2) TL – – – TL – – –

L-14780 454 @ 1.4 MPa 

(200 psia)

 – 300 (Note 3) 1 322 15 TL –

Solstice PF 464 16 510 9 360 5 411 34

Solvokane 496 22 – – 305 3 – –

Notes:

(1) Low pressure AIT test was performed at 0.34 MPa (50 psia) unless otherwise noted. At JSC-WSTF, if TL was observed, the test 

 was repeated at a higher pressure. 

(2) Historic data for AK-225.7,27

(3) Two of three tests showed unusual low energy reactions. The third test was a TL. 

The AIT acceptance criteria stated in the test plan were based on criteria used in past solvent 

evaluations for use with oxygen systems:27

• Category A—AIT >400 °F—Acceptable for use in oxygen systems.

• Category B—AIT 250 to 400 °F—May be used with caution in oxygen systems.

• Category C—AIT <250 °F—Not recommended for use in oxygen systems.

When a reaction was observed with the larger sample size, all three solvent candidates met the 

AIT criteria to be acceptable for use at lower pressures and acceptable for use with caution at higher 

pressures. 

Historic AIT test data for AK-225 (the dual isomer form), assumed to have been performed 

with the standard sample size of ≈200 mg, showed no reactions up to the TL of the test apparatus.7,27 A repeat of this test for AK-225G with a larger sample size showed that, although no reaction 

was observed at 0.34 MPa (50 psia) to the TL, reactions were observed at 0.48 MPa (70 psia) and 

13.8 MPa (2,000 psia), indicating that AK-225G is more reactive than previously thought. 
26

10. SECOND DOWN-SELECTION

10.1 Data Reviewed for the Second Down-Selection

At the February 2014 TIM at JSC-WSTF, the project team reconvened to narrow the test set 

to two candidates. The data reviewed at this TIM included the test results for quick screen solvency, 

metals compatibility, nonmetals compatibility, and the results for the oxygen compatibility tests completed to date. Test results for metals and nonmetals compatibility available to date from the DLA 

study were also reviewed. The DLA tests for materials compatibility had been performed by ambient 

immersion for longer time periods (21 days for metals and 30 days for nonmetals) on a smaller set of 

materials. The DLA tests for nonmetals, which included exposure up to 90 days, were not complete 

at the time of this TIM. Solvokane was not tested for metals compatibility in the DLA study. The 

DLA test results for materials compatibility were shown to correlate well with the test results shown 

in this TP. 

In addition to the test data obtained to date, the project team also reviewed the environmental and health data for the solvent candidates. This included status updates on VOC exemption and 

SNAP approval for Solstice PF. 

10.2 Solvents Selected for Further Testing

The objective for the February 2014 TIM was to down-select the solvent candidates from 

three to two. Solstice PF and L-14780 were selected to proceed to the next phase of testing for the 

following reasons:

(1) All three solvents performed equal to or better than AK-225G for nonmetals compatibility. All of the metals compatibility tests were determined to be acceptable although corrosion of 

4140 carbon steel after exposure to L-14780 was noted for further investigation. Low alloy carbon 

steel is unusual in the construction of oxygen systems, but is used in associated test apparatus. 

(2) Solstice PF was preferred based on environmental and health criteria. L-14780 was preferred over Solvokane based on environmental criteria, but Solvokane was preferred over L-14780 

based on toxicity. 

(3) Oxygen compatibility: Solvokane was significantly more reactive in LOX than Solstice 

PF or L-14780. The AIT data did not reveal a clear distinction between the three solvents. Also 

discussed during this TIM was the flammability and reactivity of the two primary components in 

Solvokane: Solkane 365 mfc and tDCE. Both of these components are stated on their SDS to be 

flammable in air. Based on the LOX mechanical impact test data and the SDS data, the project team 

concluded that use of Solvokane with oxygen systems was contraindicated. This was the deciding 

factor in the down-selection. 
27

11. NONVOLATILE RESIDUE REMOVAL EFFICIENCY

11.1 Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test Method

The purpose of the nonvolatile residue removal efficiency test was to assess the ability of a solvent to remove specific contaminants by ambient temperature flush. This test method was designed to 

mimic the NVR verification sampling process used at MSFC and SSC for oxygen systems hardware. 

Stainless steel test panels were fabricated for this test based on the test panel used in ASTM E1235-08, 

Standard Test Method for Gravimetric Determination of Nonvolatile Residue (NVR) in Environmentally Controlled Areas for Spacecraft,28 but with one-fourth the surface area to yield a 152 mm × 152 mm 

(6 in × 6 in) flat, lipped surface. Individual contaminants were applied to the test panel to achieve 

a target contamination level of approximately 40 mg/0.1 m2. The contaminant was air dried and then 

baked for 2 hours at 55 oC (130 oF). Under a fume hood, the contaminated panel was mounted on 

a stand and gently flushed first with 200 mL of the test solvent and then with 200 mL of AK-225G. 

Each solvent flush was captured in a clean beaker. The test configuration is shown in figure 5. The 

captured solvent was analyzed for NVR content by drying and gravimetric analysis. 

Figure 5. Configuration to flush a test panel for the NVR removal efficiency test.
28

These tests were performed for Solstice PF, L-14780, and AK-225G. AK-225G was included for 

comparison. Each solvent/contaminant combination was tested three times. If the results did not 

agree within 10%, then the test was repeated. The contaminant removal efficiency for the test solvent 

was calculated as:

mT ( ) − mTB

mT ( ) − mTB + mAK ( − mAKB )

×100 = % NVR removed,

where:

mT = mass of contaminant removed by the test solvent.

mTB = mass of the background NVR in the test solvent blank. 

mAK = mass of the contaminant removed by the second rinse with AK-225G. 

mAKB = mass of the background NVR in the AK-225G solvent blank.

The NVR contaminants used to challenge the candidate solvents were:

• Mineral oil—CAS 8042-47-5 (representative of RP-1 fuel, petroleum-based hydraulic oils, and 

most petroleum-based motor oils and tube bending oils). 

• Petroleum-based machine tool hydraulic fluid, ISO grade 46—Mobil DTE25TM (Exxon Mobil 

Corp.). 

• Synthetic hydraulic fluid, MIL-PRF-83282,20 fire resistant, synthetic hydrocarbon base—Brayco 

Micronic® 882 (Castrol Industrial North America). 

• Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate (gauge calibration oil)—MONOPLEX DOS (The C. P. Hall Co.).

• Fingerprint simulated by synthetic sebum, modified Spangler soil per ASTM D4265-98 (R 2007), 

Standard Guide for Evaluating Stain Removal Performance in Home Laundering, section A2.16.2 

(Scientific Services S/D, Inc., Sparrow Bush , NY).29

• Fluorocarbon grease—Krytox 240AC (DuPont Chemical Solutions). 

• Heavy paraffinic grease (crane grease), U-101 Big Red Grease (Universal, Inc.).

• WD-40 aerosol (medium-heavy aliphatic hydrocarbons) (WD-40 Company).

• CHRISTO-LUBE® MCG 111 (Lubrication Technology, Inc.) fluorocarbon grease was added to 

the test set after the release of the test plan when it was determined that CHRISTO-LUBE was 

commonly used as a substitute for Krytox 240AC at MSFC and SSC. 

11.2 Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test Results

Test results for AK-225G, Solstice PF, and L-14780 with the above contaminants are shown in 

appendix H. Charts comparing the removal efficiency of the candidate solvents versus AK-225G for 

each solvent are shown in figures 6 through 14. Cleaning efficiencies over 100% are due to the tolerance 

of the analytical balance and subtraction of solvent NVR background. The cleaning efficiencies of the 

candidate solvents were determined to be similar to the cleaning efficiencies of AK-225G and therefore 

suitable for cleaning NASA propulsion oxygen systems. 
29

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Percent Removed

F6_1516

Figure 6. Mineral oil removal efficiency—percent removed by the test

solvent of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, 

second rinse with AK-225G.

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Percent Removed

F7_1516

Figure 7. Mobil DTE25 hydraulic oil removal efficiency—percent removed 

by the test solvent of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, 

second rinse with AK-225G.

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Note: Data from run 2. Test was repeated due to inconsistency of total contaminant recovered per plate due 

to spilled solvent during the tests of L-14780 and inadequate percentage of target containment mass collected.

Percent Removed

F8_1516

Figure 8. MIL-PRF-8328220 hydraulic fluid removal efficiency—percent removed 

by the test solvent of total removed (data from run 2). First rinse 

with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G. 
30

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Note: Data from runs 2 and 3. Test was repeated due to inconsistency of total contaminant recovered per 

plate in run 1. Three tests were added for Solstice PF (run 3) to confirm performance.

Percent Removed

F9_1516

Figure 9. Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate removal efficiency—percent removed 

by the test solvent of total removed (data from runs 2 and 3). 

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G.

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Note: Data from run 2. Test was repeated due to inconsistency of total contaminant recovered per plate 

in run 1.

Percent Removed

F10_1516

Figure 10. Synthetic sebum removal efficiency—percent removed by the test 

solvent of total removed (data from run 2). First rinse with 

test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G.

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Percent Removed

F11_1516

Figure 11. Krytox grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent 

of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G.
31

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Percent Removed

F12_1516

Figure 12. Crane grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent of total 

removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G. 

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Percent Removed

Note: WD-40 contains a high percentage of volatile components that evaporate during initial drying. Total 

contaminant recovered was <30%. This creates a more variable result.

F13_1516

Figure 13. WD-40 grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent 

of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G. 

105

100

95

90

85

80

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Percent Removed

F14_1516

Figure 14. Christo-Lube grease removal efficiency—percent removed by the test solvent 

of total removed. First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G.
32

12. EXTENDED OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY TESTS AND ASSESSMENT

12.1 Refinement of Liquid Oxygen Mechanical Impact Test for Volatile Liquids

In response to the discrepant results between the ambient LOX mechanical impact ignition 

tests performed at MSFC and SSC, tests were repeated at each site witnessed by representatives 

of the NESC IAT. A table was developed to identify the variables be tested at each location. (See 

table  8.) The IAT assessment, results, and recommendations are shown in appendix I.1. Appendix I.2 contains oxygen compatibility test data generated at MSFC for this assessment. Ambient 

LOX mechanical impact tests of Solstice PF and L-14780 were repeated at JSC-WSTF using the 

modified test parameters. Discussion of the test parameter analyses and final results are shown in 

appendix I.3. 

Table 8. Matrix of variables tested for the independent assessment.

LOX Impact Threshold Testing MSFC JSC-WSTF

Insert disks No inserts Add Inserts

MSFC technician prepare samples MSFC and JSC-WSTF cleaning

JSC-WSTF technician prepare samples JSC-WSTF and MSFC cleaning

11/16-inch sample cup

Cleaning JSC-WSTF cleaning MSFC cleaning

Common solvent filtration Same solvent container and filters

Test with solvent from the same container Standard MSFC method Standard JSC-WSTF method

Humidity Low High

Rebound catcher Use* Use

*Test not performed due to shortage of specimen cups.

12.1.1 Modified Test Parameters

The modified test parameters developed as a result of the independent assessment do not 

deviate from the ASTM G86-98a test protocols,24 but are refinements determined to be necessary 

for repeatability when testing volatile liquids such as cleaning solvents using a grease cup. These 

refinements will be recommended to ASTM committee G04 for potential incorporation into the test 

method. The refined test parameters were as follows:

(1) Acceptance criteria: Reactions occurring when the striker pin impacts the test material 

alone are counted towards the acceptance criteria. Reactions resulting from nonuniform impacts on 

the edge of the grease cup, which may expose fresh aluminum or create point or line contact, are 

unreliable indicators of the reactivity of the material and are disregarded. 
33

(2) Use of rebound catcher: The rebound catcher, required for the high-pressure mechanical 

impact test (NASA-STD-6001, Test 13B),25 is not required for test 13A by ASTM G86-98a.24 Use of 

the rebound catcher reduces uncontrolled variables such as a shift in position of the grease cup after 

the initial impact or partial vaporization of the test sample that may result in a reaction on a secondary impact after no reaction on the initial, controlled impact. 

(3) Use the stainless steel insert disk under the grease cup within the sample cup: Use of the 

insert disk provides a more rigid impact surface and thus a more rigorous test. ASTM G86-98a24 is 

unclear on when the insert disk is to be used. 

(4) Solvent sample preparation: Filter the solvent to remove any background particulate 

prior to test. 

(5) Humidity control: Prepare test samples in an area with relative humidity <60% for 

improved test sensitivity.

(6) Grease cup dimensions: Use the original ASTM G86-8930 grease cup dimensions for 

consistency. Conversion of ASTM G86 from inch-pound to metric units created a slight disparity in 

grease cup dimensions from older stock to newly manufactured stock. 

Due to the difficulty of placing and retaining the grease cup in the center of the sample cup 

that is then filled with LOX, the IAT recommended the development of a one-piece grease cup/

sample cup for future tests. This would reduce the number of false indications due to the striker pin 

impacting the edge of the grease cup.

12.1.2 Liquid Oxygen Mechanical Impact Test Results Using the Refined Test Parameters

LOX mechanical impact tests of Solstice PF and L-14780 were repeated at JSC-WSTF in 

September 2014 using the modified test parameters. In these tests, both solvents met the screening 

criteria at 98 J (72 ft-lb). Solstice reacted once in 61 impacts at 98 J (72 ft-lb). L-14780 showed no 

reactions in 70 impacts at 98 J (72 ft-lb) (app. I.3). These results were consistent with the original 

test results seen at MSFC, therefore, the tests were not repeated with the modified test parameters 

at MSFC. 

12.2 Heat of Combustion Tests

To supplement the AIT and LOX mechanical impact data, heat of combustion (HOC) tests 

were performed at JSC-WSTF for Solstice PF, L-14780, and AK-225G. HOC tests were performed 

in accordance with ASTM D4809, Standard Test Method for Heat of Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter (Precision Method).12 HOC is a measure of the energy released 

per gram of material should an ignition occur. It is an indicator of the potential for the material, 

if ignited, to ignite an adjacent material within the oxygen system and thus propagate the kindling 

chain. HOC test results for these solvents, compared to some nonmetals commonly used within oxygen systems, are shown in table 9.
34

Table 9. Heat of combustion for solvents versus common nonmetals used in oxygen service.30

Comparison Materials

Heat of Combustion (cal/g) 

at 3.45 MPa (500 psia)

JSC-WSTF Test Data 2014

Guidance per ASTM G63-99, 

Section 7.6.6:

<2,500 cal/g Preferred

2,500 to 10,000 cal/g Use With Care

>10,000 cal/g Poor

Common nonmetals 

used successfully in 

oxygen service

FluoroGreen E600 2,400*

PTFE 1,700*

PCTFE 2,557*

Honeywell Solstice PF 2,448

3M L-14780 1,925

Asahi AK-225G 1,153

Isopropyl alcohol (a flammable solvent) 7,165*

* Reference appendix I.3.

12.3 Oxygen Compatibility Analysis of Solvents

JSC-WSTF performed an analysis of the oxygen compatibility of Solstice PF and L-14780 

versus AK-225G using the approach described in ASTM G63-99, Standard Guide for Evaluating 

Nonmetallic Materials for Oxygen Service31 for performing an Oxygen Compatibility Assessment 

(OCA). An OCA as defined in ASTM G63-99 requires definition of the system within which the 

material will be used, including temperature, pressure, and configuration. The oxygen system within 

which a cleaning solvent might be entrapped due to a process escape is undefined, as is the quantity 

of solvent that might be entrapped. To evaluate the potential risk of using a solvent with known 

reactive properties for cleaning an oxygen system, engineering judgment is required to compare the 

properties of the solvent with those of other solvents and nonmetals that have been successfully used 

with oxygen systems in the past. This is the basis of the oxygen compatibility analysis performed by 

JSC-WSTF for this study and shown in appendix I.3. 

Based on this oxygen compatibility analysis, Solstice PF and L-14780 have been determined 

to be an acceptable flammability risk for cleaning and NVR verification of NASA propulsion oxygen 

systems and associated hardware. These solvents are safe for use with reasonable efforts to assure 

that the solvent is adequately removed prior to introduction of oxygen to the system. Because these 

solvents are somewhat more reactive than the historically used solvents, CFC-113 and HCFC-225/

HCFC-225cb, additional precautions, such as the use of hydrocarbon detectors to verify solvent 

removal, are recommended.
35

13. ON-SITE VENDOR DEMONSTRATIONS

13.1 Purpose of the On-Site Demonstrations

Both of the solvents selected as the final candidates to replace AK-225G have boiling points 

below 32 °C (90 °F) and therefore are expected to require some modifications to current procedures 

to prevent excessive loss. The suppliers of these solvents were invited to visit MSFC and SSC to 

demonstrate the use of their product to the end users and to answer questions. Honeywell and 3M 

accepted this invitation to provide a demonstration at both facilities. M&P engineers from MSFC 

witnessed these demonstrations at both facilities. 

13.2 Honeywell Demonstrations

The boiling point of Honeywell Solstice PF is 19 °C (66 °F), below the typical operating 

temperatures of cleanrooms and laboratories at MSFC and SSC, and below ambient temperatures 

in Huntsville, Alabama, and the Gulf Coast of Mississippi during a significant portion of the year. 

Propulsion test operations are performed year-around at both locations and component processing 

operations must frequently be performed without the benefit of air conditioning. Solstice PF must 

be shipped and stored in pressure vessels due to the low boiling point. The primary purpose of the 

Honeywell demonstrations was to alleviate concerns that the solvent would boil away too quickly for 

practical use, or require costly special handling methods. 

13.2.1 Honeywell Demonstration at Stennis Space Center

Concerns were raised early in this project whether a solvent with a boiling point of 19 °C 

(66 °F) would be impractical for use during the summer months in south Mississippi. To alleviate 

these concerns, representatives of Honeywell visited SSC on September 18–19, 2013, to demonstrate 

Solstice PF to SSC engineers and technicians. A Honeywell chemist (fig. 15) demonstrated the product at the SSC Component Processing Facility. This facility is an open-air shop with large doors that 

uses localized filtration (such as clean tents) when required. The day of this demonstration was warm 

and the doors were open. The ambient temperature was 30 °C (86 °F) with 83% relative humidity. 

The report for this demonstration at SSC is shown in appendix J.1. 

13.2.2 Honeywell Demonstration at Marshall Space Flight Center

On November 4–6, 2013, representatives of Honeywell visited MSFC to discuss the potential 

use of Solstice PF in the vapor degreaser currently used with AK-225G in the MSFC Test Laboratory’s Valve and Components Lab. The boiling point of Solstice PF is much lower than AK-225G; 

therefore, there was concern that Solstice PF would be ineffective as a vapor degreasing solvent. As 

a minimum, it was expected that major modifications to, or replacement of, this vapor degreaser 

would be required. To alleviate these concerns, Honeywell brought a vapor degreaser demonstration 

unit to MSFC to show how their product could perform in equipment adapted for that purpose.
36

Figure 15. A Honeywell chemist demonstrating Solstice PF with an SSC 

Component Processing Facility technician.

During this visit, representatives of Honeywell also demonstrated Solstice PF to MSFC engineers 

and technicians in field cleaning operations within MSFC propulsion test areas. Appendix J.2 contains a summary of these demonstrations. 

13.2.3 Feedback From the Honeywell Demonstrations

The feedback from the demonstrations of Solstice PF at SSC and MSFC was positive. Users 

at both facilities recommended proceeding with Solstice PF as a potential replacement candidate for 

AK-225G. The requirements to transport and store Solstice PF in pressure vessels were discussed 

during the demonstrations at SSC and MSFC. Users at both facilities considered these requirements 

to be only a minor inconvenience that could even potentially save storage and disposal costs with 

a cylinder exchange program. Technicians at MSFC liked the convenience of dispensing solvent 

directly from a small pressure vessel with a hose and nozzle rather than transferring and dispensing 

it from the pressurized canister sprayers currently used with AK-225G.

13.2.4 Solstice Performance Fluid Spray Cleaner Product

It was noted during the demonstration at MSFC that the Solstice PF Spray Cleaner product 

(app. B.10), which contains Solstice 1234ze as the propellant, is a different product that must be 

considered separately from the single component Solstice PF liquid. Unlike Solstice PF (1233zd(E), 

trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene) which has no upper explosion limit or lower explosion limit 

in air (app. B.2), Solstice 1234ze (trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoroprop-1-ene) exhibits flame limits in air at 

temperatures in excess of 28 °C (82.4 °F) (app. B.11). Solstice 1234ze propellant dissolved in Solstice 

PF could alter the flammability of Solstice PF in oxygen. Therefore, Solstice PF spray cleaner should 
37

not be used as a substitute for Solstice PF for cleaning components for oxygen service without separate oxygen compatibility tests for this product. When needed, Solstice PF should be pressurized 

with gaseous nitrogen (GN2). Solstice PF may also be pressurized by heating the vessel in which it is 

stored with a heating blanket. 

13.3 3M Demonstrations

The boiling point of L-14780 is 28–30 °C (82–86 °F), significantly lower than the boiling 

point of AK-225G and well within the range of ambient temperatures in Huntsville, Alabama, and 

the Gulf Coast of Mississippi during the summer months. Although this is higher than the boiling 

point of Solstice PF, L-14780 may also require modified procedures for shipping, storage, and use. 

Representatives from 3M were invited to demonstrate their product at MSFC and SSC to obtain user 

feedback prior to the final down-selection. 

13.3.1 3M Demonstration at Marshall Space Flight Center

On August 20, 2014, representatives of 3M, including a solvent chemist, visited MSFC to 

discuss the potential use of L-14780 in the vapor degreaser currently used in the Valve and Components Lab, and to demonstrate the use of their product in manual cleaning applications to MSFC 

Test Laboratory engineers and technicians. They also answered questions from the users regarding 

solvent testing, distillation, and handling. 

13.3.1.1 Nonvolatile Residue Verification With L-14780. During the 3M demonstration at 

MSFC, technicians in the Valve and Components Lab tried L-14780 with their NVR sampling and 

verification apparatus. During this trial, a residue was detected in the FTIR spectrometer that partially overlapped and interfered with the hydrocarbon peaks used to measure residual NVR contamination. This was the same concern noted in section 4.2. The 3M chemist stated that this residue was 

probably one of the stabilizers. 3M agreed to supply samples of the stabilizers used in L-14780 for 

comparison to the residue detected in these tests.

13.3.2 3M Demonstration at Stennis Space Center

Immediately after the demonstration at MSFC, the 3M representatives traveled to south Mississippi to demonstrate their product at SSC the following day. On August 21, 2014, the 3M representatives 

demonstrated their product at the SSC Component Processing Facility. A 3M chemist demonstrated 

use of L-14780 for cleaning of several components including complex tubing. (See fig. 16.)

Requirements for packaging, transportation, and shipping of L-14780 were discussed during 

these meetings. 3M informed NASA that L-14780 may be shipped and stored in 4-liter (1-gallon) 

bottles or smaller but, due to its boiling point and vapor pressure, larger volumes of L-14780 require 

stronger containers than the lined carbon steel pails and drums used for AK-225G. L-14780 may be 

shipped and stored in stainless steel 55-gallon drums or 5-gallon pressure vessels. For large quantity 

users, a container exchange program could be arranged.
38

Figure 16. A 3M chemist demonstrating L-14780 with an SSC 

Component Processing Facility technician.

13.3.3 Feedback From the 3M Demonstrations

The feedback from the demonstrations of L-14780 at SSC and MSFC was mostly positive. 

Users at both facilities recommended proceeding with L-14780 as a potential replacement candidate 

for AK-225G. It was noted, however, that one of the solvent stabilizers apparently interfered with the 

hydrocarbon peaks measured during verification of NVR using FTIR. This would require MSFC 

and SSC labs to use a different quantitative method to verify NVR. It was also noted that use of 

a four-component solvent (L-14780 is an azeotrope of methyl perfluoropropyl ether and tDCE plus 

two stabilizer chemicals) would require more analytical monitoring for quality control during distillation and recycling than AK-225G, a one component solvent that does not require a stabilizer. 
39

14. FINAL DOWN-SELECTION

14.1 Data Evaluated for the Final Down-Selection

A TIM was convened at JSC-WSTF on October 21–22, 2014, to select the final replacement candidate for AK-225G. All of the data obtained to date was summarized and reviewed. The 

oxygen compatibility test data were discussed in detail and the oxygen compatibility analysis was 

presented by JSC-WSTF. A table of decision parameters was presented and the committee rated the 

final solvent candidates on these parameters. The results of this assessment are shown in table 10. 

An X indicates the preferred solvent for that parameter.

Table 10. Decision point parameters for the selection of a replacement for AK-225G.

Honeywell 

Solstice PF

3M

L-14780

No 

Preference Notes

SHE

Environmental X Based on GWP and VOC comparison

Health and safety X Based on Acceptable Exposure Limit comparison

Technical/performance

Metals compatibility X L-14780 corrosion on carbon steel after exposure and storage 

noted, but not considered a concern for selection

Nonmetal compatibility X

Cleaning effectiveness X

NVR verification X L-14780 complicates NVR analysis with the FTIR method. 

Correction for interference peak is required. Residue detected 

in some tests

Oxygen compatibility X L-14780—Analysis on the FTIR residue should be performed. 

Vendor commitment on stabilizer consistency required

Implementation

Hands on X* Operator preference 

Solvent cost X Based on vendor feedback, not firm quotes

Reclamation X

Facility mods X Both require some facility mods to vapor degreaser and distillers 

for different boiling point, heat of vaporization, etc.

Equipment needs X Solstice PF need for pressure vessels

Vendor readiness X Solstice PF now manufactured in Louisiana

Solvent maintenance cost X L-14780 requires four component monitoring / possible adjustments

Disposal cost X tDCE in L-14780 can go acidic requiring hazardous disposal

*Slight preference.
40

14.2 Final Selection

14.2.1 Acceptability for Technical Performance

The project team agreed that Solstice PF and L-14780 met the primary technical performance 

requirements, but with some questions remaining regarding L-14780:

(1) The cleaning efficiency of both solvents was comparable to AK-225G for the contaminants of concern. Both solvents were capable of achieving the cleanliness requirements for MSFC 

and SSC propulsion oxygen systems hardware, GSE, and associated test systems. 

(2) Materials compatibility for both solvents was equal to or better than AK-225G, with the 

exception of L-14780 with 4140 low alloy carbon steel. Although used in test support apparatus, low 

alloy carbon steel is unusual in the construction of NASA propulsion oxygen systems, therefore the 

team concluded that this is not a barrier to the use of L-14780 with systems that do not contain low 

alloy carbon steel. L-14780 should not be used to clean other systems containing low alloy carbon 

steels without further investigation and precautions to prevent corrosion.

(3) Solstice PF and L-14780 as tested were judged to be acceptable for use with NASA propulsion oxygen systems, with reasonable efforts to assure that the solvent is adequately removed prior 

to the introduction of oxygen to the system. Although both solvents were shown to be more reactive 

in oxygen than CFC-113 or HCFC-225/HCFC-225cb, their flammability characteristics were ‘in 

family’ with other nonmetals that have been used safely within oxygen systems. Furthermore, the 

lower boiling points of these solvents contribute to faster drying and a reduction in the probability 

of solvent entrapment within an oxygen system component after cleaning. 

(4) Two concerns remained regarding the suitability of L-14780 for use in MSFC and SSC 

propulsion oxygen system applications:

(a) A residue was detected in the test samples of L-14780 that interfered with the MSFC/

SSC test method for verification of NVR by FTIR. In some samples tested gravimetrically, the residue exceeded the solvent residue limits required by MSFC and SSC specifications. If the residue was 

confirmed to be a stabilizer of L-14780 rather than a contaminant that could be removed by distillation without affecting the L-14780, then L-14780 as currently formulated may be unsuitable for 

use by MSFC and SSC. It was also recommended that the NVR residue attributed to the stabilizer 

should be tested for HOC to assure that this residue does not pose a greater flammability risk than 

other contaminants intended to be precluded by the 1 mg/0.1 m2 NVR cleanliness limit for NASA 

propulsion oxygen systems.

(b) It was noted that the L-14780 formula tested is an azeotrope only at the boiling point 

of the solvent. The boiling point of the HFE component is 34 oC (93 oF), significantly lower than the 

boiling point of tDCE, 48 oC (118 oF). If an escape of L-14780 were left within an oxygen system 

component stored at a temperature below the boiling point, it is possible that the HFE fraction could 

evaporate preferentially leaving a solvent enriched in tDCE. Whether this enriched blend would pass 

the NASA criteria for oxygen compatibility is unknown.
41

The technical performance concerns remaining for L-14780 could potentially be resolved 

with more testing and, if necessary, reformulation of the stabilizer. However, the greater certainty of 

performance of a single component material made Solstice PF the preferred candidate. 

14.2.2 Safety, Health, and Environmental Factors

Solstice PF was clearly preferred over L-14780 for its lower toxicity and favorable environmental characteristics. Solstice PF has a higher AEL than AK-225G or L-14780. Solstice PF is also one 

of a new class olefin-based halogenated chemicals that breaks down rapidly in the atmosphere. It fully 

meets all currently identified environmental requirements and goals including very low GWP. Neither 

solvent had an objectionable odor. Both solvents were expected to be accepted by the end users.

14.2.3 Business Factors

As a single component solvent that does not require stabilizers, Solstice PF was preferred 

over the four component L-14780 azeotropic blend with stabilizers for implementation and business 

considerations. A single component material will require less analytical effort to monitor its chemical composition for quality assurance. Also, the performance of L-14780 is dependent on chemical 

stabilizers to prevent chemical breakdown of the tDCE component. These implementation issues are 

minor when purchasing and dispensing a cleaning solvent from small containers for one-time use, 

but become significant when the solvent is used in a vapor degreaser for an extended time period and 

when repeatedly recovered, distilled, and reused.

14.2.4 Selection of Honeywell Solstice Performance Fluid for Implementation

Honeywell Solstice PF was selected as the preferred solvent to replace AK-225G at MSFC 

and SSC. 3M L-14780 was identified as a potential backup should Solstice PF become unavailable 

in the future or should unforeseen obstacles to implementation arise during the final assessment 

phase. The remaining technical performance concerns noted in 14.2.1(4) for L-14780 would need to 

be resolved. As noted in section 3.3.2, DuPont Vertrel MCA, used in a two-step cleaning process, 

was also identified as a backup. The final selection of Solstice PF was driven by SHE factors, by the 

remaining technical questions regarding use of L-14780, and for business considerations related to 

the cost and complexity of monitoring and maintaining a multiple-component material.
42

15. COMPONENT LEVEL CLEANING AND IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENTS

15.1 Objectives of the Component Level Cleaning and Implementation Assessments

Investigations were performed at MSFC and SSC to assess the use of the new solvent in place 

of AK-225G in actual launch vehicle and engine test operations. The purpose of these investigations 

was to confirm that the solvent was suitable for use in field operations and to identify any potential 

issues with user acceptance. Necessary modifications to equipment and procedures were also noted 

during these activities to assess potential cost and schedule impacts of the transition from AK-225G 

to the new solvent. Personnel involved in these investigations were primarily the end users: engineers, 

test technicians, and laboratory personnel currently processing NASA propulsion oxygen system 

hardware. The objectives of the final component level cleaning and implementation assessments were 

to confirm the suitability of the replacement solvent in the intended final applications and to identify 

required modifications to equipment and procedures necessary to transition to the new solvent.

15.2 Marshall Space Flight Center End User Evaluations

Solstice PF was provided to the MSFC Propulsion Test office for direct comparison to 

AK-225G in actual field cleaning tasks. Solvent field trials were performed at test stand 116. Items 

cleaned at test stand 116 included flanges, B-nuts, tubing, piping, and instrumentation. The Propulsion Test technicians reported that they saw no difference in the cleaning performance or usage rate 

of Solstice PF versus AK-225G. Solstice PF was reported to seem colder and evaporate faster than 

AK-225G, but the faster evaporation was seen as a plus. Some icing from moisture condensation 

was observed on the aluminum foil on which parts were placed for cleaning, but not on the parts 

themselves. 

Due to the age of the vapor degreasing system in the Valve and Component Lab now used 

with AK-225G, a request had already been submitted to the capital plan for a replacement. Discussions were held with a vapor degreaser supplier to identify the requirements for a system using Solstice PF and verify that a system could be supplied within the current cost estimate. No other new 

equipment or modifications were identified as necessary. 

15.3 Stennis Space Cemter End User Evaluations

To verify the performance of the solvent in a shop operation, the cleaning trials similar to 

those performed during the vendor demonstrations were repeated for Solstice PF and L-14780. Flex 

hose, rigid tubing, and fittings from the Component Processing Facility were contaminated, cleaned, 

and quantitatively analyzed to measure cleaning efficiency. The results of these trials are shown in 

appendix K. 
43

SSC identified a capital requirement for a new distillation system designed to purify and contain Solstice PF. Purchase of a second distillation system will support transition from AK-225G to 

Solstice PF without disruption of operations. 

15.4 Laboratory Implementation Assessments

The MSFC M&P Contamination Lab performed three additional tests not described in the 

test plan. These tests were to:

(1) Confirm the effectiveness of Solstice PF to remove particulate.

(2) Confirm the capability of a real time hydrocarbon analyzer (‘sniffer’) to detect the presence of residual Solstice PF entrapped within hardware. 

(3) Evaluate the use of a gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer (GC/MS) for receiving 

inspection and determination of lot-to-lot consistency of Solstice PF. 

15.4.1 Particulate Removal 

The particulate removal test was designed to verify that rinsing with Solstice PF would meet 

the particulate requirements for propulsion system components. In accordance with MSFC-SPEC164D, Cleanliness of Components for Use in Oxygen, Fuel, and Pneumatic Systems, Specification 

for,1 oxygen systems and associated hardware must be verified free of particulate >800 μ in longest 

dimension, and silting of fine particulate is prohibited. For fuel system hardware, the particulate size 

limit is 400 μ. 

15.4.1.1 Particulate Removal Test 1. Three clean stainless steel panels, one for each solvent to be 

tested, were heavily contaminated with Course Test Dust (reference ISO 12103-1, Road Vehicles – Test 

Dust for Filter Evaluation—Part 1: Arizona Test Dust), type A4.32 The test dust was brushed through 

a No. 60 sieve, 250-μ (0.01-in) pore size, onto panels wetted with distilled water. The panels were then 

air dried in a filtered flow bench. The contaminated panels were rinsed with AK-225G, Solstice PF, 

and L-14780 from a PTFE squeeze bottle. A visual inspection with white task lighting showed that the 

particulate was not removed. The solvent flush was repeated with a Sure Shot® sprayer (Milwaukee 

Sprayer Mfg. Co., Inc.) pressurized to 70 psi. This removed most, but not all, of the particulate. The 

remaining particulate was successfully removed with solvent-moistened, lint-free wipers. 

15.4.1.2 Particulate Removal Test 2. Clean, dry stainless steel panels were lightly dusted with 

Course Test Dust using the No. 60 sieve and brush. For each of the three solvents, a flush from the 

PTFE squeeze bottle achieved visual cleanliness. The particulate removed from the panels was visible 

in the solvent captured from the flush when inspected with white light. 

15.4.1.3 Particulate Removal Conclusions. The conclusion of these particulate removal tests 

was that flushing of lightly contaminated surfaces is sufficient to meet the required particulate cleanliness levels, but heavily contaminated surfaces must be precleaned prior to flushing or cleaned manually. This is the current standard procedure.
44

15.4.2 Drying and Verification of Removal of Residual Solvent

The objective of this trial was to evaluate the drying properties of Solstice PF and to confirm 

that a real-time sensor could be used to detect the presence of Solstice PF within a component that 

was not adequately dried. The sensor used for this test was a handheld Yellow Jacket® AccuProbe 

UVTM Leak Detector, Model 69336, with solid electrolyte sensor (fig. 17). The sensor is used by holding a ‘sniffer’ probe at an orifice of a tube or other component to detect trace vapor from solvent that 

was inadequately removed from the part. The system was set on ‘high sensitivity.’

Figure 17. Hydrocarbon leak detector.

For each test, solvent was poured into a test article, the test article was capped (for tubes), 

and rocked or rotated to wet all interior surfaces. The tubes were stainless steel of various lengths 

and OD. The solvent was then poured out, the article was dried (or not), and the sniffer was used 

to detect residual solvent. The test scenarios and results are shown in table 11. L-14780 was not 

included in tests 3–8. These tests showed that:

• The sniffer detected AK-225G, Solstice PF, and L-14780.

• AK-225G and Solstice PF were removed to below the detection limit of the sniffer by low pressure 

purge for a sufficient length of time.

• Ambient drying for 2 hours was insufficient to remove AK-225G from inside a pipe but was sufficient 

to remove Solstice PF.

• Solstice PF appeared to dry more rapidly than AK-225G, consistent with the lower boiling point.
45

Table 11. Drying tests and test results.

Test No. Test Article Drying Method

Meter Reading

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 10-mL glass beaker Evaporated to dryness on a filtered 

flow bench

0 0 0

2 30.5 cm (12 in) – 0.1 cm (3/8 in) OD tube, 

wetted with 7 mL solvent.

None. Tube sampled on a flow bench 

for 20 min

1–5 1–4 1–2

3 3 m (10 ft) – 1.9 cm (3/4 in) OD tube—

straight

Purge with 34 kPa (5 psi) high purity 

air for 15 min

1 0

4 3 m (10 ft) – 0.6 (1/4 in) OD tube—straight Purge with 34 kPa (5 psi) high purity 

air for 15 min

0 0

5 3 m (10 ft) – 0.6 (1/4 in) OD tube—curved Purge with 34 kPa (5 psi) high purity 

air for 15 min

0 0

6 1.2 m (4 ft) – 1.3 cm (1/2 in) OD pipe 2-hr ambient dry, no purge 1–4 0

7 79 cm (31 in) – 0.1 cm (3/8 in) OD tube 15-min ambient dry, no purge 7 4

8 79 cm (31 in) – 0.1 cm (3/8 in) OD tube Purge with 34 kPa (5 psi) air for 5 min 2 4

15.4.3 Receiving Inspection and Determination of Lot-to-Lot Consistency

Three samples of Solstice PF from three lots were submitted to the MSFC Chemistry Laboratory for analysis by GC/MS to determine the constituents of the solvent and compare these lots for 

consistency. This was a first step toward determining a receiving inspection test for the solvent. 

The analysis showed that GC/MS could be used for receiving inspection and that all three 

lots contained >99% trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene (Marshall Space Flight Center Internal 

Report, EM10 (015-0001), dated January 7, 2015).

15.5 Follow-Up Investigation of L-14780 Residue

During the demonstrations of L-14780 at MSFC and SSC, residue from L-14780 was detected 

during NVR verification by the FTIR method. The SSC Gas and Materials Science Laboratory performed an evaluation of solvent residue from L-14780. A 200-mL sample of the solvent evaporated 

to dryness yielded 5.7 mg of residue, visible as dried droplets in the evaporating pan. This residue 

was analyzed by FTIR spectrometer. The FTIR results were compared to mineral oil and to a sample 

provided by 3M of one of the proprietary stabilizers used in L-14780. The residue from L-14780 

matched the reference spectra of the stabilizer. 

To be suitable for use as an NVR verification solvent for NASA rocket engine test facilities, 

solvents are required to have NVR background residue <2 ppm weight/weight or <1 mg NVR/

200 mL. For use as a cleaning solvent for propulsion systems, the MSFC purity requirement is 

≤10 mg NVR per 500 mL of solvent.1 The quantity of stabilizer detected in L-14780 exceeds both 

of these requirements. The solvent purity requirement may be achieved by distillation in-house to 

remove impurities. The stabilizer, however, is not an impurity, but is an essential component to inhibit 

the deterioration of the solvent. Discussion with a 3M chemist confirmed that the quantity of the 
46

stabilizer required by the 3M solvent specification exceeds these NASA purity requirements. This 

makes the current formulation of L-14780 unsuitable for use at MSFC or SSC. 

Solvent manufacturers use many different chemical formulas to stabilize their products. It is 

possible that the azeotrope of methyl perfluoropropyl ether and tDCE could be reformulated by 3M 

with a different stabilizer formula to meet the MSFC and SSC requirements for NVR background residue. This would be considered a new product by NASA and require testing as specified in appendix A. 
47

16. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

16.1 Conclusions of This Test Project

16.1.1 Honeywell Solstice Performance Fluid 

Honeywell Solstice PF is acceptable and preferred as the replacement for HCFC-225 solvent 

for cleaning and NVR verification sampling of NASA propulsion oxygen systems hardware, GSE, 

and associated test systems. Solstice PF is recommended for cleaning and NVR sampling in applications at NASA propulsion test facilities where AK-225G is currently used. 

16.1.2 3M L-14780 Developmental Material

3M L-14780 as formulated does not meet the solvent purity requirements for cleaning and 

NVR verification of NASA propulsion oxygen systems hardware, GSE, and associated test systems, 

due to the required concentration of the stabilizer. This issue could potentially be resolved by reformulation of the stabilizer and testing of the reformulated product. 

16.1.3 Flammability of Solstice Performance Fluid and L-14780 in Enriched Oxygen Environments 

Solstice PF and L-14780 were shown to be flammable in enriched oxygen environments and 

more reactive than AK-225G. However, it was concluded that these products could be safely used 

with propulsion oxygen systems when reasonable precautions are in place to assure that the solvent 

is adequately removed prior to introduction of oxygen to the system. Uncertainties remain regarding 

the stability of the HFE/tDCE ratio of L-14780 when stored at a temperature lower than the boiling 

point of the azeotrope. This could potentially affect the flammability risk of solvent inadvertently 

left within an oxygen system component. Also, the relative flammability of a stabilizer residue versus 

other NVR contaminants has not been assessed. Due to these uncertainties, L-14780 is judged to be 

a higher risk than Solstice PF. 

16.1.4 Materials or Contaminants Other Than Those Tested

No claim is made here regarding the safety or efficacy of Solstice PF or L-14780 with materials or contaminants other than those tested. 

16.1.5 Breathing Oxygen Systems

No claim is made here regarding the suitability of Solstice PF or L-14780 for use with breathing oxygen systems.
48

16.2 Recommendations

16.2.1 Implementation of Solstice Performance Fluid

MSFC and SSC user organizations should proceed to implement Solstice PF as the replacement for AK-225G on a schedule to avoid disruption of propulsion test operations, but prior to the 

depletion of stockpiled AK-225G. The following future work was identified during the test program 

to be addressed during the implementation phase:

• Purchase of a vapor degreaser system for the MSFC Test Laboratory Valve and Component Lab 

tailored for Solstice PF, to be used in parallel with the AK-225G system during the transition.

• Purchase of a distillation system for the SSC Component Processing Facility tailored for Solstice 

PF, to be used in parallel with the AK-225G system during the transition.

• Development of a NASA procurement specification for Solstice PF, to include cleanliness requirements and to prohibit use of pressurizing gases other than GN2.

• Revision of MSFC and SSC procedures and work instructions to add Solstice PF as an approved 

solvent. This includes determination of required changes to process support equipment and processing parameters to implement Solstice PF in place of AK-225G in these procedures. 

• Establishment of a procurement contract with Honeywell or a designated distributer to supply 

Solstice PF in bulk to MSFC and SSC, with arrangements for a container exchange program to 

minimize cost. 

• Verification that Solstice PF is supplied to SSC and MSFC sufficiently pure to be used as a cleaner 

for propulsion oxygen systems. This includes visits to the Honeywell manufacturing facility for 

Solstice PF by NASA personnel to validate the Honeywell quality assurance processes, and the 

development and implementation of receiving inspection tests at NASA to verify quality. 

16.2.2 3M L-14780 as a Backup Replacement Solvent

The 3M azeotrope of methyl perfluoropropyl ether and trans-1,2 dichloroethylene should be 

considered a backup replacement solvent for Solstice PF if the product can be formulated with a stabilizer that meets the SSC NVR requirement of <2 ppm. This reformulated product would require 

testing accordance with the test plan in appendix A and to resolve open questions regarding storage 

of an azeotropic product at nonazeotropic temperatures.

16.2.3 Testing of Solstice Performance Fluid Spray Cleaner

Solstice PF spray cleaner, which contains the propellant Solstice 1234ze, should be tested for 

oxygen compatibility to assure that this product form does not present a hazard when used with oxygen systems. Oxygen compatibility testing should include the following:
49

• Ambient LOX mechanical impact in accordance with ASTM G86,24 using the modified test parameters specified in section 12.1.1.

• AIT in accordance with ASTM G72 26 with changes as specified in section 9.1.2.1.

• Heat of Combustion in accordance with ASTM D4809.12

• Analysis of oxygen compatibility relative to Solstice PF as described in section 12.3.
50
51

REFERENCES

 1. MSFC-SPEC-164D, Cleanliness of Components for Use in Oxygen, Fuel, and Pneumatic 

Systems, Specification for, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, January 30, 

2014.

 2. JSC SE-S-0073F, Space Shuttle Specification: Fluid Procurement and Use Control, NASA 

Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, May 20, 1994. 

 3. JSC SE-S-0073G, Space Shuttle Specification: Fluid Procurement and Use Control, NASA 

Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, May 27, 1999.

 4. Roberts, M.B.; Gschwender, L.J.; and Snyder, Jr., C.E.: AFRL-ML-WP-TR-2003-4040, The 

Wipe Solvent Program, Air Force Research Laboratory, Bedford, MA, February 2003.

 5. ASTM G127 - 95(2008), Standard Guide for the Selection of Cleaning Agents for Oxygen Systems, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2008, <http://www.astm.org>.

 6. ASTM MNL36-2nd, Safe Use of Oxygen and Oxygen Systems: Handbook for Design,

Operation, and Maintenance: 2nd Edition, H.D. Beeson, S.R. Smith, and W.F. Stewart, Eds., 

ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2007, <http://www.astm.org>.

 7. Beeson, H.; Beisinger, P.; Delgado, R.; and Antin, N.: “Evaluation of Solvent Alternatives for 

Cleaning of Oxygen Systems,” NASA/CP—1999–209258, Proceedings of the Third Aerospace 

Environmental Technology Conference, A.F. Whitaker, D.R. Cross, S.V. Caruso, and M. ClarkIngram, Eds., NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, pp. 373–377, April 1999.

 8. Melton, D.: “Critical Surface Cleaning and Verification Alternatives,” NASA/CP—2001–210417, 

Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Aerospace Materials, Processes, and Environmental Technology, D.E. Griffin and D. Cross Stanley, Eds., NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, 

AL, pp. 899–902, September 2000.

 9. Melendez, O.; Trizzino, M.; and Fedderson, B.: “Evaluation of AK-225®, Vertrel® MCA, 

and HFE A 7100 as Alternative Solvents for Precision Cleaning and Verification Technology,” 

in Proceedings of the Second Aerospace Environmental Technology Conference, A.F. Whitaker, 

M. Clark-Ingram, and S.L. Hessler, Eds., NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, 

August 6–8, 1996, NASA Conference Publication 3349, pp. 319–327, March 1997.

10. Ross, H.R.: “The Use of HFC (CFC Free) Processes at the NASA Stennis Space Center,” 

in Proceedings of the Second Aerospace Environmental Technology Conference, A.F. Whitaker, 

M. Clark-Ingram, and S.L. Hessler, Eds., NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, 

August 6–8, 1996, NASA Conference Publication 3349, pp. 299–309, March 1997.
52

11. Wittman, C.L.; and Eichinger, E.C.: “The Search for a Replacement for CFC 113 in the Precision Cleaning and Verification of Shuttle Hardware,” in Proceedings of the Second Aerospace 

Environmental Technology Conference, A.F. Whitaker, M. Clark-Ingram, and S.L. Hessler, Eds., 

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, August 6–8, 1996, NASA Conference 

Publication 3349, pp. 311–318, March 1997.

12. ASTM D4809-13, Standard Test Method for Heat of Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon 

Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter (Precision Method), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 

PA, 2013, <http://www.astm.org>.

13. Mitchell, M.; and Lowrey, N.: “The Search for Nonflammable Solvent Alternatives for Cleaning 

Aerospace Oxygen Systems,” <http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130003208.

pdf>, Conference Presentation, 2012 International Workshop on Environment and Alternative 

Energy, Greenbelt, MD, December 4–7, 2012.

14. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Vol. 9, Part 63, Subpart F, Table 2, <http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/

CFR-2011-title40-vol9/xml/CFR-2011-title40-vol9-part63.xml#seqnum63.56>, July 1, 2011.

15. Federal Register, 40 CFR, Vol. 1, Subchapter C, Part 51.100(s), <http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/ 

retrieveECFR?gp=1&SID=8a0f4130892dbc70a23fd84d74dc96c0&ty=HTML&h=L&r=PART

&n=pt40.2.51#se40.2.51_1100>, July 1, 1999.

16. Myhre, G.; Shindell, D.; Breon, F.-M.; et al.: “Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing,” 

in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the 

Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, 

G.-K. Plattner, et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New 

York, NY, USA, 2013.

17. Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 75, 48 CFR Parts 1, 2, 11, 23, and 52, Federal Acquisition Regulation; Biobased Procurements (final rule), section II.A.5, <http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/

FR-2012-04-18/html/2012-9291.htm>, April 18, 2012.

18. MSFC-SPEC-164B, Cleanliness of Components for Use in Oxygen, Fuel, and Pneumatic 

Systems, Specification for, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, November 19, 

1994.

19. ASTM D1133-13, Standard Test Method for Kauri-Butanol Value of Hydrocarbon Solvents, 

ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013, <http://www.astm.org>.

20. MIL-PRF-83282D, Amendment 1, Performance Specification: Hydraulic Fluid, Fire Resistant, 

Synthetic Hydrocarbon Base, NATO Code Number H-537, December 10, 1997.
53

21. ASTM F483-09 (Reapproved 2014), Standard Practice for Total Immersion Corrosion Test 

for Aircraft Maintenance Chemicals, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, 

<http://www.astm.org>.

22. ASTM D2240-05 (Reapproved 2010), Standard Test Method for Rubber Property—Durometer 

Hardness, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010, <http://www.astm.org>.

23. MIL-G-21569B(SHIPS), Military Specification, Gaskets, Cylinder Liner Seal, Synthetic Rubber, Naval Sea Systems Command (Ship Systems), February 5, 1965; validated May 9, 1989.

24. ASTM G86-98a (Reapproved 2011), Standard Test Method for Determining Ignition Sensitivity of Materials to Mechanical Impact in Ambient Liquid Oxygen and Pressurized Liquid 

and Gaseous Oxygen Environments, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011, 

<http://www.astm.org>.

25. NASA-STD-6001B, Flammability, Offgassing, and Compatibility Requirements and Test Procedures, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, August 26, 2011.

26. ASTM G72/G72M-09, Standard Test Method for Autogenous Ignition Temperature of Liquids and Solids in a High-Pressure Oxygen-Enriched Environment, ASTM International, 

West Conshohocken, PA, 2009, <http://www.astm.org>.

27. WSTF-IR-0134, United States Air Force Wipe Solvent Testing, Investigative Report, Lyndon B. 

Johnson Space Center, White Sands Test Facility, Las Cruces, NM, November 13, 2000.

28. ASTM E1235-08, Standard Test Method for Gravimetric Determination of Nonvolatile 

Residue (NVR) in Environmentally Controlled Areas for Spacecraft, ASTM International, West 

Conshohocken, PA, 2008, <http://www.astm.org>.

29. ASTM D4265-98 (Reapproved 2007), Standard Guide for Evaluating Stain Removal Performance in Home Laundering, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2007, <http://

www.astm.org>.

30. ASTM G86-89 (Reapproved 1995), Standard Test Method for Determining Ignition Sensitivity 

of Materials to Mechanical Impact in Pressurized Oxygen Environments, ASTM International, 

West Conshohocken, PA, 1995, <www.astm.org>.

31. ASTM G63-99 (Reapproved 2007), Standard Guide for Evaluating Nonmetallic Materials 

for Oxygen Service, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2007, <http://www.astm.

org>.

32. ISO 12103-1, Road Vehicles—Test Dust for Filter Evaluation—Part 1: Arizona Test Dust, First 

edition, December 15, 1997.
1

APPENDIX A—TEST PLAN FOR SOLVENT REPLACEMENT FOR CLEANING

AND VERIFICATION SAMPLING OF MSFC/SSC PROPULSION 

OXYGEN SYSTEMS HARDWARE, GROUND SUPPORT 

EQUIPMENT, AND ASSOCIATED TEST SYSTEMS, REVISION A, 

JULY 26, 2013

The test plan for solvent replacement for cleaning and verification sampling is given in appendix A.
Revision A 7/26/2013

1

Test Plan for Solvent Replacement for Cleaning and Verification Sampling of MSFC/SSC Propulsion 

Oxygen Systems Hardware, Ground Support Equipment, and Associated Test Systems

MSFC/SSC joint test plan 

Contacts:

MSFC: Mark Mitchell (EM50) SSC: Bruce Farner (RA20)

M&P Environmental Effects Branch (228) 688-2967

(256) 544-5860

WSTF: Susana Harper (RF111) (For LOX/GOX flammability and reactivity testing)

(575) 524-5418

INTRODUCTION

Liquid and gaseous oxygen (LOX/GOX) systems used in bipropellant propulsion 

systems require a high level of cleanliness to support engine performance requirements 

and prevent mishaps. Systems to be wetted by gaseous or liquid oxygen, and systems 

providing pressurization or purge (P&P) gases to these systems, must be clean, 

particularly of hydrocarbons and large (> 800 μ) particles, to avoid the potential hazard 

of a reaction and subsequent fire or explosion. Solvents used to clean and verify the 

cleanliness of oxygen systems and supporting test hardware must be compatible with 

the materials of construction of these systems and effective at removing expected 

contaminants to the level required. When complete removal of residual cleaning 

solvent from the component or system cannot be verified with a high level of 

confidence, the solvent must also be minimally reactive with LOX/GOX at the system use 

conditions. This test plan establishes test methods for evaluating solvents to be used 

for cleaning of propulsion oxygen systems and associated P&P systems, ground support 

equipment, and test systems at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Stennis Space 

Center (SSC), and for sampling of these systems for verification of cleanliness. 

Historically, chlorofluorcarbon-113 (CFC-113) solvent was used for these 

applications. When CFC-113, a Class I ozone-depleting substance (ODS) was banned in 

the 1990’s, hydrochlorofluorocarbon-2251(HCFC-225), a Class II ODS, was selected by 

MSFC and SSC to replace CFC-113 for final cleaning and verification where a suitable 

non-ODS replacement could not be found. MSFC and SSC later converted from HCFC225 to the single isomer HCFC-225cb2

, a less toxic product. In this test plan, HCFC-225cb 

is used as the baseline solvent for comparison of cleaning efficiency and materials 

compatibility. The goal is to identify a single replacement solvent that meets or exceeds 

the performance of HCFC-225cb in all user applications. Given the physical limitations 

of non-ODS solvents, this may not be fully achievable and selective compromises may be 

required.

 

1 Manufactured by Asahi Glass Company, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; supplied in North America by AGC Chemicals Americas, Exton, PA, under the 

product name Asahiklin AK-225. AK-225 is a blend of two isomers, 3,3-Dichloro-1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225ca) (Chemical Abstract 

Service [CAS] Registry Number 422-56-0), and 1,3-Dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb) (CAS Number 507-55-1). This solvent is 

sometimes referred to as HCFC-225ca/cb.

2 Manufactured by Asahi Glass Company, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; supplied in North America by AGC Chemicals Americas, Exton, PA, under the 

product name Asahiklin AK-225G. AK-225G contains only the less toxic isomer (>99%) 1,3-Dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb) 

(CAS Number 507-55-1). This solvent has been referred to in some publications as HCFC-225G.
Revision A 7/26/2013

2

1. Scope

1.1.This plan describes test methods for evaluating the suitability of solvents for cleaning of 

LOX/GOX and supporting system components and for sampling of these components to verify removal 

of nonvolatile residues (NVR). 

1.2.Test procedures are specified for:

a. Measuring and analyzing the background nonvolatile residue (NVR) content in as-received 

(and purified, if required) solvent.

Rationale: Solvent used to clean and verify LOX/GOX systems must have a low background 

NVR. The limit for background NVR varies by application. The highest limit permitted for 

cleaning of MSFC propulsion systems is 4 mg/200mL (MSFC-SPEC-164C). Rinse solvent for 

NVR verification at SSC is limited to a background NVR of 1 mg/200mL. This test will 

determine whether the as-delivered test solvent must be purified prior to testing for cleaning 

efficiency and prior to production use. 

b. Evaluating the compatibility of cleaning solvents with materials used to construct liquid and 

gaseous oxygen (LOX/GOX) systems.

Rationale: Solvents must not corrode the metals of the hardware being cleaned. To minimize 

processing costs, solvents that are compatible with commonly used nonmetals (soft goods) 

are preferred. However, aggressive NVR cleaning solvents such as HCFC-225cb are not 

compatible with some soft goods such as Viton. Testing of solvents with nonmetals is 

performed for comparison with other solvents and to identify materials that will require 

special handling, such as removal and replacement, when the solvent is used.

c. Measuring the effectiveness of the cleaning solvent at removing contaminants commonly 

requiring cleaning from LOX/GOX systems.

Rationale: The solvent must be capable of removing contaminants that pose a safety hazard 

to oxygen systems. The solvent must be capable of removing contaminants to below 1 

mg/0.1m2, the pass/fail criterion for most LOX/GOX system components. No solvent is 100% 

effective at cleaning all types of contaminants; therefore a baseline solvent (in this case 

HCFC-225cb) is tested in parallel for comparison purposes. 

d. Evaluating the reactivity of the solvent in LOX/GOX.

Rationale: For safe use in LOX/GOX systems where complete removal of the solvent cannot 

be assured, the solvent must be non-reactive with LOX/GOX at the expected temperature 

and pressure conditions of the system. Historically, due to the variety of LOX/GOX systems 

that may be cleaned at MSFC and SSC and the extreme consequences of a fire in one of these 

systems, very conservative test methods and acceptance criteria have been used. CFC-113, 

HCFC-225ca/cb and HCFC-225cb all passed the highest acceptance criteria for the test 

methods in this plan.

1.3.These cleaning solvent criteria are discussed in ASTM G 127 Standard Guide for the Selection of 

Cleaning Agents for Oxygen Systems. ASTM G 127 lists materials and test methods to be considered 

when selecting cleaning agents. The materials and contaminants specified in this plan were selected 

using ASTM G 127 and ASTM MNL36 Safe Use of Oxygen and Oxygen Systems as a guide; considering

historical and current propulsion system designs; and with input from users at NASA’s Marshall Space 
Revision A 7/26/2013

3

Flight Center and its Michoud Assembly Facility and at Stennis Space Center regarding cleaning 

challenges with LOX/GOX systems encountered at these locations. Future designs, system operating 

conditions, and other production and test facilities may require different materials and encounter 

different contaminants than those specified here. Additional testing may be required to assess the 

suitability of the solvent for new projects or applications. 

1.4.The test methods specified in this plan for flammability and reactivity of solvents in LOX/GOX 

were selected to replicate tests that were performed in the past to evaluate HCFC-225ca/cb and HCFC225cb for both NASA and the United States Air Force. This approach was selected to maximize the data 

available for direct comparison to HCFC-225cb performance. The HCFC-225ca isomer is much more toxic 

than the HCFC-225cb isomer, therefore HCFC-225ca/cb is no longer used at NASA. Testing for oxygen 

compatibility at higher pressures may be required for future systems and is beyond the scope of this 

plan.

1.5.The cleaning performance of a particular solvent depends upon the cleaning method used 

including details such as time, temperature, and mechanical action applied during cleaning. Cleaning 

performance also depends on the materials, configuration, and condition of the item being cleaned, 

including surface texture, surface finish, complexity of the part, and type of contaminants present. Final 

evaluation of the solvent is performed by end user testing on full-scale hardware items using current 

HCFC-225cb cleaning and NVR verification processes in use at MSFC and SSC. 

Note: Evaluation of replacement solvents for applications that do not currently use HCFC-225cb, or for 

HCFC-225cb applications at other facilities that are substantially different from propulsion system 

applications, is beyond the scope of this plan.

1.6. In addition to these performance requirements, use of the solvent must meet applicable Safety, 

Health, and Environmental (SHE) requirements for the intended use. Evaluation of solvents for 

personnel safety precautions, life cycle cost, and environmental impact is the responsibility of the end 

user organization. These attributes must be assessed by the user for the expected end use application 

to determine required changes to equipment and operating procedures to protect the health of workers 

and to comply with federal, state, and local regulations. 

1.7.During the performance of these test methods, minor adjustments to the test protocols 

described here may be required to accommodate solvents and contaminants that vary in properties. 

Adjustments to the test protocols will be agreed upon by the test project stakeholders and documented 

in the test report. 

2. Reference Documents

2.1.NASA

KSC-SPEC-P-0022 Solvent, Cleaning, 1,3-Dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-Pentafluoropropane, HCFC-225G, 

Specification for

MSFC-SPEC-164C Cleanliness of Components for Use in Oxygen, Fuel, and Pneumatic Systems, 

Specification for

RPTSTD-8070-0001 Surface Cleanliness Standard of Fluid Systems for Rocket Engine Test Facilities of 

the NASA Rocket Propulsion Test Program

2.2.Military

Mil-H-5606 Hydraulic Fluid, Petroleum Base, Aircraft, Missile, and Ordnance
Revision A 7/26/2013

4

MIL-PRF-83282 Hydraulic Fluid, Fire Resistant, Synthetic Hydrocarbon Base, Metric, NATO Code 

Number H-537

2.3.General Services Administration

A-A-59743 Cleaning Compound, Dichloropentafluoropropane (HCFC-225)

2.4.Industry Voluntary Consensus Standards

ASTM D 1430 Standard Classification System for Polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE) 

ASTM D 2109 Standard Test Methods for Nonvolatile Matter in Halogenated Organic Solvents and 

Their Admixtures

ASTM D 2240 Standard Test Method for Rubber Property – Durometer Hardness

ASTM D 2512-95(2008) Standard Test Method for Compatibility of Materials with Liquid Oxygen 

(Impact Sensitivity Threshold and Pass-Fail Techniques)

ASTM D4265-98(R 2007) Standard Guide for Evaluating Stain Removal Performance in Home 

Laundering

ASTM E 1235-08 Standard test Method for Gravimetric Determination of Nonvolatile Residue (NVR) 

in Environmentally Controlled Areas for Spacecraft

ASTM F 483-09 Standard Practice for Total Immersion Corrosion Test for Aircraft Maintenance 

Chemicals

ASTM G 86-98a (Reapproved 2011), Standard Test Method for Determining Ignition Sensitivity of 

Materials to Mechanical Impact in Ambient Liquid Oxygen and Pressurized Liquid and Gaseous 

Oxygen Environments

ASTM G122 Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Cleaning Agents

ASTM G127 Standard Guide for the Selection of Cleaning Agents for Oxygen Systems

ASTM MNL36 Safe Use of Oxygen and Oxygen Systems

ISO 12103-1 Road vehicles — Test dust for filter evaluation — Part 1: Arizona test dust

2.5 Technical Publications

SMC-TR-95-28 Nonvolatile Residue Solvent Replacement, Arnold, G. S. and Uht, J. C., The Aerospace 

Corporation, El Segundo, CA, March 1, 1995.

3. Test Procedures

3.1.Test Method for Nonvolatile Residue Background in Neat Cleaning Solvents 

This test method is equivalent to ASTM D 2109, Standard Test Methods for Nonvolatile Matter in 

Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their Admixtures Method C, using a solvent sample of 200 mL instead 

of 1000 mL. 

3.1.1. Sampling Procedure

3.1.1.1. Gently agitate the as-received container of solvent prior to sampling to counteract any 

settling or stratification of constituents in the solvent being sampled. This may be performed by swirling 

the solvent in the container or rolling the container sideways prior to opening. 
Revision A 7/26/2013

5

3.1.1.2. On completion of agitation, draw 200 mL of solvent using a glass pipette and transfer to 

a glass container, or deliver directly to the filtration system.

Note 1. All pipettes, glassware, and evaporating dishes used in this procedure must be precleaned to 

remove background particulate and NVR to below 0.1 mg/0.1 m2. Use of verified cleaning procedures 

for the dishware is adequate for acceptance of the cleanliness of these items.

3.1.1.3. Measure the pH of the solvent with litmus paper and record on a solvent data sheet.

3.1.2. Gravimetric NVR analysis procedure

3.1.2.1. Filter the solvent sample through a 10 micron pore size or less non-gridded filter 

membrane, compatible with the fluids being tested. Collect the filtered solvent into a cleaned container.

3.1.2.2. Separate the filtered 200 mL sample into a 180-190 mL portion to evaporate and 

reserve the 10-20 mL portion for rinsing of the evaporation vessel. Cover the container containing the 

remaining 20 mL with a watch glass or Teflon lined lid.

3.1.2.3. Evaporate a 180 mL of the solvent sample to a 10–20 mL volume using a steam bath or 

vacuum rotary evaporator or a thermostatically controlled hot plate.

3.1.2.4. Transfer the 10-20 mL evaporated sample to a clean 50 mL constant weight (within 0.1 

mg), tared glass weighing container (see note 2), which was previously weighed to the nearest 0.1 mg. 

The cleaned weighing container shall be handled only with cleaned tongs or forceps. Rinse the sample 

container (evaporation flask) twice with approximately half of the remaining 20 mL of filtered fluid and 

transfer the rinse fluid to the weighing container. All of the remaining 20 mL of filtered fluid shall be 

used. 

3.1.2.5. A calibrated analytical balance shall be used for all weight measurements.

Note 2. An aluminum weighing pan may be used if the compatibility of the solvent with aluminum has 

first been verified.

3.1.2.6. Continue evaporation by placing the weighing dish inside a constant-temperature oven 

at a temperature of 105 ± 5 oC. Allow the weighing dish to remain inside the oven until the fluid has just 

evaporated to dryness.

3.1.2.7. Remove the weighing dish from the oven and place in a desiccator to cool for 30 

minutes. Remove the cool weighing dish and weigh to the nearest 0.1 mg.

3.1.2.8. Subtract the weight of the tared weighing dish to obtain the weight of the residue in mg. 

Record the weight as mg/200 mL.

3.1.2.9. Calculate the NVR in ppm by weight as follows:

NVR ppm by weight = (A)(1000)

 ρ

Where:

A = residue in mg/200mL

ρ = density of solvent in kg/L at 25 oC

3.1.3. Infrared analysis of the nonvolatile residue

3.1.3.1. This procedure involves dissolving the residue obtained from the solvent in section 2 in 

tetrachloroethylene and analyzing the solution with an infrared spectrometer. This is a semi-
Revision A 7/26/2013

6

quantitative procedure in that some residues may not exhibit infrared peaks within the detection range 

of the instrument. Comparison of the gravimetric result in mg/200 mL to the calculated result derived by 

this method may indicate that some of the residue has not been detected by the spectrometer and may 

warrant further investigation. 

3.1.3.2. Equipment

a. Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectrometer

b. Quartz cell, 20mm pathlength (10 mm optional) 

c. Pharmaceutical grade mineral oil 

d. Tetrachloroethylene, spectrometric grade

e. Temperature controlled oven (optional)

3.1.3.3. Calibration

a. Before using this method, the FTIR spectrometer shall be initially calibrated. 

b. Follow manufacturer’s instructions for internal optical alignment if required, and optimal 

energy through put. Instrument parameters (number of scans, wave number resolution, 

gain ranging radius, etc.) should be adjusted as needed to optimize results.

c. Using tetrachloroethylene in a 20 mm quartz cell, perform a background (single beam) 

scan daily or before use between 3200 cm-1and 2600 cm-1. The background spectrum will 

be used to develop absorbance spectra for the calibration standards in (d, e and f below).

d. For a 50 ml sample aliquot, calibrate the FTIR spectrometer by preparing mineral oil 

standards in tetrachlorethylene. 

e. A minimum of five calibration points shall be obtained. 

f. The final calibration concentrations shall range from 0.02 mg/ml to an upper limit of 0.36 

mg/ml. The 0.02mg/ml mineral oil standard in tetrachloroethylene represents 0.5 mg of 

NVR in a 200ml sample brought down to dryness and reconstituted with 7 ml of 

terachloroethylene. 

g. Progressing from the lowest calibration standard to the highest standard, scan the various 

hydrocarbon blends in the 3200 cm-1and 2600 cm-1range using a 20 mm quartz cell. If a 

representative aliquot or entire of the sample volume is analyzed, prepare equivalent 

calibration standards based on the total amount of solvent used (e.g., 50 ml of a 200 ml 

sample with an NVR of 1 mg/200 ml = 0.25 mgs. of NVR ml 0.25 mgs. reconstituted with 7 

ml of tetrachloroethylene is 0.036 mg/ml. Therefore, an equivalent NVR (hydrocarbon) 

standard of 0.036 mg/ml would represent 1 mg/200 ml from a 50 ml aliquot.The quartz 

cell should be flushed twice with tetrachloroethylene and a minimum of two times using a 

standard of the next highest concentration level when changing standards. 

h. Use the spectra from Sections D, E and F to compute the least squares regression 

calibration coefficients. The correlation coefficient for the linear regression or quadratic 
Revision A 7/26/2013

7

model should be 0.990 or better. Either peak intensity or area can be modeled. The 

calibration curve cannot have a y intercept of zero, and it should not be forced to go 

through zero.

3.1.3.4. Infrared Analysis Procedure

a. Perform a background scan daily with tetrachloroethylene or before use between 3200 

cm -1 and 2600 cm-1. The single beam background spectra will be used to develop 

absorbance spectra for analyzing samples. 

b. Following the initial calibration (Section 3.2) and the background scan (a), analyze check 

standards daily or before sample analysis. The check standards shall represent 1mg/200 

ml and 4 mg/200ml. The check standards (mineral oil in tetrachloroethylene) should read 

within ±10%.

c. To the residue obtained in section 2, after completion of weighing, add 7 mL of 

tetrachloroethylene to the residue.

d. Briefly swirl the solvent over the residue and transfer the solution to a 20 mm quartz cell. 

Use care during transfer to avoid loss of the sample due to spilling or overfilling of the cell.

e. Record the sample infrared absorption spectrum from 3200 to 2600 cm-1 using the same 

cell pathlength that was used to develop the calibration curve.

f. Determine the amount of NVR (mgs of hydrocarbon) in the sample by using the least 

squares regression calibration curve (section 3.3). If the sample concentration is greater 

than the highest calibration standard, a dilution of the sample with tetrachloroethylene 

shall be made and the appropriate dilution factor applied.

NVR = (MS) (Vs)

Where: 

MS = FTIR measured sample NVR concentration (mg/200 mL)

Vs = Tetrachloroethylene volume used to reconstitute the sample residue (e.g., 7 mL)

NVR = mg of NVR (hydrocarbon) contained in the 200 mL solvent sample

3.1.4. If the result of the NVR analysis in section 3.1.2.6 is significantly higher than the result in 

section 3.1.3.4f, then some of the residue may not have been detected in the wavelength range of the 

FTIR spectrometer. This should be noted in the test report. 

3.1.5. If the solvent sample as received is found to exceed 4 mg/200mL3, the solvent must be 

distilled to lower the NVR level prior to testing for NVR removal efficiency, section 3.3.3.

 

3

10 mg/500mL (4 mg/200mL) is the maximum allowable NVR in the final rinse fluid per MSFC-SPEC-164C. KSC-SPEC-P-0022, Solvent, Cleaning, 

1,3-Dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane, HCFC-225G, specifies 10 ppm by weight (max) ( 3.12 mg/200mL). (AK-225G has a density of 1.56 

g/mL at 25oC.) Commercial Item Description A-A-59743, Cleaning Compound Solvent, Dichloropentafluoropropane (HCFC-225), specifies 2.0 

ppm by weight, (max) (0.6 mg/200mL) for both HCFC-225ca/cb and HCFC-225cb. RPSTD-8070-0001 specifies a max residue for AK-225 as 2 

ppm (max) but does not indicate whether this is ppmv or ppm by weight; solvents used for final rinsing and verification are limited to 4 

mg/200mL for tanks or vessels and 1 mg/200mL for all other items. 
Revision A 7/26/2013

8

3.1.5.1. Repeat measurement of the solvent pH after distillation of solvent. 

3.1.5.2. The solvent vendor shall be consulted prior to distillation to determine any special 

distillation requirements. Stabilizers could be removed by the distillation process, requiring addition of 

new stabilizer to prevent solvent deterioration. 

3.1.6. Infrared analysis of the solvent

3.1.6.1. To determine the infrared signature of the solvent, for evaluation of lot to lot 

consistency and whether the neat solvent may be used as the FTIR carrier solvent instead of 

tetrachloroethylene, enabling the lab to directly test sampled solvent, transfer 7 ml of the solvent to the 

20 mm quartz cell and record the infrared absorption spectrum from 3200 to 2600 cm-1 using the same 

cell pathlength as in 3.1.3.4. 

3.1.6.2. Note any significant differences in the recorded absorption spectra that may be 

attributable to the solvent rather than the NVR content. 

3.1.6.3. The infrared signatures of each solvent recorded at different test labs shall be compared 

to validate the consistency of the solvent samples between labs.

3.2.Test Methods for Materials Compatibility with Cleaning Solvents 

3.2.1. Two classes of materials require compatibility testing, metals and nonmetals. The test 

methods shown below are selected for common materials used as LOX/GOX system materials of 

construction. If the solvent will be used on components containing materials that are not typically used 

in oxygen systems, such as titanium and polyvinyl chloride, additional tests and different test methods

may be required to evaluate the solvent for use with those materials.

3.2.1.1. Extended exposure testing, required to verify compatibility of the solvent with 

nonmetallic seals used in cleaning and distillation systems, is not included as a part of this test plan. 

Although this data is important for implementation, this is not a selection criterion for the solvent. 

3.2.1.2. Cleaning solvents that are effective at solvating hydrocarbon-based or silicone-based 

contaminants will be incompatible with some nonmetals. Incompatibility data is required primarily to 

identify limitations of the solvent.

3.2.2. Test Method for Solvent Corrosiveness with Metals

3.2.2.1. The corrosiveness of the solvent on metals shall be evaluated under conditions of total 

immersion in accordance with ASTM F 483-09, Standard Practice for Total Immersion Corrosion Test for 

Aircraft Maintenance Chemicals and in solvent vapor for comparison. 

3.2.2.1.1. Solvent shall be tested in the as-received condition. 

3.2.2.1.2. Metal coupons shall be cut from sheet stock to a nominal size of 50.8 mm by 25.4 mm (2 

in. by 1 in.). Thickness of the coupons should be approx. 1.6 mm (0.06 in.) but may vary based on 

availability of sheet stock. Metals that are not supplied or used as sheet stock may be fabricated from 

other stock to a similar surface area. Coupons will be tested in the unstressed condition.

3.2.2.1.3. The thickness and stock type (sheet or plate) of the test coupons shall be recorded in 

the test report.

3.2.2.1.4. Metals to be tested with the candidate solvent shall be:

a. 304L stainless steel

b. A-286 PH stainless steel
Revision A 7/26/2013

9

c. 17-4 PH stainless steel

d. 440C stainless steel

e. AISI 4140 low alloy steel

f. Tin-Bronze

g. Brass – Admiralty brass CDA 443 (Copper Development Association)

h. Co-Cr-Ni alloy - Elgiloy® (Elgiloy Specialty Metals) or Haynes® 188 (Haynes International)

i. 2219-T6 aluminum

j. 6061-T6 aluminum

k. 2195 T8 or T3M4 aluminum-lithium (plate stock)

l. InconelTM 718 (Specialty Metals Corp.)

m. MonelTM 400 (Specialty Metals Corp.)

3.2.2.1.5. Coupons shall be pre-cleaned with a low-NVR solvent known to be compatible with the 

metal, examined, immersed in the test solvent at the solvent boil temperature for 24 hours, removed to 

a desiccator for 30 minutes, and examined and weighed. The coupons shall then be returned to the 

same test solvent for an additional 144 hours, then the desiccation, examination and weighing repeated. 

To prevent excessive solvent evaporation during testing, a Soxhlet extractor, reflux system, or 

equivalent must be used for continuous solvent vapor recovery. 

3.2.2.1.6. Seven test coupons, three for immersion, three for suspension in the solvent vapor, and 

one for a control, shall be used for each metal with each solvent. 

3.2.2.1.7. Coupons shall be examined before and after exposure to the solvent for weight loss or 

gain, and for visual evidence of attack such as pitting, etching, or discoloration. ASTM F 483-09 contains 

a recommended report form. 

3.2.3. Test Method for Solvent Compatibility with Nonmetals (Soft Goods)

3.2.3.1. The compatibility of the solvent with nonmetals shall be evaluated under conditions of 

total immersion at the boil temperature of the solvent. This test method is similar to ASTM F 483-09. 

3.2.3.2. No cleaning solvent is expected to be compatible with all nonmetals therefore exposure 

to the baseline HCFC-225cb solvent shall be included in the test matrix for comparative purposes. 

3.2.3.3. Solvent shall be tested in the as-received condition. 

3.2.3.4. Test specimens shall be o-rings or gaskets with an inner diameter of 12.7 mm to 25.4 

mm (0.50 in to 1.0 in, with all specimens of a specific material nominally of the same dimensions.

3.2.3.5. Four test specimens, three for immersion and one as a control, shall be used for each 

material with each solvent. 

3.2.3.6. Nonmetals to be tested for compatibility with the solvent shall be:

a. FKM poly(hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride) elastomer Viton A (DuPont) or FKM 

Compound V0747-75 (Parker Hannafin)

b. FFKM poly(tetrafluoropropylene-co-perfluoromethylvinyl ether) elastomer - Kalrez (DuPont) 

c. NBR poly(acrylonitrile-co-butadiene) rubber (Buna N) – Mil-G-21569B Class I
Revision A 7/26/2013

10

d. Polytetrafluoroethylene - PTFE Teflon (DuPont) or Algoflon E2 (Solvay Solexis) 

e. FEP fluorinated ethylene-propylene copolymer - FEP Teflon (DuPont)

f. Polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE) – Kel-F 81 (3M) or Neoflon CTFE (Daiken) meeting the 

requirements of ASTM D 1430 Group 01 Class 1 Grade 3.

g. Aromatic polyimide - Vespel SP21 (DuPont)

h. PEEK polyketone – Victrex PEEK (LNP) or equivalent

i. PTFE with silica fiber – Gylon style 3502 for oxygen service (Garlock)

3.2.3.7. O-ring test specimens shall be pre-cleaned by wiping with a soft, low residue, lint free 

wiper and ethyl alcohol, air dried, and placed in a desiccator for approximately 24 hours. Following 

cleaning, specimens shall be handled only with clean stainless steel, tongs, forceps, or handling hooks.

3.2.3.8. Prior to immersion in the solvent, the specimens shall be weighed, measured for outer 

diameter in two perpendicular locations, and visually inspected for initial condition. Elastomers (items 

a. through c.) shall be measured for hardness in accordance with ASTM D 2240 Type A (Shore A 

durometer) at the point of maximum thickness.

3.2.3.9. Immersion of the specimens shall be performed in a glass container, fitted with a reflux 

condenser, on a thermostatically controlled hot plate controlled to maintain the solvent at boiling 

temperature. Stainless steel wire shall be used to separate and retain the specimens in the solvent. 

3.2.3.10. The specimens shall be placed in the boiling solvent for 15 minutes, removed and 

allowed to air dry in a clean desiccator. 

3.2.3.11. Thirty minutes after removal from the solvent, the specimens shall be weighed, 

measured, tested for hardness (elastomers only), and visually inspected for evidence of cracking, 

discoloration, or other evidence of attack. 

3.2.3.12. Specimens exhibiting a weight gain or linear swell of greater than 1 % shall be returned 

to the desiccator for 24 hours and then re-measured. 

3.2.3.13. Specimens continuing to exhibit a weight gain or linear swell of greater than 1 % after 

24hours shall be returned to the desiccator for seven days and then re-measured. 

3.3.Test Methods for Cleaning Effectiveness

3.3.1. The solvent must be effective at removing the NVR contaminants of concern for 

propulsion oxygen systems. A joint MSFC/SSC cleaning working group identified the following 

contaminants of concern: 

a. Mineral oil – CAS 8042-47-5 (representative of RP-1 fuel, petroleum-based hydraulic oils, and 

most petroleum-based motor oils and tube bending oils).

b. Petroleum-based machine tool hydraulic fluid, ISO grade 46 – Mobil DTE 25.

c. Synthetic hydraulic fluid, MIL-PRF-83282, fire resistant, synthetic hydrocarbon base - Castrol 

Brayco Micronic® 882.

d. Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate (gauge calibration oil) - Monoplex® DOS (The C. P. Hall Co.) or 

equivalent.
Revision A 7/26/2013

11

e. Fingerprint simulated by synthetic sebum, modified Spangler soil per ASTM D4265-98 (R 2007), 

Standard Guide for Evaluating Stain Removal Performance in Home Laundering, section A2.16.2

supplied by Scientific Services S/D, Inc., Sparrow Bush , NY)

f. Fluorocarbon grease - Krytox® 240AC.

g. Heavy paraffinic grease (crane grease), Big Red 

h. WD-40 from aerosol or bulk liquid (medium-heavy aliphatic hydrocarbons) – WD-40 Company

i. Particulate dust, ISO 12103-A4 course test dust (graded desert sand) 

Note: The expected performance of the solvent for removal of particulate dust will be evaluated

analytically by comparison of wetting index. Solvents found to be effective at removing NVR that have a 

wetting index equal to or higher than chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) – 1134are expected to adequately 

remove particulate from propulsion oxygen components. Wetting Index = (1000 x density) / (surface 

tension x viscosity). Particulate removal performance will be verified during the component level 

cleaning tests (section 5).

3.3.2. Quick Screen Solvency Test

3.3.2.1. Each candidate solvent shall be screened by this procedure for suitability as a solvent for 

common contaminants selected from the list in section 3.3.1. 

3.3.2.2. Triple rinse with cb-225 five aluminum weighing dishes for each solvent to be evaluated, 

plus five for the baseline HCFC-225cb solvent for comparison, dry in a oven at 100oC for one hour, and 

weigh each dish on a calibrated balance accurate to ± 0.1 mg.

3.3.2.3. Prepare a batch of mixed contaminant by dissolving 500 mg of equal parts of the 

following contaminants in 100 ml of HCFC-225cb. 

a. Mineral oil – CAS 8042-47-5 

b. Mil-PRF-83282 hydraulic fluid – Castrol Brayco Micronic® 882

c. Di-2-ethylhexl sebacate (gauge calibration oil), Monoplex® DOS (The C. P. Hall Co.) or 

equivalent

d. WD-40 

e. Krytox GPL103 compressor oil (representative of fluorocarbon oils and greases)

3.3.2.4. Apply one mL of this mixed contaminant with a pipette to each aluminum weighing dish, 

bake in an oven at 100 oC for one hour, cool in a desiccator for one hour, and reweigh.

3.3.2.5. Flush the contaminated weighing dish with 100 mL of the test solvent from a glass 

volumetric cylinder in three steps, capturing all of the flush solvent in a clean beaker. 

a. With the contaminated dish on a flat surface, pour 30 mL of test solvent into the dish, swirl, 

and decant into the beaker.

b. Repeat step a. with an additional 30 mL.

 

4

CFC-113 has a lower wetting index than HCFC-225cb. CFC-113 was used successfully for many years to remove 

particulate from NASA LOX/GOX systems, therefore cleaners with a wetting index equal to or higher than CFC-113 

are expected to have satisfactory particulate removal performance. 
Revision A 7/26/2013

12

c. Holding the dish, fold it slightly and slowly flush the remaining 40 mL of test solvent through 

each side of the fold, draining the solvent into the beaker such that the maximum surface 

area is exposed to the solvent. 

Note: The collected test solvent effluent is not analyzed for the quick screen solvency test. If more 

data is desired, this effluent solvent may be evaporated to gravimetrically measure NVR removal or 

may be analyzed by FTIR to evaluate which constituents of the test contaminant mix were 

effectively solvated. 

3.3.2.6. Dry, desiccate, and weigh the dish as in 3.3.2.4.

3.3.2.7. Calculate the weight of contaminant applied, weight of contaminant removed, and 

cleaning efficiency as the percentage of contaminant removed over contaminant applied. Note in the 

test report any visual anomalies.

3.3.2.8. The quick-look cleaning performance of the candidate solvents will be compared to the 

performance of HCFC-225cb to inform the candidate down-selection process. Solvents with removal 

efficiency below 90% are unlikely to be viable candidates for further testing. Historical data has shown 

HCFC-225ca/cb and/or HCFC-225cb to remove 96-99% of these contaminants.

3.3.3. Nonvolatile residue removal efficiency test

3.3.3.1. This test method is to assess the cleaning efficiency of a solvent to remove specific 

contaminants by ambient temperature flush. This method evaluates cleaning solvency without the use 

of heat or mechanical action beyond gravity flush. Contaminant removal efficiency is compared to the 

baseline solvent, HCFC-225cb. This test method is based on the NVR test method described in ASTM E 

1235 and adapted by The Aerospace Corporation as described in the technical report SMC-TR-95-28.

3.3.3.2. This test shall be performed for contaminants 3.3.1 a. through h. with each candidate 

test solvent. 

3.3.3.3. Equipment

a. NVR test panels, 304L stainless steel, fabricated per ASTM E 1235 figure 2 except that initial 

plate dimensions shall be 163 mm x 163 mm (6.4 in x 6.4 in) to yield a 152 mm x 152 mm (6 

in x 6 in) flat, lipped surface. All dimensions are approximate. Thickness of the panel is not 

critical. The test panel surface shall be the as received finish, not electropolished. The 

surface finish of the test panels shall be measured and reported.

b. NVR test panel stand, as shown in ASTM E 1235 figure 4, to fit panel (a).

c. Drying oven, cleaned to remove background NVR, to dry the NVR test panels.

d. Calibrated analytical balance for weighing of sample contaminants prior to dissolving with 

solvent

e. Low form glass collection jars with Teflon sealed lid, 250 mL min.

f. Beakers and pipettes for creation and transfer of contaminant solutions

g. Oil-free aluminum foil, food service grade

h. Gloves, nitrile, low NVR clean

i. Apparatus to perform gravimetric NVR analysis in accordance with section 3.1.2. 

3.3.3.4. Pre-clean the NVR test panels and glassware to remove residual NVR, dry in a clean 

drying oven, and protect from recontamination by wrapping with oil-free aluminum foil until use.
Revision A 7/26/2013

13

3.3.3.5. Separately mix each test contaminant shown listed in section 3.3.1 a. through h. in a 

volatile carrier solvent to create a solution with a concentration of 200 mg contaminant per 100 mL of 

carrier solvent. Thinner contaminants may be used without dilution. 

3.3.3.6. Remove the foil from the NVR test panel and, with the plate tipped slightly away from 

the open corner, under a fume hood slowly apply 5 mL of solvated contaminant, or 10 mg of unsolvated 

contaminant, to the witness surface. If needed, tip the test panel to distribute the contaminant across 

the test surface while minimizing contaminant contact with the lip of the panel or loss of contaminant 

through the drain point. The objective is to apply the contaminant to a level of 40 mg/0.1 m2. Air dry 

the panel and then bake in the horizontal position (to prevent gravity migration of the contaminant) for 

two hours at 55 oC (130 oF). After baking, protect the panel from particulate fallout until use with 

aluminum foil, a covered enclosure, or by storing the panel face down (resting on lip) on a clean surface. 

Do not contact the contaminated surface during handling or storage. 

3.3.3.7. Under a fume hood, place the contaminated NVR test panel on the test panel stand with 

the open corner set to drain into a 250 mL glass collection container. 

3.3.3.8. Flush the contaminated NVR test panel with 200 mL of test solvent from a Teflon wash 

bottle, flushing the complete contaminated surface and collecting all of the draining solvent into the 

glass collection container. Cover the beaker immediately to prevent particulate entry and loss of solvent. 

3.3.3.9. After the test panel is visually dry, flush the NVR test panel with 200 mL of HCFC-225cb, 

collected in a second collection container. Cover the beaker immediately to prevent particulate entry 

and loss of solvent. 

3.3.3.10. Perform a gravimetric NVR analysis on each collected test solvent in accordance with 

section 3.1.2, using 20 mL additional matching solvent to rinse the evaporating dish.

3.3.3.11. Calculate the approximate contaminant removal efficiency (Removal %) of the test 

solvent rinse as 

(mT – mTB)

 _____________________ x 100 = Removal %

(mT – mTB) + (mAK – mAKB)

Where: mT = mass of contaminant removed by the test solvent

mTB = mass of the background NVR in the test solvent blank

mAK = mass of the contaminant removed by the second rinse with HCFC-225cb

mAKB = mass of the background NVR in the HCFC-225cb solvent blank

3.3.3.12. This test shall be repeated three times for each contaminant with each test solvent. 

Removal efficiency for each set of three contaminant/solvent tests should be within 10%. If not, a retest 

shall be performed until at least three results are within 10%.

3.3.3.13. This test shall also be performed three times with HCFC-225cb as both the test solvent 

and the rinse solvent to establish a baseline removal efficiency of the HCFC-225cb alone.

3.3.3.14. Test results shall be reported as compared to the removal efficiencies of HCFC-225cb.

3.4.Test Methods for Flammability and Reactivity of Cleaning Solvents in LOX/GOX
Revision A 7/26/2013

14

3.4.1. For unrestricted use on existing NASA LOX/GOX propulsion systems, propulsion systems 

GSE, and associated test stands, the solvent shall be shown to be compatible with oxygen in accordance 

with these test methods. Use of solvents that are potentially reactive with LOX/GOX at the anticipated 

worst case end item use conditions of temperature and pressure shall be restricted to cleaning activities 

where complete drying and removal of the solvent can be assured. 

3.4.2. LOX Mechanical Impact Test Method

3.4.2.1. The neat solvent shall be tested in accordance with ASTM G 86-98a (Reapproved 2011), 

Standard Test Method for Determining Ignition Sensitivity of Materials to Mechanical Impact in Ambient 

Liquid Oxygen and Pressurized Liquid and Gaseous Oxygen Environments, section 4.2, Ambient LOX 

Impact Test, at 98 J (72 ft-lb) impact force. 

3.4.2.2. Preparation of the solvent sample for test shall be in accordance with ASTM D 2512-

95(2008), Standard Test Method for Compatibility of Materials with Liquid Oxygen (Impact Sensitivity 

Threshold and Pass-Fail Techniques), section 10.1 to obtain a sample thickness (depth) of 1.27 ± 0.13mm 

(0.050 ± 0.005 in.) in the specimen cup before freezing. (This determination is required due to variations 

from liquid to liquid in physical properties such as density, surface tension, and volatility.) A micrometer 

depth gage with leveling blocks is suggested for measurement.

3.4.2.3. If the solvent does not pass the LOX Impact Test at 98 J with no reactions in 20 impacts 

or not more than 1 reaction in 60 impacts, LOX impact threshold tests shall be performed (known as the 

“Bruceton method”) to determine the LOX reactivity of the solvent and to provide a basis for 

comparison of solvents that do not pass at 98 J. Solvents that react at impacts lower than 27 J (20 ft-lb) 

are incompatible with LOX and require no further testing. 

3.4.2.4. Solvents that fail the LOX Mechanical Impact test at 98 J but pass at above 27 J or show 

anomalous results may be considered for further testing or evaluation. 

3.4.3. Autogenous Ignition Test Method (AIT)

3.4.3.1. The neat solvent shall be tested in accordance with ASTM G72-09, Standard Test 

Method for Autogenous Ignition temperature of Liquids and Solids in a High Pressure Oxygen-Enriched 

Environment, modified for testing of volatile liquids. Tests shall be performed at 50 psi and 2000 psi.

3.4.3.2. To minimize the volatilization and loss of test solvent, step 8.4 of ASTM G72-09, flushing 

of the system twice with oxygen to purge the chamber of atmospheric gases, will not be performed. 

This will result in an oxygen concentration of approximately 81% for the test at 50 psi. At 2000 psi, the 

relative concentration of nitrogen will be negligible resulting in an oxygen concentration > 99%.

3.4.3.3. To decrease volatilization of the solvent prior to test, pre-chilling of the test solvent is 

permitted.

3.4.3.4. The following criteria have been used to determine suitability of a solvent for use with 

high pressure gaseous oxygen systems up to 2000 psi. Suitability of the solvent for use in gaseous 

oxygen at pressures greater than 2000 psi may require additional testing. 

a. AIT > 400 F – Acceptable for use in oxygen systems.

b. AIT 250 F to 400 F – May be used with caution in oxygen systems.

c. AIT < 250 F – Not recommended for use in oxygen systems.

4. Evaluation of Data from Coupon-level Tests and LOX/GOX Tests
Revision A 7/26/2013

15

Prior to advancement to cleaning demonstration tests at the component level, test results for each 

solvent from section 3 will be evaluated and compared with the requirements of each user application. 

Some solvents may be suitable for one use but not suitable for other uses, such as use in field cleaning 

versus NVR verification sampling or use with stainless steel but not with aluminum. While it is preferred 

that a single solvent be qualified to replace all current uses of HCFC-225cb, this may not be achievable. 

5. Component Level Cleaning Tests

5.1.Following down selection of candidate solvents, the selected solvent shall be tested by the users 

in intended final applications. The specific solvent process, contaminants, and components shall 

simulate expected worst case usage in launch vehicle production and test operations. These end uses 

will include ambient flush cleaning, ambient wipe cleaning, cleaning in an immersion system, and use as 

a sampling solvent for NVR cleanliness verification.

5.2.The identified users that will participate in the component level cleaning tests for MSFC and SSC 

propulsion test operations are: 

 MSFC Valve and Component Lab - component cleaning (tubes, instruments)

 MSFC Propulsion Test Area - field cleaning

 MSFC Fabrication Shop Precision Cleaning Lab – NVR verification

 SSC Component Processing Facility – component cleaning

 SSC Calibration Lab – instrument cleaning, NVR verification

 SSC Propulsion test Area - field cleaning

5.3.Parameters to be evaluated during component level cleaning tests include:

 Cleaning of complex surfaces and blind holes (Valve lab)

 Handling of the solvent in a variety of end uses

 Ease of capture of drained solvent during NVR sampling

 Drying rate and effectiveness

 Operator acceptance (odors, handling concerns)

5.4.Components will be cleaned and/or sampled for NVR using the candidate solvent. This will be

followed by verification of cleanliness using HCFC-225cb in accordance with the standard procedures for 

that operation to evaluate the effectiveness of the candidate solvent. 

5.5.Drying will be evaluated by visual inspection and, where feasible, by a leak detector (THC 

analyzer) to verify removal. When drying is evaluated for a candidate solvent, this evaluation shall be 

performed prior to sampling of the component with HCFC-225cb.

5.6. Use of a THC analyzer to sense residual solvent will also serve to validate that this is an effective 

method to verify complete drying of the solvent.
Revision A 7/26/2013

16

Appendix A. Candidate Solvents to Test

Several new solvents and solvent azeotropes (stable blends at the solvent boiling point) have been 

developed since the 1990’s to minimize ozone depleting potential and, in some cases, global warming 

potential. Some of these are now commercially available in the United States. Others are not yet 

approved for sale in the US, but are available from the vendor for test purposes. Two solvents that were 

tested in the past for use with oxygen systems (DuPont Vertrel MCA and 3M L-14780) but were not 

selected for use at that time are considered worthy of re-evaluation. After extensive surveys of solvent 

vendors and HCFC-225 (ca/cb and cb) users from NASA, DoD, and commercial aerospace companies;

and review of current and historical NASA, Department of Defense, and industry literature; solvents that 

have been identified as potential candidates to replace HCFC-225cb in propulsion oxygen system 

applications are:

Single component solvents

 AGC Chemicals AE3000 (HFE-347pc-f2 [1,1,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-ethane])

 DuPont Capstone 4-I (> 90% perfluorobutyl iodide)

 Honeywell Solstice PF (HFO-1233zd(E) [Trans-1-chloro-3,3,3,-trifluoroprop-1-ene])

 Solvay Solkane (HFC-365mfc [1,1,1,3,3 pentafluorobutane])

Azeotropes with trans-1,2 dichloroethylene (tDCE)

 DuPont Vertrel MCA (38% tDCE / 62% HFC-43-10mee [ 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane] 

with HQMEE stabilizer)

 AGC Chemicals AE3000AT (45% tDCE / 55% AE3000)

 3M L-14780 developmental fluid (22% tDCE / 78% HFE-347mcc3 [methyl perfluoropropyl ether])

HFE-347mcc3 is available from 3M as Novec 7000 Engineered Fluid. Although 3M offers other 

azeotropes of their Novec fluids with tDCE, the azeotrope of tDCE and Novec 7000 is not 

currently marketed; thus the “developmental” designation.

 Solvay Solvokane (30% tDCE/ 70% HFC-365mfc)
2

APPENDIX B—SOLVENT SAFETY DATA SHEETS

Various solvent safety data sheets can be found in the following sections within appendix B:

B.1 AGC Chemicals Americas (Asahi Glass Company, Japan) Asahiklin AK-225G 

 (baseline) 

B.2 Honeywell Solstice Performance Fluid 

B.3 3M L-14780 Developmental Material 

B.4 DuPont Capstone 4-I 

B.5 AGC Chemicals Americas (Asahi Glass Company, Japan) Asahiklin AE3000 

B.6 AGC Chemicals Americas (Asahi Glass Company, Japan) Asahiklin AE3000AT 

B.7 Solvay Solkane 365 mfc 

B.8 Solvay Solvokane 

B.9 DuPont Vertrel MCA 

B.10 Honeywell Solstice Spray Cleaner 

B.11 Honeywell Solstice 1234ze 
A_HI GLASS COMPANY

No.U-132 (rev. 9) Page 1 of 6

Product Name Prepared: 6-June-1994 Revised: 14-Nov-2001

ASAHIKLIN AK-225G

Section I- Company Identification

Manufacturer's Name

ASAHI GLASS Co., Ltd.

Address

1-12 Yurakucho 1-Chome

Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8405, JAPAN

Chemicals General Division, Fluorochemicals Division

Telephone Number for Information

011-81-3-3218-5479

Facsimile Number for Information

011-81-3-3218-7854

Supplier's Name

AGA Chemicals, Inc.

Address

2201 Water Ridge Parkway Suite 400,

Charlotte, NC28217, USA

Telephone Number for Information

704-329-7600

Facsimile Number for Information

704-357-6308

Emergency Contact (In USA, Canada)

1-800-424-9300

Section I1-Composition/Information on Ingredients

Component: 1,3-Dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb) CAS No. 507-55-1

> 99%

Note: This product does not contain any CFCs.

No.U-132 (rev.09)
Page 2 of 6

Section III- Physical/Chemical Characteristics

Boiling Point: 56,1 deg.C

Specific Gravity: 1.558 @ 25 deg.C

Vapor Pressure: 0.035 MPa @ 25 deg.C

Freezing Point: -116 deg,C

Vapor Density (Air = 1): 7.0

Evaporation Rate (Diethyl ether=l): 0.85

Solubility in Water: 0.016g/100g H20 @ 25 deg,C

Appearance and Odor: Clear, colorless liquid with slight ethereal odor.

Section IV - Fire and Explosion Hazard Data

Flash Point (Method Used): None (Tag Closed Cup & Cleveland Open Cup)

Flammable Limits: LEL = None; UEL = None

Extinguishing Media

As appropriate for combustibles in area.

Special Fire Fighting Procedures

Use water spray to cool containers. Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) is required if drums

rupture and contents are spilled under fire conditions.

Unusual Fire and Explosion Hazards

Containers may rupture under fire conditions. Decomposition may occur.

NFPA Hazard Code

NFPA codes are designed for use by firefighters, sheriffs, or other emergency response teams who are

concerned with the hazards of burning or exploding materials. These NFPA codes are not intended to

address the hazards of this product other than in a fire situation.

Decomposition of this product at temperature above 300 degree C can form hydrogen fluoride (HF),

but HF will only accumulate with continuous exposure to excess heat in a sealed vessel.

a) Flammability- 0 b) Health - 2 c) Instability- 0

Section V- Reactivity Data

Stability

Stable

Condition to Avoid

Material is stable. However, avoid open flames and high temperature.

Incompatibility (Materials to Avoid)

Incompatible with alkali or alkaline earth metals-powdered AI, Zn, Be, etc.

Hazardous Decomposition or Byproducts

Decomposition products are hazardous. This compound can be decomposed by high temperatures (open

flames, glowing metal surfaces, etc.) forming hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids-possibly carbonyl halides.

Hazardous Polymerization

Will Not Occur

Section VI- Health Hazard Data

Route(s) of Entry

Inhalation: X

Skin: X

Eye: X

Ingestion: X

No.U-132 (rev.09)
Page 3 of 6

Health Hazard Data (Continued)

Animal Data:

1,3-Dichloro-1,1,2,2, 3-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb)

Inhalation: 4-h LC50:36,800 ppm in rats

Oral: LD50 : >5 g/kg in rats

Dermal: LD50: >2g/kg in rabbit.

Eye: Not irritant up to 0.1ml in rabbit.

Data from acute toxicity studies indicate that this compound has very low acute toxicity.

HCFC-225cb causes neither eye irritation nor dermal toxicity in standardized tests; skin application of this

compound at high doses (2,000mg/kg body weight) produces no adverse effects. Therefore, the dermal

LD50 is greater than 2,000mg/kg body weight. Oral administration of this compound at high doses

(5,000mg/kg body weight) does not cause any mortality and the oral LD50 is greater than 5,000mg/kg

body weight. This compound also has very low acute inhalation toxicity as measured by the concentration

that cause 50% mortality in experimental animals, the LC50, listed above. Cardiac sensitization response

in dogs is observed at approximately 20,000ppm for HC FC-225cb.

In 28-day inhalation studies with rat, the activity and responsiveness of the animals was reduced at

5,000ppm or greater. Toxicity was otherwise confined to the liver; liver enlargement and induction of

peroxisomes was seen following treatment. In 28-day study with marmoset, exposure to HCFC-225cb at

5,000ppm caused somnolence during exposure and an increase of cytochrome P-450, indicative of an

adaptive response to this compound. However, no liver enlargement was seen and virtually no

peroxisome induction was observed.

This compound does not produce genetic damage in bacterial cell cultures (Ames Assay), CHL, and

in-vivo unscheduled DNA syntheses assay. In one in-vitro study with mammalian cell cultures (human

lymphocytes) genetic damage was produced but the response was only marginal.The overall evidence

from these studies implies that this chemical is not genotoxic.

Carcinogenicity

HCFC-225cb is not listed by NTP, IARC or OSHA as a carcinogen.

Exposure Guidelines:

AK-225G

AEL* : 400ppm (8h-TWA)

TLV-TWA(ACGIH): Not established

PEL-TWA(OSHA): Not established

* AEL is the Acceptable Exposure Limit set by Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.

EEL* : 1000 ppm (time limit 15 min.)

2500 ppm (time limit 1 min.)

* EEL is the Emergency Exposure Limit set by Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.

Emergency Exposure Limits (EELs) are to be used for short-term emergency exposure control. They are

concentrations of short periods which should not result in permanent adverse health effects or interfere

with escape. They should not be confused with ACGIH TLV-TWA or TLV STEL values that are designed

for repeated exposure guidelines. For the use of AK-225G, daily exposure limits such as AEL as well as

EEL are to be followed. The EEL for AK-225G is needed to avoid anaesthetic effects which could prevent

self-rescue. If an EEL is exceeded for specified duration, evacuation, sheltering in place or other

mitigation steps should be taken.

No.U-132 (rev.09)
Page 4 of 6

Health Hazard Data (Continued)

Remarks

AELs (Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.) of HCFC-225cb is 400ppm. Though no ACGIH TLV or OSHA PEL are

assigned, Asahi Glass temporarily recommends that workplace exposure level should be maintained at

400 ppm or less for this compound until the authorized control level such as ACGIH TLV or OSHA PEL are

assigned.

Signs and Symptoms of Exposure

EYE CONTACT:

The compound may cause eye irritation.

SKIN CONTACT:

The compound may cause skin irritation.

INHALATION:

Inhalation of high concentrations of vapor is harmful and may cause hepatitis, heart irregularities,

unconsciousness, or death. Intentional misuse can be fatal. Vapor reduces oxygen available for breathing

and is heavier than air.

Emergency and First Aid Procedures

INHALATION:

If high concentrations are inhaled, immediately remove to fresh air. Keep persons calm. If not breathing,

give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Call a physician.

SKIN CONTACT:

In case of skin contact, flush with water. Get medical attention if irritation is present.

EYE CONTACT:

In case of eye contact, immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for 15minutes. Call a physician.

INGESTION:

No specific intervention is indicated as the compound is not likely to be hazardous by ingestion. Consult a

physician if necessary. Do not induce vomi ting because the hazard of aspirating the material into the

lungs is considered greater than swallowing it.

Section VII- Precautions for Safe Handlin_l and Use

Steps to Be Taken in Case Material is Released or Spilled

NOTES: Review "Fire and ExplosionHazard Data" and "Precautions to Be Taken in Handling and Storing"

before proceeding with clean up. Use appropriate Personal Protective Equipment during clean up.

Dike spill. Prevent liquid from entering sewers, waterways or low areas. Ventilate area. Collect on

absorbent material and transfer to steel drums for recovery/disposal. Comply with Federal, State, and

local regulations on reporting releases.

Waste Disposal Method

Recover by distillation or remove to permitted waste disposal facility. Comply with Federal, State, and

local regulations.

No.U-132 (rev.09)
Page 5 of 6

Precautions for Safe Handling and Use(Continued)

Precautions to Be Taken in Handling and Storing

Use with sufficient ventilation to keep employee exposure below recommended limits. Provide adequate

ventilation for storage, handling, and use, especially for enclosed or low spaces. Avoid contact of liquid

with eyes and prolonged skin exposure. Do not allow product to contact open flame or electrical heating

elements because dangerous decomposition products may form.

Storage Conditions

Store in clean, dry, well-ventilated area. Do not heat above 30 deg.C.

Section VIII- Control Measures

Respiratory Protection

Use respiratory protection approved by NIOSH in USA or other equivalent in each country if exposure

limits may be exceeded. Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) is required if a large spill occurs.

Ventilation

Normal ventilation for standard manufacturing procedures is generally adequate. Local exhaust should be

used when large amounts are released. Mechanical ventilation should be used in low places.

Eye/Skin Protection

Impervious gloves should be used to avoid prolonged or repeated exposure. Chemical splash goggles

should be available for use as needed to prevent eye contact.

Other Precautionary Information

NPCA - HMIS (National Paint and Coating Association - Hazardous Materials Identification

System) Hazard Rating

HMIS codes are intended for use in everyday workplace setting to provide a rapid indication of the

occupational hazards associated with chemicals used in the workplace.

a) Flammability-1 b) Health- 1 c) Reactivity-0

Section IX- Regulator)/Information

For European Union

EEC Classification: Not classified

Hazard Symbol: Not established

Risk phrases: Not established

Safety phrases: Not established, but recommend 23 (Don't breath gas_fumes_vapor_spray),

24/25 (Toxic in contact with skin and if swallowed), 36/37 (Irritation to eyes and respiratory system)

Council Directive 92/32/EEC Status: These chemicals are listed on the EINECS ( HCFC-225cb: 208-

076-9).

No.U-132 (rev.09)
Page 6 of 6

Regulatory Information (Continued)

For United States of America

SNAP Acceptable: HCFC-225cb is listed as SNAP acceptable substitutes for CFCs in the Solvent

Cleaning Sector of the Clean Air Act.

Non-VOC: HCFC-225cb is exempted from VOC regulations in the Clean Air Act.

TSCA Status: HCFC-225cb is listed on the TSCA Inventory.

SARA Section 302: HCFC-225cb is not Section 302 hazard.

SARA Section 311,312: Acute = Yes

Chronic = Yes

Fire = No

Reactivity = No

Pressure = No

SARA Section 313 = Yes

Section X-Transportation Information

UN No.: Not established

ADR / RID Status: Not regulated

IMDG Status: Not regulated

ICAO / IATA Status: Not regulated

US DOT Status: Not regulated

Section XI- Additional Information

This Material Safety Data Sheet is offered only for your information, consideration and investigation.

Asahi Glass Co., Ltd. provides no warranties, either express or implied, and assumes no responsibilityfor

the accuracy or completeness of the data contained herein.

WARNINGS

This substance harms public health and environment by destroying ozone in the upper atmosphere.

No.U-132 (rev.09)
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 1 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION 

Product name : SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF) 

MSDS Number : 000000017461 

Product Use Description : Solvent

Company : Honeywell International, Inc. 

101 Columbia Road 

Morristown, NJ 07962-1057 

For more information call : 800-522-8001 

+1-973-455-6300 

 (Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:00pm) 

In case of emergency call : Medical: 1-800-498-5701 or +1-303-389-1414 

: Transportation (CHEMTREC): 1-800-424-9300 or +1-703-

527-3887 

: 

 : (24 hours/day, 7 days/week) 

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION 

Emergency Overview 

Form : liquid, clear 

Color : colourless 

Odor : slight 

Hazard Summary : This product is not flammable at ambient temperatures and 

atmospheric pressure. Vapours are heavier than air and can 

cause suffocation by reducing oxygen available for breathing. 

Causes asphyxiation in high concentrations. The victim will 

not realize that he/she is suffocating. Excessive exposure may 

cause central nervous system effects including drowsiness 

and dizziness. Excessive exposure may also cause cardiac 

arrhythmia. Do not breathe vapours or spray mist. Avoid 

contact with skin, eyes and clothing. At higher temperatures, 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 2 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

(>250°C), decomposition products may include hydrochloric 

acid (HCl), hydrofluoric acid (HF) and carbonyl halides. The 

ACGIH Threshold Limit Values (2007) for Hydrogen Fluoride 

are TLV-TWA 0.5 ppm and Ceiling Exposure Limit 2 ppm. 

Potential Health Effects 

Skin : Not classified as a skin irritant in animal testing.

Eyes : No adverse health effects are expected.

Ingestion : Unlikely route of exposure.

Effects due to ingestion may include:

Gastrointestinal discomfort

Inhalation : Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing.

Causes asphyxiation in high concentrations. The victim will 

not realize that he/she is suffocating.

Excessive exposure may cause central nervous system 

effects including drowsiness and dizziness. Excessive 

exposure may also cause cardiac arrhythmia.

Chronic Exposure : None known.

Carcinogenicity 

No component of this product present at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as a known 

or anticipated carcinogen by NTP, IARC, or OSHA. 

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS 

Chemical nature : Substance 

Chemical Name CAS-No. Concentration 

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene 102687-65-0 >99.00 %
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 3 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

SECTION 4. FIRST AID MEASURES 

Inhalation : Remove to fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. 

If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Use oxygen as required, 

provided a qualified operator is present. Call a physician. 

Skin contact : After contact with skin, wash immediately with plenty of water. 

If symptoms persist, call a physician. Take off all contaminated 

clothing immediately. Wash contaminated clothing before reuse. 

Eye contact : Rinse immediately with plenty of water, also under the eyelids, 

for at least 15 minutes. Call a physician if irritation develops or 

persists. 

Ingestion : If victim is fully conscious, give a cupful of water. Do not induce 

vomiting without medical advice. Never give anything by mouth 

to an unconscious person. Call a physician immediately. 

Notes to physician 

Treatment : Treat symptomatically. 

SECTION 5. FIREFIGHTING MEASURES 

Suitable extinguishing media : The product is not flammable. 

Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local 

circumstances and the surrounding environment. 

Water spray 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

Dry chemical 

Foam 

Specific hazards during 

firefighting 

: This product is not flammable at ambient temperatures and 

atmospheric pressure. 

However, this material can ignite when mixed with air under 

pressure and exposed to strong ignition sources. 

Container may rupture on heating. 

Cool closed containers exposed to fire with water spray. 

Do not allow run-off from fire fighting to enter drains or water 

courses. 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 4 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing. 

Exposure to decomposition products may be a hazard to 

health. 

In case of fire hazardous decomposition products may be 

produced such as: 

Hydrogen fluoride 

Gaseous hydrogen chloride (HCl). 

Carbon monoxide 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

Carbonyl halides 

Special protective equipment 

for firefighters 

: In the event of fire and/or explosion do not breathe fumes. 

Wear self-contained breathing apparatus and protective suit. 

No unprotected exposed skin areas. 

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES 

Personal precautions : Immediately evacuate personnel to safe areas.

Keep people away from and upwind of spill/leak.

Wear personal protective equipment. Unprotected persons 

must be kept away.

Remove all sources of ignition.

Ventilate the area.

Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing.

Avoid accumulation of vapours in low areas.

Unprotected personnel should not return until air has been 

tested and determined safe.

Ensure that the oxygen content is >= 19.5%.

Environmental precautions : Should not be released into the environment.

Do not flush into surface water or sanitary sewer system.

Prevent further leakage or spillage if safe to do so.

Prevent spreading over a wide area (e.g. by containment or oil 

barriers).

Methods for cleaning up : Contain spillage, and then collect with non-combustible 

absorbent material, (e.g. sand, earth, diatomaceous earth, 

vermiculite) and place in container for disposal according to 

local / national regulations (see section 13).
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 5 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE 

Handling 

Handling : Handle with care.

Do not use in areas without adequate ventilation.

Do not breathe vapours or spray mist.

Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing.

Pressurized container. Protect from sunlight and do not expose 

to temperatures exceeding 50 °C.

Follow all standard safety precautions for handling and use of 

compressed gas cylinders.

Use authorized cylinders only.

Protect cylinders from physical damage.

Do not puncture or drop cylinders, expose them to open flame 

or excessive heat.

Do not pierce or burn, even after use. Do not spray on a naked 

flame or any incandescent material.

Do not remove screw cap until immediately ready for use.

Always replace cap after use.

Advice on protection 

against fire and explosion 

: Can form a combustible mixture with air at pressures above 

atmospheric pressure.

Keep product and empty container away from heat and 

sources of ignition.

Storage 

Requirements for storage 

areas and containers 

: Pressurized container: protect from sunlight and do not expose 

to temperatures exceeding 50 °C. Do not pierce or burn, even 

after use.

Keep containers tightly closed in a dry, cool and well-ventilated 

place.

Storage rooms must be properly ventilated.

Ensure adequate ventilation, especially in confined areas.

Protect cylinders from physical damage.

Store away from incompatible substances.

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 6 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

Protective measures : Ensure that eyewash stations and safety showers are close to 

the workstation location.

Do not breathe vapours or spray mist.

Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing.

Engineering measures : Use with local exhaust ventilation.

Perform filling operations only at stations with exhaust 

ventilation facilities.

Eye protection : Do not wear contact lenses.

Wear as appropriate:

Goggles or face shield, giving complete protection to eyes

Hand protection : Impervious gloves

Gloves must be inspected prior to use.

Replace when worn.

Skin and body protection : Wear as appropriate:

Solvent-resistant gloves

Solvent-resistant apron and boots

If splashes are likely to occur, wear:

Protective suit

Respiratory protection : In case of insufficient ventilation wear suitable respiratory 

equipment.

Wear a positive-pressure supplied-air respirator.

For rescue and maintenance work in storage tanks use selfcontained breathing apparatus.

Use NIOSH approved respiratory protection.

Hygiene measures : Handle in accordance with good industrial hygiene and safety 

practice.

Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing.

Do not breathe vapours or spray mist.

Ensure adequate ventilation, especially in confined areas.

Remove and wash contaminated clothing before re-use.

Contaminated work clothing should not be allowed out of the 

workplace.

Keep working clothes separately.

Wash hands before breaks and immediately after handling the 

product.

Exposure Guidelines

Components CAS-No. Value Control 

parameters 

Upda

te 

Basis 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 7 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

trans-1-Chloro3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

102687-65-0 TWA :

time 

weighted 

average 

(800 ppm) 2013 Honeywell:Limit 

established by 

Honeywell 

International Inc.

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

Physical state : liquid, clear

Color : colourless 

Odor : slight 

Melting point/freezing point : < -90 °C 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 102 

Boiling point/boiling range : 19 °C 

Flash point : Method: ISO 2719 

Note: not applicable 

Flammability : The product is not flammable. 

Method: Flammability (gases) 

Lower explosion limit : Note: None 

Upper explosion limit : Note: None 

Vapor pressure : 1,516 hPa 

at 30 °C(86 °F) 

Vapor density : Note: (Air = 1.0), not determined 

Density : 1.27 g/cm3 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 8 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

Water solubility : 1.90 g/l at 20 °C 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 105 

Partition coefficient: noctanol/water : log Pow: 2.2 at 25 °C 

Ignition temperature : 380 °C at 986.8 - 1,035.9 hPa 

Method: DIN 51794 

Oxidizing properties : The substance or mixture is not classified as oxidizing. 

Molecular Weight : 130.5 g/mol 

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY 

Possibility of hazardous 

reactions 

: Polymerization can occur. 

Conditions to avoid : Protect from heat/overheating. 

Keep away from direct sunlight. 

Heat, flames and sparks. 

Do not mix with oxygen or air above atmospheric pressure. 

Incompatible materials to 

avoid 

: Strong oxidizing agents 

Magnesium 

Aluminium 

Hazardous decomposition 

products 

: In case of fire hazardous decomposition products may be 

produced such as: 

Carbon monoxide 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

Carbonyl halides 

Gaseous hydrogen chloride (HCl). 

Gaseous hydrogen fluoride (HF). 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 9 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Acute inhalation toxicity : LC50: 120000 ppm 

Exposure time: 4 h 

Species: rat 

Skin irritation : Species: rabbit 

Result: No skin irritation 

Classification: Not classified as a skin irritant in animal testing. 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 404 

Exposure time: 4 h 

Sensitisation : Result: Does not cause skin sensitisation. 

Classification: Patch test on human volunteers did not 

demonstrate sensitisation properties. 

 : Cardiac sensitization 

Species: dogs 

Note: Cardiac sensitisation threshold (dog): 25000 ppm. 

Repeated dose toxicity : Species: rat 

Application Route: Inhalation 

Exposure time: 4 Weeks 

NOEL: 4500 ppm 

Note: Subacute toxicity 

Genotoxicity in vitro : Test Method: Mutagenicity (Salmonella typhimurium - reverse 

mutation assay) 

Result: negative 

Genotoxicity in vivo : Species: rat 

Cell type: Bone marrow 

Method: Mutagenicity (micronucleus test) 

Result: negative 

Genotoxicity in vivo : Test Method: Unscheduled DNA synthesis 

Species: rat 

Result: negative 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 10 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

Genotoxicity in vivo : Species: mouse 

Cell type: Bone marrow 

Method: Mutagenicity (micronucleus test) 

Result: negative 

Reproductive toxicity : Species: rabbit 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 15,000 ppm 

 : Species: rat 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 10,000 ppm 

Teratogenicity : Species: rabbit 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 15,000 ppm 

 : Species: rat 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 10,000 ppm 

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Ecotoxicity effects 

Toxicity to fish : LC50: 38 mg/l 

Exposure time: 96 h 

Species: Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout) 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 203 

Toxicity to daphnia and other 

aquatic invertebrates

: Immobilization 

EC50: 82 mg/l 

Exposure time: 48 h 

Species: Daphnia magna (Water flea) 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 202 

Toxicity to algae : Growth inhibition 

EC50: 106.7 mg/l 

Exposure time: 72 h 

Species: Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (green algae) 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 11 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 201 

: Growth rate 

NOEC: 115 mg/l 

Exposure time: 72 h 

Species: Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (green algae) 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 201 

Elimination information (persistence and degradability) 

Biodegradability : Result: Not readily biodegradable. 

Value: 0 % 

Method: OECD 301 D 

Further information on ecology 

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS 

Disposal methods : Observe all Federal, State, and Local Environmental 

regulations. 

Note : Where possible recycling is preferred to disposal or 

incineration.

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION 

DOT UN/ID No. : UN 3163

Proper shipping name : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

(Trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene) 

Class 2.2 

Packing group 

Hazard Labels 2.2

IATA UN/ID No. : UN 3163 

Description of the goods : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

 (Trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene) 

Class : 2.2 

Hazard Labels : 2.2 

Packing instruction (cargo : 200 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 12 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

aircraft) 

Packing instruction 

(passenger aircraft) 

: 200 

IMDG UN/ID No. : UN 3163 

Description of the goods : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

 (TRANS-1-CHLORO-3,3,3-

TRIFLUOROPROPENE) 

Class : 2.2 

Hazard Labels : 2.2 

EmS Number : F-C, S-V 

Marine pollutant : no 

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION 

Inventories 

US. Toxic Substances 

Control Act 

: On TSCA Inventory 

Australia. Industrial 

Chemical (Notification and 

Assessment) Act 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

102687-65-0 

Canada. Canadian 

Environmental Protection 

Act (CEPA). Domestic 

Substances List (DSL) 

: All components of this product are on the Canadian DSL. 

Japan. Kashin-Hou Law 

List 

: On the inventory, or in compliance with the inventory 

Korea. Toxic Chemical 

Control Law (TCCL) List 

: On the inventory, or in compliance with the inventory 

Philippines. The Toxic 

Substances and Hazardous 

and Nuclear Waste Control 

Act 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

102687-65-0 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 13 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

China. Inventory of Existing 

Chemical Substances 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

102687-65-0 

New Zealand. Inventory of 

Chemicals (NZIoC), as 

published by ERMA New 

Zealand 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

102687-65-0 

National regulatory information 

SARA 302 Components : SARA 302: No chemicals in this material are subject to the 

reporting requirements of SARA Title III, Section 302. 

SARA 313 Components : SARA 313: This material does not contain any chemical 

components with known CAS numbers that exceed the 

threshold (De Minimis) reporting levels established by SARA 

Title III, Section 313. 

SARA 311/312 Hazards : Acute Health Hazard 

Sudden Release of Pressure Hazard 

California Prop. 65 : This product does not contain any chemicals known to State of 

California to cause cancer, birth defects, or any other 

reproductive harm. 

WHMIS Classification : A: Compressed Gas 

This product has been classified according to the hazard criteria 

of the CPR and the MSDS contains all of the information 

required by the CPR.
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid (PF)

000000017461

Page 14 / 14 

Version 1.2 Revision Date 08/12/2013 Print Date 10/08/2013 

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION 

HMIS III NFPA

Health hazard : 2 2 

Flammability : 0 0 

Physical Hazard : 0 

Instability : 0 

Hazard rating and rating systems (e.g. HMIS® III, NFPA): This information is intended solely for the 

use of individuals trained in the particular system. 

Further information 

The information provided in this Safety Data Sheet is correct to the best of our knowledge, 

information and belief at the date of its publication. The information given is designed only as a 

guidance for safe handling, use, processing, storage, transportation, disposal and release and is not 

to be considered a warranty or quality specification. The information relates only to the specific 

material designated and may not be valid for such material used in combination with any other 

materials or in any process, unless specified in the text. Final determination of suitability of any 

material is the sole responsibility of the user. This information should not constitute a guarantee for 

any specific product properties. 

Changes since the last version are highlighted in the margin. This version replaces all previous 

versions.

Previous Issue Date: 04/23/2013

Prepared by: Honeywell Performance Materials and Technologies Product Stewardship Group 










Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

1 / 10 

This SDS adheres to the standards and regulatory requirements of the United States and may not meet the regulatory 

requirements in other countries. 

 

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION 

Product name : Capstone® 4-I

Tradename/Synonym : Zonyl®

 PFBI 

MSDS Number : 130000042690 

Product Use : Chemical intermediate 

Manufacturer : DuPont 

1007 Market Street 

Wilmington, DE 19898 

Product Information : 1-800-441-7515 (outside the U.S. 1-302-774-1000) 

Medical Emergency : 1-800-441-3637 (outside the U.S. 1-302-774-1139) 

Transport Emergency : CHEMTREC: 1-800-424-9300 (outside the U.S. 1-703-527-3887) 

Other information : professional use

 

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION 

Emergency Overview 

The hazards of this product are associated mainly with its processing. Inhalation of decomposition products in 

high concentration may cause shortness of breath (lung oedema). Inhalation of aerosol or fine spray mist may 

cause serious respiratory problems. 

Warning symptoms:

Irregular cardiac activity Pain, Itching, Rash, Sensitisation, Irritation, Ulceration 

Potential Health Effects 

Skin : Causes skin irritation. May cause:, Pain, Burning sensation, Itching, 

Redness, Swelling, Rash. 

Eyes : Causes eye irritation. May cause:, Pain, tearing, Swelling, Redness, 

Temporary, visual impairment. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

2 / 10 

Inhalation : May cause irritation of respiratory tract. May cause:, Cough, Shortness of 

breath, Central nervous system depression, dizziness, confusion, 

incoordination, drowsiness, or unconsciousness, Prolonged contact may 

cause:, irregular heartbeat with a strange sensation in the chest, heart 

thumping, apprehension, feeling of fainting, dizziness or weakness, Fluid in 

the lungs (pulmonary oedema) with cough, wheezing, abnormal lung 

sounds, possibly progressing to severe shortness of breath and bluish 

discoloration of the skin (symptoms might be delayed). 

Ingestion : Gross overexposure may cause: Thyroid effects 

Repeated exposure : May cause harm to the unborn child. 

Target Organs 

Perfluorobutyl 

iodide 

: Respiratory Tract 

Iodine : Thyroid 

Carcinogenicity 

None of the components present in this material at concentrations equal to or greater than 0.1% are listed by 

IARC, NTP, or OSHA, as a carcinogen.

 

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS 

Component CAS-No. Concentration 

Perfluorobutyl iodide 423-39-2 >90% 

Perfluorohexyl Iodide 355-43-1 <0.4 % 

Perfluoroethyl iodide 354-64-3 <0.5 % 

Iodine 7553-56-2 <0.1 % 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

3 / 10 

 

SECTION 4. FIRST AID MEASURES 

Skin contact : Wash off immediately with soap and plenty of water. Wash contaminated 

clothing before re-use. 

Eye contact : Rinse immediately with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. Seek medical 

advice. 

Inhalation : Move to fresh air. Oxygen or artificial respiration if needed. Symptoms may be 

delayed. Call a physician immediately. 

Ingestion : Call a physician or poison control centre immediately. If swallowed, DO NOT 

induce vomiting unless directed to do so by medical personnel. Never give 

anything by mouth to an unconscious person. 

General advice : When symptoms persist or in all cases of doubt seek medical advice. 

 

SECTION 5. FIREFIGHTING MEASURES 

Flammable Properties

Flash point : closed cup 

does not flash 

Thermal decomposition : > 200 °C (> 392 °F) 

To avoid thermal decomposition, do not overheat. 

 Thermal decomposition can lead to release of irritating gases and vapours. 

Fire and Explosion Hazard : The product itself does not burn. Hazardous decomposition products formed 

under fire conditions. Hazardous combustion products Hydrogen fluoride 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) Carbon monoxide Other hazardous decomposition 

products may be formed. 

Suitable extinguishing media : Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local circumstances and 

the surrounding environment.

Firefighting Instructions : Wear self contained breathing apparatus for fire fighting if necessary. 

Evacuate personnel to safe areas. Do not allow run-off from fire fighting to 

enter drains or water courses.
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

4 / 10 

 

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES 

NOTE: Review FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES and HANDLING (PERSONNEL) sections before proceeding with cleanup. Use appropriate PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT during clean-up. 

Safeguards (Personnel) : Evacuate personnel to safe areas. Use personal protective equipment. 

Ventilate the area. 

Spill Cleanup 

 

: Dam up. Soak up with inert absorbent material (e.g. sand, silica gel, acid 

binder, universal binder, sawdust). Pick up and transfer to properly labelled 

containers. 

Accidental Release Measures : Do not discharge to streams, ponds, lakes or sewers. Avoid subsoil 

penetration. 

 

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE 

Handling (Personnel) : Avoid formation of respirable particles. Do not breathe vapours or spray mist. 

Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing. 

Wash hands before breaks and immediately after handling the product. Wash 

contaminated clothing before re-use. 

Handling (Physical Aspects) : To avoid thermal decomposition, do not overheat. Thermal decomposition 

can lead to release of irritating gases and vapours. 

Do not spray near open flame or heated surface. 

Storage : Keep tightly closed in a dry, cool and well-ventilated place. 

 

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION 

Personal protective equipment 

Respiratory protection : In case of mist, spray or aerosol exposure wear suitable personal respiratory 

protection and protective suit. 

Hand protection : Additional protection: Impervious gloves 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

5 / 10 

Eye protection : Wear safety glasses or coverall chemical splash goggles. 

Skin and body protection : Lightweight protective clothing 

Exposure Guidelines 

Exposure Limit Values

Perfluorobutyl iodide

AEL * (DUPONT) 375 ppm 8 & 12 hr. TWA

Iodine

PEL: (OSHA) 0.1 ppm 1 mg/m3 TLV-C

TLV (ACGIH) 0.01 ppm TWA Inhalable fraction and vapor.

TLV (ACGIH) 0.1 ppm STEL Vapor and aerosol.

* AEL is DuPont's Acceptable Exposure Limit. Where governmentally imposed occupational exposure limits which 

are lower than the AEL are in effect, such limits shall take precedence.

 

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

Form : liquid 

Color : clear, colourless, to, violet 

Odor : slight, acidic 

Melting point : < -70 °C (< -94 °F) 

Boiling point : 69.1 °C (156.4 °F) 

% Volatile : > 98 % 

Vapour Pressure : 148 Torr at 25 °C (77 °F) 

Specific gravity : 2.00 at 25 °C (77 °F) 

Water solubility : negligible 

 

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY 

Stability : Stable under normal conditions. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

6 / 10 

Conditions to avoid : To avoid thermal decomposition, do not overheat.

 

Hazardous decomposition 

products 

: Carbon dioxide , Carbon monoxide, Hydrofluoric acid...%

Incompletely burned carbon products 

Other hazardous decomposition products may be formed. 

 

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Perfluorobutyl iodide 

Inhalation 4 h LC50 : 14000 ppm , rat

Target Organs: Respiratory Tract 

Respiratory tract irritation

Inhalation : 6000 ppm , dog 

Cardiac sensitization

Skin irritation : Skin irritation, guinea pig 

Eye irritation : Eye irritation, animals (unspecified species) 

Skin sensitization : Did not cause sensitization on laboratory animals., guinea pig 

Repeated dose toxicity : Inhalation

rat 

Respiratory tract irritation, Nasal irritation 

Mutagenicity : Evidence suggests this substance does not cause genetic damage in 

animals. 

Tests on bacterial or mammalian cell cultures did not show mutagenic 

effects. 

Further information : Cardiac sensitisation threshold limit : 84000 mg/m3

Perfluorohexyl Iodide 

Inhalation NOEC : 7500 ppm , dog 

Not a cardiac sensitizer.

Skin irritation : Non-corrosive 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

7 / 10 

Perfluoroethyl iodide 

Inhalation 4 h LC50 : 40000 ppm , rat 

Central nervous system depression

Incoordination

Hypoactivity

Anaesthetic effects

Cardiac sensitization

Further information : Cardiac sensitisation threshold limit : 5030 mg/m3

Iodine 

Dermal Acute toxicity 

estimate 

: 1,100 mg/kg , rabbit 

Oral Acute toxicity estimate : 500 mg/kg , human 

Inhalation 4 h Acute 

toxicity estimate 

: 1.5 mg/l , rat 

Skin irritation : Skin irritation, Not tested on animals 

Eye irritation : Corrosive, multiple species 

Skin sensitization : Did not cause sensitization on laboratory animals., mouse 

There are rare or inconclusive reports of human skin sensitization. 

Repeated dose toxicity : Oral

human 

 

Target Organs: Thyroid 

Thyroid effects 

Carcinogenicity : Overall weight of evidence indicates that the substance is not 

carcinogenic. 

Mutagenicity : Overall weight of evidence indicates that the substance is not 

mutagenic. 

Genetic damage in cultured mammalian cells was observed in some 

laboratory tests but not in others. 

 Did not cause genetic damage in animals. 

Information given is based on data obtained from similar substances. 

Reproductive toxicity : Effects on or via lactation 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

8 / 10 

Teratogenicity : Has been reported to cause: 

Reduced embryo-foetal viability 

Reduced growth 

 

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Aquatic Toxicity 

Perfluorobutyl iodide 

96 h LC50 : Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow) 2.3 mg/l 

48 h EC50 : Daphnia magna (Water flea) 1.7 mg/l 

Iodine 

96 h LC50 : Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout) 1.67 mg/l 

72 h ErC50 : Desmodesmus subspicatus (green algae) 0.13 mg/l 

48 h LC50 : Daphnia magna (Water flea) 0.55 mg/l 

Environmental Fate 

Perfluorobutyl iodide 

Biodegradability : Not readily biodegradable. 

Additional ecological information : No data is available on the product itself. 

 

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS 

Waste Disposal : Collect spent solvent and either reclaim or incinerate. Collect materials 

containing or contaminated with solvent, including rags, disposable wipes, 

and gloves in a sealed container for incineration. Prevent wastewater, spent 

solvent, and materials containing or contaminated with solvent from entering 

waterways. Wastewater should be sent to a wastewater treatment facility. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

9 / 10 

 

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION 

IATA_C UN number : 3082

Proper shipping name : Environmentally hazardous substance, liquid, n.o.s. 

(Perfluorobutyl Iodide)

Class : 9

Packing group : III 

Labelling No. : 9 

IMDG UN number : 3082

Proper shipping name : Environmentally hazardous substance, liquid, n.o.s. 

(Perfluorobutyl Iodide) 

Class : 9

Packing group : III 

Labelling No. : 9 

Marine pollutant : yes (Perfluorobutyl Iodide)

 

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION 

TSCA Status : On the inventory, or in compliance with the inventory 

SARA 313 Regulated 

Chemical(s) 

: SARA 313: This material does not contain any chemical components with 

known CAS numbers that exceed the threshold (De Minimis) reporting levels 

established by SARA Title III, Section 313. 

Title III hazard 

classification 

: Acute Health Hazard: Yes 

Chronic Health Hazard: No 

Fire: No 

Reactivity/Physical hazard: No 

Pressure: No 

California Prop. 65 : Chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects or 

any other harm: none known 

 

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION 
Material Safety Data Sheet

Capstone®4-I 

Version 2.2 

Revision Date 12/20/2011 Ref. 130000042690

10 / 10 

HMIS

Health : 2 

Flammability : 0 

Reactivity/Physical hazard : 0 

PPE : Personal Protection rating to be 

supplied by user depending on use 

conditions. 

The DuPont Oval Logo® and Capstone®

are registered trademarks or trademarks of E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company or its affiliates. 

 

Contact person : MSDS Coordinator, DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts, Wilmington, DE 

19898, (800) 441-7515 

The information provided in this Safety Data Sheet is correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief at 

the date of its publication. The information given is designed only as a guidance for safe handling, use, processing, 

storage, transportation, disposal and release and is not to be considered a warranty or quality specification. The 

information relates only to the specific material designated and may not be valid for such material used in combination 

with any other materials or in any process, unless specified in the text. 

Significant change from previous version is denoted with a double bar. 

 
: 

Effective Date: 03/28/2013

Version: 15

SAFETY DATA SHEET

ASAHIKLIN AE3000

1. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000

General Use: Solvent

Manufacturer

ASAHI GLASS CO., LTD

Chemicals Company

1-5-1, Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku,Tokyo 100-8405, JAPAN

Telephone Number for Information

+81-3-3218-5574

Facsimile Number for Information

+81-3-3218-7854

Supplier

AGC Chemicals Americas, Inc.

55 E. Uwchlan Avenue

Suite 201

Exton, PA 19341

24 Hours Medical Emergency Telephone #: 800-420-8479

24 Hours Transportation Emergency # (CHEMTREC): 800-424-9300

Customer Service #: 800-424-7833

2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

This product is hazardous under OSHA.

Emergency Overview: WARNING!

May cause eye and skin irritation.

Prolonged or repeated skin contact with liquid may cause drying, cracking,

redness, itching, and/or swelling (dermatitis).

Aspiration hazard if swallowed - can enter lungs and cause damage.

Inhalation of high concentration of vapors is harmful and may cause heart

irregularites, unconsciousness, or death.

PAGE FOOTER

Page 1 of 7

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000 Product ID#: 205500000 Effective Date: 03/28/2013
Potential Health Effects:

Inhalation: Inhalation of vapor may cause coughing, dizziness, dullness, drowsiness, and

headache. Inhalation of higher concentrations of vapor is harmful and may cause

heart irregularities, central nervous system depression, narcosis,

unconsciousness, respiratory failure, or death. Intentional misuse can be fatal.

Vapor reduces oxygen available for breathing and is heavier than air.

Skin Contact: May cause skin irritation.

Eye Contact: May cause eye irritation.

3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Component Name CAS-NO Weight %

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl

ether

406-78-0 99.9-100

OSHA - 29 CFR 1910 Specifically Regulated Chemicals

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl ether

4. FIRST AID MEASURES

Eye Contact: Immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. Remove

contact lenses, if worn. Get medical attention if irritation persists.

Skin Contact: In case of skin contact, flush with water. Remove contaminated clothing and

shoes. Get medical attention if irritation persists.

Inhalation: If inhalation symptoms occur, immediately remove to fresh air. Keep person calm.

If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Get

medical attention if cough or other symptoms develop.

Ingestion: No specific intervention is indicated as the compound is not likely to be hazardous

by ingestion. Do not induce vomiting because the hazard of aspirating the material

into the lungs is considered greater than swallowing it. Get medical attention if

symptoms develop. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person.

6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Unsuitable Extinguish Media/Methods: None

PAGE FOOTER

Hazardous Combustion Product or Gases: Containers may rupture under fire conditions. Decomposition

of this product at temperature above 300deg.C (572deg.F) can form hydrogen fluoride (HF), but HF will only

accumulate with continuous exposure to excess heat in a sealed vessel.

Special Protective Equipment For Fire Fighters: Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) is required

if drums rupture and contents are spilled under fire conditions.

Additional Information: Use water spray to cool containers. Move containers from fire areas if it can be done

without risk.

Page 2 of 7

5. FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

Suitable Extinguishing Media: Dry chemical, Carbon dioxide (CO2) Water spray mist or foam.

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000 Product ID#: 205500000 Effective Date: 03/28/2013
Personal precautions:

Ensure adequate ventilation.

Use personal respiratory protection, impermeable gloves, chemical splash goggles and protective clothing.

Environmental precautions:

Collect contaminated water/firefighting water separately. Do not wash away into drain or waterway.

Methods for cleaning up/taking up:

Absorb or contain liquid with inert material and dispose of in accordance with applicable regulations.

In case of spill or other release:

NOTES: Review chapter 5, chapter 7, and chapter 8 before proceeding with clean up. Use appropriate Personal

Protective Equipment during clean up.

Extinguish flames in area to avoid forming dangerous decomposition products (See chapter 5). Dike spill. Prevent

liquid from entering sewers, waterways or low areas. Ventilate area. Collect on absorbent material and transfer to

steel drums for recovery/disposal. Comply with Federal, State, and local regulations on reporting releases.

Additional information:

Additional information: Review chapter 7 for safe handling information.

Review chapter 13 for disposal information.

7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Handling:

Use with sufficient ventilation to keep employee exposure below recommended limits. Provide adequate ventilation

for storage, handling, and use, especially for enclosed or low spaces. Avoid contact of liquid with eyes and prolonged

skin exposure. Do not allow product to contact open flame or electrical heating elements because dangerous

decomposition products may form.

Storage

Store in clean, dry, well-ventilated area. Do not store product in direct sunlight.

8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION

Exposure Guidelines:

Component Name AEL: CEC: EEL: ECE:

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2

-trifluoroethyl ether

Daily exposure limit:

50ppm (8h-TWA)

*AEL is the

Acceptable Exposure

Limit set by Asahi

Glass Co., Ltd.

Ceiling exposure

concentration

(non-emergency):

150ppm

Exposure Limit

recommended by US

EPA

Emergency exposure

limit: 150ppm (time

limit 15min)

Emergency Exposure

Limit (EEL) set by

Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.

Emergency ceiling

exposure

concentration:

500ppm

Emergency ceiling

exposure

concentration set by

Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.

PAGE FOOTER

Page 3 of 7

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000 Product ID#: 205500000 Effective Date: 03/28/2013
EEL: Emergency Exposure Limits (EELs) are to be used for short-term emergency exposure control. They are

concentrations of short periods which should not result in permanent adverse health effects or interfere with escape.

They should not be confused with daily exposure limits (such as AEL's and EPA recommended exposure limits) that

are designed for repeated exposure guidelines. For the use of AE3000, daily exposure limits such as AEL as well as

EEL are to be followed. The EEL for AE3000 is needed to avoid anaesthetic effects, which could prevent self-rescue.

If an EEL is exceeded for specified duration, evacuation, sheltering in place or other mitigatin steps should be taken.

Occupational Exposure Controls.

Engineering Controls:

Normal ventilation for standard manufacturing procedures is generally adequate. Local exhaust should be used when

large amounts are released. Vapors are heavier than air. Use with adequate ventilation to prevent vapor buildup in

low lying areas.

Personal Protection:

Respiratory Protection Use respiratory protection approved by NIOSH in USA or other equivalent in each

country if exposure limits may be exceeded. Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) is required if a large spill

occurs.

Hand Protection: Impervious gloves

Eye Protection: Safety glasses and/or chemical tight goggles if splashing is likely to occur.

Additional advice:

Provide eyewash stations Impermeable apron and boots to prevent skin contact.

NPCA - HMIS (National Paint and Coating Association - Hazardous Materials Identification System) Hazard

Rating

HMIS codes are intended for use in everyday workplace setting to provide a rapid indication of the occupational

hazards associated with chemicals used in the workplace.

a) Flammability - 0, b) Health - 1, c) Reactivity - 0

9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance and Odor: Clear, colorless liquid with slight ethereal odor

Boiling Point (°F/C): 134/56.2

Melting Point/Range: -138 deg.F (-94 degC)

Flash Point (Method Used):None (Pensky-Martens Closed Cup & Cleveland Open Cup)

Lower Explosive Limit: None

Autoignition Temp. (°F/C): 1094deg.F (590deg.C)

Upper Explosive Limit: None

Vapor Pressure: 31kPa @25deg.C

Relative Density: 1.47 @25deg.C

Solubility in Water: 0.01g/100g H2O @20deg.C

Solubility in Solvent 0.09g H2O/100g

pH Value N/D @20 deg.C

Viscosity: 6.5 x 10^-4 Pa @25deg.C

Partition Coefficient n-octanol/water: log Pow=2.18

Other: (Vapor density, miscibility, evaporation rate, conductivity, etc.): N/D

PAGE FOOTER

Page 4 of 7

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000 Product ID#: 205500000 Effective Date: 03/28/2013
10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Conditions to Avoid: Material is stable however, avoid open flames and high temperature. Do not allow product

to contact open flame or electrical heating elements because dangerous decomposition products may form.

Stability: Stable under recommended storage conditions.

Materials to Avoid:

Incompatible with alkali or alkaline earth metals-powdered Al, Zn, Be, etc.

Avoid contamination with caustic soda, caustic potash, or oxidizing materials. Shock sensitive compounds may be

formed.

Hazardous Decomposition Products:

Decomposition products are hazardous. This compound can be decomposed by high temperatures (open flames,

glowing metal surfaces, etc.) forming hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids-possibly carbonyl halides.

Hazardous Polymerization: Will Not Occur

11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Animal Data

Component Name Inhalation Oral Dermal Eyes

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2

-trifluoroethyl ether

LC50: >24.8mg/L

(3010ppm) in rat

LD50: >2,000mg/kg

in rat

LD50: >2,000mg/kg

in rat

1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl ether

Acute Toxicity:

Oral LD50 (rat): >2000mg/kg

Inhalation LC50 (rat): >24.8mg/L (3010ppm)

Dermal LD50 (rat): >2000mg/kg

Skin and eye irritation:

Slight irritation to eye and mucous membranes

Skin irritation (rabbit): none

Eye irritation (rabbit): slight

Sensitization:

Skin (rat): none

Genetic Studies:

Ames Assay: Negative (OECD 471 & 472)

Chromosomal Aberration Test: Negative (CHL Cell) (OECD 473)

Repeated Dose Oral Toxicity (28 Day): NOEL 1000mg/kg/d

Repeated Dose Inhalation Toxicity (5 day): NOEL 1800ppm

Rats exposed to 2500 or 5000 ppm for 6 hours per day for 5 days showed convulsions.

Repeated Dose Inhalation Toxicity (90 day): NOEL 1000ppm

Rats exposed to 1000ppm for 6 hours per day, 5 days per week for 90 days showed no adverse effects.

PAGE FOOTER

Page 5 of 7

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000 Product ID#: 205500000 Effective Date: 03/28/2013
Carcinogenicity

(ACGIH): N/E

12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Biodegradability: Not biodegraded (OECD 301C)

Bioaccumulation: N/D

Activated Sludge Study: >100mg/L (OECD 209)

Fish Toxicity: LC50 (96hr) (Carp): >76mg/L

Other Information: Algal growth inhibition: ErC50>213mg/L ---- EbC50>213mg/L

Mobility inhibition (Daphnia magna): 48hr-EC50>94mg/L

13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Waste treatment: Recover by distillation or remove to permitted waste disposal facility.

Packaging treatment: Dispose of waste containers to authorized landfill, in accordance with local laws

and regulations.

Comply with all federal, state, and local regulations.

Do not dump this product into sewers, on the ground, or into any body of water.

Disposal methods Reuse the residual product when possible. Send waste product for thermal

destruction, using high-temperature incinerators designed to burn fluorine

compounds. Dispose of waste containers in accordance with local laws and

regulations.

Comply with all federal, state, and local regulations.

Do not dump this product into sewers, on the ground, or into any body of water.

14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT)

Hazardous Materials: N/A

Hazard Class or Division: Not classified

Identification Number: Not regulated

Packing Group: Not classified

Hazardous Materials Description and Proper Shipping Name: N/A

Label(s) Required: Not classified

UN/Id No.: N/A

IMDG Status: Not restricted

Marine Pollutant: No

ICAO/IATA Status: Not restricted

15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

PAGE FOOTER

Page 6 of 7

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000 Product ID#: 205500000 Effective Date: 03/28/2013
For European Union

EEC Classification Not classified

Hazard Symbol Not established

Risk Phrases: Not established

Safety Phrases:

Not established

For United States of America

SNAP Acceptable:

Acceptable for precision cleaning, electronics cleaning, & aerosol solvents.

OSHA

This product is hazardous under 29 CFR 1910.1200

TSCA Status:

This chemical is listed on the TSCA inventory.

TSCA - Sect. 5(a)(2) - Chemicals with SNUR

This material will be the subject of a significant new use rule (SNUR) under 40 CFR Part 721. Accordingly, this

material can only be used for the following industrial-use applications: (i) cleaning electronic components; (ii) precision

cleaning; (iii) dewatering of electronic components and other parts following aqueous cleaning; and (iv)

carrier/lubricant coating for hard disk drives and other precision parts.

SARA Section 302:

N/A

Sara (311, 312) Hazard Class:

Acute Health Hazard,

SARA Section 313: N/A

16. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

N/E: Not Established

N/A: Not Applicable

N/D: No Data

C.O.C.: Cleveland Open Cup

NFPA Hazard Code

NFPA codes are designed for use by firefighters, sheriffs, or other emergency response teams who are concerned

with the hazards of burning or exploding materials. These NFPA codes are not intended to address the hazards of

this product other than in a fire situation.

NFPA Rating:

Health 2, Flammability 0 , Reactivity 0

Revision Summary - MSDS Section(s) Updated: 15

PAGE FOOTER

Page 7 of 7

Product Name: ASAHIKLIN AE3000 Product ID#: 205500000 Effective Date: 03/28/2013
: 

Effective Date: 07/22/2013

Version: 15

SAFETY DATA SHEET

AE3000AT

1. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Product Name: AE3000AT

General Use: Solvent

Manufacturer

ASAHI GLASS CO., LTD

Chemicals Company

1-5-1, Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku,Tokyo 100-8405, JAPAN

Telephone Number for Information

+81-3-3218-5574

Facsimile Number for Information

+81-3-3218-7854

Supplier

AGC Chemicals Americas, Inc.

55 E. Uwchlan Avenue

Suite 201

Exton, PA 19341

24 Hours Medical Emergency Telephone #: 800-420-8479

24 Hours Transportation Emergency # (CHEMTREC): 800-424-9300

Customer Service #: 800-424-7833

2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

This product is hazardous under OSHA.

Emergency Overview: WARNING!

May cause eye and skin irritation.

Prolonged or repeated skin contact with liquid may cause drying, cracking,

redness, itching, and/or swelling (dermatitis).

Aspiration hazard if swallowed - can enter lungs and cause damage.

Inhalation of high concentration of vapors is harmful and may cause heart

irregularites, unconsciousness, or death.

PAGE FOOTER

Page 1 of 8

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
Potential Health Effects:

Inhalation: Inhalation of vapor may cause coughing, dizziness, dullness, drowsiness, and

headache. Inhalation of higher concentrations of vapor is harmful and may cause

heart irregularities, central nervous system depression, narcosis,

unconsciousness, respiratory failure, or death. Intentional misuse can be fatal.

Vapor reduces oxygen available for breathing and is heavier than air.

Skin Contact: May cause skin irritation.

Eye Contact: May cause eye irritation.

3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Component Name CAS-NO Weight %

1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene 156-60-5 46-54

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl

ether

406-78-0 43-52

OSHA - 29 CFR 1910 Specifically Regulated Chemicals

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl ether and 1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene are hazardous components.

4. FIRST AID MEASURES

Eye Contact: Immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. Remove

contact lenses, if worn. Get medical attention if irritation persists.

Skin Contact: In case of skin contact, flush with water. Remove contaminated clothing and

shoes. Get medical attention if irritation persists.

Inhalation: If inhalation symptoms occur, immediately remove to fresh air. Keep person calm.

If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Get

medical attention if cough or other symptoms develop.

Ingestion: No specific intervention is indicated as the compound is not likely to be hazardous

by ingestion. Do not induce vomiting because the hazard of aspirating the material

into the lungs is considered greater than swallowing it. Get medical attention if

symptoms develop. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person.

PAGE FOOTER

Suitable Extinguishing

Media:

Dry chemical Carbon dioxide (CO2) Water spray mist or foam.

Unsuitable Extinguish Media/Methods: None

Unusual Fire and Explosion Hazards: None known

Page 2 of 8

Hazardous Combustion Product or Gases: Containers may rupture under fire conditions. Decomposition

of this product at temperature above 300deg.C (572deg.F) can form hydrogen fluoride (HF), but HF will only

accumulate with continuous exposure to excess heat in a sealed vessel.

Special Protective Equipment For Fire Fighters: Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) is required

if drums rupture and contents are spilled under fire conditions.

Additional Information: Use water spray to cool containers. Move containers from fire areas if it can be done

without risk.

5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Personal precautions:

Ensure adequate ventilation.

Use personal respiratory protection, impermeable gloves, chemical splash goggles and protective clothing.

Environmental precautions:

Collect contaminated water/firefighting water separately. Do not wash away into drain or waterway.

Methods for cleaning up/taking up:

Absorb or contain liquid with inert material and dispose of in accordance with applicable regulations.

In case of spill or other release:

NOTES: Review chapter 5, chapter 7, and chapter 8 before proceeding with clean up. Use appropriate Personal

Protective Equipment during clean up.

Extinguish flames in area to avoid forming dangerous decomposition products (See chapter 5). Dike spill. Prevent

liquid from entering sewers, waterways or low areas. Ventilate area. Collect on absorbent material and transfer to

steel drums for recovery/disposal. Comply with Federal, State, and local regulations on reporting releases.

Additional information:

Additional information: Review chapter 7 for safe handling information.

Review chapter 13 for disposal information.

7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Handling:

Use with sufficient ventilation to keep employee exposure below recommended limits. Provide adequate ventilation

for storage, handling, and use, especially for enclosed or low spaces. Avoid contact of liquid with eyes and prolonged

skin exposure. Do not allow product to contact open flame or electrical heating elements because dangerous

decomposition products may form. Trans-1,2-dichlorethylene can react with air to form explosive peroxides.

Storage

Store in clean, dry, well-ventilated area. Do not store product in direct sunlight.

8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION

Component Name ACGIH TLV: OSHA PEL: NIOSH - Pocket

Guide - OELs

1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene 200 ppm TWA 200 ppm TWA

790 mg/m3 TWA

REL-TWA: 200ppm

790mg/m^3

Exposure Guidelines:

Component Name AEL: CEC: EEL: ECE:

PAGE FOOTER

Page 3 of 8

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2

-trifluoroethyl ether

Daily exposure limit:

50ppm (8h-TWA)

*AEL is the

Acceptable Exposure

Limit set by Asahi

Glass Co., Ltd.

Ceiling exposure

concentration

(non-emergency):

150ppm

Exposure Limit

recommended by US

EPA

Emergency exposure

limit: 150ppm (time

limit 15min)

Emergency Exposure

Limit (EEL) set by

Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.

Emergency ceiling

exposure

concentration:

500ppm

Emergency ceiling

exposure

concentration set by

Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.

EEL: Emergency Exposure Limits (EELs) are to be used for short-term emergency exposure control. They are

concentrations of short periods which should not result in permanent adverse health effects or interfere with escape.

They should not be confused with daily exposure limits (such as AEL's and EPA recommended exposure limits) that

are designed for repeated exposure guidelines. For the use of AE3000, daily exposure limits such as AEL as well as

EEL are to be followed. The EEL for AE3000 is needed to avoid anaesthetic effects, which could prevent self-rescue.

If an EEL is exceeded for specified duration, evacuation, sheltering in place or other mitigatin steps should be taken.

Occupational Exposure Controls.

Engineering Controls:

Normal ventilation for standard manufacturing procedures is generally adequate. Local exhaust should be used when

large amounts are released. Vapors are heavier than air. Use with adequate ventilation to prevent vapor buildup in

low lying areas.

Personal Protection:

Respiratory Protection Use respiratory protection approved by NIOSH in USA or other equivalent in each

country if exposure limits may be exceeded. Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) is required if a large spill

occurs.

Hand Protection: Impervious gloves

Eye Protection: Safety glasses and/or chemical tight goggles if splashing is likely to occur.

Additional advice:

Provide eyewash stations Impermeable apron and boots to prevent skin contact.

NPCA - HMIS (National Paint and Coating Association - Hazardous Materials Identification System) Hazard

Rating

HMIS codes are intended for use in everyday workplace setting to provide a rapid indication of the occupational

hazards associated with chemicals used in the workplace.

a) Flammability - 0, b) Health - 1, c) Reactivity - 0

9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Appearance and Odor: Clear, colorless liquid with slight ethereal odor

Boiling Point (°F/C): 100.4/38.0

Melting Point/Range: -56.74 deg.F (-49.3 degC )

Flash Point (Method Used):None (Pensky-Martens Closed Cup & Cleveland Open Cup)

Lower Explosive Limit: 9.8%

Autoignition Temp. (°F/C): N/D

Upper Explosive Limit: 13.3%

Vapor Pressure: 0.048MPa @ 20deg.C

Specific Gravity: 1.36 @ 25deg.C

PAGE FOOTER

Page 4 of 8

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
Solubility in Water: N/D

pH Value Neutral

Vapor Density: N/D

Evaporation Rate: (Ethyl ether = 1) : 0.9

10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Conditions to Avoid: Material is stable however, avoid open flames and high temperature. Do not allow product

to contact open flame or electrical heating elements because dangerous decomposition products may form.

Trans-1,2-dichlorethylene can react with air to form explosive peroxides.

Stability: Stable under recommended storage conditions.

Materials to Avoid:

Incompatible with alkali or alkaline earth metals-powdered Al, Zn, Be, etc.

Avoid contamination with caustic soda, caustic potash, or oxidizing materials. Shock sensitive compounds may be

formed.

Hazardous Decomposition Products:

Decomposition products are hazardous. This compound can be decomposed by high temperatures (open flames,

glowing metal surfaces, etc.) forming hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids-possibly carbonyl halides.

Hazardous Polymerization: Will Not Occur

11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Animal Data

Component Name Inhalation Oral Dermal Eyes

1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene 6-h LC50:

21,700ppm in mouse

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2

-trifluoroethyl ether

LC50: >24.8mg/L

(3010ppm) in rat

LD50: >2,000mg/kg

in rat

LD50: >2,000mg/kg

in rat

1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene

Other Toxicity Information:

Administration of trans-1,2-dichloroethylene in the drinking water to male and female mice at doses of 21,210 or 420

mg/kg/d for 90 days produced few adverse findings. In female, there was a decrease in lung weight (11%) at the high

dose, in thymus weight (33 and 18%) at the high and intermediate dose levels, respectively. Decreases in SGPT,

SGOT, and aniline hydroxylase activity were observed at all levels. In males, there was an increase of SAP and a

decrease of glutathione. Glucose levels were increased in both sexes at all doses.

 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl ether

PAGE FOOTER

Page 5 of 8

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
Acute Toxicity:

Skin and eye irritation:

Slight irritation to eye and mucous membranes

Skin irritation (rabbit): none

Eye irritation (rabbit): slight

Sensitization:

Skin (rat): none

Genetic Studies:

Ames Assay: Negative (OECD 471 & 472)

Chromosomal Aberration Test: Negative (CHL Cell) (OECD 473)

Repeated Dose Oral Toxicity (28 Day): NOEL 1000mg/kg/d

Repeated Dose Inhalation Toxicity (5 day): NOEL 1800ppm

Rats exposed to 2500 or 5000 ppm for 6 hours per day for 5 days showed convulsions.

Repeated Dose Inhalation Toxicity (90 day): NOEL 1000ppm

Rats exposed to 1000ppm for 6 hours per day, 5 days per week for 90 days showed no adverse effects.

12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Biodegradability: Not biodegraded (OECD 301C)

Bioaccumulation: N/D

Activated Sludge Study: >100mg/L (OECD 209)

Fish Toxicity: LC50 (96hr) (Carp): >76mg/L

Other Information: Algal growth inhibition: ErC50>213mg/L ---- EbC50>213mg/L

Mobility inhibition (Daphnia magna): 48hr-EC50>94mg/L

13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Waste treatment: Recover by distillation or remove to permitted waste disposal facility.

Packaging treatment: Dispose of waste containers in accordance with local laws and regulations.

Comply with all federal, state, and local regulations.

Do not dump this product into sewers, on the ground, or into any body of water.

Disposal methods Reuse the residual product when possible. Send waste product for thermal

destruction, using high-temperature incinerators designed to burn fluorine

compounds. Dispose of waste containers in accordance with local laws and

regulations.

Comply with all federal, state, and local regulations.

Do not dump this product into sewers, on the ground, or into any body of water.

14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT)

Hazardous Materials: N/A

Hazard Class or Division: Not classified

PAGE FOOTER

Page 6 of 8

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
Identification Number: Not regulated

Packing Group: Not classified

Hazardous Materials Description and Proper Shipping Name: N/A

Label(s) Required: Not classified

UN/Id No.: N/A

IMDG Status: Not restricted

Marine Pollutant: No

ICAO/IATA Status: Not restricted

15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

For European Union

EEC Classification Not classified

Hazard Symbol Not established

R-Phrases Not established

Safety Phrases:

Not established

Council Directive 92/32/EEC Status:

These chemicals are listed on the EINECS: (trans-1,2-dichloroethylene: 205-860-2)

For United States of America

SNAP Acceptable:

Acceptable for precision cleaning, electronics cleaning, & aerosol solvents.

OSHA

This product is hazardous under 29 CFR 1910.1200

TSCA Status:

This chemical is listed on the TSCA inventory.

TSCA - Sect. 5(a)(2) - Chemicals with SNUR

This material will be the subject of a significant new use rule (SNUR) under 40 CFR Part 721. Accordingly, this

material can only be used for the following industrial-use applications: (i) cleaning electronic components; (ii) precision

cleaning; (iii) dewatering of electronic components and other parts following aqueous cleaning; and (iv)

carrier/lubricant coating for hard disk drives and other precision parts.

SARA Section 302:

N/A

Sara (311, 312) Hazard Class:

Acute Health Hazard,

SARA Section 313: Yes trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene)

State Regulations (United States)

PAGE FOOTER

Page 7 of 8

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
Component Name U.S. - CERCLA/SARA - Hazardous Substances

and their Reportable Quantities

1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene

 156-60-5

1000 lb

454 kg 1 lb

0.454 kg

CERCLA Section 103: Yes (trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene: 1000lbs RQ)

User should ensure that this material is in compliance with federal requirements and ensure conformity to local

regulations.

16. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

N/E: Not Established

N/A: Not Applicable

N/D: No Data

C.O.C.: Cleveland Open Cup

NFPA Hazard Code

NFPA codes are designed for use by firefighters, sheriffs, or other emergency response teams who are concerned

with the hazards of burning or exploding materials. These NFPA codes are not intended to address the hazards of

this product other than in a fire situation.

NFPA Rating:

Health 2, Flammability 0 , Reactivity 0

Revision Summary - MSDS Section(s) Updated: 15

PAGE FOOTER

Page 8 of 8

Product Name: AE3000AT Product ID#: 201650001 Effective Date: 07/22/2013
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 1/9

Chemical: Pentafluorobutane NFPA: H=0 F=4 I=1 S=None

HMIS: H=0 F=4 R=1 PPE= Supplied by user; 

dependent on conditions

MSDS Number: S3651204

Effective Date: 03 December 2004

Issued by: Solvay Chemicals, Inc. Regulatory Affairs Department

Not valid three years after effective date or after issuance of superseding MSDS, whichever is

earlier. French or Spanish translations of this MSDS may be available. Check www.solvaychemicals.us

or call Solvay Fluorides, LLC to verify the latest version or translation availability.

Material Safety Data Sheets contain country specific regulatory information. Therefore, the

MSDS’s provided are for use only by customers of Solvay Fluorides, LLC in North America. If you

are located in a country other than Canada, Mexico or the United States, please contact the Solvay

Group company in your country for MSDS information applicable to your location.

1. Company and Product Identification

1.1 Product Name: Solkane® 365 mfc

Chemical Name: 1,1,1,3,3pentafluorobutane

Synonyms: Pentafluorobutane, HFC365 mfc

Chemical Formula: C4H5F5

Molecular Weight: 148

CAS Number: 406586

EINECS Number: 4302501

1.2 Recommended Uses: Foaming agents; solvents

1.3 Supplier: Solvay Fluorides, LLC

PO BOX 27328 Houston, TX 772277328

3333 Richmond Ave. Houston, Texas 77098

1.4 Emergency Telephone Numbers

Emergencies (USA): 18004249300 (CHEMTREC®)

Transportation Emergencies (INTERNATIONAL/MARITIME): 17035273887 (CHEMTREC®)

Transportation Emergencies (CANADA): 16139966666 (CANUTEC)

Transportation Emergencies (MEXICOSETIQ): 018000021400 (MEX. REPUBLIC)

5255591588 (Mexico City and metro 

area)
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 2/9

2. Composition/Information on Ingredients

INGREDIENTS FORMULA WT. PERCENT CAS #

1,1,1,3,3pentafluorobutane C4H5F5 ≥ 99.50 406586

3. Hazards Identification 

Emergency Overview:

• Highly flammable.

• In case of decomposition, releases hydrogen fluoride.

3.1 Route of Entry: Inhalation: Yes Skin: Yes Ingestion: Unlikely

3.2 Potential Effects of exposure:

Inhalation:

• No reported cases of intoxication in humans.

• Risk of moderate consequences experimentally observed or under certain conditions.

• At high concentrations, risk of narcosis or asphyxia by lack of oxygen.

Eyes: Slight irritation.

Skin contact: In case of repeated contact: dry and chapped skin.

Ingestion: No data available for humans.

Carcinogenicity: See section 11.3.

4. FirstAid Measures 

General Recommendations:

4.1 Inhalation:

• Remove the subject from the contaminated area.

• Administer oxygen or cardiopulmonary resuscitation if necessary.

• Consult a physician in case of respiratory and nervous symptoms.

Eyes:

• Flush with running water for several minutes, while keeping the eyelids wide open.

• Consult an ophthalmologist in case of persistent pain.

Skin:

• Wash the affected skin with soap and water.

• Consult a physician in case of persistent pain or redness.

Ingestion: Unknown symptoms: consult a physician for advice.

If the subject is completely conscious: Rinse mouth and administer fresh water. 

If the subject is unconscious: Not applicable.

4.2 Medical Treatment/Notes to Physician: None.
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 3/9

5. FireFighting Measures 

5.1 Flash point: ≤ 27°C (17°F); Highly Flammable.

5.2 Autoignition Temperature: 580°C (1076°F).

5.3 Flammability Limits: Upper limit 13.3% (V/V); Lower limit 3.6% (V/V).

5.4 Unusual Fire and Explosion Hazards: Explosion possible with gas vapor and air mixture 

(See section 10).

5.5 Extinguishing Methods 

Common:

• Powder.

• Foam, AFFF.

• CO2.

Inappropriate extinguishing means: Water.

5.6 Fire Fighting Procedures

Specific hazards:

• Highly flammable (see section 9).

• Formation of dangerous gas/vapors in case of decomposition (see section 10).

• Gas/vapors are heavier than air and so may travel along the ground; remote 

ignition possible.

• Gas/vapors explosion possible in presence of air.

Protective measures in case of intervention:

• Evacuate all nonessential personnel.

• Wear selfcontained breathing apparatus when in close proximity or in confined spaces.

• After intervention, take a shower, remove clothing carefully, clean and check 

the equipment.

• Intervention only by capable personnel who are trained and aware of the hazards of 

the product.

• When intervention in close proximity wear acidresistant oversuit.

Other precautions:

• If safe to do so, remove the exposed containers, or cool with large quantities of water.

• Approach from upwind.

• As for any fire, ventilate and clean the rooms before reentry.

• After the fire, proceed rapidly to clean the surfaces exposed to the fumes in order to 

limit the damage to the equipment.

• Avoid propagating the fire, when directing the extinguishing means in a jet on the surface 

of the burning liquid.
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 4/9

6. Accidental Release Measures 

6.1 Precautions:

• Follow the protective measures given in sections 5 and 8.

• Keep away materials and products which are incompatible with the product 

(see section 10).

• Eliminate all sources of ignition, and do not generate flames or sparks.

• If safe to do so, without overexposing anyone, try to stop the leak.

• Approach from upwind.

• Disperse gas/vapors with water spray.

• Protect intervention team with water spray.

6.2 Cleanup methods:

• If possible, dam large quantities of liquid with sand or earth.

• Prevent the product from entering sewers or confined places.

• Place everything in a closed, labeled container compatible with the product.

• Store the product in a safe and isolated place.

• For disposal methods, refer to section 13.

• Collect the product with suitable means.

• Clean the area with large quantities of water.

6.3 Precautions for protection of the environment: Prevent discharges into the environment 

(atmosphere.....).

7. Handling and Storage

7.1 Handling:

• Carry out industrial operations in closed piping circuits and equipment.

• Operate in a wellventilated area.

• Prevent product vapors’ decomposition from contacting hot spots.

• Keep away from heat sources.

• Keep away from reactive products (see section 10).

• Handle small quantities under a lab hood.

• Do not use tools that produce sparks.

• Use only equipment and materials which are compatible with the product.

7.2 Storage:

• Store in a ventilated, cool area.

• Keep away from heat sources.

• Keep away from reactive products (see section 10).

• Provide containment bund around storage containers and transfer installation.

• For bulk storage, consult the producer.

7.3 Specific Uses: For any particular use, please contact the supplier.
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 5/9

7.4 Other precautions:

• No open flames or sparks, no smoking.

• Follow the protective measures given in section 8.

• Use grounded equipment.

• Warn people about the dangers of the product.

• Prevent electrostatic discharges.

• Provide electrical equipment safe for hazardous locations.

7.5 Packaging:

• Ordinary steel.

8. Exposure Controls/Personal Protection 

8.1 Exposure Limit Values  

Authorized limit Values

None listed

8.2 Exposure Controls:

• Follow the protective measures given in section 7.

• Provide premises ventilation.

• Respect local, state and national regulations for aqueous emissions (see section 15).

8.2.1 Occupational Exposure Controls:

8.2.1.1 Ventilation: Provide local ventilation suitable for the emission risk.

8.2.1.2 Respiratory protection:

• Minimum need if the local exhaust ventilation is adequate.

• Selfcontained breathing apparatus in medium confinement/insufficient oxygen/ 

in case of large uncontrolled emissions / in all circumstances when the mask and 

cartridge do not give adequate protection.

• Use only respiratory protection that conforms to international /national standards.

8.2.1.3 Hand protection: Protective gloves  chemicalresistant (Neoprene).

8.2.1.4 Eye protection: Wear protective goggles for all industrial operations.

8.2.1.5 Skin protection:

• Overalls.

• Apron/boots of butyl rubber if risk of splashing.

8.3 Other precautions:

• Provide shower and eye wash stations.

• Consult the industrial hygienist or the safety manager for the selection of personal 

protective equipment suitable for the working conditions.

• Do not smoke, eat and drink in the working area. 
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 6/9

9. Physical and Chemical Properties

9.1 Appearance: volatile liquid.

Color: colorless.

Odor: ethereal.

9.2 Important Health, Safety and Environmental information:

pH: 6 Concentration: 1.7 g/l.

Change of state:

Melting point: Not applicable.

Boiling point: 40°C (104°F).

Decomposition Temperature: No data.

Flash Point: ≤ 27°C (17°F)  Remark: Highly Flammable; Method: DIN 51755 T2.

Flammability: Upper Limit: 13.3% (V/V); Lower limit: 3.6%(V/V).

Explosive Properties: Explosion possible with gas/vapor and air mixtures. 

(See also Section 10).

Oxidizing Properties: Not applicable.

Vapor Pressure:

• 43.3 kPa @ 20°C (68°F).

• 1.42 bar (abs) @ 50°C (122°F).

Relative Density:

Specific gravity (H2O=1): 1.27.

Solubility:

Water: 1.7 g/l @ 21°C (70°F).

Fat: No data.

Partition coefficient: P (noctanol/water): 1.6 Method: Measured value.

Viscosity: 0.4 mPa.s @ 25°C (77°F).

Vapor Density (air=1): 5.11.

10. Stability and Reactivity 

10.1 Conditions to avoid: Heat/Sources of heat.

10.2 Materials and substances to avoid:

• Oxidizing agents.

• Metallic powders.

• Alkaline metals.

10.3 Hazardous decomposition products:

• Hydrogen fluoride.

• Fluorophosgene.

10.4 Hazardous Polymerization: Will not occur.

10.5 Other information: The vapor is heavier than air and disperses at ground level.
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 7/9

11. Toxicological Information 

11.1 Acute toxicity:

Inhalation: LC50, 4h, rat, > 10%.

Oral: LD50, rat, > 2,000 mg/kg.

Dermal: No data.

Irritation:

• Rabbit, nonirritant (skin).

• Rabbit, slight irritant (eyes).

Sensitization: Guinea Pig, Non sensitizing (skin).

Comments: No appreciable toxic effect.

11.2 Chronic toxicity:

• Inhalation, after repeated exposure, rat, 30,000 ppm, observed effect (body weight).

• No mutagenic effect.

• Inhalation, after a single exposure, dog, ≥ 7.5%, cardiac sensitization following 

adrenergic stimulation.

11.3 Carcinogenic Designation: None.

12. Ecological Information

12.1 Acute ecotoxicity:

• Fishes, Brachydanio rerio, LC50, 96h, >200 mg/l.

• Crustaceans, Daphnia magna, NOEC, 48 h, > 200 mg/l.

• Algae, Selenastrum capricornutum, NOEC, 72 h, = 113 mg/l.

• Terrestrial plants, NOEC, 1,000 ppm.

12.2 Chronic ecotoxicity: No data.

12.3 Mobility:

• Air, Henry's law constant (H) ca. 3.8kPa.m3

/mol  considerable volatility.

Conditions: 20°C (68°F) / calculated value.

• Soil/sediments, adsorption, log KOC ca. 1.8.

Conditions: calculated value.

12.4 Degradation

Abiotic:

• Air, indirect photooxidation, t1⁄2 ca. 7.04 year(s).

• Air, photolysis, ODP =0  Result: no effect on stratospheric zone. 

Reference value for CFC 11: ODP =1.

• Air, greenhouse effect, GWP = 890. 

Reference value for carbon dioxide: GWP = 1. (SOLKANE® 365mfc).

Biotic: Aerobic, test ready biodegradability/closed bottle, = 13%, 28 day(s)

Nonreadily biodegradable.
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 8/9

12.5 Potential for bioaccumulation: Bioconcentration: log Po/w ca. 1.61.

Improbable bioaccumulation  Conditions: measured value.

12.6 Other adverse effects /Comments:

• Product is persistent in air (atmospheric lifetime: 1619 years).

• Hazard for the aquatic environment is limited due to product properties:

Considerable volatility, Low bioaccumulation potential.

13. Disposal Considerations

13.1 Waste treatment:

• Dispose in compliance with local, state and national regulations.

• It is recommended to contact the producer for recycling /recovery.

• Send the product to an authorized industrial waste incinerator.

• The incinerator must be equipped with a system for the neutralization of HF.

13.2 Packaging treatment: To avoid treatment, use dedicated containers. 

13.3 RCRA Hazardous Waste: D001 (Ignitability).

14. Transport Information

Mode DOT IMDG IATA

UN Number 1993 1993 1993

Class (Subsidiary) 333

Proper Shipping Name Flammable Liquid, Flammable Liquid, Flammable Liquid,

N.O.S. (Pentafluorobutane) N.O.S. (Pentafluorobutane) N.O.S. (Pentafluorobutane)

Hazard label (Subsidiary) Flammable Liquid Flammable Liquid Flammable Liquid

Marine Pollutant

Placard [Subsidiary]

Packing Group II

MFAG

Emergency Info ERG: 123 EmS: 307 ERG Code: 3HP

15. Regulatory Information

National Regulations (US)

TSCA Inventory 8(b): Yes.

SARA Title III Sec. 302/303 Extremely Hazardous Substances (40 CFR 355): No.

SARA Title III Sec. 311/312 (40 CFR 370):

Hazard Category: Fire Hazard.

Threshold planning quantity: 10,000 lbs.
MSDS No. S3651204 Revised 120304

Copyright 2003, Solvay Fluorides, LLC 

A subsidiary of Solvay Chemicals, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

www.solvaychemicals.us 1.800.765.8292

Solkane

® 365 mfc

Solkane® 365 mfc

Material Safety Data Sheet

Page 9/9

SARA Title III Sec. 313 Toxic Chemical Emissions Reporting (40 CFR 372): No.

CERCLA Hazardous Substance (40 CFR Part 302)

Listed Substance: No.

Unlisted Substance: Yes, Reportable Quantity 100 lbs.

Characteristic: D001 Ignitability.

State Component Listing: 

State Comment: None identified.

National Regulations (Canada)

Canadian DSL Registration: No.

WHMIS Classification: B2  Flammable Liquid.

This product has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the Controlled Products Regulations, and the

MSDS contains all the information required by the Controlled Products Regulations.

Labeling according to Directive 1999/45/EC.

Category ID Phrase

Symbols F Highly flammable.

Phrases R 11 Highly flammable.

Phrases S 16 Keep away from sources of ignition  No smoking.

16. Other Information

16.1 Ratings:

NFPA (NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION)

Health = 0 Flammability = 4 Instability = 1 Special = None

HMIS (HAZARDOUS MATERIAL INFORMATION SYSTEM)

Health = 0 Fire = 4 Reactivity = 1 PPE = Supplied by User; dependent on local conditions

16.2 Other Information:

The previous information is based upon our current knowledge and experience of our product

and is not exhaustive. It applies to the product as defined by the specifications. In case of

combinations or mixtures, one must confirm that no new hazards are likely to exist. In any

case, the user is not exempt from observing all legal, administrative and regulatory procedures

relating to the product, personal hygiene, and integrity of the work environment. (Unless noted

to the contrary, the technical information applies only to pure product).

To our actual knowledge, the information contained herein is accurate as of the date of this

document. However, neither Solvay Fluorides, LLC nor any of its affiliates makes any warranty,

express or implied, or accepts any liability in connection with this information or its use. This

information is for use by technically skilled persons at their own discretion and risk and does

not relate to the use of this product in combination with any other substance or any other

process. This is not a license under any patent or other proprietary right. The user alone must

finally determine suitability of any information or material for any contemplated use, the

manner of use and whether any patents are infringed. This information gives typical properties

only and is not to be used for specification purposes.

Trademarks and/or other Solvay Fluorides, LLC products referenced herein are either trademarks

or registered trademarks of Solvay Fluorides, LLC or its affiliates, unless otherwise indicated.

16.3 Reason for revision:

Supersedes edition: Solvay Fluorides, LLC MSDS, S3651103 dated 111103.

Purpose of revision: update information, correct typos.
P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 

SAFETY DATA SHEET 

North American Version 

Solvokane (TM) 

1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

1.1. Identification of the substance or mixture 

Product name : Solvokane (TM) 

Molecular formula : C2H2Cl2 ; C4H5F5 

1.2. Use of the Substance/Mixture 

Recommended use : - Aerosol propellants 

 - Cleaning agent 

 - Detergent 

 - Electrical industry 

 - Electronic industry 

1.3. Company/Undertaking Identification 

Address : SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

3333 RICHMOND AVENUE 

HOUSTON TX 77098-3099 

United States 

1.4. Emergency and contact telephone numbers 

Emergency telephone : 1 (800) 424-9300 CHEMTREC ® (USA & Canada) 

01-800-00-214-00 (MEX. REPUBLIC) 

Contact telephone number 

(product information):

: US: +1-800-765-8292 (Product information) 

US: +1-713-525-6500 (Product information) 

2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

2.1. Emergency Overview: 

NFPA : H= 0 F= 0 I= 0 S= none 

HMIS : H= 0 F= 0 R= 0 PPE = Supplied by User; dependent on local 

conditions 

General Information

Appearance : liquid 

Colour : colourless 

Odour : ether-like 

Main effects

- The product is not flammable. 

- In use, may form flammable/explosive vapour-air mixture. 

- Harmful by inhalation. 

- Harmful to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the aquatic environment. 

- Hazardous decomposition products formed under fire conditions. 

- Gaseous hydrogen fluoride (HF). 
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 2/10

2.2. Potential Health Effects: 

Inhalation

- May be harmful by inhalation (after often repeated exposure). 

Eye contact

- Contact with eyes may cause irritation. 

Skin contact

- The product may be absorbed through the skin. 

Ingestion

- No information available. 

- Ingestion may cause gastrointestinal irritation, nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea. 

Other toxicity effects

- See section 11: Toxicological Information 

2.3. Environmental Effects: 

- See section 12: Ecological Information 

3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

1,1,1,3,3-pentafluorobutane

CAS-No. : 406-58-6 

ELINCS No. : 430-250-1 

Concentration : >= 65,0 %

trans-Dichloro ethylene

CAS-No. : 156-60-5 

Concentration : < 35,0 %

4. FIRST AID MEASURES

4.1. Inhalation 

- Oxygen or cardiopulmonary resuscitation if necessary 

- Remove to fresh air. 

- If symptoms persist, call a physician. 

4.2. Eye contact 

- Flush eyes with running water for several minutes, while keeping the eyelids wide open. 

- If eye irritation persists, consult a specialist. 

4.3. Skin contact 

- Wash off with soap and water. 

- Remove and wash contaminated clothing before re-use. 

- If symptoms persist, call a physician. 

4.4. Ingestion 

- If symptoms persist, call a physician. 

If victim is conscious: 

- Clean mouth with water and drink afterwards plenty of water. 

If victim is unconscious but breathing:

- Oxygen or artificial respiration if needed. 

5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 3/10

5.1. Suitable extinguishing media

- powder 

- Foam, AFFF 

- Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

5.2. Extinguishing media which shall not be used for safety reasons

- Water may be ineffective. 

5.3. Special exposure hazards in a fire

- The product is not flammable. 

- Vapours are heavier than air and may spread along floors. 

- Risk of ignition. 

- Vapours may form explosive mixtures with air. 

- Hazardous decomposition products formed under fire conditions. 

5.4. Hazardous decomposition products 

- Gaseous hydrogen fluoride (HF). 

- Fluorophosgene 

- Gaseous hydrogen chloride (HCl). 

- Phosgene 

- Carbon monoxide 

- The release of other hazardous decomposition products is possible. 

5.5. Special protective equipment for fire-fighters 

- Wear self-contained breathing apparatus and protective suit. 

- Fire fighters must wear fire resistant personnel protective equipment. 

- Wear chemical resistant oversuit 

- Clean contaminated surface thoroughly. 

5.6. Other information 

- Evacuate personnel to safe areas. 

- Keep containers and surroundings cool with water spray. 

- After the fire, proceed rapidly with cleaning of surfaces exposed to the fumes in order to limit equipment 

damage. 

- Approach from upwind. 

- Avoid propagating the fire when directing the extinguishing agent as a jet onto the surface of the burning 

liquid. 

6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

6.1. Personal precautions

- Refer to protective measures listed in sections 7 and 8. 

- Approach from upwind. 

- Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by reducing oxygen available for breathing. 

- Suppress (knock down) gases/vapours/mists with a water spray jet. 

- Avoid spraying the leak source. 

- Cover the spreading liquid with foam in order to slow down the evaporation. 

- Prevent further leakage or spillage if safe to do so. 

- Keep away from open flames, hot surfaces and sources of ignition. 

- Ventilate the area. 

6.2. Environmental precautions 

- Should not be released into the environment. 

6.3. Methods for cleaning up 

- Dam up. 
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 4/10

- Soak up with inert absorbent material. 

- Prevent product from entering drains. 

- Keep in properly labelled containers. 

- Keep in suitable, closed containers for disposal. 

- Treat recovered material as described in the section "Disposal considerations". 

7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

7.1. Handling 

- Use only in well-ventilated areas. 

- Use only equipment and materials which are compatible with the product. 

- Keep away from Incompatible products. 

- Keep away from heat/sparks/open flames/hot surfaces. - No smoking. 

- Ensure all equipment is electrically grounded before beginning transfer operations. 

- Take measures to prevent the build up of electrostatic charge. 

7.2. Storage 

- Store in original container. 

- Keep container closed. 

- Keep in a cool, well-ventilated place. 

- Keep away from heat and sources of ignition. 

- Keep away from incompatible products 

- Keep in a bunded area. 

- Do not freeze. 

- Keep in a dry place. 

7.3. Other information 

- To avoid thermal decomposition, do not overheat. 

8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION

8.1. Exposure Limit Values 

1,1,1,3,3-pentafluorobutane

- SAEL (Solvay Acceptable Exposure Limit) 2006

TWA = 1.000 ppm 

trans-Dichloro ethylene

- Canada. Alberta OELs (Occupational Health & Safety Code, Schedule 1, Table 2) 10 2006

time weighted average = 200 ppm 

time weighted average = 793 mg/m3 

- Canada. British Columbia OELs. (Occupational Exposure Limits for Chemical Substances, Occupational 

Health and Safety Regulation 296/97, as amended) 07 2007

time weighted average = 200 ppm 

- US. ACGIH Threshold Limit Values 2009

time weighted average = 200 ppm 

- Canada. Quebec OELS. (Ministry of Labor - Regulation Respecting the Quality of the Work Environment) 

2006

time weighted average = 200 ppm 

time weighted average = 793 mg/m3 

- Canada. Ontario OELs. (Ministry of Labor - Control of Exposure to Biological or Chemical Agents) 08 2008

time weighted average = 200 ppm 

time weighted average = 790 mg/m3 

- Canada. Ontario OELs. (Ministry of Labor - Control of Exposure to Biological or Chemical Agents) 08 2008
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 5/10

Short term exposure limit = 250 ppm 

Short term exposure limit = 990 mg/m3 

- Canada. Quebec OELS. (Ministry of Labor - Regulation Respecting the Quality of the Work Environment) 12 

2008

time weighted average = 200 ppm 

time weighted average = 793 mg/m3 

8.2. Engineering controls 

- Provide appropriate exhaust ventilation at machinery. 

- Apply technical measures to comply with the occupational exposure limits. 

- Refer to protective measures listed in sections 7 and 8. 

8.3. Personal protective equipment

8.3.1. Respiratory protection

- Use NIOSH approved respiratory protection. 

- Comply with OSHA respiratory protection requirements. 

- Self-contained breathing apparatus in medium confinement/insufficient oxygen/in case of large uncontrolled 

emissions/in all circumstances when the mask and cartridge do not give adequate protection. 

- Use only respiratory protection that conforms to international/ national standards. 

8.3.2. Hand protection

- Protective gloves - impervious chemical resistant: 

- Neoprene 

- Take note of the information given by the producer concerning permeability and break through times, and of 

special workplace conditions (mechanical strain, duration of contact). 

8.3.3. Eye protection 

- Chemical resistant goggles must be worn. 

8.3.4. Skin and body protection 

- Wear suitable protective clothing. 

8.3.5. Hygiene measures 

- Consult the industrial hygienist or the safety manager for the selection of personal protective equipment 

suitable for the working conditions. 

9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

9.1. General Information

Appearance : liquid 

Colour : colourless 

Odour : ether-like 

9.2. Important health safety and environmental information

pH : = 6 (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 

Concentration: 1,7 g/l

Boiling point/boiling range : 36 °C ( 97 °F )

Flash point : Remarks: does not flash, The product is not flammable.

Method: closed cup

Flammability : Upper explosion limit:

9,4 %(V) 
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 6/10

Lower explosion limit:

5,4 %(V)

Remarks: The product is not flammable.

Explosive properties : Explosion danger:

Remarks: Vapours may form explosive mixture with air.

Oxidizing properties : Remarks: Non oxidizer 

Vapour pressure : 540 hPa 

Temperature: 20 °C ( 68 °F )

Relative density / Density : 1,225

Solubility : 3,34 g/l

Partition coefficient: 

n-octanol/water

: log Pow: 

< 3 

Method: calculated value

Viscosity : 0,53 mPa.s 

Temperature: 25 °C ( 77 °F )

Vapour density : > 1 

Method: calculated value 

9.3. Other data

Freezing point: : -43 °C ( -45 °F )

10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

10.1. Stability 

- Stable under recommended storage conditions. 

- Strong oxidizers, alkali metals and alkaline earth metals may cause fires or explosions. 

- Vapours are heavier than air and may spread along floors. 

10.2. Conditions to avoid 

- Direct sources of heat. 

- Keep away from direct sunlight. 

- Do not freeze. 

10.3. Materials to avoid 

- Oxidizing agents, Powdered metals, Reducing agents, Alkali metals 

10.4. Hazardous decomposition products 

- Gaseous hydrogen fluoride (HF)., Fluorophosgene, Gaseous hydrogen chloride (HCl)., Phosgene, Carbon 

monoxide, The release of other hazardous decomposition products is possible. 

11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Toxicological data

Acute oral toxicity 

- LD50, rat, > 2.000 mg/kg (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 

- LD50, rat, > 2.000 mg/kg (trans-Dichloro ethylene) 

Acute inhalation toxicity 

- LC50, 4 h, rat, > 0,605 g/l (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 7/10

- LD50, 4 h, rat, 0,0955 g/l (trans-Dichloro ethylene) 

Skin irritation 

- rabbit, No skin irritation (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 

Eye irritation 

- rabbit, Mild eye irritation (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 

Sensitisation

- guinea pig (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 

Chronic toxicity 

- Inhalation, after a single exposure, dog, NOEL: >= 7,5 %, cardiac sensitization following adrenergic 

stimulation, (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 

- Inhalation, Repeated exposure, rat, NOEL: 30000 ppm, (SOLKANE ® 365mfc) 

- Inhalation, 90-day, rat, NOEL: > 4000 ppm, (trans-Dichloro ethylene) 

- Oral, rat, NOEL: 190 mg/kg, (trans-Dichloro ethylene) 

Remarks 

- Harmful by inhalation.

- Information given is based on data on the components and the toxicology of similar products.

- There is no data available for this product. 

- May cause eye and skin irritation. 

- May cause irritation of the mucous membranes. 

12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

12.1. Ecotoxicity effects

Acute toxicity

- Fishes, Brachydanio rerio, LC50, 96 h, > 200 mg/l 

- Crustaceans, Daphnia magna, NOEC, 48 h, > 200 mg/l 

Chronic toxicity 

- Algae, Selenastrum capricornutum, NOEC, 72 h, = 113 mg/l 

12.2. Mobility

- Air, Henry's law constant (H) ca. 38 hPa.m3/mol 

Conditions: 20 °C / calculated value 

Remarks: considerable volatility

- Soil/sediments, adsorption, log KOC:ca. 1,8 

Conditions: calculated value 

12.3. Persistence and degradability 

Abiotic degradation

- Air, indirect photo-oxidation, t 1/2 ca. 7,04 y 

Biodegradation

- aerobic, Tested according to: Closed Bottle test 

Remarks: Not readily biodegradable.

12.4. Bioaccumulative potential

- Bioaccumulative potential: log Pow ca. 1,61

Result: Bioaccumulation is unlikely.

Remarks: measured value

12.5. Other adverse effects

- Ozone Depletion Potential : 

Ozone depletion potential; ODP; (R-11 = 1) = 0 

Result: no effect on stratospheric ozone
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 8/10

- Global Warming Potential : 

Global warming potential (GWP) = 890 

Remarks: Reference value for carbon dioxide: GWP = 1

12.6. Remarks 

- Information refers to the main component. 

- The product contains following substances which are hazardous for the environment: 

- Harmful to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the aquatic environment. 

13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

13.1. Waste from residues / unused products

- In accordance with local and national regulations. 

- Refer to manufacturer/supplier for information on recovery/recycling. 

- or 

- Must be incinerated in a suitable incineration plant holding a permit delivered by the competent authorities. 

- The incinerator must be equipped with a system for the neutralisation or recovery of HF. 

13.2. Packaging treatment

- To avoid treatments, as far as possible, use dedicated containers. 

13.3. RCRA Hazardous Waste 

- Listed RCRA Hazardous Waste (40 CFR 302) - Yes 

 

14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

- not regulated 

- It is recommended that ERG Guide number 111 be used for all non-regulated material. 

15. REGULATORY INFORMATION 

15.1. Inventory Information

Australian Inventory of Chemical 

Substances (AICS)

: - In compliance with inventory. 

Canadian Domestic Substances 

List (DSL)

: - In compliance with inventory. 

Inventory of Existing Chemical 

Substances (China) (IECS)

: - In compliance with inventory. 

Japan (ENCS) List (ENCS (JP)) : - In compliance with inventory. 

New Zealand Interim Inventory of 

Chems. (NZ CLSC)

: - In compliance with inventory. 

Toxic Substance Control Act list 

(TSCA)

: - In compliance with inventory. 

EU list of existing chemical 

substances (EINECS)

: - In compliance with inventory, The formulation contains ELINCS 

substances.. 

Korea Existing Chemicals Inv. 

(KECI) (KECI (KR))

: - In compliance with inventory. 
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 9/10

Philippines PICCS (PICCS (PH)) : - One or more components not listed on inventory. 

15.2. Other regulations

 US. EPA Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) SARA Title III Section 302 

Extremely Hazardous Substance (40 CFR 355, Appendix A)

- not regulated. 

 US. EPA Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) SARA Title III Section 313 Toxic 

Chemicals (40 CFR 372.65) - Supplier Notification Required

- no. 

 US. EPA CERCLA Hazardous Substances (40 CFR 302)

- This product is reportable under 40 CFR Part 302.4 because it contains the following substance(s):, 

trans-dichloroethylene. 

 US. New Jersey Worker and Community Right-to-Know Act (New Jersey Statute Annotated Section 34:5A-5)

- yes. 

 US. Pennsylvania Worker and Community Right-to-Know Law (34 Pa. Code Chap. 301-323)

- yes. 

 US. California Safe Drinking Water & Toxic Enforcement Act (Proposition 65)

- not regulated. 

 

15.3. Classification and labelling

 Canada. Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). WHMIS Ingredient Disclosure List (Can. Gaz., Part 

II, Vol. 122, No. 2) 

- Toxic Material Causing Other Toxic Effects 

Remarks: This product has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the Controlled Products 

Regulations and the MSDS contains all the information required by the Controlled Products Regulations. 

 EC Label

- Hazardous components which must be listed on the label: 1,1,1,3,3-pentafluorobutane / trans-Dichloro 

ethylene

- The product is classified and labelled in accordance with Directive 1999/45/EC. 

Symbol(s) Xn Harmful 

R-phrase(s) R18 In use, may form flammable/explosive vapour-air mixture. 

R20 Harmful by inhalation. 

R52/53 Harmful to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse 

effects in the aquatic environment. 

S-phrase(s) S16 Keep away from sources of ignition - No smoking. 

S29 Do not empty into drains. 

S36/37/39 Wear suitable protective clothing, gloves and eye/face protection. 

S61 Avoid release to the environment. Refer to special instructions/ 

Safety data sheets. 
Solvokane (TM) 

SAFETY DATA SHEET

P 19104 / Canada 

Issuing date 22.03.2010 / Report version 1.4 

Copyright 2010, SOLVAY FLUORIDES, LLC 

A subsidiary of SOLVAY Chemicals 

All Rights Reserved 

www.solvaychemicals.us 10/10

16. OTHER INFORMATION

Ratings : 

NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 

Health = 0 Flammability = 0 Instability = 0 Special =none 

HMIS (Hazardous Material Information System) 

Health = 0 Fire = 0 Reactivity = 0 PPE : Supplied by User; dependent on local conditions 

 Further information 

- Update

This data sheet contains changes from the previous version in section(s): 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, 10.1 ,10.2 

- Distribute new edition to clients 

Material Safety Data Sheets contain country specific regulatory information; therefore, the MSDS's provided are for use 

only by customers of the company mentioned in section 1 in North America. If you are located in a country other than 

Canada, Mexico or the United States, please contact the Solvay Group company in your country for MSDS information 

applicable to your location. 

The previous information is based upon our current knowledge and experience of our product and is not exhaustive. It 

applies to the product as defined by the specifications. In case of combinations or mixtures, one must confirm that no 

new hazards are likely to exist. In any case, the user is not exempt from observing all legal, administrative and 

regulatory procedures relating to the product, personal hygiene, and integrity of the work environment. (Unless noted 

to the contrary, the technical information applies only to pure product). 

To our actual knowledge, the information contained herein is accurate as of the date of this document. However, 

neither the company mentioned in section 1 nor any of its affiliates makes any warranty, express or implied, including 

merchantability or fitness for use, or accepts any liability in connection with this information or its use. This information 

is for use by technically skilled persons at their own discretion and risk and does not relate to the use of this product in 

combination with any other substance or any other process. This is not a license under any patent or other proprietary 

right. The user alone must finally determine suitability of any information or material for any contemplated use in 

compliance with applicable law, the manner of use and whether any patents are infringed. This information gives 

typical properties only and is not to be used for specification purposes. The company mentioned in section 1 reserves 

the right to make additions, deletions or modifications to the information at any time without prior notification. 

Trademarks and/or other products of the company mentioned in section 1 referenced herein are either trademarks or 

registered trademarks of the company mentioned in section 1 or its affiliates, unless otherwise indicated. 

This product has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the Controlled Products Regulations and the 

MSDS contains all the information required by the Controlled Products Regulations. 

Copyright 2009, Company mentioned in Section 1. All Rights Reserved.
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

1 / 11 

This SDS adheres to the standards and regulatory requirements of the United States and may not meet the regulatory 

requirements in other countries. 

 

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION 

Product name : DuPontTM

 VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid

MSDS Number : 130000000634 

Product Use : Cleaning agent 

Manufacturer : DuPont 

1007 Market Street 

Wilmington, DE 19898 

Product Information : 1-800-441-7515 (outside the U.S. 1-302-774-1000) 

Medical Emergency : 1-800-441-3637 (outside the U.S. 1-302-774-1139) 

Transport Emergency : CHEMTREC: 1-800-424-9300 (outside the U.S. 1-703-527-3887) 

 

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION 

Emergency Overview 

Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by reducing oxygen available for breathing. Prolonged 

skin contact may defat the skin and produce dermatitis. May cause cardiac arrhythmia. 

Potential Health Effects 

Skin 

trans-Dichloroethylene : Causes skin irritation. May cause:, Pain, burning sensation, itching, 

redness, swelling, or rash.. 

Eyes 

trans-Dichloroethylene : May cause eye irritation. May cause:, Tearing, redness, or discomfort.. 

Inhalation 

trans-Dichloroethylene : May cause: Central nervous system depression with dizziness, confusion, 

incoordination, drowsiness, or unconsciousness. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

2 / 11 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-

Decafluoropentane 

: Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by reducing oxygen 

available for breathing. Effects of breathing high concentrations of vapour 

may include:, Tiredness or drowsiness, Central nervous system effects, 

Convulsions. 

Repeated exposure 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-

Decafluoropentane 

: Adverse effects from repeated inhalation may include: Central nervous 

system effects 

Target Organs 

trans-Dichloroethylene : Central nervous system 

Carcinogenicity 

None of the components present in this material at concentrations equal to or greater than 0.1% are listed by 

IARC, NTP, or OSHA, as a carcinogen.

 

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS 

Component CAS-No. Concentration 

trans-Dichloroethylene 156-60-5 37 - 39 % 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-Decafluoropentane 138495-42-8 61 - 63 % 

 

SECTION 4. FIRST AID MEASURES 

Skin contact : Take off all contaminated clothing immediately. Wash off with warm water. 

Eye contact : In case of eye contact 

Hold eyelids apart and flush eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. 

Get medical attention. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

3 / 11 

Inhalation : Remove from exposure, lie down. Move to fresh air. Keep patient warm and 

at rest. Artificial respiration and/or oxygen may be necessary. Consult a 

physician. 

Ingestion : Do not induce vomiting without medical advice. Never give anything by mouth 

to an unconscious person. Drink 1 or 2 glasses of water. If vomiting occurs, 

have victim lean forward to reduce the risk of aspiration. Consult a physician. 

General advice : Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Victim to lie down in 

the recovery position, cover and keep him warm. Give oxygen or artificial 

respiration if needed. When symptoms persist or in all cases of doubt seek 

medical advice. 

Notes to physician : Do not give adrenaline or similar drugs. 

 

SECTION 5. FIREFIGHTING MEASURES 

Flammable Properties

Flash point : Method : Pensky-Martens closed cup - PMCC 

does not flash 

Lower explosion limit : Method : None per ASTM E681 

Upper explosion limit : Method : None per ASTM E681 

Fire and Explosion Hazard : Fire or intense heat may cause violent rupture of packages. 

 Hazardous combustion products: Hydrogen fluoride Fluorinated hydrocarbons 

Carbonyl halides Carbon oxides Hydrogen chloride 

 The product is not flammable. 

Suitable extinguishing media : Water spray, Water mist, Dry chemical, Carbon dioxide (CO2) 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

4 / 11 

Firefighting Instructions : In the event of fire, wear self-contained breathing apparatus. Use personal 

protective equipment. Wear neoprene gloves during cleaning up work after a 

fire. Exposure to decomposition products may be a hazard to health. 

Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local circumstances and 

the surrounding environment. Evacuate personnel to safe areas. Cool 

containers / tanks with water spray. Fire residues and contaminated fire 

extinguishing water must be disposed of in accordance with local regulations.

 

 

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES 

NOTE: Review FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES and HANDLING (PERSONNEL) sections before proceeding with cleanup. Use appropriate PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT during clean-up. 

Safeguards (Personnel) : Evacuate personnel to safe areas. Ventilate area, especially low or enclosed 

places where heavy vapours might collect. In case of insufficient ventilation, 

wear suitable respiratory equipment. Refer to protective measures listed in 

sections 7 and 8. 

Spill Cleanup 

 

: Contain spillage, and then collect with non-combustible absorbent material, 

(e.g. sand, earth, diatomaceous earth, vermiculite) and place in container for 

disposal according to local / national regulations (see section 13). 

Accidental Release Measures : Prevent further leakage or spillage. Prevent spreading over a wide area (e.g. 

by containment or oil barriers). Should not be released into the environment. 

 

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE 

Handling (Personnel) : Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing. Avoid breathing vapours or mist. 

Provide sufficient air exchange and/or exhaust in work rooms. For personal 

protection see section 8. 

Handle in accordance with good industrial hygiene and safety practice. When 

using do not eat, drink or smoke. Do not breathe vapours or spray mist. Avoid 

contact with skin, eyes and clothing. Wash hands before breaks and at the 

end of workday. 

Handling (Physical Aspects) : Material should not be dispensed from its container by pouring, except for 

small sample containers where fume hoods or where other ventilation is used 

to manage the exposure limits. The use of a drum pump is recommended for 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

5 / 11 

dispensing from shipping containers. 

Storage : Protect from contamination. Keep container tightly closed in a dry and wellventilated place. Store in original container. Avoid freezing temperatures. If 

stored below -10°C (14°F), mix prior to use. 

Storage temperature : < 52 °C (< 126 °F) 

 

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION 

Engineering controls : Use sufficient ventilation to keep employee exposure below recommended 

limits. 

Personal protective equipment 

Respiratory protection : For rescue and maintenance work in storage tanks use self-contained 

breathing apparatus. Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation 

by reducing oxygen available for breathing. 

Hand protection : Material: Solvent-resistant gloves 

Eye protection : Safety glasses with side-shields Additionally wear a face shield where the 

possibility exists for face contact due to splashing, spraying or airborne 

contact with this material. 

Skin and body protection : Protective suit 

Exposure Guidelines 

Exposure Limit Values

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-Decafluoropentane

AEL * (DUPONT) 200 ppm 8 & 12 hr. TWA

AEL * (DUPONT) 400 ppm Ceiling Limit Value:

trans-Dichloroethylene

PEL: (OSHA) 200 ppm 790 mg/m3 8 hr. TWA
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

6 / 11 

TLV (ACGIH) 200 ppm TWA

AEL * (DUPONT) 200 ppm 8 & 12 hr. TWA

* AEL is DuPont's Acceptable Exposure Limit. Where governmentally imposed occupational exposure limits which 

are lower than the AEL are in effect, such limits shall take precedence.

 

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

Form : liquid 

Color : colourless 

Odor : ether-like 

pH : neutral 

Melting point/range : < -50.0 °C (< -58.0 °F) 

Boiling point/boiling range : 39.0 °C (102.2 °F) at 1,013 hPa 

Vapour Pressure : 216 hPa at 0 °C (32 °F) 

 : 619 hPa at 25 °C (77 °F) 

 : 1,481 hPa at 50 °C (122 °F) 

Density : 1.47 g/cm3 at 0 °C (32 °F) 

Density : 1.41 g/cm3 at 25 °C (77 °F) 

Density : 1.35 g/cm3 at 50 °C (122 °F) 

Water solubility : 15 g/l at 25 °C (77 °F) 

Viscosity : 0.49 mPa.s at 25 °C (77 °F) 

Vapour density : 5.4 

 

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY 

Stability : No decomposition if stored and applied as directed. 

Incompatibility : Alkali metals Alkaline earth metals, Powdered metals, Powdered metal salts, 

Strong bases

Hazardous decomposition 

products 

: Hazardous decomposition products formed under fire conditions.: Fluorinated 

hydrocarbons, Hydrogen fluoride, Carbon dioxide (CO2), Carbon monoxide 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

7 / 11 

 

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Further information : Aspiration may cause pulmonary oedema and pneumonitis. 

trans-Dichloroethylene 

Dermal LD50 : > 5,000 mg/kg , rabbit 

Oral LD50 : 7,902 mg/kg , rat 

Inhalation 4 h LC50 : 96.4 mg/l , rat

Target Organs: Central nervous system 

narcosis

Inhalation Low Observed 

Adverse Effect 

Concentration (LOAEC) 

: 250000 ppm , rat 

Cardiac sensitization

Skin irritation : Skin irritation, rabbit 

Eye irritation : Mild eye irritation, rabbit 

Repeated dose toxicity : Inhalation

rat 

90 d 

No toxicologically significant effects were found. 

 Oral - feed

rat 

90 d 

No toxicologically significant effects were found. 

Mutagenicity : Did not cause genetic damage in animals. 

Tests on bacterial or mammalian cell cultures did not show mutagenic 

effects. 

Reproductive toxicity : Animal testing showed no reproductive toxicity. 

Teratogenicity : Animal testing showed no developmental toxicity. 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-Decafluoropentane 

Dermal LD50 : > 5,000 mg/kg , rabbit 

Oral LD50 : > 5,000 mg/kg , rat 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

8 / 11 

Inhalation 4 h LC50 : 114 mg/l , rat 

Central nervous system effects

Convulsions

Skin irritation : No skin irritation, rabbit 

Eye irritation : No eye irritation, rabbit 

Skin sensitization : Did not cause sensitization on laboratory animals., guinea pig 

Repeated dose toxicity : Inhalation

rat 

No toxicologically significant effects were found. 

Mutagenicity : Did not cause genetic damage in animals. 

Did not cause genetic damage in cultured mammalian cells. 

Did not cause genetic damage in cultured bacterial cells. 

Reproductive toxicity : Animal testing showed no reproductive toxicity. 

Teratogenicity : Animal testing showed no developmental toxicity. 

 

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Aquatic Toxicity 

trans-Dichloroethylene 

96 h LC50 : Lepomis macrochirus (Bluegill sunfish) 74 mg/l 

96 h EC50 : Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (green algae) 798 mg/l 

48 h LC50 : Daphnia magna (Water flea) 79 mg/l 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-Decafluoropentane 

96 h LC50 : Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout) 13.9 mg/l 

96 h LC50 : Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow) 27.2 mg/l 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

9 / 11 

96 h LC50 : Danio rerio (zebra fish) 13 mg/l 

72 h EC50 : Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (green algae) > 120 mg/l 

48 h LC50 : Daphnia magna (Water flea) 11.7 mg/l 

21 d : NOEC Daphnia magna (Water flea) 1.72 mg/l 

Environmental Fate 

trans-Dichloroethylene 

Biodegradability : 95 % 

Readily biodegradable. 

Bioaccumulation : Bioaccumulation is unlikely. 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-Decafluoropentane 

Biodegradability : Not readily biodegradable. 

Bioaccumulation : Bioaccumulation is unlikely. 

 

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS 

Waste Disposal : Can be used after re-conditioning. If recycling is not practicable, dispose of in 

compliance with local regulations. The product should not be allowed to enter 

drains, water courses or the soil. 

Environmental Hazards : If recycling is not practicable, dispose of in compliance with local regulations. 

 

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION 

Not classified as dangerous in the meaning of transport regulations. 

DOT only - when shipped in packages with > 2640 lbs., use: UN3082, Environmentally Hazardous Substance, 

Liquid, N.O.S. (Dichloroethylene), 9, PGIII RQ (Dichloroethylene) 

Not classified as dangerous in the meaning of transport regulations. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

10 / 11 

 

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION 

TSCA : 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-DECAFLUOROPENTANE (CAS# 138495-42-8) is 

controlled by TSCA Section 5, Significant New Use Rule 

(SNUR; 40 CFR 721.5645) The approved uses are: precision and 

general cleaning, carrier fluid, displacement drying, 

printed circuit board cleaning, particulate removal and film 

cleaning, process medium, heat transfer fluid (dielectric 

and non-dielectric), and test fluid. Processors and users 

of this substance must also comply with the applicable 

general SNUR requirements set forth in 40 CFR 721 subpart A, 

including export notification requirements if applicable (40 

CFR 721.20), and the applicable record keeping requirements 

set forth at 40 CFR 721.125. 

SARA 313 Regulated 

Chemical(s) 

: trans-Dichloroethylene 

CERCLA Reportable 

Quantity 

: 2,639 lbs 

Based on the percentage composition of this chemical in the product.:

trans-Dichloroethylene 

California Prop. 65 : Chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects or 

any other harm: none known 

PA Right to Know 

Regulated Chemical(s) 

: Substances on the Pennsylvania Hazardous Substances List present at 

a concentration of 1% or more (0.01% for Special Hazardous 

Substances): trans-Dichloroethylene 

NJ Right to Know 

Regulated Chemical(s) 

: Substances on the New Jersey Workplace Hazardous Substance List 

present at a concentration of 1% or more (0.1% for substances 

identified as carcinogens, mutagens or teratogens): transDichloroethylene 

 
Material Safety Data Sheet

DuPontTM VERTREL® MCA specialty fluid 

Version 2.1 

Revision Date 07/13/2012 Ref. 130000000634

11 / 11 

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION 

Before use read DuPont's safety information. 

For further information contact the local DuPont office or DuPont's nominated distributors. 

DuPontTM Vertrel® are registered trademarks or trademarks of E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company or its affiliates. 

 

Contact person : MSDS Coordinator, DuPont Chemicals and Fluoroproducts, Wilmington, DE 

19898, (800) 441-7515 

The information provided in this Safety Data Sheet is correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief at 

the date of its publication. The information given is designed only as a guidance for safe handling, use, processing, 

storage, transportation, disposal and release and is not to be considered a warranty or quality specification. The 

information relates only to the specific material designated and may not be valid for such material used in combination 

with any other materials or in any process, unless specified in the text. 

Significant change from previous version is denoted with a double bar. 

 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 1 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION 

Product name : SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner 

MSDS Number : 000000017627 

Product Use Description : Solvent

Company : Honeywell International, Inc. 

101 Columbia Road 

Morristown, NJ 07962-1057 

For more information call : 800-522-8001 

+1-973-455-6300 

 (Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:00pm) 

In case of emergency call : Medical: 1-800-498-5701 or +1-303-389-1414 

: Transportation (CHEMTREC): 1-800-424-9300 or +1-703-

527-3887 

: 

 : (24 hours/day, 7 days/week) 

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION 

Emergency Overview 

Form : Liquefied gas 

Color : clear and colourless 

Odor : slight 

Hazard Summary : This product is not flammable at ambient temperatures and 

atmospheric pressure. Vapours are heavier than air and can 

cause suffocation by reducing oxygen available for breathing. 

Causes asphyxiation in high concentrations. The victim will 

not realize that he/she is suffocating. Excessive exposure may 

cause central nervous system effects including drowsiness 

and dizziness. Excessive exposure may also cause cardiac 

arrhythmia. May cause eye irritation. Do not breathe vapours 

or spray mist. Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing. At 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 2 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

higher temperatures, (>250°C), decomposition products may 

include hydrochloric acid (HCl), hydrofluoric acid (HF) and 

carbonyl halides. The ACGIH Threshold Limit Values (2007) 

for Hydrogen Fluoride are TLV-TWA 0.5 ppm and Ceiling 

Exposure Limit 2 ppm. 

Potential Health Effects 

Skin : Not classified as a skin irritant in animal testing.

Eyes : May cause eye irritation.

Ingestion : Unlikely route of exposure.

Effects due to ingestion may include:

Gastrointestinal discomfort

Inhalation : Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing.

Causes asphyxiation in high concentrations. The victim will 

not realize that he/she is suffocating.

Excessive exposure may cause central nervous system 

effects including drowsiness and dizziness. Excessive 

exposure may also cause cardiac arrhythmia.

Chronic Exposure : None known.

Carcinogenicity 

No component of this product present at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as a known 

or anticipated carcinogen by NTP, IARC, or OSHA. 

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS 

Chemical Name CAS-No. Concentration 

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene 102687-65-0 80.00 %

trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 29118-24-9 20.00 %
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 3 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

SECTION 4. FIRST AID MEASURES 

Inhalation : Remove to fresh air. If breathing is irregular or stopped, 

administer artificial respiration. Use oxygen as required, 

provided a qualified operator is present. Call a physician. 

Skin contact : Rapid evaporation of the liquid may cause frostbite. If there is 

evidence of frostbite, bathe (do not rub) with lukewarm (not 

hot) water. If water is not available, cover with a clean, soft 

cloth or similar covering. Call a physician if irritation develops 

or persists. 

Eye contact : Rinse immediately with plenty of water, also under the eyelids, 

for at least 15 minutes. In case of frostbite water should be 

lukewarm, not hot. If symptoms persist, call a physician. 

Ingestion : Unlikely route of exposure. As this product is a gas, refer to the 

inhalation section. Do not induce vomiting without medical 

advice. Call a physician immediately. 

Notes to physician 

Treatment : Treat frost-bitten areas as needed. 

SECTION 5. FIREFIGHTING MEASURES 

Suitable extinguishing media : Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local 

circumstances and the surrounding environment. 

Water mist 

Dry powder 

Foam 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

Specific hazards during 

firefighting 

: This product is not flammable at ambient temperatures and 

atmospheric pressure. 

However, this material can ignite when mixed with air under 

pressure and exposed to strong ignition sources. 

Container may rupture on heating. 

Cool closed containers exposed to fire with water spray. 

Do not allow run-off from fire fighting to enter drains or water 

courses. 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 4 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing. 

Exposure to decomposition products may be a hazard to 

health. 

In case of fire hazardous decomposition products may be 

produced such as: 

Hydrogen fluoride 

Gaseous hydrogen chloride (HCl). 

Carbon monoxide 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

Carbonyl halides 

Special protective equipment 

for firefighters 

: In the event of fire and/or explosion do not breathe fumes. 

Wear self-contained breathing apparatus and protective suit. 

No unprotected exposed skin areas. 

Exposure to decomposition products may be a hazard to 

health. 

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES 

Personal precautions : Immediately evacuate personnel to safe areas.

Keep people away from and upwind of spill/leak.

Wear personal protective equipment. Unprotected persons 

must be kept away.

Remove all sources of ignition.

Avoid skin contact with leaking liquid (danger of frostbite).

Ventilate the area.

After release, disperses into the air.

Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing.

Avoid accumulation of vapours in low areas.

Unprotected personnel should not return until air has been 

tested and determined safe.

Environmental precautions : Prevent further leakage or spillage if safe to do so.

The product evaporates readily.

Prevent spreading over a wide area (e.g. by containment or oil 

barriers).

Methods for cleaning up : Do not direct water spray at the point of leakage.

Allow to evaporate.
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 5 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE 

Handling 

Handling : Handle with care.

Do not breathe vapours or spray mist.

Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing.

Wear personal protective equipment.

Pressurized container. Protect from sunlight and do not expose 

to temperatures exceeding 50 °C.

Follow all standard safety precautions for handling and use of 

compressed gas cylinders.

Use authorized cylinders only.

Protect cylinders from physical damage.

Do not puncture or drop cylinders, expose them to open flame 

or excessive heat.

Do not pierce or burn, even after use. Do not spray on a naked 

flame or any incandescent material.

Do not remove screw cap until immediately ready for use.

Always replace cap after use.

Advice on protection 

against fire and explosion 

: Do not spray on a naked flame or any incandescent material.

Keep away from direct sunlight.

Fire or intense heat may cause violent rupture of packages.

Vapours may form explosive mixtures with air.

The product is not easily combustible.

Storage 

Requirements for storage 

areas and containers 

: Keep containers tightly closed in a cool, well-ventilated place.

Keep away from direct sunlight.

Protect cylinders from physical damage.

Store away from incompatible substances.

Further information on 

storage conditions 

: Keep only in the original container at temperature not 

exceeding 50°C

Advice on common storage : Do not store together with:

Oxidizing agents
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 6 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION

Protective measures : Ensure that eyewash stations and safety showers are close to 

the workstation location.

Engineering measures : Local exhaust

Eye protection : Goggles

Hand protection : Protective gloves

Skin and body protection : impervious clothing

Wear cold insulating gloves/ face shield/ eye protection.

Respiratory protection : In case of insufficient ventilation wear suitable respiratory 

equipment.

Wear a positive-pressure supplied-air respirator.

Hygiene measures : Keep working clothes separately.

Do not smoke.

Do not breathe vapours or spray mist.

Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing.

Exposure Guidelines

Components CAS-No. Value Control 

parameters 

Upda

te 

Basis 

trans-1-Chloro3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

102687-65-0 TWA :

time 

weighted 

average 

(800 ppm) 2013 Honeywell:Limit 

established by 

Honeywell 

International Inc.

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop1-ene 

29118-24-9 TWA :

time 

weighted 

average 

(800 ppm) 2012 WEEL:US. AIHA 

Workplace 

Environmental 

Exposure Level 

(WEEL) Guides
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 7 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop1-ene 

29118-24-9 TWA :

time 

weighted 

average 

(800 ppm) 31.03.

11

Honeywell:Limit 

established by 

Honeywell 

International Inc.

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

Physical state : Liquefied gas

Color : clear and colourless 

Odor : slight 

pH : Note: not applicable 

Boiling point/boiling range : Note: not determined 

Flash point : Note: does not flash 

Lower explosion limit : Note: no data available 

Upper explosion limit : Note: no data available 

Vapor pressure : 234 kPa 

at 30 °C(86 °F) 

Vapor density : Note: not determined, (Air = 1.0) 

Density : Note: not determined 

Water solubility : Note: not determined 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 8 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

Ignition temperature : Note: no data available 

Decomposition temperature : Note: Hazardous decomposition products formed under fire 

conditions., To avoid thermal decomposition, do not overheat. 

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY 

Chemical stability : Stable under normal conditions. 

Possibility of hazardous 

reactions 

: Hazardous polymerisation does not occur. 

Conditions to avoid : Pressurized container. Protect from sunlight and do not 

expose to temperatures exceeding 50 °C. 

Can form a combustible mixture with air at pressures above 

atmospheric pressure. 

Do not mix with oxygen or air above atmospheric pressure. 

Incompatible materials to 

avoid 

: Reactions with alkali metals. 

Hazardous decomposition 

products 

: In case of fire hazardous decomposition products may be 

produced such as: 

Carbon monoxide 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

Carbonyl halides 

Gaseous hydrogen chloride (HCl). 

Gaseous hydrogen fluoride (HF). 

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Acute inhalation toxicity

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: LC50: 120000 ppm 

Exposure time: 4 h 

Species: rat 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: 100000 ppm 

Species: mouse 

Note: Acute (4-Hour) Inhalation Toxicity Screening Study 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 9 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

(mouse): No lethality at >100,000 ppm. 

 LC50: > 207000 ppm 

Exposure time: 4 h 

Species: rat 

Skin irritation

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Species: rabbit 

Result: No skin irritation 

Classification: Not classified as a skin irritant in animal testing. 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 404 

Exposure time: 4 h 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: Species: rabbit 

Result: No skin irritation 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 404 

Sensitisation

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Cardiac sensitization 

Species: dogs 

Note: Cardiac sensitisation threshold (dog): 25000 ppm. 

 Result: Does not cause skin sensitization. 

Classification: Patch test on human volunteers did not 

demonstrate sensitization properties. 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: Cardiac sensitization 

Species: dogs 

Note: Did not cause sensitization on laboratory animals. 

Repeated dose toxicity

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Species: rat 

Application Route: Inhalation 

Exposure time: (4 Weeks) 

NOEL: 4500 ppm 

Subacute toxicity 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: Species: rat 

Application Route: Inhalation 

Exposure time: (13 Weeks) 

NOEL: 5000 ppm 

Causes mild effects on the heart. 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 10 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

Genotoxicity in vitro

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Test Method: Mutagenicity (Salmonella typhimurium - reverse 

mutation assay) 

Result: negative 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: Test Method: Chromosome aberration test in vitro 

Cell type: Human lymphocytes 

Result: negative 

 : Test Method: Ames test 

Result: negative 

Genotoxicity in vivo

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Species: rat 

Cell type: Bone marrow 

Method: Mutagenicity (micronucleus test) 

Result: negative 

 : Test Method: Unscheduled DNA synthesis 

Species: rat 

Result: negative 

 : Species: mouse 

Cell type: Bone marrow 

Method: Mutagenicity (micronucleus test) 

Result: negative 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: Test Method: Mutagenicity (in vivo mammalian bone-marrow 

cytogenetic test, chromosomal analysis) 

Species: mouse 

Cell type: Micronucleus 

Application Route: Inhalation 

Result: negative 

Reproductive toxicity 

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Species: rabbit 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 15,000 ppm 

 Species: rat 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 10,000 ppm 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 11 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

Teratogenicity

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Species: rabbit 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 15,000 ppm 

 Species: rat 

Note: No-observed-effect level - 10,000 ppm 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: Species: rabbit 

Method: Prenatal Developmental Inhalation Toxicity Study 

Note: Did not show teratogenic effects in animal experiments. 

 Species: rat 

Method: Prenatal Developmental Inhalation Toxicity Study 

Note: Did not show teratogenic effects in animal experiments. 

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Toxicity to fish 

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: LC50: 38 mg/l 

Exposure time: 96 h 

Species: Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout) 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 203 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: NOEC: > 117 mg/l 

Exposure time: 96 h 

Species: Cyprinus carpio (Carp) 

Toxicity to daphnia and other aquatic invertebrates 

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Immobilization 

EC50: 82 mg/l 

Exposure time: 48 h 

Species: Daphnia magna (Water flea) 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 202 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: EC50: > 160 mg/l 

Exposure time: 48 h 

Species: Daphnia magna (Water flea) 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 12 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

Toxicity to algae 

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Growth inhibition 

EC50: 106.7 mg/l 

Exposure time: 72 h 

Species: Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (green algae) 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 201 

 Growth rate 

NOEC: 115 mg/l 

Exposure time: 72 h 

Species: Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (green algae) 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 201 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: Growth inhibition 

NOEC: > 170 mg/l 

Exposure time: 72 h 

Species: Algae 

Biodegradability 

trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-

trifluoropropene 

: Result: Not readily biodegradable. 

Value: 0 % 

Method: OECD 301 D 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 

: aerobic 

Result: Not readily biodegradable. 

Further information on ecology 

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS 

Disposal methods : Observe all Federal, State, and Local Environmental 

regulations. 

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION 

DOT UN/ID No. : UN 3163

Proper shipping name : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

(Trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene, trans1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene) 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 13 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

Class 2.2 

Packing group 

Hazard Labels 2.2

IATA UN/ID No. : UN 3163 

Description of the goods : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

 (Trans-1-Chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene, trans1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene) 

Class : 2.2 

Hazard Labels : 2.2 

Packing instruction (cargo 

aircraft) 

: 200 

Packing instruction 

(passenger aircraft) 

: 200 

IMDG UN/ID No. : UN 3163 

Description of the goods : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

 (TRANS-1-CHLORO-3,3,3-

TRIFLUOROPROPENE, TRANS-1,3,3,3-

TETRAFLUOROPROP-1-ENE) 

Class : 2.2 

Hazard Labels : 2.2 

EmS Number : F-C, S-V 

Marine Pollutant : no 

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION 

Inventories 

US. Toxic Substances 

Control Act 

: On TSCA Inventory 

Australia. Industrial 

Chemical (Notification and 

Assessment) Act 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

Canada. Canadian 

Environmental Protection 

Act (CEPA). Domestic 

Substances List (DSL) 

: This product contains one or several components that are not 

on the Canadian DSL nor NDSL. 

Japan. Kashin-Hou Law : On the inventory, or in compliance with the inventory 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 14 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

List 

Korea. Toxic Chemical 

Control Law (TCCL) List 

: On the inventory, or in compliance with the inventory 

Philippines. The Toxic 

Substances and Hazardous 

and Nuclear Waste Control 

Act 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

China. Inventory of Existing 

Chemical Substances 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

New Zealand. Inventory of 

Chemicals (NZIoC), as 

published by ERMA New 

Zealand 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

National regulatory information 

SARA 302 Components : SARA 302: No chemicals in this material are subject to the 

reporting requirements of SARA Title III, Section 302. 

SARA 313 Components : SARA 313: This material does not contain any chemical 

components with known CAS numbers that exceed the 

threshold (De Minimis) reporting levels established by SARA 

Title III, Section 313. 

SARA 311/312 Hazards : Acute Health Hazard 

Sudden Release of Pressure Hazard 

California Prop. 65 : This product does not contain any chemicals known to State of 

California to cause cancer, birth defects, or any other 

reproductive harm. 
SAFETY DATA SHEET

SolsticeTM PF Spray Cleaner

000000017627

Page 15 / 15 

Version 1.1 Revision Date 04/23/2013 Print Date 04/25/2013 

WHMIS Classification : A: A: Compressed gas 

This product has been classified according to the hazard criteria 

of the CPR and the MSDS contains all of the information 

required by the CPR.

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION 

HMIS III NFPA

Health hazard : 1 2 

Flammability : 0 0 

Physical Hazard : 0 

Instability : 0 

Hazard rating and rating systems (e.g. HMIS® III, NFPA): This information is intended solely for the 

use of individuals trained in the particular system. 

Further information 

The information provided in this Safety Data Sheet is correct to the best of our knowledge, 

information and belief at the date of its publication. The information given is designed only as a 

guidance for safe handling, use, processing, storage, transportation, disposal and release and is not 

to be considered a warranty or quality specification. The information relates only to the specific 

material designated and may not be valid for such material used in combination with any other 

materials or in any process, unless specified in the text. Final determination of suitability of any 

material is the sole responsibility of the user. This information should not constitute a guarantee for 

any specific product properties. 

Changes since the last version are highlighted in the margin. This version replaces all previous 

versions.

Previous Issue Date: 04/02/2013

Prepared by: Honeywell Performance Materials and Technologies Product Stewardship Group 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 1 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

SECTION 1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION 

Product name : SolsticeTM 1234ze

MSDS Number : 000000012546 

Product Use Description : Aerosol propellant, Foam blowing agent, Refrigerant

Company : Honeywell International, Inc. 

101 Columbia Road 

Morristown, NJ 07962-1057 

For more information call : 800-522-8001 

 (Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:00pm) 

In case of emergency call : Medical (PROSAR): 1-800-498-5701 or +1-651-523-0309 

: Transportation (CHEMTREC): 1-800-424-9300 or +1-703-

527-3887 

: 

 : (24 hours/day, 7 days/week) 

SECTION 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION 

Emergency Overview 

Form : Liquefied gas 

Color : colourless 

Odor : slight ether-like 

Hazard Summary : Warning! Container under pressure. Gas reduces oxygen 

available for breathing. Causes asphyxiation in high 

concentrations. The victim will not realize that he/she is 

suffocating. Rapid evaporation of the liquid may cause 

frostbite. Excessive exposure may cause central nervous 

system effects including drowsiness and dizziness. Excessive 

exposure may also cause cardiac arrhythmia. May cause eye 

irritation. 

Potential Health Effects 

Skin : No skin irritation

Eyes : May cause eye irritation.

Ingestion : Unlikely route of exposure.

Inhalation : Excessive exposure may cause central nervous system 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 2 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

effects including drowsiness and dizziness. Excessive 

exposure may also cause cardiac arrhythmia.

Chronic Exposure : None known.

Carcinogenicity 

No component of this product present at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as a known 

or anticipated carcinogen by NTP, IARC, or OSHA. 

SECTION 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS 

Chemical nature : Substance 

Chemical Name CAS-No. Concentration 

trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene 29118-24-9 100.00% 

SECTION 4. FIRST AID MEASURES 

Inhalation : Remove to fresh air. If breathing is irregular or stopped, 

administer artificial respiration. Use oxygen as required, 

provided a qualified operator is present. Call a physician. 

Skin contact : Rapid evaporation of the liquid may cause frostbite. If there is 

evidence of frostbite, bathe (do not rub) with lukewarm (not 

hot) water. If water is not available, cover with a clean, soft 

cloth or similar covering. Call a physician if irritation develops 

or persists. 

Eye contact : Rinse immediately with plenty of water, also under the eyelids, 

for at least 15 minutes. In case of frostbite water should be 

lukewarm, not hot. If symptoms persist, call a physician. 

Ingestion : Unlikely route of exposure. As this product is a gas, refer to the 

inhalation section. Do not induce vomiting without medical 

advice. Call a physician immediately. 

Notes to physician 

Treatment : Treat frost-bitten areas as needed. 

SECTION 5. FIREFIGHTING MEASURES 

Suitable extinguishing media : Use extinguishing measures that are appropriate to local 

circumstances and the surrounding environment. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 3 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

Water mist 

Dry powder 

Foam 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 

Specific hazards during 

firefighting 

: Contents under pressure. 

Heating will cause pressure rise with risk of bursting 

Cool closed containers exposed to fire with water spray. 

Product is not combustible under normal conditions. 

However, this material can ignite when mixed with air under 

pressure and exposed to strong ignition sources. 

Do not allow run-off from fire fighting to enter drains or water 

courses. 

Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing. 

Some risk may be expected of corrosive and toxic 

decomposition products. 

Fire may cause evolution of: 

Hydrogen fluoride 

Special protective equipment 

for firefighters 

: In the event of fire and/or explosion do not breathe fumes. 

Wear self-contained breathing apparatus and protective suit. 

No unprotected exposed skin areas. 

Exposure to decomposition products may be a hazard to 

health. 

SECTION 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES 

Personal precautions : Immediately evacuate personnel to safe areas.

Keep people away from and upwind of spill/leak.

Wear personal protective equipment. Unprotected persons 

must be kept away.

Remove all sources of ignition.

Avoid skin contact with leaking liquid (danger of frostbite).

Ventilate the area.

After release, disperses into the air.

Vapours are heavier than air and can cause suffocation by 

reducing oxygen available for breathing.

Avoid accumulation of vapours in low areas.

Unprotected personnel should not return until air has been 

tested and determined safe.

Environmental precautions : Prevent further leakage or spillage if safe to do so.

The product evaporates readily.

Prevent spreading over a wide area (e.g. by containment or oil 

barriers).

Methods for cleaning up : Do not direct water spray at the point of leakage.
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 4 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

Allow to evaporate.

SECTION 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE 

Handling 

Handling : Handle with care.

Avoid inhalation of vapour or mist.

Do not get in eyes, on skin, or on clothing.

Wear personal protective equipment.

Pressurized container. Protect from sunlight and do not expose 

to temperatures exceeding 50 °C.

Follow all standard safety precautions for handling and use of 

compressed gas cylinders.

Use authorized cylinders only.

Protect cylinders from physical damage.

Do not puncture or drop cylinders, expose them to open flame 

or excessive heat.

Do not pierce or burn, even after use. Do not spray on a naked 

flame or any incandescent material.

Do not remove screw cap until immediately ready for use.

Always replace cap after use.

Advice on protection 

against fire and explosion 

: Do not spray on a naked flame or any incandescent material.

Keep away from direct sunlight.

Fire or intense heat may cause violent rupture of packages.

Vapours may form explosive mixtures with air.

The product is not easily combustible.

Storage 

Requirements for storage 

areas and containers 

: Keep containers tightly closed in a cool, well-ventilated place.

Keep away from direct sunlight.

Further information on 

storage conditions 

: Keep only in the original container at temperature not 

exceeding 50°C

Advice on common storage : Do not store together with:

Oxidizing agents

SECTION 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION

Protective measures : Do not breathe vapour.

Avoid contact with skin, eyes and clothing.

Ensure that eyewash stations and safety showers are close to 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 5 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

the workstation location.

Engineering measures : Local exhaust

Eye protection : Goggles

Hand protection : Protective gloves

Skin and body protection : impervious clothing

Wear cold insulating gloves/ face shield/ eye protection.

Respiratory protection : In case of insufficient ventilation wear suitable respiratory 

equipment.

Wear a positive-pressure supplied-air respirator.

Hygiene measures : Avoid breathing vapors, mist or gas.

Keep working clothes separately.

Do not smoke.

Exposure Guidelines– 

Components CASNo. Value Control 

parameters 

Update Basis 

trans-1,3,3,3-

Tetrafluoropro

p-1-ene 

29118-

24-9

TWA : time 

weighted 

average 

(800 ppm) 31.03.11 Honeywell:Limit 

established by 

Honeywell 

International 

Inc.

 

TWA : time 

weighted 

average 

(800 ppm) 2009 WEEL:US. 

Workplace 

Environmental 

Exposure Level 

(WEEL) Guides

 

SECTION 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

Physical state : Liquefied gas

Colour : colourless 

Odour : slight ether-like 

Boiling point/boiling range : -19 °C 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 6 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

Flash point : Note: does not flash 

Lower explosion limit : Note: Exhibits flame limits at temperatures in excess of 28 ̊ C. 

Upper explosion limit : Note: Exhibits flame limits at temperatures in excess of 28 ̊ C. 

Vapour pressure : 4,192 hPa 

at 20 °C(68 °F) 

 10,998 hPa 

at 54.4 °C(129.9 °F) 

Vapour density : 4 

Note: (Air = 1.0) 

Density : 1.17 g/cm3 at 21.1 °C 

Water solubility : 0.373 g/l 

Partition coefficient: noctanol/water : log Pow: 1.6 

Ignition temperature : 368 °C 

Method: Autoignition temperature 

Decomposition temperature : Note: Hazardous decomposition products formed under fire 

conditions., To avoid thermal decomposition, do not overheat. 

SECTION 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY 

Conditions to avoid : Pressurized container. Protect from sunlight and do not 

expose to temperatures exceeding 50 °C.

Can form a combustible mixture with air at pressures above 

atmospheric pressure.

Do not mix with oxygen or air above atmospheric pressure.
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 7 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

 

Materials to avoid : Reactions with alkali metals.

Hazardous decomposition 

products 

: Pyrolysis products containing fluoride

Fluorocarbons

Hydrogen fluoride

Thermal decomposition : Hazardous decomposition products formed under fire 

conditions., To avoid thermal decomposition, do not overheat.

Hazardous reactions : Hazardous polymerisation does not occur.

Stable under normal conditions.

SECTION 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Acute inhalation toxicity : Species: mouse 

Note: Acute (4-Hour) Inhalation Toxicity Screening Study 

(mouse): No lethality at >100,000 ppm. 

 : LC50: > 207000 ppm 

Exposure time: 4 h 

Species: rat 

Skin irritation : Species: rabbit 

Result: No skin irritation 

Method: OECD Test Guideline 404 

Sensitisation : Cardiac sensitization 

Species: dogs 

Result: Did not cause sensitization on laboratory animals. 

Repeated dose toxicity : Species: rat 

Application Route: Inhalation 

Exposure time: 13 Weeks 

Note: Causes mild effects on the heart. NOEL 5,000 ppm 

Genotoxicity in vitro : Test Method: Chromosome aberration test in vitro 

Cell type: Human lymphocytes 

Result: negative 

 : Test Method: Ames test 

Result: negative 

Genotoxicity in vivo : Test Method: Mutagenicity (in vivo mammalian bone-marrow 

cytogenetic test, chromosomal analysis) 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 8 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

Species: mouse 

Cell type: Micronucleus 

Application Route: Inhalation 

Result: negative 

Teratogenicity : Species: rabbit 

Method: Prenatal Developmental Inhalation Toxicity Study 

Note: Did not show teratogenic effects in animal experiments. 

 : Species: rat 

Method: Prenatal Developmental Inhalation Toxicity Study 

Note: Did not show teratogenic effects in animal experiments. 

SECTION 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 

Ecotoxicity effects 

Toxicity to fish : NOEC: > 117 mg/l 

Exposure time: 96 h 

Species: Cyprinus carpio (Carp) 

Toxicity to daphnia and other 

aquatic invertebrates.

: EC50: > 160 mg/l 

Exposure time: 48 h 

Species: Daphnia magna (Water flea) 

Toxicity to algae : Growth inhibition 

NOEC: > 170 mg/l 

Exposure time: 72 h 

Species: Algae 

Elimination information (persistence and degradability) 

Biodegradability : aerobic 

Result: Not readily biodegradable. 

Further information on ecology 

Additional ecological 

information 

: no data available 

SECTION 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS 

Disposal methods : Observe all Federal, State, and Local Environmental 

regulations. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 9 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

SECTION 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION 

DOT UN/ID No. : UN 3163

Proper shipping name : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

(trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene) 

Class 2.2 

Packing group 

Hazard Labels 2.2

IATA UN/ID No. : UN 3163 

Description of the goods : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

 (trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-ene) 

Class : 2.2 

Hazard Labels : 2.2 

Packing instruction (cargo 

aircraft) 

: 200 

Packing instruction 

(passenger aircraft) 

: 200 

IMDG UN/ID No. : UN 3163 

Description of the goods : LIQUEFIED GAS, N.O.S. 

 (TRANS-1,3,3,3-TETRAFLUOROPROP-1-ENE) 

Class : 2.2 

Hazard Labels : 2.2 

EmS Number : F-C 

Marine pollutant : no 

SECTION 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION 

Inventories 

US. Toxic Substances 

Control Act 

: On TSCA Inventory 

Australia. Industrial 

Chemical (Notification and 

Assessment) Act 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-

ene 

29118-24-9 

Canada. Canadian 

Environmental Protection 

Act (CEPA). Domestic 

Substances List (DSL) 

: All components of this product are on the Canadian DSL list. 

Japan. Kashin-Hou Law : On the inventory, or in compliance with the inventory 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 10 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

List 

Korea. Existing Chemicals 

Inventory (KECI) 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-

ene 

29118-24-9 

Philippines. The Toxic 

Substances and Hazardous 

and Nuclear Waste Control 

Act 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-

ene 

29118-24-9 

China. Inventory of Existing 

Chemical Substances 

: On the inventory, or in compliance with the inventory 

New Zealand. Inventory of 

Chemicals (NZIoC), as 

published by ERMA New 

Zealand 

: Not in compliance with the inventory 

: trans-1,3,3,3-Tetrafluoroprop-1-

ene 

29118-24-9 

National regulatory information 

SARA 302 Components : SARA 302: No chemicals in this material are subject to the 

reporting requirements of SARA Title III, Section 302. 

SARA 313 Components : SARA 313: This material does not contain any chemical 

components with known CAS numbers that exceed the 

threshold (De Minimis) reporting levels established by SARA 

Title III, Section 313. 

SARA 311/312 Hazards : Acute Health Hazard 

Sudden Release of Pressure Hazard 

California Prop. 65 : This product does not contain any chemicals known to State of 

California to cause cancer, birth defects, or any other 

reproductive harm. 
Material Safety Data Sheet

SolsticeTM 1234ze

000000012546

Page 11 / 11 

Version 2 Revision Date 04/25/2012 Print Date 11/12/2013 

WHMIS Classification : A: Compressed Gas 

This product has been classified according to the hazard criteria 

of the CPR and the MSDS contains all of the information 

required by the CPR.

SECTION 16. OTHER INFORMATION 

HMIS III NFPA

Health hazard : 1 2 

Flammability : 0 0 

Physical Hazard : 0 

Instability : 0 

Hazard rating and rating systems (e.g. HMIS® III, NFPA): This information is intended solely for the 

use of individuals trained in the particular system. 

Further information 

The information provided in this Safety Data Sheet is correct to the best of our knowledge, 

information and belief at the date of its publication. The information given is designed only as a 

guidance for safe handling, use, processing, storage, transportation, disposal and release and is not 

to be considered a warranty or quality specification. The information relates only to the specific 

material designated and may not be valid for such material used in combination with any other 

materials or in any process, unless specified in the text. Final determination of suitability of any 

material is the sole responsibility of the user. This information should not constitute a guarantee for 

any specific product properties. 

Changes since the last version are highlighted in the margin. This version replaces all previous 

versions.

Previous Issue Date: 11/10/2011

Prepared by: Honeywell Performance Materials and Technologies Product Stewardship Group 
3

APPENDIX C—TEST REPORTS FOR NONVOLATILE RESIDUE 

BACKGROUND IN SOLVENTS

The following test reports for NVR background in solvents can be found in sections C.1 and 

C.2:

C.1 SSC—Gravimetric and FTIR NVR Analysis of the Candidate Solvents 

C.2 MSFC—NVR Analysis of Solvent Study Samples (EM10 memo 013-605) 
SSC Gas & Materials Science 1

Solvent Lot # Initial 

(g)

Pan + 

NVR (g)

Grav. NVR

(mg)

FTIR NVR

(mg)

HCFC225cb 91207300 2.3289 2.3289 <0.1 0.12

Solstice PF BB103A 2.3359 2.3362 0.3 0.19

3M L-14780

No Lot #

Bottle dated 

2/3/2011

2.3099 2.3100 0.1 0.09

Vertrel MCA CT13AG092 2.3520 2.3535 1.5 1.97

Solvokane

No Lot #

Drum dated 

08/01/01

2.3348 2.3390 4.2 3.4

Solkane 16136 2.2781 2.2787 0.6 0.32

Capstone 4-I 18 2.2780 2.3740 96.0 1.34*

Gravimetric and FTIR NVR Analysis

of the Candidate Solvents (per 200ml)

* Capstone 4I contains high levels of inorganic components.
Capstone 4I (PFBI) Issues

SSC Gas & Materials Science 2

Photo reactivity

Liberates iodine when 

exposed to light

Stability / Corrosion

Reacts with iron, steel and 

aluminum alloys. Product 

purity varies from lot to lot.

Contamination

High particulate levels are 

generated after exposure 

to iron / steel. Filtered 

particulate matter draws 

moisture in from the 

atmosphere.

Limited Availability 

OEM has shown no 

commercial interest to 

produce PFBI as a precision 

cleaning solvent

High Cost 

>4X than HCFC225

PFBI After 4 hrs

Exposure to Light

PFBI - Immediately 

Poured from an 

Amber Bottle
SSC Gas & Materials Science 3

Particulate Matter Collected from Capstone 4I (PFBI), Lot #18

Heavy Silting 

Observed in 

Unused 

Capstone 4I 

rec’d from 

USAF / WPAB 

SSC Lab 8/30/2013
Initial Weight of Filter (mg) 73.4 mg

Weight after filtration of 100mL 

Capstone 4-I (mg) 77.5mg

Total weight of filtered matter 

(mg) 4.1mg

Filtrate Mass After Filtering 100mL 

Capstone 4I (PFBI)Solvent

DuPont

Filtered 100ml of Capstone 4I through a 47 mm dia. filter with a 0.45 

micron pore size.
X-Ray Spectrum of the PFBI Particulate Matter from Lot #18

SSC Gas & Materials Science 5

Per email response from Raymond Davenport /Dupont, “Lot 18 has a lot of iron in your tests which 

suggests that it was probably stored in mild steel drums which caused some corrosion prior to it 

being re-packaged into amber bottles. It is not a high purity lot and the corrosion could have been 

accelerated by an impurity. The pink / violet / purple color change is to be expected and is 

unavoidable and is generated by the liberated iodine on exposure to light.”

Lab Observations: Glassware is difficult to clean - heavy stains, may lightly etch the glassware under 

the right conditions. Sodium and Silicon in the X-Ray spectrum suggest PFBI is leaching these 

elements from the glass.

SSC Gas & Materials Science
SSC Gas & Materials Science 6

Filtered NVR 

associated 

with 

Capstone 4I 

from Lot 18 

Forms 

moisture on 

the filter pad 

as it sits in 

the lab.




4

APPENDIX D—QUICK SCREEN SOLVENCY TEST RESULTS

Appendix D contains the SSC Solvent Screening Test Results, excerpt from: HCFC225cb 

(AK225g) Replacement Study, 1st Technical Interchange Meeting, September 19–20, 2013, Updated 

December 2013.
SSC Solvent Screening Test Results 

Excerpt from: 

HCFC225cb (AK225g) Replacement Study

1

st Technical Interchange Meeting

Sept. 19-20, 2013/Updated Dec. 2013

Bruce Farner - NASA/SSC RA 20

H. Richard Ross - A2R / SSC Gas & Materials Science

SSC Gas & Materials Science 1
Outline

• Lab Results of Solvent Screening Tests for NVR Removal 

(Cleaning Efficiency)

• Candidate Solvents Tested

– Neat Solvents

• AGC Chemicals HCFC225 cb (AK225g) Control Solvent

• Honeywell Solstice PF (HFO 1233zd)

• Solvay Solkane (HFC-365)

• Dupont Capstone 4I (Perfluorobutyl iodide (PFBI) or Nonafluoro-1-

iodobutane)

– Azeotropes

• 3M L-14780 (22%tDCE/78% HFE-347mcc3)

• Solvay Solvokane (30% tDCE/70% HFC-365mfc)

• Dupont Vertrel MCA (38%tDCE/62%HFE-43-10mee)

• NVR Miscibility / Saturation Tests

• Solvent NVR Data

SSC Gas & Materials Science 2
SSC Replacement Study Team

• NASA /SSC

– Bruce Farner, NASA Project Lead

• SSC Lab (Quick Screen Cleaning Tests and Doping 

Flex Hoses for the Field Cleaning Demonstration 

with Honeywell using Solstice PF)

– H. Richard Ross , Solvent Test Lead /A2R

– Taylor Davie / A2R - Chemist

– Eric Guttierrez / A2R - Chemist

– Marry Kerschbaum / A2R - Chemist

SSC Gas & Materials Science 3
Quick Screening Test Details

• Triple rinse with HCFC225cb, ten aluminum weighing dishes (pans) per solvent to be tested 

• Next, immerse the pans in a beaker filled with HCFC225cb for a min. of two hrs.

• Place the aluminum pans in a preheated (100 deg. C) oven for one hour.

• Prepare a batch of mixed contaminants by dissolving 0.5240g of equal parts of the following 

contaminants in100ml of HCFC225cb. 

– 0.1023g of Mineral Oil – pharmaceutical grade – mixed aliphatic

– 0.1018g of MIL-PRF-8382 – ester based hydraulic fluid

– 0.1025g of Di-2-ethylhexylsebacate (gauge calibration oil), Monoplex DOS

– 0.1112g of WD 40 (medium-heavy hydrocarbons)

– 0.1062g of Krytox GPL103 (fluorocarbon lubricant for oxygen systems)

• Remove the pans from the oven and place in a desiccator for a min. of one hour.

• Weigh each dish on a calibrated balance accurate to ± 0.1mg. This weight is reported as the 

“clean pan” in the results table. Apply 1 ml of the mixed NVR std. to each aluminum weighing 

dish. 

• Return the pans to the oven and bake for one hr. at 100 deg. C. Transfer pans to the desiccator 

and cool for 1 hr. and reweigh each pan. This is reported as the “Pan + NVR ” in the results 

table. 

SSC Gas & Materials Science 4

0.5240 g. NVR 

mix / 100ml 

1ml of NVR 

mix / 100ml

NVR Transferred to 

the Al Weighing Pan
Quick Screen Test Details (Continuation)

• The mass difference between the “Pan + NVR” and “Clean Pan” is the “Initial Pan 

NVR” (i.e., NVR added to the pan).

– Note. Each pan was doped with 5 mg; however, only 3.3mg (avg. for 10 pans doped with 

NVR for each test solvent) remained after the 1 hr. bakeout at 100C. 

– Pan surface area = 5.31in2 w/3.4mg of NVR is ≈ 92.2mg / ft 2.

• Flush each NVR doped weighing pan with 100ml of the test solvent from a glass 

volumetric cylinder in three steps, capturing all of the flush solvent in a clean beaker.

– With the NVR doped dish on a flat surface, pour 30 ml of test solvent into the dish, swirl 

and decant into a beaker

– Repeat the above step with an additional 30ml

– Holding the dish, fold it slightly and slowly flush the remaining 40 ml of test solvent 

through each side of the fold, draining the solvent into the beaker such that the maximum 

surface area is exposed.

• Dry in the oven at 100 deg.C for 1 hr., cool in the desiccator for 1 hr. and reweigh. 

This is reported as “NVR Removed From the Pan, Post Solvent Flush”.

• % Cleaning Efficiency = (mgs. of NVR Removed from the Pan After the Post 

Solvent Flush / Doped Pan NVR mgs.) (100)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 5
SSC Gas & Materials Science 6

Solvent Screening Test Results for Cleaning Efficiency

Avg. NVR Removal of Test Solvents 

Contamination Level = 3.4 mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 89.5mg / ft2

99.1%

98.3%

97.6% 97.5% 97.4%

97.0%

87.3%

85.0%

86.0%

87.0%

88.0%

89.0%

90.0%

91.0%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

99.0%

100.0%

AK-225g Solvokane Solstice PF Vertrel MCA Capstone 4-I 3M L-14780 Solkane 365mfc

% of NVR 

Removed

% of NVR Removed ( avg. of 10 cleaning tests for each solvent)
Cleaning Efficiency Tests Using HCFC225cb (AK225g) 

NVR Contamination Level = 3.3 mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 89.5mg/ ft.2

HCFC225cb (Control/Baseline Solvent) 

100.0% 100.0%

97.1%

100.0% 100.0%

97.1%

100.0%

97.0%

100.0% 100.0%

90.0%

91.0%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

99.0%

100.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

“n” = 10 tests

Avg. NVR Removal Efficiency = 99.1 %

RSD = 1.45% SSC Gas & Materials Science 7

% of NVR 

Removed
Solvay Solvokane

Avg. NVR Removal Efficiency = 98.3%

RSD = 1.98%

100.0% 100.0%

97.0%

100.0%

97.2% 97.1%

100.0%

94.6%

100.0%

97.1%

90.0%

91.0%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

99.0%

100.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Cleaning % Efficiency

“n” =10 tests

SSC Gas & Materials Science 8

Cleaning Efficiency Tests Using Solvokane

NVR Contamination Level = 3.4 mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 92.2 mg/ ft.2
97.1% 97.0%

94.1%

100.0%

96.9% 97.0%

100.0%

97.0%

97.3%

100.0%

90.0%

91.0%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

99.0%

100.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

% Cleaning Efficiency

n tests

Avg. NVR Removal Efficiency = 97.6%

RSD = 1.92% SSC Gas & Materials Science 9

Cleaning Efficiency Tests Using Solstice PF

NVR Contamination Level = 3.4 mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 92.2 mg / ft2

Honeywell Solstice PF
Avg. NVR Removal Efficiency = 97.5%

RSD = 2.38%

92.1%

100.0%

97.1% 97.3%

100.0%

97.4%

97.1% 97.1% 97.2%

100.0%

90.0%

91.0%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

99.0%

100.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

%Cleaning Efficiency

“n” = 10 tests

SSC Gas & Materials Science 10

Cleaning Efficiency Tests Using Vertrel MCA

NVR Contamination Level = 3.5mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 94.7mg / ft2

DuPont Vertrel MCA
Avg. NVR Removal Efficiency = 97.4%

RSD= 2.21%

93.8%

97.1% 97.2%

94.6%

97.2% 97.1% 97.2%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

90.0%

91.0%

92.0%

93.0%

94.0%

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

99.0%

100.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

% Cleaning Efficiency

“n” = 10 tests

SSC Gas & Materials Science 11

Cleaning Efficiency Tests Using Capstone 4-I

NVR Contamination Level = 3.3 mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 89.5mg / ft2

DuPont Capstone 4-I (PFBI)
SSC Gas & Materials Science

12

93.9

100

94.1

100

94.1

97 97 96.9

100

93.9

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Cleaning Efficiency Tests Using L-14780 

NVR Contamination Level = 3.2 mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 86.8mg / ft2 

3M L-14780 

Avg. NVR Removal Efficiency = 97.5%

RSD = 2.38%

% Cleaning Efficiency

“n”=10 tests
Solvay Solkane 365mfc

85.3%

89.2%

88.6%

85.3%

88.2%

83.8%

91.2%

85.3%

90.6%

85.7%

80.0%

82.0%

84.0%

86.0%

88.0%

90.0%

92.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

%Cleaning Efficiency

“n”= 10 tests

SSC Gas & Materials Science 13

Avg. NVR Removal Efficiency = 87.3%

RSD = 2.93%

Cleaning Efficiency Tests Using Solkane

NVR Contamination Level = 3.0 mg /5.31 in2 ≈ 81.4mg / ft2 

Solvay Solkane
SSC Gas & Materials Science 14

The solubility of a substance (e.g., hydraulic fluid) in a solvent 

can be measured as the saturation concentration or by the 

miscibility of the substance with the solvent.

Miscibility /Saturation Tests of the Candidate Solvents 
SSC Gas & Materials Science 15

MIL-PRF-8382 – ester based hydraulic fluid

10 10

1.3 0.95 0.7 0.47

0

5

10

15

HCFC225cb Solstice PF Solvokane Vertrel MCA 3M Solkane

NVR Miscibility /Saturation Tests for the Candidate Solvents 

Milliliters of Hydraulic Fluid (NVR) required to achieve saturation 

(separation). Each bottle contains “10ml” of solvent.

Note: The Hyd. Fluid was 

still soluble in AK225g & 

Solstice PF at equal 

volumes (1:1). Solstice PF 

surpassed the other 

candidate solvents.

ml of 

Hyd. 

Fluid 

added 

to each 

solvent 

bottle

> >

ml of Hyd. Fluid req’d to achieve phase 

separation for each test solvent. Each 

bottle contains 10ml of the corresponding 

test solvent.
SSC Gas & Materials Science 16

NVR Miscibility Range of the Candidate Solvents 

0.95ml of Hydraulic Fluid was added to each bottle containing 

10ml of solvent)

Vertrel MCA is partially miscible, the remaining three solvents are fully 

miscible ( no stratification or phase separation were observed with the 

three remaining solvents).

MIL-PRF-8382 – ester based hydraulic fluid

Conc. for each bottle = 0.95ml Hyd. Fluid /10 ml Solvent
SSC Gas & Materials Science 17

Solvokane is partially miscible w/1.3ml of hydraulic fluid, the Solstice PF 

and the Control (AK225g) are fully miscible ( no stratification or phase 

separation were observed ).

NVR Miscibility Range of the Candidate Solvents

Next, 1.3 ml of Hydraulic Fluid was added to each bottle containing 10ml of solvent

MIL-PRF-8382 – ester based hydraulic fluid

Conc. for each bottle = 1.3ml Hyd. Fluid /10 ml Solvent
SSC Gas & Materials Science 18

10 10 10 10

3.6

1.4

0

5

10

15

HCFC225cb Solstice PF 3M Solvokane Vertrel MCA Solkane

NVR Miscibility /Saturation Tests for the Candidate Solvents 

Vol of RP1 (NVR) required to achieve saturation (separation) is reported 

in the below graph. Each bottle contains 10ml of solvent. RP1 is 

predominantly C9-C16 (w/ sulfur < 30 ppm) & aromatics 5% Max. 

ml of RP1 added to each solvent bottle

RP1 was still soluble in 

AK225g, Solstice PF, 3M 

L14780 and Solvokane at 

equal volumes (1:1). 
SSC Gas & Materials Science 19

Miscibility /Saturation Response of the Candidate Solvents 

to Heavy Weight (85-140W) Gear Oil (Petroleum-Based)

Six drops (150mg) of Gear Oil was added to each bottle (10ml 

solvent) 

The Gear Oil was fully miscible in Solstice & HCFC225cb (AK225g)

3ML14780 & Solkane were the least miscible solvents 
SSC Gas & Materials Science 20

Miscibility Response of the Candidate Solvents to Heavy 

Weight (85-140W) Gear Oil (Petroleum-Based)

Six drops (150mg) of Gear Oil was added to each bottle (10ml 

solvent) 

The Gear Oil was fully miscible in Solstice & HCFC225cb (AK225g)

3ML14780 & Solkane were the least effective solvents 

Solvokane and Vertrel MCA were placed out of 

order to highlight the miscibility / saturation rank
Solvent Cleaning Performance Rankings 

Based on SSC Lab Tests

SSC Gas & Materials Science 21

Quick 

Screen

Hyd Fluid

Solubility

RP1 

Solubility

85-140W 

Solubility

Rank (Test 

Avg.)1

HCFC225cb 1 1 1 1 1

Solstice PF 3 2 1 1 1 1.5

Solvokane 2 2 1 3 2

Vertrel MCA 4 3 2 2 2.8

3M L14780 5 4 1 4 3.5

Solkane 6 5 3 5 4.8

1 HCFC225cb (AK 225g) has a value of “1” ( best solvency and cleaning 

efficiency). The closer the candidate solvent is to “1”, the better the fit is to 

performing similar to HCFC225 cb.

2 The quick screening cleaning tests show Solstice PF has a 97.6% NVR Removal 

Efficiency. AK225g has a 99.1% NVR removal efficiency.
SSC Gas & Materials Science 22

10

10

4

9

10

5

4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Solvokane

Vertrel MCA

3M L-14780

Solkane 365mfc

Capstone 4-I

Solstice PF

AK-225g

Solvent Odor Strength

odor
Solvent Efficiency for NVR Removal

3.3mg NVR 

HCFC225cb (Control /Baseline Solvent)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 23

Cleaned Pan 

(g.)

Pan + NVR 

(g.)

Initial 

Pan NVR 

(g.)

Pan + NVR Post 

Solvent Flush 

(g.)

NVR Removed from 

Pan, Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

% Solvent 

Efficiency NVR

Removal

2.2783 2.2817 0.0034 2.2783 0.0034 100.0%

2.3163 2.3198 0.0035 2.3163 0.0035 100.0%

2.2569 2.2603 0.0034 2.2570 0.0033 97.1%

2.2718 2.2750 0.0032 2.2718 0.0032 100.0%

2.3042 2.3075 0.0033 2.3042 0.0033 100.0%

2.2613 2.2647 0.0034 2.2614 0.0033 97.1%

2.3265 2.3298 0.0033 2.3265 0.0033 100.0%

2.3343 2.3376 0.0033 2.3344 0.0032 97.0%

2.2789 2.2823 0.0034 2.2789 0.0034 100.0%

2.3243 2.3275 0.0032 2.3243 0.0032 100.0%

Kb = 37 Avg. Efficiency = 99.1 %
Solvent Efficiency for NVR Removal

3.4 mg NVR 

Solvay Solvokane (Test Solvent)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 24

Cleaned Pan 

(g.)

Pan + NVR 

(g.)

Initial Pan 

NVR (g.)

Pan + NVR 

Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

NVR Removed from 

Pan, Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

% Solvent 

Efficiency NVR

Removal

2.4423 2.4453 0.0030 2.4423 0.0030 100.0%

2.3880 2.3912 0.0032 2.3880 0.0032 100.0%

2.4083 2.4116 0.0033 2.4084 0.0032 97.0%

2.4123 2.4157 0.0034 2.4123 0.0034 100.0%

2.4379 2.4415 0.0036 2.4380 0.0035 97.2%

2.3895 2.3929 0.0034 2.3896 0.0033 97.1%

2.3925 2.3959 0.0034 2.3925 0.0034 100.0%

2.3880 2.3917 0.0037 2.3882 0.0035 94.6%

2.4358 2.4392 0.0034 2.4358 0.0034 100.0%

2.3595 2.3630 0.0035 2.3596 0.0034 97.1%

Kb = 25 Avg. Efficiency = 98.3%
Solvent Efficiency for NVR Removal

3.4 mg NVR 

Honeywell Solstice PF (Test Solvent)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 25

Cleaned Pan 

(g.)

Pan + NVR 

(g.)

Initial Pan 

NVR (g.)

Pan + NVR 

Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

NVR Removed from 

Pan, Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

% Solvent 

Efficiency NVR

Removal

2.3237 2.3271 0.0034 2.3238 0.0033 97.1%

2.3390 2.3423 0.0033 2.3391 0.0032 97.0%

2.3654 2.3688 0.0034 2.3656 0.0032 94.1%

2.3365 2.3399 0.0034 2.3365 0.0034 100.0%

2.3269 2.3301 0.0032 2.3270 0.0031 96.9%

2.3942 2.3975 0.0033 2.3943 0.0032 97.0%

2.4031 2.4064 0.0033 2.4031 0.0033 100.0%

2.3567 2.3600 0.0033 2.3568 0.0032 97.0%

2.3776 2.3813 0.0037 2.3777 0.0036 97.3%

2.3588 2.3626 0.0038 2.3588 0.0038 100.0%

Kb = 25 Avg. Efficiency = 97.6%
Solvent Efficiency for NVR Removal 

3.6mg NVR 

DuPont Vertrel MCA (Test Solvent)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 26

Cleaned Pan 

(g.)

Pan + NVR 

(g.)

Initial Pan 

NVR (g.)

Pan + NVR 

Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

NVR Removed from 

Pan, Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

% Solvent 

Efficiency NVR

Removal

2.3778 2.3816 0.0038 2.3781 0.0035 92.1%

2.3799 2.3832 0.0033 2.3799 0.0033 100.0%

2.3748 2.3783 0.0035 2.3749 0.0034 97.1%

2.3865 2.3902 0.0037 2.3866 0.0036 97.3%

2.3701 2.3736 0.0035 2.3701 0.0035 100.0%

2.3762 2.3801 0.0039 2.3763 0.0038 97.4%

2.4100 2.4135 0.0035 2.4101 0.0034 97.1%

2.4522 2.4556 0.0034 2.4523 0.0033 97.1%

2.3903 2.3939 0.0036 2.3904 0.0035 97.2%

2.3643 2.3677 0.0034 2.3643 0.0034 100.0%

Kb = 20 Avg. Efficiency = 97.8%
Solvent Efficiency for NVR Removal

3.5mg NVR 

DuPont Capstone 4-I (Test Solvent)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 27

Cleaned Pan 

(g.)

Pan + NVR 

(g.)

Initial Pan 

NVR (g.)

Pan + NVR 

Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

NVR Removed from 

Pan, Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

% Solvent 

Efficiency NVR

Removal

2.3660 2.3692 0.0032 2.3662 0.0030 93.8%

2.3510 2.3545 0.0035 2.3511 0.0034 97.1%

2.3807 2.3843 0.0036 2.3808 0.0035 97.2%

2.4340 2.4377 0.0037 2.4342 0.0035 94.6%

2.2808 2.2844 0.0036 2.2809 0.0035 97.2%

2.4554 2.4589 0.0035 2.4555 0.0034 97.1%

2.3824 2.3860 0.0036 2.3825 0.0035 97.2%

2.3908 2.3943 0.0035 2.3908 0.0035 100.0%

2.3619 2.3655 0.0036 2.3619 0.0036 100.0%

2.4313 2.4348 0.0035 2.4313 0.0035 100.0%

Kb = Similar to 

AK-225g (37)

Avg. Efficiency = 97.4%
Solvent Efficiency for NVR Removal

3.3mg NVR 

3M L-14780 (Test Solvent)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 28

Cleaned Pan 

(g.)

Pan + NVR 

(g.)

Initial Pan 

NVR (g.)

Pan + NVR 

Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

NVR Removed from 

Pan, Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

% Solvent 

Efficiency NVR

Removal

2.5269 2.5302 0.0033 2.5271 0.0031 93.9%

2.5035 2.5069 0.0034 2.5035 0.0034 100.0%

2.5007 2.5041 0.0034 2.5009 0.0032 94.1%

2.5244 2.5276 0.0032 2.5244 0.0032 100.0%

2.4982 2.5016 0.0034 2.4984 0.0032 94.1%

2.5183 2.5216 0.0033 2.5184 0.0032 97.0%

2.4972 2.5005 0.0033 2.4973 0.0032 97.0%

2.5422 2.5454 0.0032 2.5423 0.0031 96.9%

2.5111 2.5143 0.0032 2.5111 0.0032 100.0%

2.5269 2.5302 0.0033 2.5271 0.0031 93.9%

Kb = Similar to MCA (20) Avg. Efficiency = 97.0%
Solvent Efficiency for NVR Removal

3.5mg NVR 

Solvay Solkane 365mfc (Test Solvent)

SSC Gas & Materials Science 29

Cleaned Pan 

(g.)

Pan + NVR 

(g.)

Initial Pan 

NVR (g.)

Pan + NVR 

Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

NVR Removed from 

Pan, Post Solvent 

Flush (g.)

% Solvent 

Efficiency NVR

Removal

2.3943 2.3977 0.0034 2.3948 0.0029 85.3%

2.3565 2.3602 0.0037 2.3569 0.0033 89.2%

2.3507 2.3542 0.0035 2.3511 0.0031 88.6%

2.3414 2.3448 0.0034 2.3419 0.0029 85.3%

2.3870 2.3904 0.0034 2.3874 0.0030 88.2%

2.3077 2.3114 0.0037 2.3083 0.0031 83.8%

2.3671 2.3705 0.0034 2.3674 0.0031 91.2%

2.4233 2.4267 0.0034 2.4238 0.0029 85.3%

2.3577 2.3609 0.0032 2.3580 0.0029 90.6%

2.3748 2.3783 0.0035 2.3753 0.0030 85.7%

Kb = 12 Avg. Efficiency = 87.3%
5

APPENDIX E—METALS COMPATIBILITY DATA

Appendix E contains the Metals Corrosion Test Results for the Candidate Solvents, HCFC225cb (AK225g) Replacement Study, 2nd Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM), February 19–20, 

2014.
1

HCFC225cb (AK225g) Replacement Study

2nd Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 

Metals Corrosion Test Results

for the Candidate Solvents

Hosted by 

NASA White Sands Test Facility

Feb. 19-20, 2014

Bruce Farner - NASA / Stennis Space Center (SSC) 

H. Richard Ross - A2R / SSC Gas & Materials Science

J2X Power Pack Test at SSC
To determine the reactivity ( corrosiveness) of the 

three candidate cleaning solvents” that were selected 

from the Phase 1 study with thirteen different alloys that 

were exposed to solvent vapor and total liquid 

immersion by measuring a combination of weight 

changes and visual qualitative changes. 

Phase II Test Objective
Solvents & Alloys Tested

• Solvents

– AGC Chemicals HCFC225 cb (AK225g) Baseline Solvent

– Honeywell Solstice PF (HFO 1233zd)

– 3M L-14780 (22%tDCE/78% HFE-347mcc3)

– Solvay Solvokane (30% tDCE/70% HFC-365mfc)

• Metals

– Carbon Steel (4140)

– Stainless Steels (17-4PH, A286, 304 & 440C)

– Nickel Alloys (Monel 400 & Inconel 718)

– Co Cr Ni Alloy (Elgiloy)

– Tin Bronze 

– Brass ( Naval Brass)

– Aluminum (6061 -T6, 2195 -T8 & 2219 -T6)
Acknowledgements

SSC Gas & Materials Science 4

NASA /SSC Project Lead

Bruce Farner / RA 20 

NASA /MSFC

Mark Mitchell for providing the aluminum alloy coupons, 

2195 and 2219

SSC Laboratory Team

H. Rick Ross - Lab Lead / A2Research

Mary Kerschbaum - Lab Scientist / A2Research

Erick Guttierrez - Lab Scientist/ A2Research

Taylor Davie – Lab Scientist / A2 Research
Test coupons for each given alloy were fabricated from new or 

fresh stock – the fabricated coupons measured approximately 2” 

x 0.75”

All fabricated coupons were cleaned with AK225g (rinsed 2X, 

soaked for 1 hr, rec’d a final rinse after soaking, dried with forced 

GN and were immediately placed in Teflon holders that separated 

each coupon and were stored in a laboratory desiccator.

The corrosion tests were performed at the BP temperature for 

each candidate solvent while ensuring the coupons had free 

contact with the solvent and were isolated from each other using 

Teflon support devices

The boiling point temperature for each solvent was maintained 

using a constant temperature water bath

Test Protocol
6

Coupon set in HP Glass Tube. 

Heavy Wall Glass Tube Rated at 

150 psig, Tube Vol. 210 ml. 

Alloy coupon set secured in HP 

Glass Tube w/ 80 ml of test 

solvent prior to placing in the 

water bath.

Six replicate test coupons for each 

alloy were placed in ACE High 

Pressure Borosilicate Glass Tube w/ 

a # 25 TFE threaded plug (rated @ 

150 psi).

Three replicates were totally 

immersed in the solvent and three 

replicates were placed above the 

liquid for exposure to the solvent 

vapor. 

(6 coupons + 1 control / alloy) (13 

alloys/solvent) ( 3 tests/ coupon @ 

before solvent exposure, @ 24 hrs 

& for additional 144hrs / solvent) = 

273 coupon tests / solvent. For 4 

solvents, “n” = 948 tests

Test Protocol (Continuation)
7

Close up view of an alloy coupon set coming out 

the water bath after solvent exposure. The coupons 

are secured to a TFE rod. 

Test Protocol (Continuation)
Side View

Coupons for 

each alloy 

were placed 

in the Teflon 

holder and 

stored in the 

desiccator. 
Top View of 

the Teflon 

Coupon 

Holder

The radial 

slots secure 

& separate 

each alloy 

coupon.
Analytical Process

Solvent compatibility testing for the alloy coupons were 

performed for weight changes, corrosion, etching, pitting, 

discoloration and other signs of degradation. 

Weight lost and surface corrosion is based on the 

appearance of the surfaces compared to the control coupon.

Total solvent immersion and solvent vapor tests were 

performed in triplicate for each alloy coupon and analyzed in 

accordance with ASTM F-483-09. 

Coupon samples and the control coupon were re-weighed 

after each solvent exposure test to the nearest 0.1mg
Metal Coupon Changes After 168 hrs in Solstice PF 

(HFO 1233zd) at 72 deg F

Ferrous Based 

Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

A286 SST -0.1mg -0.3 mg 0.0 mg No Change

304L -0.1mg -0.1mg -0.1mg No Change

440C SST 0.2 mg 0.0 mg 0.1mg No Change

17-4PH 0.2 mg 0.1 mg 0.0 mg No Change

AISI 4140 0.2 mg -0.5 mg -0.4 mg No Change

Non Ferrous

Based Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

Eligiloy 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Inconel 718 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.1mg No Change

Monel 400 0.0 mg -0.1 mg -0.1mg No Change

Naval Brass -0.1 mg -0.1mg 0.0 mg No Change

Tin Bronze 510 -0.2 mg -0.2 mg -0.2 mg No Change

6061 T6 Al 0.0 mg -0.1mg 0.0 mg No Change

2219 T6 Al 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.1 mg No Change

2195 T8(Al Li) 0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.1 mg No Change
Metal Coupon Change After 168 hrs 

in L14780 at 82 deg F

Ferrous Based 

Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

A286 SST 0.0 mg -0.2 mg 0.0 mg No Change

304L 0.0 mg -0.1mg -0.2 mg No Change

440C SST -0.1 mg -0.2 mg - 0.1mg No Change

17-4PH 0.0 mg 0.0 mg -0.1 mg No Change

AISI 4140 -0.1 mg -0.5 mg -0.3 mg Delayed Rust 1

Non Ferrous

Based Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

Eligiloy 0.1 mg 0.0 mg -0.1 mg No Change

Inconel 718 0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Monel 400 -0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Naval Brass 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Tin Bronze 510 -0.2 mg -0.2 mg 0.0 mg No Change

6061 T6 Al 0.0 mg -0.1mg 0.1 mg No Change

2219 T6 Al 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.1 mg No Change

2195 T8(Al Li) -0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

1 No rust or discoloration were present after the 168 hr exposure test was performed
AISI 4140 Low Alloy Steel

3M L-14780 After 168 hr exposure

Note: No visible discoloration on the liquid exposed 

coupons after drying 168 hr (post 144hr) exposure
AISI 4140 Low Alloy Steel Exposed to 3M L-14780 

4 Weeks After the 168 hr Exposure Test

Control

AK-225g

Note: All three coupons that were exposed to the 3M liquid show discoloration, while all 

three coupons exposed to the 3M vapor show no discoloration.

Coupons exposed to liquid

Coupons exposed 

to vapor
Metal Coupon Change After 168 hrs 

in Solvokane at 93 deg F

Ferrous Based 

Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

A286 SST 0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.1 mg No Change

304L 0.0 mg -0.1mg 0.0 mg No Change

440C SST -0.1 mg -0.1 mg 0.0 mg No Change

17-4PH 0.0 mg -0.1 mg 0.1 mg No Change

AISI 4140 0.0 mg -0.1 mg 0.2 mg No Change

Non Ferrous

Based Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

Eligiloy 0.1 mg 0.1 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Inconel 718 0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.1 mg No Change

Monel 400 0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Naval Brass 0.0 mg 0.0mg 0.0 mg No Change

Tin Bronze 510 0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

6061 T6 Al 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

2219 T6 Al 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

2195 T8(Al Li) 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.1 mg No Change
Metal Coupon Change After 168 hrs 

in AK225G at 133 deg F

Ferrous Based 

Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

A286 SST 0.0 mg -0.1 mg -0.1 mg No Change

304L -0.1 mg -0.1mg -0.1 mg No Change

440C SST -0.3 mg -0.3 mg -0.1 mg No Change

17-4PH 0.0 mg -0.1 mg -0.1 mg No Change

AISI 4140 0.5 mg -0.3 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Non Ferrous

Based Coupons

Vapor Coupon 

Wt Change

Liquid Coupon 

Wt Change

Control Coupon 

Wt Change

Sample vs. Control

Appearance 

Eligiloy -0.2 mg -0.1 mg -0.1 mg No Change

Inconel 718 -0.1 mg -0.1 mg 0.0 mg No Change

Monel 400 -0.1 mg -0.2 mg -0.1 mg No Change

Naval Brass -0.2 mg -0.2mg -0.1 mg No Change

Tin Bronze 510 -0.1 mg -0.1 mg -0.1 mg No Change

6061 T6 Al -0.1 mg 0.0 mg 0.0 mg No Change

2219 T6 Al 0.0 mg -0.1 mg 0.0 mg No Change

2195 T8(Al Li) 0.0 mg 0.0 mg 0.1 mg No Change
A-286 Stainless Steel 

Representative Coupon from Liquid Immersion Tests

3M L-14780

Control AK225G

Solstice PF Solvokane
304L Stainless Steel

Control AK-225g

Solstice PF

3M L-14780

Solvokane
440C Stainless Steel

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

AK-225g Control
17-4 PH Stainless Steel

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

AK-225g Control
Monel 400 ( Nickel)

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

AK-225g Control
Inconel 718

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

AK-225g Control
Co-Cr-Ni Alloy - Elgiloy

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

Control AK-225g
Naval Brass 

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

Control AK-225g
6061-T6 Aluminum

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

AK-225g Control
2195-T8 Aluminum-Lithium

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

AK-225g Control
2219-T6 Aluminum

Solstice PF 3M L-14780 Solvokane

AK-225g Control
6

APPENDIX F—NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY TEST RESULTS

Appendix F contains the Nonmetals Compatibility Immersion Test—Immersion data sheets 

by solvent and bar charts by nonmetal.
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

401.29 20.17 91 453.64 21.35 92 13.0 5.9 1.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

399.11 20.12 88 449.68 21.46 90 12.7 6.7 2.3

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

406.00 20.32 93 454.84 21.43 94 12.0 5.5 1.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

407.24 20.45 93 407.25 20.65 93 0.0 1.0 0.0

1

388.53 24.66 92 444.39 25.50 90 14.4 3.4 -2.2

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

389.27 24.61 88 447.41 25.43 93 14.9 3.3 5.7

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

390.37 24.70 88 446.38 25.89 93 14.3 4.8 5.7

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

388.61 24.69 87 388.63 24.66 90 0.0 -0.1 3.4

1

856.89 24.82 94 984.35 26.06 96 14.9 5.0 2.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

841.22 24.59 92 965.59 26.39 95 14.8 7.3 3.3

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

851.06 24.37 97 974.70 26.22 95 14.5 7.6 -2.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

841.11 24.01 95 841.19 25.26 96 0.0 5.2 1.1

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

11/21/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

11/25/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

11/25/13

Notes
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

11/21/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

11/25/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

11/25/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

433.04 20.71 7.9 2.7 423.63 20.86 5.6 3.4

430.50 20.85 7.9 3.6 421.20 20.72 5.5 3.0

436.58 20.90 7.5 2.9 427.58 20.85 5.3 2.6

407.24 20.47 0.0 0.1 407.16 20.51 0.0 0.3

418.08 25.98 7.6 5.4 407.83 25.27 5.0 2.5

419.76 25.88 7.8 5.1 408.91 25.87 5.0 5.1

420.25 25.93 7.7 5.0 409.85 25.59 5.0 3.6

388.62 25.29 0.0 2.4 388.57 25.19 0.0 2.0

913.65 25.76 6.6 3.8 883.14 25.29 3.1 1.9

896.61 25.90 6.6 5.3 866.63 25.40 3.0 3.3

906.93 25.85 6.6 6.1 877.10 25.41 3.1 4.3

841.29 25.59 0.0 6.6 841.32 25.27 0.0 5.2
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

11/21/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

11/25/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

11/25/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

12.6 5.0 7.8 3.0 5.5 2.7

14.5 4.0 7.7 2.7 5.0 1.7

14.7 1.4 6.6 -1.5 3.0 -2.1
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

541.33 20.56 542.46 20.93 0.2 1.8

2

527.96 20.69 529.18 20.74 0.2 0.2

3

518.95 20.64 520.15 20.74 0.2 0.5

Control

527.01 20.84 526.99 20.79 0.0 -0.2

1

411.73 25.58 413.63 24.95 0.5 -2.5

2

402.48 25.40 404.30 25.39 0.5 -0.1

3

414.73 25.50 416.60 25.31 0.5 -0.8

Control

412.84 25.55 412.86 25.56 0.0 0.1

1

602.93 20.83 603.95 20.79 0.2 -0.2

2

605.56 20.62 606.60 20.71 0.2 0.4

3

594.88 20.65 595.99 20.67 0.2 0.1

Control

594.01 20.74 594.02 20.66 0.0 -0.4

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

11/25/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

11/25/13

F. PCTFE 

11/25/13

Notes: Hardness measurements not applicable to materials on this sheet.
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

11/25/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

11/25/13

F. PCTFE 

11/25/13

Notes: Hardness measurements not applicable to materials on this sheet.

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

20.65 0.4

25.45 -0.5
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

11/25/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

11/25/13

F. PCTFE 

11/25/13

Notes: Hardness measurements not applicable to materials on this sheet.

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.2 1.1 0.4

0.5 -1.2 -0.5

0.2 0.5
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

427.58 20.65 427.61 20.78 0.0 0.6

Floated in tube. Did NOT 

float after boil.

2

426.40 20.77 426.42 20.85 0.0 0.4

Floated in tube. Did NOT 

float after boil.

3

425.96 20.77 425.98 20.77 0.0 0.0

Floated in tube. Did NOT 

float after boil.

Control

423.68 20.78 423.74 20.81 0.0 0.1

Floated in tube. 

1

366.71 20.83 366.73 20.76 0.0 -0.3

Floated in tube before and 

after boil.

2

374.34 20.78 374.33 20.78 0.0 0.0

Floated in tube before and 

after boil.

3

367.69 20.80 367.69 20.88 0.0 0.4

Floated in tube before and 

after boil.

Control

371.19 20.83 371.21 20.87 0.0 0.2

Floated in tube. 

1

500.73 18.95 501.22 19.14 0.1 1.0

2

495.21 19.07 496.12 18.99 0.2 -0.4

3

529.86 19.08 531.11 19.29 0.2 1.1

Control

532.55 19.32 532.56 19.16 0.0 -0.8

G. Vespel 

SP21 

11/25/13 

H. PEEK 

11/25/13

I. Gylon 

11/25/13

Notes: Hardness measurements not applicable to materials on this sheet.
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

11/25/13 

H. PEEK 

11/25/13

I. Gylon 

11/25/13

Notes: Hardness measurements not applicable to materials on this sheet.

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

18.97 0.1

19.00 -0.4
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

11/25/13 

H. PEEK 

11/25/13

I. Gylon 

11/25/13

Notes: Hardness measurements not applicable to materials on this sheet.

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.0 0.2

0.0 -0.2

0.2 1.4 -0.2
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

403.31 20.59 75 468.44 21.13 70 16.1 2.6 -6.7

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

399.57 20.42 72 463.64 21.64 71 16.0 6.0 -1.4

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

398.94 20.32 75 462.46 21.54 73 15.9 6.0 -2.7

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

404.13 20.65 73 404.16 20.65 77 0.0 0.0 5.5

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 Repeat of 

A. FKM 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/11/13

Notes
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 Repeat of 

A. FKM 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/11/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

441.18 21.30 9.4 3.4 430.20 20.95 6.7 1.7

437.17 21.19 9.4 3.8 426.25 20.89 6.7 2.3

436.27 21.19 9.4 4.3 425.46 20.82 6.6 2.5

404.08 20.70 0.0 0.2 403.99 20.35 0.0 -1.5
Solvent: AK-225G NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 Repeat of 

A. FKM 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/11/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

16.0 4.9 9.4 3.6 6.7 3.7
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

399.31 20.49 97 449.00 21.46 96 12.4 4.7 -1.0

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

399.27 20.47 97 448.48 21.48 97 12.3 5.0 0.0

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

400.38 20.48 91 450.03 21.61 94 12.4 5.5 3.3

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

400.75 20.45 92 400.75 20.54 100 0.0 0.5 8.7

1

387.90 25.09 88 404.19 25.47 90 4.2 1.5 2.3

2

390.64 24.75 94 407.17 24.77 91 4.2 0.1 -3.2

3

391.34 25.35 94 407.52 25.61 98 4.1 1.0 4.3

Control

391.20 25.41 95 391.23 25.36 99 0.0 -0.2 4.2

1

849.05 25.57 93 897.43 25.82 94 5.7 1.0 1.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

850.67 25.56 94 899.33 25.85 95 5.7 1.1 1.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

854.01 25.48 94 901.63 25.87 97 5.6 1.6 3.2

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

853.24 25.42 96 853.39 25.56 95 0.0 0.6 -1.0

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/4/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/4/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/4/13

Notes
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/4/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/4/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/4/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

424.07 21.01 6.2 2.5 413.45 20.71 3.5 1.1

423.97 20.93 6.2 2.2 413.36 20.55 3.5 0.4

425.29 20.90 6.2 2.1 414.55 20.71 3.5 1.1

400.68 20.53 0.0 0.4

396.12 24.89 2.1 -0.8 392.87 25.25 1.3 0.6

398.99 25.13 2.1 1.5 395.67 25.14 1.3 1.6

399.56 24.83 2.1 -2.1 396.30 25.61 1.3 1.0

391.07 25.22 0.0 -0.8

862.83 1.6 847.96 25.52 -0.1 -0.2

864.79 25.45 1.7 -0.4 849.73 25.48 -0.1 -0.3

867.85 25.36 1.6 -0.5 853.01 25.51 -0.1 0.1

852.56 25.41 -0.1 0.0
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/4/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/4/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/4/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

12.4 4.6 6.2 2.3 3.6 0.4

4.2 1.1 2.1 -0.4 1.3 1.8

5.6 0.6 1.6 -0.5 0.0 -0.1
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

520.94 20.78 521.77 20.86 0.2 0.4

2

520.16 20.80 520.95 20.83 0.2 0.2

3

522.24 20.81 523.03 20.82 0.2 0.0

Control

507.14 20.83 507.15 20.77 0.0 -0.3

1

405.54 25.39 406.75 25.34 0.3 -0.2

2

412.96 25.53 414.23 25.44 0.3 -0.3

3

409.02 25.51 410.26 25.40 0.3 -0.5

Control

410.85 25.57 410.86 25.52 0.0 -0.2

1

595.35 20.63 595.74 20.64 0.1 0.1

2

599.11 20.58 599.39 20.61 0.0 0.1

3

581.47 20.25 581.86 20.58 0.1 1.7

Control

589.64 20.67 589.68 20.66 0.0 0.0

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/4/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

12/4/13

F. PCTFE 

12/4/13

Notes
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/4/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

12/4/13

F. PCTFE 

12/4/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

581.76 20.59 0.0 1.7 581.68 20.65 0.0 2.0

589.66 20.61 0.0 -0.3
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/4/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

12/4/13

F. PCTFE 

12/4/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.2 0.5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.3 -0.2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.1 0.7 0.0 1.7 0.0 2.3
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

426.16 20.77 426.55 20.66 0.1 -0.6

2

426.26 20.80 426.64 20.58 0.1 -1.1

3

425.91 20.73 426.25 20.71 0.1 -0.1

Control

429.62 20.81 429.79 20.77 0.0 -0.2

1

366.29 20.65 366.36 20.80 0.0 0.7

2

353.07 20.70 353.12 20.81 0.0 0.5

3

359.29 20.76 359.36 20.78 0.0 0.1

Control

370.26 20.90 370.32 20.80 0.0 -0.5

1

517.79 19.20 517.76 19.27 0.0 0.4

2

535.26 17.21 535.28 19.38 0.0 12.6

3

499.78 17.74 499.77 19.16 0.0 8.0

Control

549.20 19.19 549.16 19.04 0.0 -0.8

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/4/13 

H. PEEK 

12/4/13

I. Gylon 

12/4/13

Notes
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/4/13 

H. PEEK 

12/4/13

I. Gylon 

12/4/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

426.36 20.82 0.0 0.1

535.22 19.19 0.0 11.5 535.16 19.12 0.0 11.1

499.73 19.12 0.0 7.8 499.67 19.06 0.0 7.5

549.11 0.0 0.0
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/4/13 

H. PEEK 

12/4/13

I. Gylon 

12/4/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.0 -0.4 0.0 0.1

0.0 0.9

0.0 7.8 0.0 9.6 0.0 9.3
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

505.44 19.22 505.37 18.95 0.0 -1.4

2

518.35 19.12 518.31 19.16 0.0 0.2

3

523.05 19.21 523.03 19.14 0.0 -0.4

Control

482.91 19.16 482.87 18.98 0.0 -0.9

1

500.65 19.02 500.64 19.07 0.0 0.2

2

500.80 19.05 500.78 18.77 0.0 -1.5

3

496.88 19.12 496.84 18.95 0.0 -0.9

Control

520.23 19.09 520.22 19.11 0.0 0.1

1

2

3

Control

Rerun of 

I. Gylon 

12/10/13

Second

Rerun of 

I. Gylon 

12/17/13

Notes
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

Rerun of 

I. Gylon 

12/10/13

Second

Rerun of 

I. Gylon 

12/17/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

6 day 

diameter

6 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

19.10 -0.6

19.04 -0.6

500.72 18.88 0.0 -0.7

520.21 19.08 0.0 -0.1
Solvent: Solstice PF NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

Rerun of 

I. Gylon 

12/10/13

Second

Rerun of 

I. Gylon 

12/17/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.0 0.4

0.0 -0.8 0.0 -0.7
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

400.81 20.61 71 424.44 20.97 63 5.9 1.7 -11.3

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

402.04 20.61 72 425.87 20.85 65 5.9 1.1 -9.7

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

397.99 20.52 73 421.29 20.95 68 5.9 2.1 -6.8

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

402.73 20.48 75 402.75 20.44 71 0.0 -0.2 -5.3

1

387.42 24.95 81 410.83 25.51 71 6.0 2.2 -12.3

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

391.42 24.68 79 414.84 25.62 71 6.0 3.8 -10.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

387.23 24.59 79 410.56 25.35 72 6.0 3.1 -8.9

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

390.93 24.79 79 390.94 24.84 81 0.0 0.2 2.5

1

855.45 25.45 67 910.29 25.75 66 6.4 1.2 -1.5

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

848.72 25.32 70 902.88 25.78 67 6.4 1.8 -4.3

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

846.92 24.90 70 899.78 25.90 66 6.2 4.0 -5.7

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

852.16 25.35 72 852.22 25.42 70 0.0 0.3 -2.8

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/10 /13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/10 /13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/10 /13

Notes
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/10 /13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/10 /13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/10 /13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

415.13 20.85 3.6 1.2 410.87 20.70 2.5 0.4

416.56 20.78 3.6 0.8 412.23 20.67 2.5 0.3

412.24 20.84 3.6 1.6 408.00 20.61 2.5 0.4

402.65 20.51 0.0 0.1 402.57 20.41 0.0 -0.3

401.43 25.42 3.6 1.9 396.98 25.27 2.5 1.3

405.55 25.56 3.6 3.6 401.10 25.47 2.5 3.2

401.23 25.66 3.6 4.3 396.72 25.44 2.5 3.5

390.86 25.14 0.0 1.4 390.72 25.11 -0.1 1.3

869.92 25.48 1.7 0.1 853.35 25.36 -0.2 -0.4

863.30 25.52 1.7 0.8 846.90 25.37 -0.2 0.2

861.26 25.37 1.7 1.9 845.24 25.15 -0.2 1.0

852.14 25.43 0.0 0.3 852.53 25.32 0.0 -0.1
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM Cpd. 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/10 /13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/10 /13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/10 /13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

5.9 1.8 3.6 1.0 2.6 0.7

6.0 2.9 3.6 1.9 2.5 1.4

6.3 2.0 1.7 0.6 -0.3 0.4
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

516.57 20.73 517.10 20.73 0.1 0.0

2

515.17 20.72 515.71 20.73 0.1 0.0

3

521.58 20.85 522.13 20.85 0.1 0.0

Control

521.45 20.79 521.44 20.81 0.0 0.1

1

411.60 25.56 412.79 25.58 0.3 0.1

2

413.00 25.56 414.17 25.38 0.3 -0.7

3

410.53 25.58 411.68 25.41 0.3 -0.7

Control

411.24 25.56 411.23 25.50 0.0 -0.3

1

588.73 20.63 589.00 20.62 0.0 0.0

2

599.71 20.71 599.93 20.71 0.0 0.0

3

583.58 20.69 583.91 20.74 0.1 0.2

Control

589.29 20.63 589.29 20.66 0.0 0.1

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/10 /13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

 12/10 /13

F. PCTFE 

12/10 /13

Notes
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/10 /13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

 12/10 /13

F. PCTFE 

12/10 /13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/10 /13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

 12/10 /13

F. PCTFE 

12/10 /13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.1 0.0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.3 -0.2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.0 -0.1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

428.62 20.88 429.27 20.78 0.2 -0.5

2

429.71 20.83 430.32 20.83 0.1 0.0

3

421.13 20.80 421.65 20.79 0.1 0.0

Control

428.79 20.78 428.83 20.75 0.0 -0.1

1

367.51 20.80 367.72 20.79 0.1 0.0

2

368.44 20.81 368.65 20.83 0.1 0.1

3

371.61 20.80 371.85 20.77 0.1 -0.2

Control

372.07 20.80 372.07 20.76 0.0 -0.2

1

520.54 19.23 521.15 19.04 0.1 -1.0

2

495.97 19.15 496.45 19.01 0.1 -0.7

3

537.41 19.02 538.02 19.07 0.1 0.2

Control

498.75 19.11 498.73 19.10 0.0 -0.1

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/10/13 

H. PEEK 

12/10/13

I. Gylon 

12/10/13

Notes
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/10/13 

H. PEEK 

12/10/13

I. Gylon 

12/10/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes
Solvent: L-14780 NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/10/13 

H. PEEK 

12/10/13

I. Gylon 

12/10/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.1 0.0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.1 0.2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.1 -0.4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

400.35 20.37 73 472.79 22.17 71 18.1 8.8 -2.7

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

400.11 20.40 73 471.60 22.26 69 17.9 9.1 -5.5

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

406.79 20.53 75 477.34 22.27 68 17.3 8.5 -9.3

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

407.51 20.45 74 407.51 20.55 75 0.0 0.5 1.4

1

389.70 25.07 82 395.86 25.09 79 1.6 0.1 -3.7

2

387.49 24.97 81 394.58 25.07 79 1.8 0.4 -2.5

3

388.81 25.32 80 395.92 25.30 80 1.8 -0.1 0.0

Control

390.89 24.83 79 390.89 24.76 80 0.0 -0.3 1.3

1

838.93 25.41 69 947.80 26.06 62 13.0 2.6 -10.1

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

2

850.75 25.36 70 958.73 26.26 64 12.7 3.5 -8.6

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

3

855.40 25.29 70 967.03 26.35 62 13.1 4.2 -11.4

weight unstable after 15 min 

exposure

Control

833.72 25.32 68 833.75 25.46 69 0.0 0.5 1.5

 A. FKM 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/12/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/12/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/12/13

Notes
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/12/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/12/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/12/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

438.02 21.36 9.4 4.8 424.26 20.95 6.0 2.8

437.57 21.47 9.4 5.2 423.93 21.03 6.0 3.1

444.25 21.53 9.2 4.9 430.91 21.16 5.9 3.1

407.43 20.48 0.0 0.2 407.36 20.45 0.0 0.0

393.42 25.85 1.0 3.1 392.06 25.05 0.6 -0.1

391.72 25.94 1.1 3.9 390.24 25.00 0.7 0.1

393.05 25.56 1.1 0.9 391.56 25.08 0.7 -0.9

390.86 24.89 0.0 0.2 390.73 25.01 0.0 0.7

871.96 25.77 3.9 1.4 843.91 25.20 0.6 -0.8

883.60 25.68 3.9 1.3 855.50 25.18 0.6 -0.7

889.50 25.88 4.0 2.3 860.64 25.25 0.6 -0.2

833.52 25.58 0.0 1.0 833.00 25.25 -0.1 -0.3
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

 A. FKM 

V0747-75 

(Viton A) 

12/12/13

B. FFKM 

(Kalrez) 

12/12/13

C. NBR 

(Buna N) 

12/12/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

17.8 8.3 9.3 4.8 6.0 3.0

1.7 0.4 1.1 2.4 0.7 -1.0

12.9 2.9 4.0 0.6 0.7 -0.3
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

524.80 20.80 525.11 20.86 0.1 0.3

2

523.50 20.78 523.83 20.78 0.1 0.0

3

528.00 20.83 528.34 20.84 0.1 0.0

Control

528.67 20.84 528.64 20.64 0.0 -1.0

1

418.41 25.52 418.95 25.47 0.1 -0.2

2

412.81 25.43 413.34 25.46 0.1 0.1

3

414.88 25.46 415.41 25.29 0.1 -0.7

Control

412.62 25.45 412.63 25.48 0.0 0.1

1

598.29 20.63 598.52 20.66 0.0 0.1

2

602.07 20.65 602.27 20.73 0.0 0.4

3

596.43 20.67 596.65 20.67 0.0 0.0

Control

596.38 20.65 596.37 20.64 0.0 0.0

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/12/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

12/12/13

F. PCTFE 

12/12/13

Notes
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/12/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

12/12/13

F. PCTFE 

12/12/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

D. PTFE 

Algoflon 

12/12/13

E. FEP 

Teflon 

12/12/13

F. PCTFE 

12/12/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.1 1.1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.1 -0.4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.0 0.2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

Initial 

weight 

mg 

Initial 

diameter 

mm

Initial 

Shore A 

hardness

Final 

weight

Final 

diameter 

mm

Final 

Shore A 

hardness

% change

weight

% change 

diameter

% change 

hardness Observed Visual Changes

1

432.36 20.81 433.19 20.79 0.2 -0.1

2

425.11 20.80 426.94 20.79 0.4 0.0

3

428.12 20.78 428.86 20.77 0.2 0.0

Control

428.58 20.80 428.60 20.81 0.0 0.0

1

366.72 20.78 367.00 20.74 0.1 -0.2

2

368.59 20.79 368.80 20.79 0.1 0.0

3

371.99 20.79 372.18 20.79 0.1 0.0

Control

369.42 20.76 369.40 20.77 0.0 0.0

1

495.27 18.91 495.45 19.13 0.0 1.2

2

527.50 19.04 527.76 19.02 0.0 -0.1

3

497.68 19.14 497.89 19.19 0.0 0.2

Control

492.45 19.10 492.47 19.09 0.0 -0.1

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/12/13 

H. PEEK 

12/12/13

I. Gylon 

12/12/13

Notes
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/12/13 

H. PEEK 

12/12/13

I. Gylon 

12/12/13

Notes

24 hour 

weight

24 hour 

diameter

24 hour 

% change 

weight

24 hour 

% change 

diameter

7 day 

weight

7 day 

diameter

7 day 

% change 

weight

7 day

% change 

diameter Observed Visual Changes

495.25 18.93 0.0 0.1

492.46 19.12 0.0 0.1
Solvent: Solvokane NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST HCFC-225cb Replacement Study

Material: Sample

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

1

2

3

Control

G. Vespel 

SP21 

12/12/13 

H. PEEK 

12/12/13

I. Gylon 

12/12/13

Notes

Initial ave. 

weight % 

change

Initial ave. 

diameter % 

change

24 hour ave. 

weight % 

change

24 hour ave. 

diameter % 

change

7 day ave. 

weight % 

change

7 day ave. 

diameter % 

change

0.3 -0.1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.1 -0.1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST

% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G run 1 12.6% 7.8% 5.5%

AK-225G run 2 16.0% 9.4% 6.7%

Solstice PF 12.4% 6.2% 3.6%

L14780 5.9% 3.6% 2.6%

Solvokane 17.8% 9.3% 6.0%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G run 1 AK-225G run 2 Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of FKM elastomer after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST

% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 14.5% 7.7% 5.0%

Solstice PF 4.2% 2.1% 1.3%

L14780 6.0% 3.6% 2.5%

Solvokane 1.7% 1.1% 0.7%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of FFKM (Kalrez) after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
NONMETALS COMPATIBILITY IMMERSION TEST

% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 14.7% 6.6% 3.0%

Solstice PF 5.6% 1.6% 0.0%

L14780 6.3% 1.7% -0.3%

Solvokane 12.9% 4.0% 0.7%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of NBR elastomer (Buna N) after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 0.2%

Solstice PF 0.2%

L14780 0.1%

Solvokane 0.1%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of PTFE after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 0.5%

Solstice PF 0.3%

L14780 0.3%

Solvokane 0.1%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of FEP after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 0.2%

Solstice PF 0.1%

L14780 0.0%

Solvokane 0.0%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of PCTFE after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 0.0%

Solstice PF 0.0%

L14780 0.1%

Solvokane 0.3%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of Vespel after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 0.0%

Solstice PF 0.0%

L14780 0.1%

Solvokane 0.1%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of PEEK after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
% weight change 24 hour weight change 7 day weight change

AK-225G 0.2%

Solstice PF 0.0%

L14780 0.1%

Solvokane 0.0%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AK-225G Solstice PF L14780 Solvokane

Percent weight change

Solvent

Weight Gain of Gylon after 15 minute boil 

Initial weight gain

After 24 hours

after 7 days
7

APPENDIX G—INITIAL OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY TEST REPORTS

Various initial oxygen compatibility test reports can be found in the following sections within 

appendix G:

G.1 MSFC Reports for Oxygen Compatibility Tests Performed for the DLA Study 

G.1.1 MSFC Solstice 1233zd(E) Solvent Test Report, May 8, 2013 

G.1.2 MSFC L-14780 Solvent Test Report, May 8, 2013 

G.1.3 MSFC Solvokane Solvent Test Report, May 8, 2013 

G.2 JSC-WSTF Solvent Oxygen Compatibility Testing, February 19, 2014 






WSTF Solvent 

Oxygen 

Compatibility 

Testing

Susana Harper 

Fred Juarez

Presented 2-19-2014
Summary of Oxygen Compatibility Testing

• AIT Solvent Testing

– Evaluation of methodology for increased reliability

– Purpose: Establish solvent ranking based on reaction temperature

– Test Plan Acceptance Criteria: No ignition preferred. Beyond that, the following 

criteria have been used. Suitability may require additional testing.

• Test 13 / G86 Mechanical Impact Testing Lox Impact Testing

– Purpose: To correlate to historical data

– Test Plan Acceptance Criteria: All solvents that pass testing above 27J (20 ft-lb) 

or show anomalous results may be considered for further testing or evaluation

• Test 13B/ G86 Pressure Threshold

– Purpose: Establish solvent ranking based on reaction threshold pressure

• Category A AIT < 250 oF Not recommended for use in oxygen systems

• Category B AIT 250 oF to 400 oF Caution when used in oxygen systems

• Category C AIT > 400 oF Recommended for use in oxygen systems
AIT Solvent Testing Summary Recommendation

• Historical AK225 showed TL’s @ 50 and 2000psi

• Concern: TL indicates inadequate test conditions for 

volatile solvents vs. a true >800F AIT

• AIT Test Method

– Increased fuel size (1000mg)

– For low pressure testing if TL is obtained consider

• testing at higher pressures,70psia or higher if necessary

– Standard Thermocouple placement

– Chilled Ice Bath for samples, data to follow

– Standard 3 purges, data to follow

• Propose method for ASTM G72 solvent revision
AIT Evaluation: Purges, Sample Size, Pressure

• Historical AK225 showed TL’s @ 50 and 2000psi, likely due to inadequate conditions

• Recommendation: 3 purges, No discernable difference in performance

• Recommendation: Increased fuel to 1000mg

• Recommendation: When testing at low Pressures increase Pressure if TL obtained

• s
AIT Data

• Solvents Ranks based on AIT, >400 0F recommended for use with

Oxygen

3M L-14780

3M L-14780

3M L-14780
Solvent AIT vs. Pressure
Chill vs. No chill: Solvokane Azeotropic Solvent

• 50psia

– Chill average AIT 4960F, STDDEV 22

– No Chill AIT 4760F

• 70psia

– Chill average AIT 4890F, STDDEV 29

– No Chill AIT 4930F

• 2000 psia

– Chill average AIT 3050F, STDDEV 3

– No Chill AIT 3010F

• All No chill data for Solvokane was within standard 

deviation of chill data

• All final testing was performed with chilling
Test 13 - Mechanical Impact Testing

• Test 13A / ASTM G86:

– PURPOSE: To correlate to historical data, All solvents that pass

testing above 27J (20 ft-lb) or show anomalous results may be

considered for further testing or evaluation

– Impact energy of 97.6 J (72 ft-lb), If fail Energy threshold

– Ambient LOX

– If 1 specimen reacts out of 20 continue to test 40 additional 

samples, discontinue if 2nd failure

• Test 13B / ASTM G86 Pressure Threshold Pressure

– Purpose: Establish Solvent Ranking based on reaction threshold 

Pressure

– Impact energy 97.6J (72 ft-lb)

– Identify pressure threshold for reaction
3M L-14780

• Material Remained IceAfter Pressurization

• Test 13A– Energy Threshold atAmbient Pressure

• Reacted at 45ft-lbs

• Passed @ 40 ft-lbs (0/20),

• Test 13BP – Pressure Threshold at 72 ft-lbs

• Reacted at 8,000psi

• Passed @ 7500 psi, 72 ft-lbs

• Evaluation was performed to ensure13BP sample retained
Solstice Performance Fluid

• Material Remained IceAfter Pressurization

• Test 13A– Energy Threshold atAmbient Pressure

• Reacted @ 20 ft-lbs

• Passed @ 15 ft-lbs,

• Test 13BP –Pressure Threshold at 72 ft-lbs

• Reacted @ 8,000 psi, 72fts-lbs

• Passed @ 7500 psi, 72 ft-lbs

• Evaluation was performed to ensure13BP sample retained
Solvokane

• Material Remained IceAfter Pressurization

• Test 13A– Energy Threshold atAmbient Pressure

• Reacted @ 10 ft-lbs (lowest energy level)

• No threshold defined

• Test 13BP – Pressure Threshold at 72 ft-lbs

• Reacted @ 500 psi, 72 ft-lbs (lowest pressure level)

• No threshold defined

• Evaluation was performed to ensure13BP sample retained
Mechanical Impact 13A- Energy Threshold

Sample

3M-L4780, 45ft-lbs Solstice, 45ft-lbs Solvokane, 45ft-lbs

Striker Pin

Cup

Lowest Reaction 

Energy

45ft-lbs

Lowest Reaction 

Energy

20ft-lbs

Lowest Reaction 

Energy

10ft-lbs (limit)

All solvents that pass

above 27J (20 ft-lb) or

show anomalous

results may be

considered for further

testing or evaluation
Test 13BP –Pressure Threshold @ 72 ft-lbs

Lowest Reaction 

Pressure 

8000 psi

Lowest Reaction 

Pressure 

8000psi

Lowest Reaction 

Pressure

500psi (limit)

Sample

Striker Pin

Cup

No recommended

acceptance criteria, 

Establish Solvent Ranking

based on reaction

threshold Pressure

3M-L4780, 8000psi Solstice, 8000psi Solvokane, 500psi
8

APPENDIX H—NONVOLATILE RESIDUE CLEANING EFFECTIVENESS TEST DATA

Nonvolatile residue removal efficiency test data sheets and graphs by contaminant are given 

in appendix H.
Contaminant: Mineral Oil

Concentration: 2.0884 mg/mL (10.442 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 24.03474 24.04039 0.00565 23.75343 23.75359 0.00016 0.00581 99.6%

AK-225G - A2 24.10997 24.11677 0.00680 23.88418 23.88435 0.00017 0.00697 99.6%

AK-225G - A3 24.10223 24.11188 0.00965 23.96211 23.96224 0.00013 0.00978 100.1%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 23.91832 23.91846 0.00014

Panel Control 

no contamination 23.88720 23.88758 0.00038 23.86872 23.86892 0.00020 0.00058

Solstice - S1 23.85308 23.86370 0.01062 23.90526 23.90543 0.00017 0.01079 99.7%

Solstice - S2 24.09097 24.09988 0.00891 23.84934 23.84948 0.00014 0.00905 100.0%

Solstice - S3 23.88189 23.89254 0.01065 23.72591 23.72600 0.00009 0.01074 100.5%

Solstice control solvent 

background 23.77466 23.77483 0.00017

L-14780 - L1 23.84173 23.85245 0.01072 24.03850 24.03859 0.00009 0.01081 100.5%

L-14780 - L2 23.89091 23.90242 0.01151 23.90161 23.90172 0.00011 0.01162 100.3%

L-14780 - L3 23.68715 23.69940 0.01225 23.73556 23.73562 0.00006 0.01231 100.7%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 23.75870 23.75885 0.00015

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Mineral Oil

Concentration: 2.0884 mg/mL (10.442 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 99.6% 99.7% 100.5%

2 99.6% 100.0% 100.3%

3 100.1% 100.5% 100.7%

Ave 99.8% 100.1% 100.5%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Mineral Oil Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Mobil DTE25 hydraulic fluid

Concentration: 2.0437 mg/ml (10.2125 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.09516 2.10662 0.01146 2.12676 2.12682 0.00006 0.01152 99.7%

AK-225G - A2 2.13733 2.14946 0.01213 2.08740 2.08746 0.00006 0.01219 99.7%

AK-225G - A3 2.19636 2.20768 0.01132 2.17934 2.17937 0.00003 0.01135 99.9%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.09410 2.09412 0.00002

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.12337 2.12345 0.00008 2.06650 2.06656 0.00006 0.00014

Solstice - S1 2.23722 2.24826 0.01104 2.07818 2.07824 0.00006 0.01110 99.6%

Solstice - S2 2.15522 2.16326 0.00804 2.08608 2.08611 0.00003 0.00807 99.9%

Solstice - S3 2.13073 2.13731 0.00658 2.06964 2.06964 0.00000 0.00658 100.3%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.08975 2.08980 0.00005

L-14780 - L1 2.09117 2.09834 0.00717 2.05816 2.05819 0.00003 0.00720 99.9%

L-14780 - L2 2.23524 2.24206 0.00682 2.08558 2.08567 0.00009 0.00691 99.0%

L-14780 - L3 2.23795 2.24802 0.01007 2.12965 2.12973 0.00008 0.01015 99.4%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.00387 2.00397 0.00010

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Mobil DTE25 hydraulic fluid

Concentration: 2.0437 mg/ml (10.2125 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 99.7% 99.6% 99.9%

2 99.7% 99.9% 99.0%

3 99.9% 100.3% 99.4%

Ave 99.74464 99.93986 99.40987

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Mobil DTE25 Oil Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: MIL-PRF-83282 Brayco Micronic 882

Concentration: 2.0953 mg/ml (10.4765 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.09859 2.10406 0.00547 1.93526 1.93530 0.00004 0.00551 99.3%

AK-225G - A2 2.29394 2.30096 0.00702 2.19347 2.19352 0.00005 0.00707 99.3%

AK-225G - A3 2.09445 2.10551 0.01106 2.15331 2.15341 0.00010 0.01116 99.1%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.22900 2.22900 0.00000

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.22255 2.22271 0.00016 2.17174 2.17189 0.00015 0.00031

Solstice - S1 2.20023 2.20269 0.00246 1.95175 1.95192 0.00017 0.00263 93.4%

Solstice - S2 2.04476 2.04666 0.00190 2.23848 2.23866 0.00018 0.00208 91.1%

Solstice - S3 2.08768 2.09107 0.00339 2.05307 2.05317 0.00010 0.00349 97.1%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.08970 2.08976 0.00006

L-14780 - L1 2.08336 2.08902 0.00566 2.18565 2.18594 0.00029 0.00595 95.0%

L-14780 - L2 2.15538 2.15851 0.00313 2.06336 2.06432 0.00096 0.00409 75.7%

L-14780 - L3 2.16020 2.16690 0.00670 2.10026 2.10047 0.00021 0.00691 96.9%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.16280 2.16294 0.00014

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

*Highlighted orange cells: Spilled some sample S3 rinse andto sample L2 pan, results invalid.

Yellow highlighted cells: Only 20-26% of inital target contaminant mass collected. Results suspect. Repeat test.
Contaminant: MIL-PRF-83282 Brayco Micronic 882

Concentration: 2.0953 mg/ml (10.4765 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 99.3% 93.4% 95.0%

2 99.3% 91.1% 75.7%

3 99.1% 97.1% 96.9%

Ave 99.22359 93.85296 89.20096

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

MIL-PRF-83282 Oil Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate

Concentration: 2.0024 mg/ml (10.012 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.13325 2.14054 0.00729 2.12663 2.12693 0.00030 0.00759 99.2%

AK-225G - A2 2.13913 2.14923 0.01010 2.14757 2.14793 0.00036 0.01046 98.8%

AK-225G - A3 2.12047 2.13269 0.01222 2.09966 2.09999 0.00033 0.01255 99.3%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.16490 2.16514 0.00024

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.11294 2.11323 0.00029 2.09938 2.09964 0.00026 0.00055

Solstice - S1 2.05348 2.06216 0.00868 2.10695 2.10720 0.00025 0.00893 99.9%

Solstice - S2 2.07035 2.08217 0.01182 2.00609 2.00633 0.00024 0.01206 100.0%

Solstice - S3 2.11882 2.12612 0.00730 2.14083 2.14108 0.00025 0.00755 99.9%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.12534 2.12538 0.00004

L-14780 - L1 2.02187 2.06216 0.04029 2.26706 2.26727 0.00021 0.04050 100.1%

L-14780 - L2 2.14400 2.14427 0.00027 2.30833 2.30856 0.00023 0.00050 110.0%

L-14780 - L3 2.23760 2.24636 0.00876 2.13124 2.13150 0.00026 0.00902 99.8%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.11275 2.11291 0.00016

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

*Orange color block: Excessive or insufficient total NVR mass collected. Results suspect. Repeat test.
Contaminant: Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate

Concentration: 2.0024 mg/ml (10.012 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 99.2% 99.9% 100.1%

2 98.8% 100.0% 110.0%

3 99.3% 99.9% 99.8%

Ave 99.06935 99.91561 103.2809

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

110.0%

115.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Sebacate Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Synthetic Sebum (fingerprint)

Concentration: 2.0036 mg/ml (10.018 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.25918 2.26567 0.00649 2.11363 2.11364 0.00001 0.00650 100.6%

AK-225G - A2 2.12524 2.13188 0.00664 2.13601 2.13604 0.00003 0.00667 100.3%

AK-225G - A3 2.21280 2.22096 0.00816 2.12693 2.12698 0.00005 0.00821 100.0%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.15760 2.15765 0.00005 2.14500 2.14507

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.07784 2.07796 0.00012

Solstice - S1 2.12054 2.12787 0.00733 2.03100 2.03103 0.00003 0.00736 100.3%

Solstice - S2 2.13139 2.14283 0.01144 2.07083 2.07086 0.00003 0.01147 100.2%

Solstice - S3 2.05551 2.06628 0.01077 2.09393 2.09405 0.00012 0.01089 99.3%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.14964 2.14976 0.00012

L-14780 - L1 2.16208 2.16884 0.00676 2.06914 2.06955 0.00041 0.00717 94.9%

L-14780 - L2 2.05356 2.05834 0.00478 2.19252 2.19392 0.00140 0.00618 77.7%

L-14780 - L3 2.19633 2.20742 0.01109 2.18895 2.18919 0.00024 0.01133 98.3%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.25937 2.25945 0.00008

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.

*Yellow highlighted cell: Result significantly out-of-family with other two samples. Repeat test. 
Contaminant: Synthetic Sebum (fingerprint)

Concentration: 2.0036 mg/ml (10.018 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 100.6% 100.3% 94.9%

2 100.3% 100.2% 77.7%

3 100.0% 99.3% 98.3%

Ave 100.3098 99.93406 90.29196

75.0%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Synthetic Sebum Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Krytox 240AC grease

Concentration: 200.61 mg/100mL (10.0305 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 24.03477 24.04514 0.01037 23.75339 23.75344 0.00005 0.01042 99.5%

AK-225G - A2 24.11012 24.12024 0.01012 23.88418 23.88417 -0.00001 0.01011 100.1%

AK-225G - A3 24.10244 24.11211 0.00967 23.96206 23.96209 0.00003 0.00970 99.7%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 23.91810 23.91810 0.00000

Panel Control 

no contamination 23.88727 23.88724 -0.00003 23.86862 23.86869 0.00007 0.00004

Solstice - S1 23.85303 23.86330 0.01027 23.90516 23.90516 0.00000 0.01027 100.0%

Solstice - S2 24.09091 24.10165 0.01074 23.84921 23.84926 0.00005 0.01079 99.5%

Solstice - S3 23.88186 23.89164 0.00978 23.72588 23.72585 -0.00003 0.00975 100.3%

Solstice control solvent 

background 23.77466 23.77473 0.00007

L-14780 - L1 23.84168 23.85205 0.01037 24.03843 24.03855 0.00012 0.01049 98.8%

L-14780 - L2 23.89081 23.90067 0.00986 23.90155 23.90158 0.00003 0.00989 99.7%

L-14780 - L3 23.68711 23.69691 0.00980 23.73552 23.73554 0.00002 0.00982 99.8%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 23.75864 23.75946 0.00082

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Krytox 240AC grease

Concentration: 200.61 mg/100mL (10.0305 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 99.5% 100.0% 98.8%

2 100.1% 99.5% 99.7%

3 99.7% 100.3% 99.8%

Ave 99.76993 99.94783 99.40202

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Krytox Grease Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Big Red (Crane Grease)

Concentration: 2.0092 mg/ml (10.046 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 24.03464 24.04525 0.01061 23.75339 23.75339 0.00000 0.01061 100.2%

AK-225G - A2 24.10996 24.12066 0.01070 23.88414 23.88403 -0.00011 0.01059 101.2%

AK-225G - A3 24.10216 24.11173 0.00957 23.96211 23.96195 -0.00016 0.00941 101.9%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 23.91816 23.91818 0.00002

Panel Control 

no contamination 23.88726 23.88737 0.00011 23.86868 23.86866 -0.00002 0.00009

Solstice - S1 23.85306 23.86389 0.01083 23.90525 23.90525 0.00000 0.01083 100.2%

Solstice - S2 24.09098 24.09657 0.00559 23.84934 23.84932 -0.00002 0.00557 100.7%

Solstice - S3 23.88194 23.88929 0.00735 23.72594 23.72591 -0.00003 0.00732 100.7%

Solstice control solvent 

background 23.77470 23.77468 -0.00002

L-14780 - L1 23.84176 23.85173 0.00997 24.03849 24.03857 0.00008 0.01005 99.4%

L-14780 - L2 23.89087 23.89757 0.00670 23.90162 23.90162 0.00000 0.00670 100.3%

L-14780 - L3 23.68723 23.69284 0.00561 23.73559 23.73571 0.00012 0.00573 98.2%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 23.75874 23.75876 0.00002

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Big Red (Crane Grease)

Concentration: 2.0092 mg/ml (10.046 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 100.2% 100.2% 99.4%

2 101.2% 100.7% 100.3%

3 101.9% 100.7% 98.2%

Ave 101.1142 100.5286 99.31448

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Crane Grease Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: WD-40 water displacing oil

Concentration: 2.0092 mg/ml (10.046 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.08520 2.08764 0.00244 2.11896 2.11900 0.00004 0.00248 99.2%

AK-225G - A2 2.17867 2.18116 0.00249 2.11343 2.11348 0.00005 0.00254 98.8%

AK-225G - A3 2.19427 2.19677 0.00250 2.12739 2.12744 0.00005 0.00255 98.8%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.08856 2.08858 0.00002

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.03361 2.03367 0.00006 2.12160 2.12161 0.00001 0.00007

Solstice - S1 2.18524 2.18808 0.00284 2.26753 2.26754 0.00001 0.00285 100.4%

Solstice - S2 2.09419 2.09721 0.00302 2.27557 2.27558 0.00001 0.00303 100.3%

Solstice - S3 2.07018 2.07300 0.00282 2.04366 2.04368 0.00002 0.00284 100.0%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.06507 2.06514 0.00007

L-14780 - L1 2.14996 2.15170 0.00174 2.23583 2.23591 0.00008 0.00182 96.5%

L-14780 - L2 2.16084 2.16192 0.00108 2.14286 2.14295 0.00009 0.00117 93.4%

L-14780 - L3 2.07347 2.07452 0.00105 2.28748 2.28749 0.00001 0.00106 101.1%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.12420 2.12429 0.00009

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: WD-40 water displacing oil

Concentration: 2.0092 mg/ml (10.046 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 99.2% 100.4% 96.5%

2 98.8% 100.3% 93.4%

3 98.8% 100.0% 101.1%

Ave 98.92837 100.2342 96.98003

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

WD-40 Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Brayco Micronic 882 Retest

Concentration: 2.0283 mg/ml (10.1415 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.17642 2.18695 0.01053 2.13231 2.13273 0.00042 0.01095 97.5%

AK-225G - A2 2.13182 2.14358 0.01176 2.04157 2.04183 0.00026 0.01202 99.1%

AK-225G - A3 2.03029 2.04139 0.01110 2.24539 2.24571 0.00032 0.01142 98.5%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.11493 2.11508 0.00015

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.27257 2.27274 0.00017 2.17896 2.17913 0.00017 0.00034

Solstice - S1 2.20672 2.21749 0.01077 2.13848 2.13848 0.00000 0.01077 101.4%

Solstice - S2 2.17076 2.18190 0.01114 2.15884 2.15901 0.00017 0.01131 99.8%

Solstice - S3 2.05896 2.06961 0.01065 2.20407 2.20428 0.00021 0.01086 99.4%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.06201 2.06212 0.00011

L-14780 - L1 2.11277 2.12004 0.00727 2.08327 2.08347 0.00020 0.00747 99.3%

L-14780 - L2 2.10725 2.11322 0.00597 2.06618 2.06635 0.00017 0.00614 99.7%

L-14780 - L3 2.12573 2.13420 0.00847 2.17529 2.17542 0.00013 0.00860 100.2%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.05949 2.05954 0.00005

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is 

subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Brayco Micronic 882 Retest

Concentration: 2.0283 mg/ml (10.1415 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 97.5% 101.4% 99.3%

2 99.1% 99.8% 99.7%

3 98.5% 99.4% 100.2%

Ave 98.33248 100.2267 99.73788

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

MIL-PRF-83282 Oil Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed (run2)

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate Run 2

Concentration: 2.0225 mg/ml (10.115 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.14119 2.14622 0.00503 2.11045 2.11058 0.00013 0.00516 100.2%

AK-225G - A2 2.11645 2.12819 0.01174 2.13177 2.13189 0.00012 0.01186 100.2%

AK-225G - A3 2.13105 2.13822 0.00717 2.10654 2.10672 0.00018 0.00735 99.4%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.09112 2.09126 0.00014

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.12548 2.12568 0.00020 2.06887 2.06901 0.00014 0.00034 100.0%

Solstice - S1 2.11505 2.12718 0.01213 2.15723 2.15741 0.00018 0.01231 99.7%

Solstice - S2 2.11920 2.12735 0.00815 2.09081 2.09099 0.00018 0.00833 99.5%

Solstice - S3 2.13209 2.13384 0.00175 2.14509 2.14528 0.00019 0.00194 96.8%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.12245 2.12268 0.00023

L-14780 - L1 2.16937 2.17790 0.00853 2.08487 2.08507 0.00020 0.00873 99.3%

L-14780 - L2 2.15868 2.17047 0.01179 2.13559 2.13563 0.00004 0.01183 100.9%

L-14780 - L3 2.14933 2.16096 0.01163 2.15043 2.15058 0.00015 0.01178 99.9%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.08958 2.08969 0.00011

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

*Orange highlighted cell: Only 20% of inital target contaminant mass collected. Results suspect. Repeat test.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate Run 2

Concentration: 2.0225 mg/ml (10.115 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 100.2% 99.7% 99.3%

2 100.2% 99.5% 100.9%

3 99.4% 96.8% 99.9%

99.8%

99.5%

98.9%

Ave 99.9% 99.0% 100.0%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Sebacate Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed (Run 2 & 3)

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate Run 3

Concentration: 2.0225 mg/ml (10.115 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1

AK-225G - A2

AK-225G - A3

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.10224 2.10232 0.00008

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.12076 2.12099 0.00023 2.14222 2.14237 0.00015 0.00038

Solstice - S1 2.12589 2.13894 0.01305 2.10883 2.10893 0.00010 0.01315 99.8%

Solstice - S2 2.13095 2.14436 0.01341 2.07813 2.07828 0.00015 0.01356 99.5%

Solstice - S3 2.14430 2.15793 0.01363 2.12842 2.12865 0.00023 0.01386 98.9%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.13211 2.13214 0.00003

L-14780 - L1

L-14780 - L2

L-14780 - L3

L-14780 control solvent 

background

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Retest of Solstice only. Tests performed parallel to Synthetic Sebum run 2; AK-225G solvent background and Panel Control are same as Sebum run 2.
Contaminant: Di-2-ethylhexyl sebacate Run 3

Concentration: 2.0225 mg/ml (10.115 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 99.8%

2 99.5%

3 98.9%

Ave 99.4%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Sebacate Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed (Run 3)

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Synthetic Sebum Run 2

Concentration: 2.0335 mg/ml (10.1675 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

Test Run

(all weights in gms) 

Test Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

Test Rinse 

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse 

NVR mass

AK Rinse 

Beaker initial 

weight

AK Rinse NVR 

in Beaker

AK Rinse 

NVR Mass

Total NVR 

Mass collected

Test Solvent 

Removal % 

Efficiency

AK-225G - A1 2.15952 2.16753 0.00801 2.09786 2.09794 0.00008 0.00809 100.0%

AK-225G - A2 2.12413 2.13196 0.00783 2.12233 2.12240 0.00007 0.00790 100.1%

AK-225G - A3 2.16100 2.16858 0.00758 2.15904 2.15916 0.00012 0.00770 99.5%

AK-225G control solvent 

background 2.10224 2.10232 0.00008

Panel Control 

no contamination 2.12076 2.12099 0.00023 2.14222 2.14237 0.00015 0.00038

Solstice - S1 2.11599 2.12813 0.01214 2.10178 2.10190 0.00012 0.01226 99.7%

Solstice - S2 2.14429 2.15639 0.01210 2.07585 2.07596 0.00011 0.01221 99.7%

Solstice - S3 2.10507 2.11534 0.01027 2.12308 2.12320 0.00012 0.01039 99.6%

Solstice control solvent 

background 2.10350 2.10419 0.00069 0.00000 0.00069

L-14780 - L1 2.15497 2.16605 0.01108 2.10466 2.10485 0.00019 0.01127 99.0%

L-14780 - L2 2.16588 2.17634 0.01046 2.09490 2.09507 0.00017 0.01063 99.1%

L-14780 - L3 2.16420 2.17540 0.01120 2.10578 2.10593 0.00015 0.01135 99.4%

L-14780 control solvent 

background 2.15489 2.15501 0.00012

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solvent background is subtracted.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Synthetic Sebum Run 2

Concentration: 2.0335 mg/ml (10.1675 mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 100.0% 99.7% 99.0%

2 100.1% 99.7% 99.1%

3 99.5% 99.6% 99.4%

Ave 99.86623 99.65794 99.17188

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Synthetic Sebum Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed (Run 2)

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
Contaminant: Christo‐Lube

Concentration: 2.0034 mg/ml (10.017mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK‐225G

Test Run(all weights in gms)

Test Rinse

Beaker initial

weight

Test Rinse

NVR in Beaker

Test Rinse

NVR mass

AK Rinse

Beaker initial

weight

AK Rinse NVR

in Beaker

AK Rinse

NVR Mass

Tot

Mass 

AK‐225G ‐ A1 2.13014 2.13778 0.00764 2.13306 2.13318 0.00012 AK‐225G ‐ A2 2.14893 2.15644 0.00751 2.14809 2.14809 0.00000 AK‐225G ‐ A3 2.18831 2.19626 0.00795 2.15092 2.15093 0.00001 AK‐225G control solvent

background 2.12489 2.12491 0.00002

Panel Control

no contamination 2.13841 2.13842 0.00001 2.16344 2.16346 0.00002 

Solstice ‐ S1 2.13439 2.14280 0.00841 2.16492 2.16490 ‐0.00002 

Solstice ‐ S2 2.05325 2.06132 0.00807 2.12182 2.12182 0.00000 

Solstice ‐ S3 2.14631 2.15398 0.00767 2.13411 2.13461 0.00050 Solstice control solvent

background 2.09167 2.09194 0.00027

L‐14780 ‐ L1 2.12065 2.12842 0.00777 2.11790 2.11792 0.00002 

L‐14780 ‐ L2 2.09709 2.10524 0.00815 2.14730 2.14730 0.00000 

L‐14780 ‐ L3 2.18515 2.19270 0.00755 2.13079 2.13079 0.00000 

L‐14780 control solvent

background 2.14930 2.14931 0.00001

Notes: % Removal Efficiency is the NVR mass removed by the test solvent rinse over the total removed by both rinses. Solven

*Yellow highlighted cell: High measured solvent NVR background.

Results greater than 100% are due to the error tolerance of the analytical balance.
Contaminant: Christo-Lube

Concentration: 2.0034 mg/ml (10.017mg/panel)

Nonvolatile Residue Removal Efficiency Test

Versus AK-225G

HCFC-225cb Replacement

MSFC/SSC joint test plan

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

1 98.7% 100.5% 100.0%

2 100.3% 100.3% 100.2%

3 100.1% 93.9% 100.3%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

105.0%

AK-225G Solstice PF L-14780

Christo-Lube Removal Efficiency

% removed by the test solvent of total removed

First rinse with test solvent, second rinse with AK-225G
9

APPENDIX I—INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT INVESTIGATION, EXTENDED OXYGEN 

COMPATIBILITY TEST DATA, AND OXYGEN COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS

Various reports can be found in the following sections within appendix I:

I.1 Independent Assessment Investigation—Ambient Pressure LOX Impact Testing, 

October 21–22, 2014 

I.2 MSFC Final Oxygen Compatibility Data 

I.3 WSTF # 15-46483, NASA White Sands Test Facility Solvent Investigation 

Special Report, January 2014 
a NASA Independent Assessment Team 

sponsored by NESC 

HCFC225cb (AK225G) Replacement Study

3

rd Technical Interchange Meeting 

Independent Assessment Investigation

Ambient Pressure LOX Impact Testing 

Hosted by 

NASA / WSTF

Oct 21-22, 2014 

Steven Gentz NASA / NESC 

H. Richard Ross - A2R / SSC Gas & Materials Science

NESC Independent Assessment Final 1
Introduction

• The initial mechanical impact testing of candidate solvents 

performed at WSTF and MSFC exhibited significant 

differences for reactivity in LOX. 

– WSTF had observed high reaction rates

– MSFC had not encountered any reactions

– Both facilities used ASTM G86 for the standard method to 

determine the impact sensitivity in LOX at ambient pressure

• As a result of the discrepant results, a NASA Independent 

Assessment Team sponsored by NESC was formed to 

investigate the test variables and conditions that could 

affect the reactivity in LOX and to establish a modified test 

protocol to ASTM G86 for a subsequent set of tests that 

would provide a reactivity ranking of the candidate 

solvents. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 2
NESC Independent Assessment Final 3

June 27, 2014 Solstice PF - Same Lot as Above, but from a Different Bottle 

Energy (ft. lbs) Temp 0F % RH Reaction 

Frequency

Reaction

Rate SST Disks

72 67 23 2/3 66.7% No

65 67 23 2/4 50% No

60 67 23 2/6 33.3% No

55 67 23 2/10 20 No

50 67 23 2/7 28.6% No

45 67 23 2/2 100% No

40 67 23 2/7 28.6 No

35 67 23 1/9 11.1% No

Initial Reactions Observed 

by NESC / IA Team at WSTF

June 23, 2014 Solstice PF Lot BA320B-10-118 (1.6 lb)

Energy (ft. lbs) Temp 0F % RH Reaction 

Frequency

Reaction

Rate SST Disks

72 66 28 2/5 40% No

65 66 28 2/6 33.3% No

60 66 28 1/11 9.1% No

55 66 28 2/6 33.3 No

50 66 28 2/12 16.7% No

45 66 28 0/3 0% No

Overall 

Reaction 

Rate 20.9%

Overall 

Reaction 

Rate 31.2%
Initial Reactions Observed 

by NESC/ IA Team at MSFC

NESC Independent Assessment Final 4

MSFC July 8, 2014 Solstice PF Lot BA320BU-10-119 (1.6 lb)

Energy (ft. 

lbs)

Temp 0F % RH Reaction 

Freq.

Reaction 

Rate

SST Disks

72 75 65 0/10 0% No

72 75 65 0/20 0% Yes

72 75 65 0/5 1 0% Yes

82.4 75 65 0/5 0% Yes

MSFC July 10 , 2014 Solstice PF Lot BA320BU-10-110 (10 lb)

Energy (ft. 

lbs)

Temp 0F % RH Reaction 

Freq.

Reaction 

Rate

SST Disks

72 79 66 0/22 0% No

1 The insert sample (grease) cups were 50% filled with the solvent.

Overall 

Reaction 

Rate 0%

Overall 

Reaction 

Rate 0%
• WSTF elevation imposes lower ambient pressure and lower boiling points 

for LOX and solvent.

• Lower humidity range at WSTF vs MSFC.

• Initially, MSFC and WSTF did not test the same solvent lots.

• Sample preparation differs significantly at each facility. 

• MSFC places the SST insert disks inside the aluminum cups and below the 

SST insert (grease) cups – SST disks are not used for the standard tests at 

WSTF. 

• WSTF reported they used 347SST insert cups. MSFC reported they used 

304SST insert cups.

• Different cleanliness level for hardware used at each facility. Level 50A 

was used at WSTF – MSFC cleans components to MSFC 164 Level IV X “A” 

(MSFC cleanliness level is comparable to 400A). 

• Facility configuration and detection process for observing reactions are 

different at each facility. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 5

Test Variables / Conditions Observed
Approach

• Examine and evaluate the test methodology & 

approaches used at each facility and analyze the test 

data generated.

• Investigate the test variables and operating 

conditions that could influence the reactivity rate at 

MSFC and WSTF and the effect/s solvents may have 

on test sensitivity. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 6
Process Parameters Evaluated

• Impact Tester Operation & Calibration 

• Test Variables (e.g. sample preparation methods, 

use of the plummet (rebound) catcher, SST disks 

below the sample insert cups, environmental 

conditions, etc.)

• Solvent Characteristics

• Type of Impacts vs. Reactivity Rate

• Cleanliness & Contamination Control

• Interpretation of Impact Results by Test Personnel

NESC Independent Assessment Final 7
Process Variability

• No standard reference materials or consensus 

standards are available for the ASTM G86 test 

method to assess any measurement bias.

• No prior studies using halogenated solvents 

were performed to evaluate the variability of 

mechanical impact testing between MSFC and 

WSTF.

NESC Independent Assessment Final 8
Ambient Pressure Impact Testers

Both testers have a rugged structural frame with the same basic drop tower 

configuration. Both testers rest on reinforced concrete. The base plate for each 

tester is anchored to a raised concrete structure with 4 SST bolts. 

MSFC WSTF

NESC Independent Assessment Final 9
Process Variation

Cooling the Impact Tester Base

The base is cooled by flowing LN2 through the base 

that surrounds the sample cup holder. Cooling was 

verified when a LOX filled sample cup holder (blank) 

was placed into the base. The cup sat for ≈ 4 

minutes with no visible boiling or decreased LOX 

level. Qualitatively, the base is sufficiently cooled. 

The LN2 flow was maintained during the tests.

WSTF

MSFC

The base is cooled by adding LN2 

to the moat. The moat surrounds

the sample cup holder in the base. 

LN2 level in the moat is maintained

throughout the testing using multiple 

Dewar transfers. NESC Independent Assessment Final 10
Process Variation

• Impact Calibration

– Dent block testing did not appear to be a scheduled test at MSFC (required to verify 

impact force is within spec per ASTM G86). Based on IA concerns, dent tests were 

performed in Aug 2014. WSTF provided the 304 SST dent blocks & the 

hemispherical striker pins. MSFC performed the dent block drops and reported 

the plummet mass. WSTF calculated the impact penetration vs. the energy level. 

• Sample Preparation

– Dispensing and obtaining uniform solvent thickness in sample cup is difficult.

– Solvent testing is infrequent at both facilities. During the initial investigation, both 

centers were still adjusting their preparation techniques 

• No apparent requirement for frozen test material characteristics ( sample uniformity & 

accumulation limit of frozen material on the sample cup rim)

• Liquid response to freezing – WSTF evaluated solvent drip directly into the cup on the chill 

bar vs. filling a cup on SST (cold plate ) located outside the chill pan and transferring 

onto the chill bar. 

• LN2 in MSFC cold box varied and empty sample cup accumulated water frost over 

extended time

– Sample preparation techniques have improved; however, the nature of volatile 

solvents do not allow them to be prepared identically. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 11
Samples are prepared entirely in 

a SST cold box filled with LN. 

LN level is slightly below the 

retainer plate / tray. 

After each sample cup was prechilled on the retainer plate,

solvent transfer to the sample 

cup was done with a rubber bulb 

- eye dropper from a solvent 

dispensing bottle.

MSFC Sample 

Prep Method

NESC Independent Assessment Final 12
MSFC Sample Prep Method 

Left. SST chill pan is placed near the center of the 

Cold Box and rests slightly above the retainer plate.

The sample cups are placed in the chill pan. The LN 

level in the Cold Box was raised slightly above the 

retainer plate. This allowed the LN to come in 

contact with the bottom of the chill pan. 

Right. A SST ladle was used to slowly add LOX to 

the SST chill pan. The Al cups w/ the frozen 

sample and the blanks were submerged in LOX 

for 30 minutes min.

The LN level in the cold box and the LOX level in 

the chill pan were maintained until all the 

impact tests are completed. NESC Independent Assessment Final 13

LOX
WSTF Sample Prep

Left. Sample cups are 

placed on a stainless 

steel plate located 

outside of the chill pan. 

Using a pipette, the 

solvent was dripped into 

the sample cup. 

Bottom. The full cup was 

transferred onto the 

cooling bar (partially 

submerged in LN2).

LN2

In Pan

SST 

Plate

Chill 

Bar

Right. Solvent sample freezes on the chill 

bar.

Cold

Box

NESC Independent Assessment Final 14
WSTF Sample Prep

Samples are transferred to the 

pre chilled sample cup holders 

in the Cold Box.

LOX level is slowly raised until 

the cups are covered in LOX.

Samples are covered in LOX for 

30 to 40 min.

Additions of LOX were 

made, as necessary, while 

tests were in progress to 

ensure that each sample 

cup is completely filled at 

time of testing.

NESC Independent Assessment Final 15
Sample 

Preparation & 

Contamination 

Control

Isolated sample fragments 

are present on the frozen 

samples during the LOX 

soak. 

No cover was placed over 

the chill box during the 

LOX soak to prevent a 

potential buildup from 

atmospheric 

contaminants (particulate 

and condensable matter). 

MSFC Preparation at WSTF

Sept 10, 2014

NESC Independent Assessment Final 16
Sample 

Preparation & 

Uniformity

Isolated sample 

fragments on the frozen 

samples prior to the LOX 

soak. Samples show 

various levels of 

uniformity and 

thickness.

WSTF 

Preparation

Sep 16, 2014

NESC Independent Assessment Final 17
Process Variation

• Solvent Characteristics

– No NVR testing or solvent filtration is performed - storage 

container can introduce particulates / contaminants - filtration 

to remove particulates and reporting the background NVR of 

is not a requirement in ASTM G86. 

– Solvent NVR and particulates can skew reactivity. 

» Particulates can act as nucleation sites and effect the 

freezing characteristics / density.

» The type and amount of NVR can influence the reactivity. 

– Azeotropes

» Solvent components may not be uniform at cryogenic 

temperatures (e.g. enriched regions of t-DCE and /or 

stabilizer/s).

NESC Independent Assessment Final 18
Process Variations

Solvent Particulates

100 ml of Solstice PF in Carbon Steel Cylinder 

Lot #: BB337A-10-24 

Particulate matter remaining after boiling away 

100ml of Solstice PF, Lot # BB-257A-U-10-53 

Rust

Silicon 

Dioxide

Carbon based 

particulates w/ no 

halogens (e.g. 

plastic)

Various 

Mineral 

Oxides

SSC Gas & Materials Science

SSC Gas & Materials Science

SSC Gas & Materials Science

SSC Gas & Materials Science

19

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Use of SST Insert Disks per ASTM G86-98a

• For ambient pressure LOX impact testing of solvents, MSFC uses SST disks. WSTF does 

not use SST disks. 

– Tests performed at MSFC and WSTF show this can cause different reaction rates. 

• Use of SST Disks are specified in:

– Par. 7.3, Method 1 - Leak Check Compounds, Dye Penetrant & Emulsifier specifies 

sulfuric acid anodized 6061 T6 aluminum disks or any substrate specified by the 

manufacturer.

– Par 7.4 Method 2 -Preparation of Leak Check Compounds and Emulsifer specifies 

to use sample cups or type 316SST disks (see fig. 8). NOTE: Figure 8 is not a disk, 

but is an “insert sample cup” that specifies 347 SST. Interchanging terms (disks 

and insert cups that use different alloys) can lead to test variations. 

– Par 7.8, Coating materials such as Paints, dry film lubricants shall be applied to 

316SST or 347SST disks. “After applying the coatings on the disks and they have 

dried, they shall be placed in regular sample cups for testing .”

• SST Disks are not specified in:

– Par. 7.2 Liquid Samples – transfer the samples into special cups (Fig.7). NOTE: 

Figure 7 shows a special insert cup fabricated from any 3000 or 5000 aluminum 

alloy. However, there is no reference in this section to use SST disks. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 20
Use of SST Insert Sample Cups in ASTM G86-98a

• SST insert cups are not specified in:

– Par. 7.2 Preparation of Liquid Samples – transfer the samples into special cups (Fig.7). NOTE: Figure 

7 shows a special insert cup fabricated from any 3000 or 5000 aluminum alloy. There is no 

reference to use SST insert cups. Also, a cautionary note should be added – “ testing halogenated 

solvents & compounds with aluminum insert cups can cause a reaction and should not be used.”

– MSFC uses 304SST Insert Cups and WSTF uses 347SST Insert Cups. Neither insert sample cup alloy 

is specified for liquid samples in par 7.2. 

• SST insert cups are specified in:

– Par 10.1.1.5 Sample Cups (under section 10, Apparatus ) specifies a special insert cup made of 

any dead soft 3000 or 5000 series aluminum alloy (see Fig. 7). 

– Par 10.1.1.7 Auxiliary Equipment ( under section 10, Apparatus), includes a grease cup holder, see 

Fig. 8. Fig. 8 is an in inset sample cup that lists SST 347. This detail should be included in 7.5, for 

the Preparation of Greases that specifies to use an aluminum cup inset. Sections 7.5 and 10.1.1.7 

specify different insert cup requirements for preparing greases & semi solid samples. 

and again in

– Par 10.2.1.7 Sample Cups (also under section 10, Apparatus ) specifies a one piece cup used for 

liquid or non-solid materials (See Fig.14). Fig 14 shows a 316SST sample cup and is not identified as 

an insert sample cup, yet it has the same dimensions as an insert sample cup specified in Fig. 7 for 

the preparation of liquid samples that is constructed from any 3000 or 5000 series aluminum alloy. 

To eliminate the potential for process variability, the insert sample cups with their respective 

alloys should be fully specified in their applicable sections (e.g. 7.2 for Liquids, 7.5 for Greases, etc.)

• The ASTM standard does not use consistent terminology and is easy to misread since applicable details 

are not always addressed in the appropriate sections. This condition appears to have caused an 

interpretation issue on the use the SST disks and the alloys used for the sample cup inserts .

NESC Independent Assessment Final 21
LOX Mechanical Impact Events Observed

Centered 

or Near 

Centered 

Impact

Edge of the 

Striker Pin 

Impacts the 

Inner Rim Wall

Rim Impact 

(Edge Effect)

Intersecting 

Impacts Can 

Produce an Edge 

Effect 

The majority of the reactions were from non-uniform impacts & were due to:

- Rebound impacts occurred after relocation and a change of orientation of the sample cup following the initial 

impact. Also, the rebound energy imparted to the sample is unknown.

- Off Angle Impact from random non-perpendicular contacts between the plunger & the striker pin

- Edge of striker pin Impacts the inner rim wall and/or the striker pin hits the rim of the insert cup

- How well the sample cup insert and the insert disc were centered in the aluminum sample holder. 

Non Uniform 

(Off Angle) 

Impact

SST Insert 

Sample Cup

SST Disk

Aluminum 

Sample Cup

SST Striker 

Pin

LOX LOX

Or Combination

w/ Varying Impact 

Energies 

Or Combination

w/ Varying Impact

Energies

LOX LOX

NESC Independent Assessment Final 22

Insert Sample 

(Grease) Cup
Spider plummet bearings are in 

the guide tract.

MSFC

Aug 2014

During the 

Drop, 

Plummet 

Is Aligned 

Plummet Perpendicular to the Vertical Drop

Axis at Impact with the Striker Pin 

WSTF

Sep 

2014

NESC Independent Assessment Final 23

Centered 

or Near 

Centered 

Uniform 

Impact
Plummet Off Perpendicular to the 

Vertical Drop Axis at Impact 

Mechanical play between the spider 

bearings and the guide track and the 

wear clearance in the striker pin guide 

can cause a non-uniform impact. The 

yellow arrows shows the upper & lower 

spider bearings are out of the guide 

track.

MSFC

Aug 2014

During the 

Drop, 

Plummet

Is Aligned 

or

Develops an Off 

Angle Contact

MSFC

Aug 2014

Non Uniform 

(Off Angle) 

Sample Impact

NESC Independent Assessment Final 24
Striker Pin Impact On the Inner Rim Wall 

of the Sample Cup

Metallic fragment was 

sliced off the top of the 

sample cup rim by the 

striker pin. The fragment 

rests at the base 

adjacent to the rim. 

Note the two charred 

regions on the thin 

metal section.

SEM 70X

SSC Gas & Materials Science

Charred Area

Charred Area

Edge of Striker 

Pin Impacted 

the Inner Rim 

Wall

The impacted area is subjected to a high strain rate from 

eccentric loading.

NESC Independent Assessment Final 25
Edge of the Sample (Grease) Cup 

Non Uniform Impact 

Striker Pin Sliced and Separated a 

Section Near the Top of the Rim 

SSC Gas & Materials Science

Striker Pin Impact On the Inner Rim Wall 

of the Sample Cup

NESC Independent Assessment Final 26

Edge of the 

Striker Pin 

Impacted the 

Inner Rim Wall
Ni 

Corresponding X-Ray Maps 

of the bottom edge of the 

striker pin. 

SEM Image. A thin section of the SST grease cup is fused 

to the bottom outer edge of the striker pin following an 

impact reaction at MSFC. The elevated Ni and reduced Cu 

intensities in the corresponding X-ray maps are due to a 

thin section of the 300 series SST from the sample cup 

adhering to the striker pin SST 17-4 PH. 

Cu

Ni 

Cl

Striker Pin Edge Impact On 

the Inner Rim Wall 

of the Insert Sample Cup

SSC Gas & Materials Science

Chlorine from the reaction 

products of the Solstice PF

Fused 

Insert 

Sample

Cup 

Striker Pin 

SST

17-4 PH 

SST

300 Series 

(18-8) SST

NESC Independent Assessment Final 27
Striker Pin Edge Impact On the Inner Rim Wall 

Area of the Sample Cup

Optical 50X

SSC Gas & Materials Science

The white arrows show the metal section was peeled away from the rim area. A 

thermal oxide film adjacent to the metallic section is also present. The orange 

colors on the separated metal section represent the Solstice PF reaction 

products. Macro-reactions appear to be assisted by frictional forces that serve 

both to remove the oxide layers and to contribute to localized heating. 

SEM Image 50X

SSC Gas & Materials Science

Edge Impact 

Occurred On 

the Inner 

Rim Wall

28

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Left. Rim impact 

followed by a non 

uniform rebound 

impact.

Impacted Rim 

(Edge Effect)

Rebounds can result in 

intersecting impacts 

and deformation of the 

insert sample cup 

Charring

Charred Area - reaction 

was initiated near the 

bent rim edge and 

propagated under the 

rim and then moved 

inward.

SSC Gas & Materials Science

29

This impact 

occurred after the 

initial reaction. 

SST Insert Sample Cup

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Insert Sample Cup With Multiple Overlapping 

Impacts On and Adjacent to the Rim Wall. Note 

the ridge that formed near the base of the rim 

wall from the overlapping impacts.

Missing 

Fragment Rub Marks

Solstice PF Reaction Products 

Multiple Overlapping Impacts 

Spalling

30

65X

SSC Gas & Materials Science

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Process Variation 

• External Contamination

– Handling hardware with non clean Latex gloves is not recommended, these 

gloves could introduce NVR and particulates. Lint free clean Nylon or Polyester 

gloves or SST tongs should be used for handling hardware with critical 

surfaces. 

– For handling non critical hardware, Polyethylene or Buna N gloves are 

preferred. Polyethylene gloves perform the best in both contact transfer 

handling and whenever solvent contact is a possibility.

– Because of ergonomics and work operations, test personnel usually do not

replace their gloves after handling non cleaned hardware and equipment -this

condition leads to a buildup of contamination on the gloves that can be

transferred to clean items . Consequently, the cleanliness level of the sampling

/ test hardware cannot be maintained.

– Aqueous cleaned items used at WSTF (e.g. Chill Box) that receive a final rinse 

using potable water can introduce particulates, dissolved solids and NVR. 

Water used for the final rinse should have a specific resistance greater than 

1 meg-ohm-cm or a conductivity of less than 1 micro-Siemen/cm, meet or 

exceed particulate cleanliness Level 400 and have a total carbon content 1ppm 

(max). 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 31
Process Variation 

• External Contamination

– Rubber bulb from the eye dropper used by MSFC could 

introduce NVR and particulates - a glass micropipette is 

recommended.

Placing a SST cover on 

the Chill Box during the 

MSFC LOX soak should 

be required to minimize 

any potential buildup 

from atmospheric 

contaminants 

(particulates and 

condensable matter).

NESC Independent Assessment Final 32
Several Samples Remained Intact

Following Impact Testing at WSTF 

• Several post impact samples remained intact (had the same frozen 

appearance as freshly prepared samples) 

– With Rebound Catcher & No SST Disks

• MSFC prepared samples - “16” samples remained intact at > 72 ft lbs

• WSTF prepared samples - “9” samples remained intact at 72 ft lbs. 

– With No Rebound Catcher & Using SST Disks

• MSFC prepared samples - “3” samples remained intact at 60 ft lbs. & “1” 

sample tested on Sep 10 remained intact @ 72 ft lbs and exhibited charring 

on the striker pin. After the Solstice PF sample melted, charring was also 

observed at the interior bottom of the insert sample (grease) cup.

• After the post test intact samples evaporated, the insert sample 

(grease) cups showed uniform circular depressions from the striker 

pin. All the impacts struck near dead center. 

• Data shows the plummet catcher reduces rebound (non-uniform) 

impacts.

• None of the MSFC or WSTF prepared samples remained intact 

following the impact tests that were done at MSFC (Aug 8-11, 2014).

NESC Independent Assessment Final 33
Several Solstice PF Samples Remained Intact (Uniform Solid) 

Following Impact Testing at WSTF 

The bold orange and red entries show the intact samples after impact

Date Prep By Rebound

Catcher

SST 

Disc

Intact 

Samples 

Reaction

Frequency

Energy 

Level

9/8/2014 WSTF No No None 0/20 72

9/8/2014 WSTF No Yes None 2/9 72

9/9/2014 MSFC No Yes None 2/23 72

9/9/2014 MSFC No Yes 3 /20 0/20 60

9/10/2014 MSFC No Yes 1/28 (Charring) 2/28 72

9/11/2014 MSFC No No None 2/13 72

9/11/2014 MSFC Yes No 11/20 0/20 72

9/11/2014 MSFC Yes No 5/5 0/5 82

9/12/2014 WSTF No No None 2/22 72

9/15/2014 WSTF Yes No 3/20 1/20 72

9/16/2014 WSTF No No None 0/20 72

9/16/2014 WSTF Yes No 6/20 0/20 72

9/16/2014 WSTF No Yes None 2/23 72 NESC Independent Assessment Final 34
Influence of the SST Disks 

on the LOX Impact Reaction Rates

NESC Independent Assessment Final 35
WSTF Impact Reactivity Rate vs % RH

LOX Impacts @72 ft. lbs (No SST Disks) 

MSFC and WSTF 

Reaction Rates

“No Plummet Catcher”

Solstice PF Lot # 

BR13019-50-42 

(Unfiltered)

36

0% 0%

9%

15%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

79 78 60 59

13%

11%

20%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

69 61 40

% RH (Mode) 

During Sample 

Prep

MSFC Impact Reactivity Rate vs % RH

LOX Impacts @72 ft. lbs (No SST Disks)

% RH (Mode) 

During Sample 

Prep

“n” = 75

“n” = 44

Overall Reaction Rate = 4/75 or 5.3%

Avg. Reaction Rate 6/44 or 13.6 % 

NESC Independent Assessment Final

WSTF

Reaction

Rate %

MSFC 

Reaction

Rate %
WSTF Impact Reactivity Rate vs % RH

LOX Impacts @72 ft. lbs (“With SST Disks”) MSFC and WSTF 

Reaction Rates 

“No Plummet Catcher”

Solstice PF Lot # 

BR13019-50-42 

(Unfiltered)

37

13%

22%

9%

7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

74 62 58 54

0%

6%

13%

5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

72 57 39 39 % RH (Mode) 

During Sample 

Prep

MSFC Impact Reactivity Rate vs % RH

LOX Impacts @72 ft. lbs (“With SST Disks”)

% RH (Mode) 

During Sample 

Prep

“n” = 75

“n” = 72

Avg. Reaction Rate = 8/75 

or 10.7%

Avg. Reaction Rate 

4/72 or 5.6 %

WSTF

Reaction

Rate %

MSFC 

Reaction

Rate %

NESC Independent Assessment Final
WSTF LOX Impact Reaction Rates for the Solstice PF Samples Tested

Sep 8 – 16, 2014

5.3% 5.2%

72 65-60

0%

5%

10%

15%

No SST Disks 

No Rebound Catcher

10.7%

12.2%

72 65-60

0%

5%

10%

15%

With SST Disks 

No Rebound Catcher

ft. lbs

ft. lbs

38

NESC Independent Assessment Final

WSTF

Reaction

Rate %

WSTF

Reaction

Rate %
13.6%

2.3%

72 65-60

0%

5%

10%

15%

5.6%

8.3%

72 65-60

0%

5%

10%

15%

ft. lbs

ft. lbs

With SST Disks 

No Rebound Catcher

No SST Disks 

No Rebound Catcher

39

MSFC LOX Impact Reaction Rates for the Solstice PF Samples Tested

Aug 11-18, 2014

NESC Independent Assessment Final

MSFC 

Reaction

Rate %

MSFC 

Reaction

Rate %
Reactivity Rates With and W/O

the Plummet Catcher 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 40
0% 0%

9%

15%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

1 (9/8) 2 (9/16) 3 (9/12) 4 (9/11)

79% 78%

60% 59%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1 (9/8) 2(9/16) 3 (9/12) 4(9/11)

0/20 0/20 2/22 2/13 WSTF Reaction 

Frequency 

“Reactions/Drops”

Dates Arranged from 

High RH to Low RH.

WSTF Reaction Rate - “No Plummet Catcher”

Overall Reaction Rate = 4/75 or 5.3%

Test Solvent:

Unfiltered Solstice PF 

Lot # BR13019-50-42

LOX Impacts @72 ft. 

lbs.

“No SST Disks”

2014 Test Dates

Reaction

Rate

% RH

41

% RH (Mode) During 

the Sample Prep

Session

“n” = 75

Corresponding % RH for Each Above Test 

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Test Solvent :

Unfiltered Solstice PF 

Lot # BR13019-50-42

LOX Impacts @72 ft. 

lbs. & 5 drops @ 82 ft 

lbs. on 9/11.

“No SST Disks”

0%

5%

0% 0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

1 (9/16) 2 (9/15) 3 (9/11) 4 (9/11)

74%

65%

59% 59%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

1 (9/16) 2(9/15) 3 (9/11) 4(9/11)

% RH (Mode) During 

the Sample Prep

Session

0/20 1/20 0/20 0/5

Dates Arranged from 

High RH to Low RH.

WSTF Reaction Rates - “With Plummet Catcher”

Overall Reaction Rate = 1/65 or 1.5 %

2014 Test Dates

WSTF Reaction 

Frequency 

“Reactions/Drops”

Reaction

Rate

% RH

42

“n” = 65

Corresponding % RH for Each Above Test 

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Impact Reactivity Rate vs % RH

LOX Impacts @72 ft. lbs (No SST Disks)

Reaction Rate 

vs % RH During 

Sample Preparation 

Tests Performed at 

MSFC and WSTF

“No Plummet Catcher “

Solstice PF Lot # 

BR13019-50-42

% RH (Mode) During 

Sample Prep

Reaction

Rate

43

0% 0%

13%

11%

9%

15%

20%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

79 78 69 61 60 59 40

WSTF WSTF MSFC MSFC WSTF WSTF MSFC

13%

0%

22%

9%

6% 7%

13%

5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

74 72 62 58 57 54 39 39

WSTF MSFC WSTF WSTF MSFC WSTF MSFC MSFC

Impact Reactivity Rate vs % RH

LOX Impacts @72 ft. lbs (With SST Disks)

% RH (Mode) During 

Sample Prep

“n” = 119

“n” = 147

Reaction

Rate

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Influence of Sample Preparation Methods on the 

Reaction Rate for all Impact Energies Tested at WSTF

Sept 8-16, 2014

NESC Independent Assessment Final 44

Sample Prep 

Method

SST Disks 

(Inserts)

Reaction Freq.1 Reaction Rate

MSFC Yes 7/99 7.1%

WSTF Yes 6/53 11.76%

MSFC No 2/58 3.4%

WSTF No 8/124 6.4%

There were not enough tests performed at MSFC to provide a similar comparison. 

1 Solstice PF Lot # BR13019-50-42
WSTF Summary

“n” Reactions “n” Drops % Reactivity

26 398 6.5%

WSTF Rebound vs Initial Reactions 

Flash & Audible Type 

Rebounds Initial Total

13 4 17

% Reactions Occurred on a Rebound 76.5% 

Flash and Audible Rebound Reactions / Total 

of All Reactions 13/26 = 50%

Reactivity Summary for Solstice PF, 

Lot # BR13019-50-42 

Aug thru Sep 2014

MSFC Summary

“n” Reactions “n” Drops % Reactivity

15 218 6.9%

MSFC Rebound vs Initial Reactions 

Flash & Audible Type 

Rebounds Initial Total

8 1 9

% Reactions Occurred on a Rebound 89% 

Flash and Audible Rebound Reactions / Total 

of All Reactions 8 / 15 = 53%

● 20 impact tests for a new material is insufficient to statistically verify the material 

will not have a reaction.

● As the solvents become more reactive in LOX, the variability in the test parameters 

become more critical.

● AIT and Heat of Combustion should be included with the LOX impact data to rate 

the reactivity risks in oxygen systems.

NESC Independent Assessment Final 45
Reactivity Rate vs. Test Variables

• Impact tests performed at MSFC and WSTF from Aug thru Sep 2014, were done from 

the same cylinder of Solstice PF 

– W/O SST Disks 

• The reactivity rate is more dependent on the % RH during sample preparation. Lower % 

RH increases the reactivity rate significantly. 

• Previous impact tests performed at WSTF also show the reactivity rates for Solstice PF 

increased when the samples were prepared and tested at lower % RH. 

– With SST Disks

• The % RH during sample preparation has little or no influence on the reaction rate.

– Affect of SST Disks on the Reactivity Rate at WSTF vs MSFC 

• The insert disks doubled the reaction rates for the WSTF ABMA 

• The use of insert disks on the MSFC ABMA reduced the reaction rate ≈ 50% at 72 ft lbs 

and increased the reactivity rate by 360% for the lower impact energies (60 -65 ft. lbs) 

– Plummet Catcher

• Utilizing the plummet catcher at WSTF reduced the reaction rates from 5.3% to 1.5%.

• After the initial impact, sample morphology has changed and the rebound energy 

imparted to the sample is unknown.

• Eccentric impacts of the samples were reduced, but were not eliminated by the 

plummet catcher. Impact testers have a fair amount of mechanical slop that will create 

non-uniform impacts (energy imparted to the sample / surface area).

NESC Independent Assessment Final 46
IA Test Protocol 

• A proposed test procedure was prepared to evaluate the relative 

reactivity of the candidate cleaning solvents by minimizing the 

influence of test variables not addressed in the standard test method, 

ASTM G86. 

– Verify all components and handling hardware are cleaned to Level 400A. 

Pins and sample cups be handled by cleaned forceps or tongs, or with 

cleaned nylon or polyester gloves. Items that do not come in direct contact 

with LOX can be handled with powder free gloves (Buna N ). 

– Aqueous cleaned components (e.g., cold box) should receive a final DI 

water rinse. The DI water shall:

• Have a specific resistance greater than 1 meg-ohm-cm or a conductivity of 

less than 1 micro-Siemen/cm 

• Meet or exceed particulate cleanliness Level 400

• Total carbon content 1ppm (max). 

– Filter Samples 

• Particulates from solvent storage container can bias test results

– Prepare Samples @ < 60% RH

• Do not prepare the samples if there is an approaching weather front, 

storms or other significant weather events. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 47
IA Test Protocol(Continuation)

– During the LOX soak, place a SST cover over the aluminum cup holders 

containing the sample cups and discs to maintain a positive pressure 

and to minimize interference from humidity and atmospheric 

contaminants.

– Use SST Disks and Rebound Catcher

• The impact test should be considered invalid if an impact occurs on the 

raised rim or edge. Non-uniform or edge impacts can produce elevated or 

irregular impact energies and can produce metallic particles.

– Prior to placing the striker pin into the striker pin guide (yoke), visually 

verify the frozen sample and disc are in the center of the aluminum cup 

holder.

– Repeat the sample preparation and impact tests over sequential days 

until 100 drop tests for each candidate solvent are performed. 

– Data from the IA Protocol to be reported by WSTF and/or by MSFC

NESC Independent Assessment Final 48
Flash and Audible Detection at MSFC

MSFC does not use backup personnel (buddy arrangement) 

for observing flash and audible reactions. 

Viewing window opens to the entire cell which limits flash 

detection.

Video detection utilizes an IR camera that has a high 

background continuum when the lights are off. Provides a 

white background for all frost near the base plate which 

limits flash detection, also the monitor is small and the 

camera view is not localized to the sample cup .

Audible detection is difficult, test cell is isolated (closed) 

during tests. 

Control 

Panel

Viewing 

Window

Monitor 

& DVR

MSFC Viewing 

Window from 

Test Cell

MSFC Control and 

Observation Side

NESC Independent Assessment Final 49
WSTF uses two personnel for observing reactions. 

During a drop, one tech observes for flashes 

through the viewing port while the 2nd tech views 

the video monitor. 

The viewing port and monitor are localized and are 

directed to the sample cup holder in the base 

plate where the flash events would occur – this 

configuration optimizes flash detection.

Video camera is a low lux camera that operates in 

the visible spectrum. When lights are off for 

testing, monitor is black and provides a high 

contrast for detecting any flashes. 

WSTF Viewing Port

WSTF Video 

Monitoring

Flash and Audible Detection at WSTF

Video Image Localized on the 

Striker Pin and Sample Cup 

Temp

%RH

NESC Independent Assessment Final 50
WSTF Control and 

Observation Side

For detecting audible events – min 

of two personnel participate, one 

tech is located near the end of 

barrier wall on the control side (has 

an open enclosure - no door). 

Plummet drop & rebound sound 

level could limit low audible 

detection.

Control panel also measures the 

drop time of the plummet to verify 

the desired drop time is ± 3% for the 

appropriate energy level.

WSTF Test Side

Flash and Audible Detection at WSTF (Continuation)

WSTF Control Panel, 

Viewing Port

and Data Recording

51

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Ergonomics

• Sample preparation process is not ergonomic. 

Left. Repetitive bending and 

kneeling. Difficult to observe grease 

cup fill level.

Right. The installation of a short LN2 transfer 

and connection to offload LN2 from the trailer 

to the WSTF Impact Tester would significantly 

improve the safety and functional features. The 

transfer line would eliminate the need to have 

to repeatedly refill dewars from outside and 

transport them back to the test cell to maintain 

the LN2 level in the open moat. Repetitive 

bending while pouring LN2 from several dewars

at multiple times during testing represents an 

ergonomic challenge. 52

NESC Independent Assessment Final
Test Personnel at MSFC and WSTF

• Personnel proficient on coordinated and 

efficient test operations.

• Very professional and conscientious. 

• Mgmt personnel were interested in the test 

challenges and ways to improve the testing 

protocols.

NESC Independent Assessment Final 53
Summary

• Most of the flash and audible reactions occurred on a rebound. Rebound impacts are 

more likely to produce edge effects that can produce non-uniform and elevated 

impact energies - edge effects can result in metal on metal contact that produces 

heat. Rebound impacts can change sample morphology and occur after a change of 

position and orientation of the insert components (cup and disk) following the initial 

impact. 

• The plummet catcher reduced the reaction rates at WSTF by 350%. Tests with the 

plummet catcher at MSFC were not performed.

• Humidity (limited testing suggests elevated humidity during sample preparation 

quenches the reactivity). Further testing using the plummet catcher for samples 

prepared at different humidity conditions are required. The correlation between 

moisture and reactivity were significantly higher when the tests were performed w/o 

the insert disks.

• Insert disks provide a more rigid surface which delivers more energy to the sample 

during impact. Insert disks resulted in an increased reaction rate for all energies 

tested at WSTF, however the test results at MSFC were reduced significantly at 72 ft. 

lbs. 

• Tests were performed at WSTF comparing the reactivity rate of the WSTF and MSFC 

sample preparation methods. The overall reaction rate for the WSTF sample 

preparation method was 9.1% and 5.25% for the samples prepared by MSFC. There 

were not enough tests conducted at MSFC to provide a similar comparison. 

• No reactions were observed for the blank sample component tests performed at 

WSTF and MSFC. Cleanliness of the components does not appear to be an issue. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 54
Recommendations

• Continue to perform impact testing with the same cylinder of Solstice PF to assess the effects of 

Low RH on the reactivity

– Continue to use IA protocol and conduct tests with and w/o disks

– Determine if other test organizations are using disks when testing liquids

– The reactivity rate of other solvents may be influenced by the %RH 

• Minimum of two set of eyes and ears should be used for detecting visual and audible reactions

• Support revisions to ASTM standards to eliminate test variables that can bias test results (use the 

plummet catcher, filter the solvent, perform and document solvent NVR, clarify the use of insert 

disks and insert sample cup alloy/s required for testing halogenated solvents, document 

environmental conditions during sample prep and testing, develop more organized and less 

fragmented sections and references in the standard for sample preparation). 

• Develop and test an unibody solvent cup to eliminate multiple sample components that can 

shift position and promote reactions due to edge affects. Halogenated liquids / greases are 

more reactive from shear forces with newly exposed aluminum (as those found in the 

aluminum sample cups).

• Audio characteristics should be studied to assess reactions.

• Investigate methods that will provide more uniform samples and sample volume to the insert 

sample cups.

• Evaluate ways to reduce mechanical slop in the impact tester - determine if specifying a 

clearance tolerance to the yoke for the striker pin would reduce the frequency of nonperpendicular impacts. 

• Implement IA contamination control recommendations.

• Periodic round robin testing between MSFC and WSTF and /or with other facilities are strongly 

recommended to develop technical data and information to minimize test variability. 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 55
Closing

• Selection of a replacement solvent/s for AK225G is 

based on their relative performance in various 

oxygen compatibility studies (autogenous ignition 

temperature (AIT), heat of combustion, mechanical 

impact, and other performance features (cleaning 

efficiency, material compatibility, environmental 

considerations, toxicity, stability, reuse, operational 

handling, field cleaning performance and human 

factors). 

NESC Independent Assessment Final 56
HCFC-225 Replacement Solvent Study

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)

Jennifer McMillian, Gary Glass, and Mark Griffin

January 9, 2015

The Defense Logistics Agency – Hazardous Minimization and Green Products Branch 

funded MSFC to perform a solvent study to find a replacement for HCFC-225. MSFC’s 

Materials Combustion Research Facility (MCRF) was assigned the responsibility of 

oxygen compatibility testing (mechanical impact and autogenous ignition tests). 

MSFC MCRF was provided the Test Plan, and any deviations from the test plan have 

been captured below.

Test 13A: Mechanical (Ambient) Impact 

Cleaning and Preparation

All of the MSFC components for mechanical impact testing were cleaned to MSFC164D IV X A in the precision cleaning lab, in building 4705. This includes striker 

pins, grease cups, samples cups, and insert disks. The components were batch tested 

before any of the newly cleaned components were used. Before the testing began, 

the test cell was inspected for cleanliness, and the floors were swept and mopped, if 

necessary. The top plate, well, ladle, hand dewars, forceps, glass eye dropper, chill 

box, and stainless steel pans were cleaned by wiping them down with Freon-113.

The impact pin surfaces were inspected for cleanliness and surface finish, before 

use.

Sample Preparation

Sample preparation was performed in accordance with ASTM D 2512-95, with few 

adjustments. First, the LN2 was turned on to chill down the base. (At MSFC, the anvil 

plate has been machined so that the LN2 flows inside the anvil plate instead of 

flowing into a moat.) Because of the volatility of the solvents, additional steps were 

taken to ensure there was little to no sample lost before testing. This included prechilling the solvents. The solvent containers were placed in the freezer and allowed 

to chill, at least overnight. L-14780, Solvokane, Solkane, Honeywell Solstice PF, and

Capstone 4-I were all prepared as follows: 25 Aluminum cups were placed into a 

clean stainless steel pan. Then, stainless steel inserts were placed into each of the 

aluminum cups, and the pan was placed into a plastic zip lock bag. To determine the 

sample weight of the solvent, a stainless steel grease cup was placed onto the 

balance, and the solvent was inserted into the grease cup with an eye dropper. The 

grease cup was considered full when the solvent level was flush (flat) with the rim 

of the grease cup at eye level. (The depth, width, and weight of the grease cups had 

been pre-measured when received from cleaning.) The chill box (located in the 

Ambient Impact test cell) was cleaned with Freon and filled with LN2. The prechilled sample was removed from the freezer and taken to the Ambient Impact test 

cell, along with the pan of cups, the glass eye dropper, and 20 stainless steel grease 

cups. When the LN2 level in the chill box was below the top plate, 5 stainless steel 
grease cups were placed onto the top plate of the chill box, and the solvent was 

inserted into them with the eye dropper. This process was done until all 20 grease 

cups were prepared. The 25 aluminum cups were taken out of the stainless steel 

pan and placed onto the top plate of the chill box to chill. Once all of the aluminum 

cups had time to chill, the 20 grease cups were placed into them, on top of the 

stainless steel inserts. When all of the grease cups were inside of the aluminum 

cups, the LN2 level was brought up to surround the aluminum cups. The stainless 

steel pan was placed into the chill box and allowed to chill. Once chilled, the 

aluminum cups were placed into the stainless steel pan. LOX was slowly ladled into 

the stainless steel pan until the samples were submerged. The samples were 

allowed to soak for a minimum of 30 minutes. 

It should be noted that the Vertrel MCA was not pre-chilled due to the separation of 

its components. 

Procedure

At MSFC, a 13A test includes 5 blanks and 20 samples. Two of the blanks are used to 

verify the cleanliness of the base before a sample is dropped on. The other 3 blanks 

are used throughout the test (after sample drops 5, 10, and 15) to ensure the 

cleanliness of the base during testing. When a reaction is detected, the well is blown 

out with GN2 and an additional 2 blanks are dropped on. This is to ensure there are 

no contaminants in the system. 

Testing was performed in accordance with ASTM G 86-98a, with few adjustments. 

One of the five blanks was placed into the well. A striker pin was then placed into 

the cup, and the pin holder was secured into place. The plummet was manually 

lowered onto the pin and a measuring rod was placed on the top side of the 

plummet, with the other end placed against the plummet holder, to verify that the 

drop height is correct. The plummet was raised back to position. The technician 

moved to the control room, and dropped the plummet onto the pin. The plummet 

was then raised and the blank was inspected for a reaction. If there was no reaction, 

a second blank was loaded and dropped on. If a reaction occurred, testing was 

halted; the base was thawed and re-cleaned. It should be noted that zero blanks 

reacted during these sets of testing. If there are no reactions with the two blanks, 5 

samples are dropped on with each sample being inspected after each drop. This is 

continued until a complete test set has been reached, with one blank after every 5 

drops. 

Bruceton Method

During the initial set of impact testing at MSFC, the Bruceton Method was used to 

determine a threshold. Bruceton Method is also referred to as the ‘Up and Down’ 

testing method. It consists of dropping on 34 samples, beginning at 72.0 ftlbs

(43.3 inches). Each drop results in either a non-reaction or a reaction, which 

determines the following drop. A non-reaction will result in the latter drop staying 

at the same energy level (72 ftlbs) until 34 drops are achieved. A reaction will 

result in the latter drop being reduced to a specified lower energy level. If there is 

no reactions on the lowered energy level drop, the next drop in the series will step 

up to the higher energy level until 34 drops are achieved. A sample data sheet is 
attached as Attachment 1. However, it was later determined that the thresholding 

method defined in ASTM G 86 should be used in future testing of these solvents. The 

table below shows the results of the initial mechanical impact and/or Bruceton 

thresholding results. 

Table 1.1 Initial Mechanical Impact and/or Bruceton Threshold Testing Results

1 The original Vetrel MCA provided to MSFC had no documentation of the stabilizer.

2 Denotes the Vertrel MCA with the known stabilizer. 

As can be seen in Table 1.1, the energy threshold for all eight of the solvents was 

found to be 72 ftlbs.

Independent Assessment Team (IAT)

While MSFC was working on the DLA Solvent Study, White Sands Test Facility 

(WSTF) was working on a solvent study funded by NASA Rocket Propulsion Test 

Program, both looking for a replacement for HCFC-225. Some of the testing 

overlapped and allowed project leads to compare data. However, when the data was 

compared, there were significant discrepancies in the observed reaction thresholds. 

Because of differences in test results between MSFC and WSTF, an independent 

assessment team (IAT) was developed to work alongside both centers while testing 

was performed. This was to document any differences that may have resulted in 

differing data between the two centers. When the IA team first visited MSFC, the 

concentration was on AK-225G, L-14780, and Solstice PF (from two different 

containers). It should be noted that the samples were pre-chilled only during the 

first round of testing. When the IA team got involved, the solvents were kept at 

room temperature prior to testing. The results can be seen in the table below.

Table 1.2 Mechanical Impact Testing Results (IA Team’s First Visit)
1 Denotes that the grease cups were only filled 1⁄2. 

It can be seen in Table 1.2, that MSFC was not seeing any reactions with the AK225G, L-14780, or Solstice PF. Because additional testing was being performed on 

the Solstice PF, there were a couple of different containers at MSFC. It was decided 

that both containers should be tested to rule out any batch differences that could 

possibly be present. However, there were no reactions detected at 72 ftlbs. Because 

of this, the project lead and IA team member asked the technician to raise the 

plummet to an energy of 82.5 ftlbs, to see if any reactions occurred. Again, none 

were seen. 

These cups were full unless noted otherwise. In the testing of the 10-lb container, 

particulate contaminants were noted in samples 20, 21, and 22, but still no reactions 

occurred. 

There were still discrepancies between the two centers, so the IA team decided to 

conduct another set of impact tests on Solstice PF. The last round of testing was 

performed to control variables such as use of inserts, technicians preparing the 

samples, and hardware used. It was also determined that relative humidity (RH) and 

temperature should be recorded during sample preparation. If no RH or 

temperature is listed, it was simply not recorded. Due to the fact that the 13A Test 

does implement a rebound catcher, the plummet is allowed to impact the pin and 

sample multiple times. Reactions are recorded as initial, R1, R2, or char only. Initial 

is defined as a reaction occurring during the initial impact, R1 is the first rebound,

and R2 is the second. When the reactions are reported as char only, it could not be 

determined if the reaction took place on the initial impact or a rebound. In the tables 

below, threshold testing was performed, per G86-98a. 

Table 1.3 – Solstice PF Mechanical Impact without Inserts at MSFC (IA Team’s 

Second Visit)
It can be seen in the Table 1.3 that when both centers were prepping with their own 

hardware, the results were very similar. Both saw two reactions at 72 ftlbs and 

zero reactions at 65 ftlbs, resulting in a threshold value of 65 ftlbs. The humidity 

and temperature were also comparable during the first two sets of tests. The final 

set of testing, without inserts, took place with WSTF prepping using MSFC’s 

hardware. Similar results were seen with two reactions at 72 ftlbs, one at 65 ftlbs, 

and zero at 60 ftlbs. Therefore, the threshold was determined to be 60 ftlbs. While 

the temperature remained consistent, there was a significant decrease in RH. It 

should also be noted that no flash or audible reactions occurred on initial impact. 

Table 1.4 – Solstice PF Mechanical Impact with Inserts (IA Team’s Second Visit)

Table 1.4 shows the same type of threshold testing as Table 1.3, but inserts were 

used. MSFC prepared samples using WSTF’s hardware, and a threshold was 

determined to be 50 ftlbs. Because this testing took place over a number of days, it 
can be seen that the RH and temperature varied from set to set, but only by a small 

amount. When MSFC prepared the samples with their own hardware, the threshold 

was determined to be 60 ftlbs. It should be noted again that none of the reactions 

seen in Table 1.4 were on the initial impact. 

During the testing, the IA team questioned if MSFC was using SS 347 grease cups 

and inserts. After XRF and Carbon/Sulfur analysis, it was determined that MSFC’s 

grease cups and inserts disks were SS 304. Marshall analyzed WSTF’s insert disks to 

be SS 304 as well. 

While WSTF employees were at MSFC for this last set of testing, it was requested 

that WSTF assist MSFC in performing a calibration (dent) test. WSTF took the data 

from the test and analyzed it. A report was given to MSFC. The results stated that 

MSFC’s actual energy values were slightly higher than the ideal energy values, due 

to a slightly higher plummet weight than suggested. Table 1.5 shows the ideal and 

actuals. Marshall is looking into correcting the plummet discrepancy. 

Table 1.5 – Calibration (Dent) Test Results

Autogenous Ignition Temperature Testing

Cleaning and Preparation

System cleanliness is also extremely important in the AIT Testing. The test chamber 

was placed in the ultrasonic cleaner with oxygen compatible detergent and DI 

water, followed by a Freon-113 wipe down. The thermocouple and brass sample 

tube holder were wiped down with Freon as well. The glass sample tubes were 

soaked in chromic acid and then rinsed with DI water. 

Sample Preparation

The solvent container, brass holder, and 3 sample tubes were placed in the freezer 

and allowed to chill, at least overnight. The day of the testing, the solvent container 

and a sample tube were removed from the freezer. A glass beaker, with enough ice 

water to fill the bottom of it, was placed on the balance. The sample tube was placed 

in the beaker, and the balance was zeroed. A clean eye-dropper was used to transfer 

the appropriate amount of solvent from its container to the sample tube. (In 

instances where an eye-dropper could not be used to retrieve the solvent, a small 

amount of solvent was poured into a beaker, as a secondary container). The sample 
tube was then transferred into a hand dewar that was filled with ice. The brass 

sample tube holder was removed from the freezer and placed in the hand dewar as 

well. The lid was placed on the dewar, and transported to the AIT test cell. When 

needed, the additional two sample tubes were removed from the freezer and filled 

with the appropriate amount of solvent. Additionally, the test chamber was prechilled in an ice bath before each individual test sample was tested. 

The idea of pre-chilling the solvents came from data that was provided by 

Honeywell. They had previously contracted Wendell Hull to perform AIT testing on 

Solstice, and the pre-chilling method was used. MSFC found it easiest to follow 

similar steps to ensure the appropriate amount of solvent remained. It should be 

noted that the Vertrel MCA was not pre-chilled due to the separation of its 

components. 

Procedure

The Autogenous Ignition Testing was performed in accordance with ASTM G72-09, 

with few adjustments. Because of the volatility of the solvents, the traditional 3 

purge that MSFC does, was not performed. A test sample was purged to 50 psi to 

verify that the liquid sample was still in the sample holder. This technique was used 

on all solvents that were tested. Due to previous (non-solvent) violent reactions 

destroying the borosilicate glass test tube inner reaction vessel and stopper, MSFC 

used a machined brass holder to hold the sample tube. 

The results of the AIT Testing of each of the solvents can be seen in the table below. 

Table 2.1 Autogenous Ignition Temperature Test Data

Solvent Sample 

Weights (g)

Ignition 

Temp (F)

Temp Rise on 

Ignition (F)

Pi (psig) P Rise on 

Ignition (psig)

L-14780 0.23

0.23

0.23

299.23

299.96

>800

87.07

39.34

-

58

58

56

70

92

N/A

0.20

0.20

0.20

>800

>800

>800

-

-

-

2040

2065

2055

N/A

N/A

N/A

1.0 318 973 2002 1967

Vertrel MCA 0.23

0.23

0.23

>800

>800

>800

-

-

-

2068

2077

2049

N/A

N/A

N/A

Solvokane 0.51

0.51

0.51

400

320

340

65

50

50

52

51

53

8

6

14
0.51

0.51

0.51

327

317

331

104

180

158

2001

2009

2028

559

910

813

Solstice PF

*Oil

0.50

0.50

0.50

501.26

519.16

>800

112.96

125.28

-

54

54

52

72.5

72.5

-

*Oil

0.50

0.50

0.50

390

384

460

213

258

619

2057

2044

2053

230

-

607

*No Oil

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

378

>800

>800

>800

65

-

-

-

54

50

52

52

21

-

-

-

*No Oil

0.23

0.23

0.23

>800

>749

>800

-

-

-

2038

2049

2073

-

-

-

Capstone 4-I 0.23

0.23

0.23

>800

>800

>800

-

-

-

2061

2038

2033

N/A

N/A

N/A

AK-225G 0.23

0.23

0.23

>800

>800

>800

-

-

-

54

51

54

N/A

N/A

N/A

0.23

0.23

0.23

>800

>800

>800

-

-

-

2067

2082

2072

N/A

N/A

N/A

During the L-14780 test at 50 psi, it was noted that there was no pressure rise on 

the temperature event on samples 1 and 2. 

When Solvokane was tested at 50 psi, it was documented that all three samples had 

a pressure drop of 20-30 degrees during the test. During each of the tests at 2000 

psi, the glass sample holders were destroyed when the ignition occurred. 

It was determined that the vendor may have contaminated the first batch of Solstice

PF that was tested. This is referred to as Solstice PF *Oil, while the other is referred 

to as Solstice PF *No oil. Between samples 2 and 3, of the 2000 psi test (*Oil), the 

2000 psi pressure transducer was replaced with a 5000 psi pressure transducer. 

This is because during sample 2, no pressure rise was seen. The pressure was at 

2790 psi at the 380F ignition. It can be seen that during the *no oil tests at 50 psi, 4 

samples were tested. The first sample ignited, however it was thought that this 
could have been an error. Three additional samples were tested and resulted in an 

ignition temperature greater than 800F. 

During the AK-225g test at 50 psi, sample number 3, a temperature drop was 

reported at 381F. A 75 degree drop was recorded. No pressure decrease or increase 

was seen during this event. 

The following is a table of the residue reported from each of the solvent AIT tests at 

different pressures and mass. 

Table 2.2 Residue Reporting During AIT Tests

NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

1.0 INTRODUCTION

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) requested NASA White Sands Test Facility 

(WSTF) to perform testing in support of the down-selection for the solvent to replace 

AK-225G.1

 A method for assessing the compatibility of materials for use in oxygen 

systems at a system level has been established and maintains a worthy track record. A 

similar approach, at a broader level, was implemented to analyze the oxygen 

compatibility of candidate replacement solvents.

2.0 TEST DOCUMENTATION

• ASTM D2402

• ASTM G723

• ASTM G864

• ASTM G635

• ASTM G946

• WSTF Forms 514, Test Request and Special Instructions (Appendix A) 

• TPS 1033797

• TPS 1050628

• NASA-STD-6001B9

• NASA/TM-2007-21374010

1

 Asahiklin AK-225G®, a hydrochlorofluorocarbon solvent, is a registered trademark of Asahi Glass Company 

(Tokyo, Japan). 2

 ASTM. Standard Test Method for Heat of Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter.

ASTM D240. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014. 3

 ASTM. Standard Test Method for Autogenous Ignition Temperature of Liquids and Solids in a High-Pressure 

Oxygen-Enriched Environment. ASTM G72. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, 

PA, 2009. 4

 ASTM. Standard Testing for Determining Ignition Sensitivity of Materials to Mechanical Impact in Ambient 

Liquid Oxygen and Pressurized Liquid and Gaseous Oxygen Environments. ASTM G86. American Society for 

Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1998. 5

 ASTM. Standard Guide for Evaluating Nonmetallic Materials for Oxygen Service. ASTM G63. American 

Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1999 (R 2007). 6 ASTM. Standard Guide for Evaluating Metals for Oxygen Service. ASTM G94. American Society for Testing 

and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2005 (R 2014). 7

 In-house document. TPS 103379, Standard Test Solvent Evaluation (AIT). Opened: July 22, 2013. 8

 In-house document. TPS 105062, Solvent Study 13A. Opened: September 5, 2014. 9

 NASA. Flammability, Odor, Offgassing, and Compatibility Requirements and Test Procedures. 

NASA-STD-6001B. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, 2011. 10 NASA Technical Memorandum. Guide for Oxygen Compatibility Assessments and Components and Systems. 

TM-2007-213740. March 2007.

 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

3.0 OBJECTIVES

The data from this test series will be used with other performance features to evaluate the 

down-selection requirements for replacing AK-225G, a class II Ozone Depleting 

Chemical (ODC). The evaluation of materials for oxygen compatibility is the main 

concern of WSTF. Some refinement of the test methods proposed will be required to 

account for the specific material properties. The objective of WSTF is also to make 

recommendations as to the method of obtaining the appropriate test data to aid in the 

ranking of the proposed solvents with respect to oxygen compatibility. 

Documentation of the logic process used to analyze the test data with respect to the 

oxygen compatibility of the candidate solvents will link this process to the developed 

method for assessment outlined in ASTM G63, G94, and NASA-STD-6001.B. 

4.0 TESTING APPROACH

In support of the investigation for down-selection for a solvent to replace AK-225G, the 

following solvent materials were evaluated:

Solvent WSTF Material Number 

HFE-7100 13-46204 

AK-225G 13-46203, 13-46221, 14-46373 

Solstice PF®1 14-46309, 14-46371, 14-46375 

L-147802

 14-46305, 14-46372 

Solvokane®3

 14-46299 

Testing included NASA-STD-6001B: Test 13 ASTM G86-98 (Appendix A.2.5) 

Mechanical Impact for Materials in Ambient Pressure LOX (Test 13A) and Mechanical 

Impact for Materials in Variable Pressure GOX and LOX (Test 13B); ASTM G72-01 

(Appendix A.2.8) Autogenous Ignition Temperature (AIT); and ASTM D240-14 

(Appendix A.2.9) Heat of Combustion (HOC) testing. Each of these tests were performed 

on selected solvents. Any deviations from the standards that were required to obtain 

reliable data were documented. Test data sheets are provided in Appendix B. 

Marshall Space Flight Center participated in several aspects of this investigation, 

including testing in parallel of AIT, and Tests 13A and 13B. 

1

 Solstice PF® is a registered trademark of Honeywell International, Inc., Morristown, NJ. 2

 L-14780 is manufactured by the 3M Company, St. Paul, MN. 3

 Solvokane® is a registered trademark of Solvay Corporation, Bruxelles, Belgium. 

2 

 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Testing was required to quantify which potential replacement solvent was less reactive in 

oxygen systems. Legacy testing provided a starting point for this evaluation. Testing used 

to analyze oxygen compatibility during previous evaluations relied on ignition tests, 

NASA-STD-6001 Test 13, and AIT. A flammability test (HOC) was included during this 

evaluation to quantify the amount of energy released by each solvent. Testing of legacy 

solvents aided in the direct comparison between potential replacement solvents and 

historically used solvents. 

The test methods used for past selection criteria are well established and yield good 

results for most materials; however, solvents proved to be challenging materials to test 

due to the volatility of the chemicals. The relatively low boiling points of the solvents 

resulted in time-dependent test requirements. Special accommodations were required for 

each of the test methods to obtain reliable results. 

Liquids were extracted from shipping containers and poured directly into glassware used 

for sample preparation. All glassware was triple-rinsed prior to sample preparation. No 

filtration of test liquids was performed prior to testing unless otherwise noted. 

5.0 MECHANICAL IMPACT TESTING – NASA STANDARD TEST 13

Mechanical impact testing was performed based on previous solvent evaluations that 

relied on mechanical impact results to make oxygen compatibility assessment. Testing 

outlined in ASTM G-86 included the three candidate materials undergoing evaluation

(Solstice PF, L-14780, Solvokane) as well as control tests on AK-225G. All tests were 

performed in liquid oxygen (LOX). Samples were frozen. 

5.1 PREPARATION METHOD – NASA STANDARD TEST 13

Preparation of samples was performed by test technicians in the test cell. Preparation of 

samples for Tests 13A and 13B were identical. Preparation temperatures and humidity 

were not recorded during initial testing. Preparation conditions were recorded only after 

ambient preparation conditions were suspected of influencing the CONSISTENCY of the 

test samples. Chilling of the aluminum cups was accomplished by placing them within a 

chill box partially filled with LOX. 

Two methods of preparation were identified during the testing of solvents the week of 

June 23, 2014. The two methods of sample preparation yielded different sample 

consistencies. The different methods of sample preparation are as follows:

3 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

1. The stainless steel insert (grease) cups were placed on a stainless steel plate located 

outside of the chill pan. The solvent was dripped into the cup and then the cup was 

transferred onto the cold block (partially submerged in LN2) cooling bar in the chill 

pan. This method of sample preparation was called Sample Preparation Method 1 

(Figure 1). 

2. The stainless steel insert (grease) cups were placed directly on the cold block 

(partially submerged in LN2) chill bar, or in the case of MSFC testing, directly on the 

chill box pan, and solvent was dripped into the cup. This method of sample 

preparation was called Sample Preparation Method 2 (Figure 2). 

Once frozen, the samples were transferred, one each, into the aluminum cups located 

within the chill box. Samples were allowed to chill within the aluminum cups for 10 min 

followed by a minimum of 45 min submersion in LOX. 

Both preparation methods were used during Tests G and H (AK-225G).1 Obtaining 

samples using Sample Preparation Method 1 was difficult due to inconsistencies in 

sample homogeneity. Sample homogeneity was observed to be dependent on the amount 

of solvent within the grease cup; if the cup was not full enough the sample would freeze 

partially white and partially clear. Clear portions of the samples tended to crack. All 

samples tested were homogenous and white in color. Sample Preparation Method 2 

consistently yielded homogenously white samples. The grease cups were purposely 

overfilled; excess frozen solvent was scraped off the grease cups prior to transferring 

samples to the aluminum cups. 

Preparation of Solstice PF was done entirely using Sample Preparation Method 1. 

Obtaining samples using Sample Preparation Method 1 was difficult due to 

inconsistencies in sample homogeneity, as previously described. Samples prepared using 

Sample Preparation Method 2 tended to freeze in the cup in a less dense solid. The 

samples resembled loose-pack snow and were slightly concave. Visibility was obscured 

when filling the grease cups using this method because the volatilized solvent created a 

volcano-like vapor cloud. 

1

 See Table 1 (Section 5.2.1) for a listing of all LOX mechanical impact tests at ambient pressure.

4 

 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Figure 1 

Sample Preparation Method 1 – Flow Chart 

Figure 2 

Sample Preparation Method 2 – Flow Chart 

5 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

5.1.1 PREPARATION VARIABLE INVESTIGATION – NASA STANDARD TEST 13 

During testing of G and H (AK-225G), no reactions were observed using either Sample 

Preparation Method 1 or Method 2. Five additional tests were performed using each of 

the sample preparation methods at the highest energy level attainable in test fixture, 

~ 108.4 J (80 ft-lbf). No reactions were observed. Samples were prepared at 17 °C 

(63 °F) and 46 percent relative humidity (RH). 

5.1.2 FINAL PREPARATION METHOD – NASA STANDARD TEST 13 

Sample Preparation Method 1, displayed in Figure 1, was chosen as the preferred method. 

This method resulted in a more consistent homogenous surface texture. Formation of ice 

crystals on the surface of the test samples was observed when preparing samples using 

Sample Preparation Method 2 (Figure 2). These ice crystals offered a non-uniform 

sample, and therefore Method 2 was not the preferred method of sample preparation. 

5.1.3 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA – NASA STANDARD TEST 13 

Any samples displaying inconsistencies were discarded. Samples that were cracked, 

broken or were non-homogenous were not tested. Prior to test, all aluminum cups were 

examined for ice fragments, and all fragments were picked out of the cups. These final 

inspections were performed to ensure consistent test samples. 

5.2 AMBIENT PRESSURE LOX MECHANICAL IMPACT TESTING - STANDARD 

TEST METHOD TEST 13A

Standard WSTF protocol for the ASTM G86 test began with the above-described Sample 

Preparation Method 1. No insert discs were placed inside the aluminum cups below the 

sample (grease) cups. A rebound catcher, which is a mechanical apparatus that limits the 

number of impacts to each sample to just one, was not used during standard testing.

Standard WSTF protocol involves performing an energy threshold. Testing began at the 

highest energy level of 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf). Two reactions at the 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf) energy 

level were required prior to decreasing the amount of energy imparted onto the sample. 

Subsequent decreases in energy levels required only one reaction per energy level. If the 

intensity of the reactions was such that the test team suspected reactions to occur at the 

next lower energy level, skipping energy levels was acceptable to expedite the bracketing 

of the reaction/energy threshold. Twenty consecutive tests in which no reactions were 

witnessed by any means, audible or visual (charring or flashing), with at least one 

reaction at the next higher energy level, were required to affirm a passing threshold 

6 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

energy level. One reaction in sixty samples at 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf) was also considered a 

passing energy threshold test. 

The data for all ambient pressure LOX mechanical impact tests performed are

summarized in Table 1. 

5.2.1 STANDARD TEST METHOD – 13A TEST RESULTS

All four solvents were tested using the standard WSTF test protocol. Initial test results for 

ambient pressure LOX mechanical impact testing are shown in Table 2. 

Test A was performed August 21, 2013 with AK-225G. Tests B, C, and D were 

performed in February 2014, a period of low relative humidity. The humidity during 

preparation for Tests A through D was not recorded. (Note: At WSTF, near Las Cruces, 

New Mexico, relative humidity tends to fall between 12 and 22 percent in the month of 

February.) All tests were performed with no stainless steel inserts below the stainless 

steel (grease) cups. All stainless steel cups were placed directly in the larger aluminum 

cup submerged in LOX. Stainless steel (grease) cups met ASTM G86 (1995) drawing cup 

dimensions (16.8 mm diameter, 1.3 mm depth). Stainless steel insert (grease) cups were 

machined and provided 90-degree angle internal edges between base and sidewall. 

Tests A (AK-225G), C (L-14780), and D (Solstice PF) passed at 97.6, 54.2, and 20.3 J 

(72, 40, and 15 ft-lbf), respectively. Test B (Solvokane) failed at the lowest energy level. 

For Test D (Solstice PF), average reaction frequency for 94.6 and 88.1 J (72 and 

65 ft-lbf) was 64 percent.

Test F ( L-14780) was prepared using Sample Preparation Method 1. The material passed 

at 88.1 J (65 ft-lbf) with 0/20 reactions. Samples were prepared at 17 °C (63 °F) and 

47 percent RH. 

Test E (Solstice PF) was performed June 23, 2014 using Sample Preparation Method 1. 

Testing was stopped due to depletion of the test material. Two reactions were observed at 

68 J (50 ft-lbf), and three tests were performed at 61 J (45 ft-lbf) with no reactions. 

Average reaction frequency for 97.6 and 88 J (72 and 65 ft-lbf) was 37 percent. Samples 

were prepared at 19 °C (66 °F) and 28 percent RH. 

7 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 1

All Ambient Pressure LOX Mechanical Impact Test Results

Date Test Material Description of Test RH 

(%)

Temp 

°C (°F)

Reactions/Test @ Energy Level 

J (ft-lbf)

108.4

(80)

97.6

(72)

88.1

(65)

81.3

(60)

74.6

(55)

68

(50)

61

(45)

54.2

(40)

47.5

(35)

40.7

(30)

33.9

(25)

27

(20)

20.3

(15)

13.5

(10)

8/21/13 A AK-225G STD -- -- -- 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2/5/14 B Solvokane STD -- -- -- 2/7 1/1 -- -- -- -- 1/2 1/1 1/8 1/12 1/12 1/2 1/11

2/6/14 C L-14780 STD -- -- -- 2/6 1/13 1/15 1/8 1/3 1/4 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- --

2/11/14 D Solstice PF STD -- -- -- 2/7 1/3 -- 1/5 1/2 1/14 1/11 1/15 1/6 1/2 1/9 0/20 --

6/23/14 E Solstice PF STD 28 19 (66) -- 2/5 2/6 1/11 2/6 2/12 0/3 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

6/24/14 F L-14780 STD 28 18 (65) 0/3 0/72 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

6/25/14 G AK 225G STD, Prep 1 46 17 (63) 0/5 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

6/25/14 H AK 225G STD, Prep 2 46 17 (63) 0/5 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

6/27/14 I Solstice PF STD 23 19 (67) -- 2/3 2/4 2/6 2/10 2/7 2/2 2/7 1/9 -- -- -- -- --

7/15/14 J Solstice PF w/insert 67 20 (68) -- 2/9 1/14 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

7/17/14 K Solstice PF STD 72 17 (63) -- 2/14 2/7 0/3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/8/14 L Solstice PF STD WS P/HW 80 18 (65) -- 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/8/14 M Solstice PF WS P/HW w/insert 61 21 (69) -- 2/9 1/7 1/4 1/2 1/11 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/9/14 N Solstice PF M P/WS HW w/insert 64 17 (62) -- 2/23 1/5 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/10/14 O Solstice PF M P/HW w/insert 50 18 (65) -- 2/28 1/2 1/1 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/11/14 P Solstice PF STD M P/HW 55 18 (65) -- 2/13 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/11/14 Q Solstice PF STD M P/HW RC 55 18 (65) 0/6 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/12/14 R Solstice PF STD WS P/M HW 72 19 (67) -- 2/22 1/3 1/15 1/8 1/7 1/8 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- --

9/15/14 S Solstice PF STD WS P/M HW 67 17 (63) -- 1/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/16/14 T Solstice PF STD WS P/HW F 75 16 (61) -- 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/16/14 U Solstice PF STD WS P/HW RC 75 18 (65) -- 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/16/14 V Solstice PF WS P/HW w/insert 75 18 (65) -- 2/15 1/10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/25/14 W Solstice PF WS P/HW w/insert F RC 57 19 (67) -- 1/61 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/25/14 X L-14780 WS P/HW w/insert F RC 55 19 (67) -- 0/70 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

STD = WSTF Standard Test Method; WS = WSTF; M = MSFC; P = Prep; HW = Hardware; F = Filtered solvent; RC = Rebound catcher used 

8 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 2 

Ambient Pressure LOX Mechanical Impact Test Results for Specific Investigations

Date Test Material Description of Test RH

(%)

Temp 

°C (°F)

Reactions/Test @ Energy Level 

J (ft-lbf)

108.4

(80)

97.6

(72)

88.1

(65)

81.3

(60)

74.6

(55)

68

(50)

61

(45)

54.2

(40)

47.5

(35)

40.7

(30)

33.9

(25)

27

(20)

20.3

(15)

13.5

(10)

WSTF Standard Method

8/21/13 A AK-225G STD -- -- -- 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2/5/14 B Solvokane STD -- -- -- 2/7 1/1 -- -- -- -- 1/2 1/1 1/8 1/12 1/12 1/2 1/11

2/6/14 C L-14780 STD -- -- -- 2/6 1/13 1/15 1/8 1/3 1/4 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- --

2/11/14 D Solstice PF STD -- -- -- 2/7 1/3 -- 1/5 1/2 1/14 1/11 1/15 1/6 1/2 1/9 0/20 --

Using a Rebound Catcher 

9/11/14 Q Solstice PF STD M P/HW RC 55 18 (65) 0/6 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/16/14 U Solstice PF STD WS P/HW RC 75 18 (65) -- 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/25/14 W Solstice PF WS P/HW w/insert F 

RC

57 19 (67) -- 1/61 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Using Filtered Solvents

9/16/14 T Solstice PF STD WS P/HW F 75 16 (61) -- 0/20

9/25/14 W Solstice PF WS P/HW w/insert F 

RC 57 19 (67) -- 1/61

--

STD = WSTF Standard Test Method; WS = WSTF; M = MSFC; P = Prep; HW = Hardware; F = Filtered solvent; RC = Rebound catcher used

9 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Test I (Solstice PF) was performed June 27, 2014 with a new container of the solvent 

from the same lot and batch as the previously provided container. Testing was restarted 

due the new solvent container. The samples were prepped using Sample Preparation 

Method 1. Two reactions were observed at 54 J (40 ft-lbf), and 1/9 samples tested reacted 

at 47.5 J (35 ft-lbf). Testing was stopped when no clean grease cups were available. 

Average reaction frequency for 97.6 and 88 J (72 and 65 ft-lbf) was 58 percent. Samples 

were prepared at 17 °C (63 °F) and 22 percent RH. 

Test J (Solstice PF) was performed July 15, 2014 and was prepared using Sample 

Preparation Method 1. Although it was known that insufficient grease cups were 

available to complete a test series, it was decided to divide available cups into two groups 

in order to assess material reactivity in the higher humidity environment that was 

currently available and to examine the effect of using stainless steel disks. In this test 

stainless steel discs were placed below the grease cups. Two reactions were observed at 

97.6 J (72 ft-lbf) and 1/9 samples tested reacted at 88.1 J (65 ft-lbf). Charring during test 

was light gray or of a discolored nature when reactions were observed. Average reaction 

frequency for 97.6 and 88.1 J (72 and 65 ft-lbf) was 15 percent. Samples were prepared at 

17 °C (63 °F) and 67 percent RH. 

Test K (Solstice PF) was performed July 17, 2014 and was prepared using Sample 

Preparation Method 1. Again, it was known that not enough grease cups were available to 

complete a test series, and it was decided to divide available cups into two groups in 

order to assess material reactivity in the higher humidity environment that was currently 

available and to examine the effect of using stainless steel disks. In this test, stainless 

steel discs were placed below the grease cups. This test provided a sample set to compare 

with tests performed without stainless steel discs below the grease cups. Two reactions 

were observed at 88.1 J (65 ft-lbf), and 0/3 samples tested reacted at 81.3 J (60 ft-lbf). 

Reactions observed during test J were less noticeable than reactions observed during 

Test K. Charring observed during this test were black and more abundant than in Test J 

when reactions were observed. Average reaction frequency for 88.1 and 81.3 J (65 and 60 

ft-lbf) was 21percent. Samples were prepared at 17°C (63°F) and 72 percent RH. 

5.2.2 STANDARD TEST METHOD – 13A DISCUSSION

Results obtained during the initial testing of each of the solvents showed the AK-225G to 

be the superior solvent with respect to oxygen compatibility. Candidate solvents were 

tested between February 5 and 11, 2014. The L-14780 and Solstice PF solvents 

performed better than the Solvokane, which failed at the lowest obtainable energy level. 

All potential replacement solvents resulted in reactions at some energy level. 

10 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Tests performed at MSFC on the Solstice PF solvent resulted in an energy threshold of 

97.6 J (72 ft-lbs). With such a large variance in results, several variables were considered 

as possible sources for these inconsistencies. 

Further testing in June and July of 2014 at WSTF was performed using Standard WSTF 

protocol, exploiting the higher humidity during spring/summer months. Tests performed 

using the standard WSTF method are displayed in Table 1. 

5.3 TEST VARIABLE INVESTIGATION – NASA STANDARD TEST 13A

Cooperative WSTF and MSFC testing took place at WSTF during the weeks of 

September 8 and 15, 2014 after conflicting results were reported by the two test centers. 

The purpose of the cooperative testing was to help establish a standardized test method 

that could be used to move forward in the solvent evaluation. Variables considered during 

this portion of the evaluation included the following:

1. Sample preparation method 

2. The use of a rebound catcher 

3. Filtering solvents before test

4. Hardware cleanliness (hardware provided by MSFC and WSTF)

5. Preparation humidity 

6. Use of insert disks below sample (grease) cups 

All testing to evaluate the effect of the described variables were performed using the 

Solstice PF solvent. 

5.3.1 VARIABLE – SAMPLE PREPARATION

The sample preparation investigation consisted of comparing the test results obtained 

when technicians from each Center (MSFC and WSTF) prepared samples for testing. 

WSTF technicians prepared samples using Sample Preparation Method 1 described in 

Section 5.1. MSFC technicians prepared samples similar to Sample Preparation 

Method 2, also described in Section 5.1. WSTF chose to use Sample Preparation 

Method 1 due to the consistency in obtaining homogenous sample surface textures. This 

variable investigation was not concerned with the sample acceptance criteria but rather 

the effect on energy threshold results. 

11 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

5.3.2 VARIABLE – REBOUND CATCHER 

During the variable evaluation, an elevated number of the reactions were observed during 

sample cup edge/striker pin edge interaction. Two modes of edge-to-edge interaction 

were identified. Figure 3 shows an example of each of the edge-to-edge orientations 

during impact. 

Figure 3 

Examples of Edge Impact: (a) Edge (Uniform), (b) Non-Uniform

Non-uniform impacts were determined to be especially severe. Two methods of obtaining 

non-uniform impacts were identified:

1. Uncentered sample cup and striker pin 

2. Secondary impacts resulting in non-uniform impacts

Non-uniform impacts result in the potential for higher energy imparted onto the test 

sample. Scraping caused by the metal-to-metal contact can produce heat and induce 

reactions. When testing solid samples, the primary impact often shatters the material and 

subsequent impacts result in higher surface area to mass ratios, which encourage 

reactions. Heat caused by metal-to-metal contact coupled with shattered test samples 

promote ignition of the material. 

Rebound catchers are mechanical devices used to prevent secondary impacts. The effects 

of secondary impacts were eliminated by the use of a rebound catcher. 

5.3.3 VARIABLE – FILTERED SOLVENTS 

Impurities within the solvents have the potential to react in LOX, as they have the 

potential to kindle to the solvent and cause reactions when impacted. Removing these 

impurities would prevent this potential for reactions. Prior to use in the field, all solvents 

are filtered; therefore, filtering of solvents prior to test would ensure testing reflects 

in-use configuration of the materials. Filtering of solvents prior to testing is also in 

accordance with good lab practices. 

12 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

5.3.4 VARIABLE – HARDWARE CLEANLINESS

The impact on cleanliness was considered as a possible reason for the disparity in test 

results between the two test centers. Hardware at WSTF is typically cleaned using a 

Brulin®1

/tap water solution followed by sonication (WSTF Job Instruction 

(WJI-) 800-0121.A. 2 All stainless steel discs and grease cups are cleaned to oxygen 

service 50A. Marshall Space Flight Center cleans hardware for oxygen service in 

accordance with MSFC-SPEC-164D.3 

To obtain comparable results, WSTF cleaned all hardware (aluminum cups, stainless 

steel cups and discs, and striker pins) to oxygen service 50A. 

5.3.5 VARIABLE – PREPARATION HUMIDITY 

Relative humidity at the time of sample preparation was considered a potential cause of 

the disparity in results between testing centers. Relative humidity in Las Cruces, New 

Mexico during the month of February usually falls between 12 and 20 percent, whereas 

typical humidity in Huntsville, Alabama is much higher. Initial testing did not include the 

recording of humidity in the prep area. 

It was believed that the formation and entrapment of water ice within or on the surface of 

samples might take place when preparing samples in humid environments. This 

entrapment of moisture was thought to decrease the reactivity of the test samples. 

For this evaluation, the humidity was monitored and recorded near the preparation area. 

The evaluation took place during the month of September, a more humid time of the year 

at WSTF. 

1

 Brulin® is a registered trademark of Brulin & Company, Inc., Indianapolis, IN. 2

 In-house document. WJI-800-0121.A. Sample Preparation Manual for NASA-STD-6001, Navy Protocol, and 

Selected ASTM Procedures. July 15, 2009. 3

 Marshall Space Flight Center. MSFC-SPEC-164D, Cleanliness of Components for Use in Oxygen, Fuel, and 

Pneumatic Systems Specification. January 30, 2014.

13 

 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

5.3.6 VARIABLE – INSERT DISCS 

Insert discs are typically placed between the soft aluminum LOX cup and the smaller 

stainless steel grease cup. Insert discs provide a more solid impact surface as opposed to 

the soft aluminum cups, which deform and absorb energy when impacted. The use of 

insert discs should result in a more severe test, but MSFC results indicated otherwise. 

WSTF does not typically use these components; however, tests repeatedly resulted in 

lower energy thresholds than MSFC. Controlled tests were performed to analyze the 

significance of this variable.

5.4 TEST VARIABLE INVESTIGATION RESULTS – NASA STANDARD TEST 13A 

The following are the results obtained from the variable investigation performed using 

the Solstice PF solvent. Tests were performed at WSTF by WSTF and MSFC personnel, 

and results are displayed in Table 3. 

Two test series (L and M) were performed September 8, 2014. The first test performed 

(Test L) was a standard WSTF test (Sample Preparation Method 1, WSTF hardware, no 

insert disk, no rebound catcher, and unfiltered solvent). Preparation conditions were 

80 percent humidity at 18 °C (65 °F). No reactions were observed at 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf). A 

second batch of samples was prepared with insert disks below the stainless steel grease 

cups. Test M yielded an energy threshold of 54.23 J (40 ft-lbf). Preparation conditions 

were 61 percent RH at 20.6 °C (69 °F).

MSFC personnel prepared the test samples September 9, 2014 with WSTF hardware, 

unfiltered solvent, and insert disks. No rebound catcher was used for this test (Test N). 

The threshold was achieved at 81.3 J (60 ft-lbf). The following day, the same test 

(Test O) performed with MSFC hardware at lower humidity resulted in a slightly lower 

threshold of 74.6 J (55 ft-lbf). 

Two tests were performed September 11, 2014, prepared by MSFC personnel. Tests were 

executed without stainless steel inserts. Samples used for both tests were prepared 

simultaneously with identical environmental conditions. The first of the tests (Test P) 

resulted in an energy threshold of 88.2 J (65 ft-lbf). The rebound catcher was installed 

and a second test (Test Q) was performed, which resulted in an energy threshold of 98.6 J 

(72 ft-lbf). Six additional tests at approximately 108.4 J (80 ft-lbf) were performed, with 

no reactions. 

14 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 3 

Ambient Pressure LOX Mechanical Impact Test Variable Investigation Results

Date Test Material Description of Test RH 

(%)

Temp 

°C (°F)

Reactions/Test @ Energy Level 

J (ft-lbf)

108.4

(80)

97.6

(72)

88.1

(65)

81.3

(60)

74.6

(55)

68

(50)

61

(45)

54.2

(40)

47.5

(35)

40.7

(30)

33.9

(25)

27

(20)

20.3

(15)

13.5

(10)

2/11/14 D Solstice PF STD -- -- -- 2/7 1/3 -- 1/5 1/2 1/14 1/11 1/15 1/6 1/2 1/9 0/20 --

9/8/14 L Solstice PF STD WS P/HW 80 18 (65) -- 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/11/14 P Solstice PF STD M P/HW 55 18 (65) -- 2/13 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/11/14 Q Solstice PF STD M P/HW RC 55 18 (65) 0/6 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/12/14 R Solstice PF STD WS P/M HW 72 19 (67) -- 2/22 1/3 1/15 1/8 1/7 1/8 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- --

9/8/14 M Solstice PF WS P/HW w/insert 61 21 (69) -- 2/9 1/7 1/4 1/2 1/11 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/9/14 N Solstice PF M P/WS HW w/insert 64 17 (62) -- 2/23 1/5 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

9/10/14 O Solstice PF M P/HW w/insert 50 18 (65) -- 2/28 1/2 1/1 0/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

STD = WSTF Standard Test Method; WS = WSTF; M = MSFC; P = Prep; HW = Hardware; F = Filtered solvent; RC = Rebound catcher used 

15 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Marshall Space Flight Center supplied clean hardware for the investigation. While testing 

on September 12, 2014, one batch of the striker pins was grossly contaminated with 

aluminum-oxide flakes thought to have been generated by the anodized pin racks. Two 

extremely energetic reactions were observed when using striker pins from this batch. The 

suspect striker pins were analyzed for particulate, and gross metallic particulate 

contamination was confirmed within this batch. In subsequent tests performed by WSTF 

personnel using MSFC hardware, the hardware was cleaned using dry gaseous nitrogen 

to blow off/remove particulate. 

A high humidity (72 percent RH) test was performed using MSFC hardware prepared by 

WSTF. No inserts were used. Tests resulted in an energy threshold of 54.2 J (40 ft-lbf).

Three tests were performed September 16, 2014. All samples were prepared under the 

same environmental conditions by WSTF personnel with WSTF hardware. Tests using 

filtered solvent (Test T) and unfiltered solvent with the rebound catcher installed (Test U) 

resulted in energy thresholds of 98.6 J (72 ft-lbf) each. The third test performed that day 

was performed with insert disks. This test was an incomplete data set resulting in 1/10 

reactions at 88.1 J (65 ft-lbf). 

In an attempt to further analyze the effects of variables, tests were separated into the three 

different types of data plots: for sample preparation method, hardware cleanliness, and

use of insert discs. Since no reactions were observed using either filtered solvents or 

rebound catchers, tests utilizing these variables were not considered during this portion of 

the evaluation. All tests presented in Figures 4 through 6 (Sections 5.4.1, 5.4.4, and 5.4.6, 

respectively) represent completed tests. Energy thresholds and reaction frequencies were 

plotted as functions of relative humidity. Black trend lines represent linear regression 

models of all data included in the plot while colored trend lines correspond to the data of 

the particular Center (WSTF blue; MSFC red). 

5.4.1 TEST RESULTS – SAMPLE PREPARATION

Sample preparation performed by WSTF and MSFC was compared using Sample 

Preparation Method 1 (Section 5.1). Energy threshold results for both MSFC and WSTF 

preparation trended very closely to the combined linear regression. The tightly grouped 

regressions indicate little to no dependence of sample preparation on energy threshold 

(Figure 4 a). When analyzing the differences between WSTF and MSFC prepped samples 

with respect to reaction frequency (Figure 4 b), some differences were observed. 

16 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

(a) (b)

Figure 4

NASA Standard Test 13A – Sample Preparation Investigation

5.4.2 TEST RESULTS – REBOUND CATCHER 

Table 2 displays the results of these tests. All tests performed with the rebound catcher 

resulted in 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf) energy thresholds. Tests performed using the rebound catcher 

were executed between 55 and 75 percent RH. No reactions were observed when using 

the rebound catcher. 

5.4.3 TEST RESULTS – FILTERED SOLVENTS 

Two tests were performed using filtered Solstice PF solvent (Table 2). All tests on 

filtered Solstice PF solvents resulted in energy thresholds of 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf); however, 

results were inconclusive due to the coupling with other variables. It is difficult to discern 

if the decrease in reactivity was a result of the filtering of the solvent or due to the use of 

the rebound catcher or high prep humidity. Due to the end use configuration and good lab 

practices, WSTF suggests the filtering of all solvents for testing. No reactions were 

observed when using the filtered solvents.

17 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

5.4.4 TEST RESULTS – HARDWARE CLEANLINESS

As part of standard procedures, a minimum of one blank test after five sample tests is 

required to ensure cleanliness of hardware. A blank test sample consists of a stainless 

steel insert placed within an aluminum cup submerged in LOX. The blank test sample is 

impacted in just the same way as an actual test sample. At no time during testing were 

reactions observed during blank impacts. Reactions during a blank test would indicate 

contamination of hardware. 

Further analysis of the differences in test center cleanliness was performed by analyzing 

the plotted data sets (Figure 5). As before, all complete data sets (excluding tests utilizing 

filtered solvents and rebound catchers) were used to compare the impact of where the 

hardware was cleaned on reaction frequency and energy threshold as a function of 

relative humidity. Reaction frequency as a function of relative humidity for both 

preparation methods correlated well with the combined linear regression (Figure 5 b). 

This relationship indicates no significant dependence of reaction frequency on the 

method of hardware cleaning. 

The relationship between energy threshold and relative humidity (Figure 5 a) is more 

inconclusive. Performing testing with MSFC-cleaned hardware at lower relative humidity 

would fill in gaps within the data set and possibly correlate more closely to the overall 

linear regression. 

(a) (b)

Figure 5 

NASA Standard Test 13A – Hardware Cleanliness Investigation

18 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

5.4.5 TEST RESULTS – PREPARATION HUMIDITY 

Decoupling variables was difficult due to the uncontrollable influence of sample 

preparation relative humidity. When analyzing the data plots described in Sections 5.4.1, 

5.4.4, and 5.4.6 (Figures 4 through 6), the dependence of reaction frequency and energy 

threshold to relative humidity is obvious. All testing indicates lower preparation humidity 

results in a more severe and reactive test. 

5.4.6 TEST RESULTS– INSERT DISCS 

When examining data with respect to the use of inserts, energy threshold data (Figure 6 a) 

trended nearly identically to average energy threshold data. Energy thresholds tended to 

decrease as a result of an increase in relative humidity. Tests performed with inserts with 

respect to reaction frequency (Figure 6 b) resulted in data that appeared to be more 

dependent on relative humidity; however, the data set was not very tightly grouped. More 

data would be required to perform a more reliable analysis of the reaction frequency 

dependence on relative humidity as a result of insert comparisons. 

(a) (b)

Figure 6 

NASA Standard Test 13A – Insert Investigation

19 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

5.5 MODIFIED TEST METHOD

Because of the differing results at WSTF and MSFC from the LOX mechanical impact 

testing, a NASA Independent Assessment (IA) Team, sponsored by NASA Engineering 

& Safety Center (NESC), was formed to investigate the test variables and conditions that 

could affect the reactivity in LOX and to establish a modified test protocol to ASTM G86 

for subsequent testing. Conclusions from the test variable investigation resulted in 

changes in the test method described in the following section.1

5.5.1 MODIFIED TEST METHOD – DESCRIPTION

The exclusion of non-uniform and secondary impacts increases the reproducibility of the 

test method; therefore, it was agreed that a rebound catcher be used to mitigate each of 

the variables. An acceptance criteria excluding non-uniform impacts ensures that 

variability associated with such impacts would not affect the reproducibility of the test 

method. 

The sample preparation method did not appear to have a significant impact in the 

reactivity of test samples; however, the pre-chilling of the sample (grease) cups prior to 

the introduction of solvent was thought to limit the chance of introducing moisture into 

test samples. Although the method of sample preparation did not have a significant 

impact, relative humidity at the time of sample preparation was shown to play a 

significant role in the impact sensitivity. 

Limited data were gathered evaluating the impact of solvent filtration on impact 

sensitivity. Nonetheless, filtration should be performed prior to performing mechanical 

impact testing due to the following:

1. Filtration is a good lab practice

2. Current storage containers of the size used for some solvents are plain, unlined carbon 

steel susceptible to oxidation

3. Filtration will be performed prior to use in the field 

1

 NESC Independent Assessment. HCFC225cg (AK225G) Replacement Study, 3rd Technical Interchange 

Meeting, Independent Assessment Investigation/Ambient Pressure LOX Impact Testing. Steven Gentz 

(NASA/NESC) and H. Richard Ross (A2R/SSC Gas & Materials Science). Hosted by NASA/WSTF October 21-

22, 2014. 

20 

 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Following the variable investigation, it was decided that the final tests would incorporate 

the following: 

1. Pre-chilling of the sample (grease) cups prior to the introduction of solvent 

2. Use of insert disks below sample (grease) cups

3. Use of a rebound catcher 

4. Filtered solvents 

5. Preparation humidity below 60 percent RH 

6. Invalidation of non-uniform impacts resulting in reactions

5.5.2 MODIFIED TEST METHOD - TEST RESULTS

Both L-14780 and Solstice PF were filtered using the same filter and filtration flask used 

by the independent assessor. The Solstice PF was filtered first. A triple rinse of the 

equipment with non-filtered L-14780 was performed on all the glassware prior to 

filtration. A triple rinse of the filtration flask was performed prior to final filtration. A 

second filter was installed prior to final filtration of the 3M solvent L-14780. Both 

solvents were filtered at approximately 10:00 AM on September 25, 2014. 

Sample preparation began at approximately 11:00 AM. Eighty samples of each of the 

solvents were prepped the day of testing. Table 4 shows the variation in prep temperature 

and humidity in ~ 15 min intervals for each of the solvent preps. Solstice PF was 

prepped, immediately followed by the preparation of the L-14780 solvent. The solvents 

were not pre-chilled. All grease cups were pre-chilled prior to sample preparation. 

Table 4 

Modified Test Method Prep Conditions 

Solvents Time Humidity

(%)

Temperature

(F)

Solstice PF

11:05 56 68

11:20 57 67

11:35 57 67

11:48 58 65

L-14780 

12:00 53 64

12:15 55 62

12:30 58 66

12:42 58 65

21 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Testing commenced at 1:00 PM. Two blank impacts were performed at the start of the 

first test. Forty tests of the Solstice solvent were performed prior to changing over to the 

L-14780 solvent. Five blank impacts were performed between testing of different 

solvents. Testing of L-14780 began at approximately 2:30 PM. Seventy tests were 

performed with L-14780 before switching back to the Solstice PF. At approximately 

6:20 PM five blank impacts were performed prior to switching back to Solstice PF. An 

additional 22 tests were performed with the Solstice PF. 

No reactions for 70 impacts occurred during the testing of L-14780. Two reactions were 

observed during the testing of the Solstice solvent. One of these reactions occurred during 

a non-uniform impact; the second occurred on an edge strike. 

5.6 SUMMARY STANDARD TEST 13 METHOD CONCLUSIONS

All candidate materials were shown to react when mechanically impacted while 

submerged in LOX. The L-14780 performed better than either of the other two candidate 

materials (Solstice PF and Solvokane); however, variables were shown to greatly affect 

the reactivity of samples. These variables were characterized through testing; and test 

parameters such as secondary rebounds, non-uniform impacts, particulate within the 

solvent and test hardware, as well as preparation humidity, were shown to affect test 

results. Further testing would be required to fully characterize the variables discussed in 

this paper; in particular, more replicates of each test performed should be tested during 

periods of lower relative humidity. 

Recommendations to ensure control of parameters were employed with positive results. 

Tests performed with these controls in place allowed for an evaluation of the materials 

rather than on external variables. Preparing adequate samples for a complete test series of 

each of the final two candidate materials, in approximately the same conditions, at the 

same time, and employing proper filtration and the use of the rebound catcher to mitigate 

uncontrolled impacts, resulted in a passing energy threshold evaluation for each of the 

materials. 

All tests performed during this evaluation are displayed in Table 1. 

22 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

6.0 HIGH-PRESSURE LOX MECHANICAL IMPACT TESTING

Limited tests were performed to analyze the effect of testing in a high-pressure oxygen 

environment. 

6.1 PREPARATION METHOD

The preparation of test samples for high-pressure LOX tests and ambient LOX tests were 

identical. The method of preparation is documented in Section 5.1 of this report. 

6.2 HIGH-PRESSURE LOX MECHANICAL IMPACT TESTING - STANDARD 

TEST METHOD TEST 13B

Standard WSTF protocol involves performing a pressure threshold. Testing began at the 

highest energy level of 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf) at some pressure above ambient conditions. One 

reaction at the 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf) energy level was required prior to decreasing the test 

pressure. Pressure was varied by 3.45 MPa (500 psi) increments. If the intensity of the 

reactions was such that the test team suspected reactions to occur at the next lower energy 

level, skipping test pressures was acceptable to expedite the bracketing of the 

reaction/energy threshold. Twenty consecutive tests in which no reactions were witnessed 

by any means, audible or visual (charring or flashing), with at least one reaction at the 

next higher energy level, were required to affirm a passing threshold pressure level. One 

reaction in 60 samples at 97.6-J (72 ft-lbf) was also considered a passing energy 

threshold test. 

Unlike testing at ambient pressures, high-pressure tests require the use of a rebound 

catcher.

6.3 STANDARD TEST METHOD – 13B TEST RESULTS/DISCUSSION

Solstice PF and L-14780 performed similarly, each passing at 51.7 MPa (7500 psia). 

Solvokane failed the pressure threshold evaluation, reacting at 3.45 MPa (500 psia). 

Solstice PF and L-14780 could be considered equivalent with respect to oxygen 

compatibility, with Solvokane performing much more poorly. 

23 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

7.0 AUTOGENOUS IGNITION TEMPERATURE TESTING 

Autogenous ignition temperature (AIT) tests are performed as a means of determining the 

temperature at which liquids and solids spontaneously ignite. The standard is detailed in

ASTM G72. 

7.1 PREPARATION METHOD – AIT TESTING

The only deviation from the standard preparation method described in ASTM G72 was 

the pre-chilling of sample material in an attempt to limit the evaporation of the test 

material. Glass beakers of the solvent were chilled inside a refrigerator. Maintaining 

pre-weighed amounts of a chilled solvent was achieved by nesting the test vial within a 

20 mL glass vial partially submerged in a saltwater ice bath. 

7.2 STANDARD TEST METHOD – AIT TESTING

The standard test method is performed as follows. A sample holding assembly, contained 

within a reaction vessel pressurized with 100 percent oxygen to 10.3 MPa (1500 psi), is 

heated in an electric furnace at a rate of 5 ± 1 °C (9 ± 1 °F)/min from 60 to 260 °C 

(140 to 500 °F). Heating of the vessel is continued at an uncontrolled rate to a maximum 

temperature of 450 °C (842 °F). Temperatures are monitored as a function of time by 

means of a thermocouple and data acquisition system. During testing, pressure is 

monitored but not maintained. Ignition of the test sample is indicated by a rapid 

temperature rise of at least 20 °C (36 °F) and confirmed posttest by the destruction of the 

sample. 

Standard testing is performed at 10.3 MPa (1500 psia) with a sample size of 

0.20 ± 0.03 g. A sample size of 200 ± 30 mg is selected to prevent damage to the test 

apparatus as a result of an overpressure caused by a reaction of test material. Samples are 

typically maintained at room temperature. Three purges of 100 percent oxygen at a 

minimum of 345 kPa (50 psia) are performed prior to each test to ensure the venting of 

residual air. 

Deviation from ASTM G72 pressures was requested of WSTF to coincide with testing 

performed during the last solvent evaluation. During that solvent evaluation, AIT tests 

were performed at two pressures: 345 kPa (50 psia) and 13.8 MPa (2000 psia). Tests with

the control solvents (AK-225G and HFE-7100) performed at the requisite test pressures 

of 345 kPa (50 psia) and 13.8 MPa (2000 psia) yielded no AITs. These results correspond 

to legacy testing. 

24 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Test results using standard methods proved to be inconclusive. Evidence of combustion 

was noted; however, potential reactions were not rapid enough to register AITs. Prior to 

testing the potential replacement solvents, an investigation into the test variables was 

performed to optimize the test method.

7.3 TEST VARIABLE INVESTIGATION – AIT TESTING

Control tests performed using HFE-7100 and AK-225G aided in the development of an 

improved test method. These solvents are considered oxygen compatible solvents and 

exhibit volatility similar to the potential replacement solvents. The absence of an AIT 

was indicative of a lack of adequate sample material within the reaction vessel during 

tests. Forced evaporation during purging and inadequate sample size were identified as 

two potential causes for inadequate available sample material during testing. 

Initially, three variables were considered during this investigation: sample size, pretest 

purges, and thermocouple placement. After obtaining inconclusive results, a fourth 

variable, test pressure, was examined resulting in AITs. To correlate with historical data, 

tests were performed at the requested test pressures of 345 kPa (50 psia) and 13.8 MPa 

(2000 psia). 

7.3.1 VARIABLE – TEST SAMPLE SIZE

Any combustion event requires three components: fuel, oxidizer, and an ignition source. 

Autogenous ignition temperature tests are typically performed in 100 percent oxygen 

environments (oxidizer), and the test method provides the heat/ignition source; therefore, 

ensuring adequate combustible material is key to combustion. 

Volatile solvents present a challenge prior to testing; however, once the reaction chamber 

is sealed, the volatility should not present a problem igniting the material. These 

materials all burn in the gas phase; therefore, evaporation of the material is required for 

combustion. Standard sized samples may be an insufficient amount of material to react 

violently enough to register as an AIT. 

Addressing inadequate sample size involved gradually increasing the sample size until a 

reaction was observed. This gradual increase in sample size allowed for a controlled 

method of varying the test protocol while ensuring safe operation of the test system. 

25 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

7.3.2 VARIABLE – PRETEST PURGES

The potential for forced evaporation due to pretest purging was considered and evaluated 

for both control solvents. Two types of tests were performed to evaluate the effect of 

purging on AIT test results. 

The first test used to evaluate purging consisted of pressurizing test samples immediately 

followed by removal of the test samples. No heat was induced on samples during these 

simulation tests. Samples were pre-chilled and weighed prior to loading into a reaction 

vessel. Three consecutive pressurization/vent cycles were completed prior to removal of 

the test sample. Posttest weights were recorded and compared to pretest weights. These 

tests were conducted at 345 kPa (50 psia), 6.9 MPa (1000 psia), and 13.8 MPa 

(2000 psia). 

The second evaluation conducted to investigate this variable involved performing AIT 

tests with and without purges. AIT tests were performed at each of the requested 

pressures with three or zero test pressure purges. 

7.3.3 VARIABLE – THERMOCOUPLE PLACEMENT

The position of the thermocouple was examined to determine its influence on AIT results. 

Figure 7 is a schematic of the AIT assembly. The standard depth of the tip of the 

thermocouple relative to the sample holder is 15 mm below the upper edge of the test 

vial. The ‘X’ dimension located on Figure 7 represents the length that was varied for this 

evaluation. Tests were performed to examine this variable at the standard depth of 15, 30, 

and 60 mm (0.59, 1.18, and 2.36 in.). All tests were performed using three purges and 

500 mg samples.

26 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Figure 7 

AIT Assembly

7.4 TEST RESULTS – AIT TESTING

The results of each of the variables described in Section 7.3 are discussed in this section. 

Triplicates of each test were performed unless otherwise noted. 

7.4.1 TEST RESULTS – TEST SAMPLE SIZE

The results of the sample size study are presented in Tables 5 and 6. Sample sizes were 

incrementally increased at each pressure until AITs were observed. Temperature Limit 

(TL) indicates tests in which the TLs of the test system were reached with no reactions. 

In the past, tests with these results were potentially erroneously reported as AITs 

> 800 °F. 

No noticeable effect is observed when increasing the sample size beyond the mass at 

which an AIT is observed. An increase in pressure tends to lower the AIT as expected. 

27 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Tests of 500 mg of each of the two control solvents resulted in AITs when tested at 

13.8 MPa (2000 psia). AITs were observed when testing HFE 7100 at 345 kPa (50 psia); 

however, no AITs were observed when testing AK-225G at that pressure. A lack of 

oxygen was suspected as a cause for the absence of any reactions when testing AK-225G. 

AK-225G was tested at 483 kPa (70 psia), yielding an AIT higher than recorded at higher 

pressures. Findings from the sample size investigation concluded 1000 mg as an optimal 

level for solvent evaluation testing. Averages and standard deviations are reported in 

Tables 5 and 6 for all triplicates performed. 

28 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 5 

AIT Method Improvement Test Matrix

345 kPa (50 psia) 13.8 MPa (2000 psia)

0 Purges 3 purges 0 Purges 3 purges

Mass

(mg)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Avg

°C (°F)

SD

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Avg

°C (°F)

SD

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Avg

°C (°F)

SD

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Avg

°C (°F)

SD

°C (°F)

AK-225G

200 TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL -- 237

(458)

228

(443)

233

(452)

233

(451)

4.4

(8) TL TL TL TL -- 

500 TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL -- 230

(446)

229

(444)

237

(459)

232

(450)

4.4

(8)

226

(438)

230

(446)

234

(454)

230

(446)

4.4

(8)

750 TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL -- -- -- -- -- -- 235

(456) -- -- 235(456) -- 

1000 TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL -- -- -- -- -- -- 230

(446) -- -- 230(446)* -- 

Historical

AK-225G 200 -- -- -- -- -- TL -- -- TL -- -- -- -- -- -- TL -- -- TL -- 

HFE-7100

200 TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL --

500 388

(731)

389

(732)

391

(735)

389

(733)

1.1

(2) TL 374(705)

380

(716)

377

(711)

4.4

(8)

341

(645)

336

(636)

334

(634)

337

(638)

3.3

(6)

337

(639)

341

(646)

3376

(636)

338

(640)

2.8

(5)

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 327

(620) -- -- 327(620) -- 

1000 -- -- -- -- -- 381

(718)

392

(738)

393

(740)

389

(732)

6.7

(12) -- -- -- -- -- 332(629) -- -- 332(629)* -- 

TL = Temperature Limit, no AIT detected, heater went to full limit; SD =Standard Deviation; Avg = average; * only one test performed

29 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 6

AIT Method Improvement Test Matrix, 483 kPa (70 psia) 

0 Purges 3 Purges

Mass

(mg)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Avg

°C (°F)

SD

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Test

°C (°F)

Avg

°C (°F)

SD

°C (°F)

AK-225G

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

750 TL TL TL TL -- TL TL TL TL --

1000 TL TL TL TL -- 273

523

278

532

276

528

276

528

2.8

(5)

TL = Temperature Limit, no AIT detected, heater went to full limit; SD = Standard Deviation; Avg = average

7.4.2 TEST RESULTS – PRETEST PURGES

Results of the purge mass loss evaluation indicate more mass was lost to purging at 

higher pressure for each of the solvents than at lower pressure. Approximately the same 

amount of solvent was lost during purging regardless of the initial sample size. Table 7 

presents the results of the purge mass loss evaluation for AK-225G and HFE-7100. 

An inherent outcome of the purging process is the loss of some of the sample, and at 

higher test pressures this loss becomes a significant factor when compared to initial 

sample mass. The evaluation of pretest purging is presented in Table 7. Historical tests

for AK-225G are also presented in Table 5 for direct comparison. An increase in sample 

size results in AIT for both control solvents. 

The influence of residual air within the reaction vessel is most notable at lower pressures 

due the ratio of air to oxygen. Table 7 shows what kind of influence the lack of 

100 percent oxygen pretest purges has on test results. An inadequate amount of oxygen 

within the reaction vessel at the beginning of the test results in a test with no AIT, as can 

be seen in Table 6 (483 kPa (70 psi)). Pretest purging with oxygen yields results during 

testing of 1000 mg AK-225G at 483 kPa (70 psia), while the lack of purging results in 

tests that reach the Temperature Limit (TL) of the test system (Table 6). As a result of 

these findings, three purges at test pressure are preferred for final solvent evaluation 

testing. 

30 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 7 

AK-225G and HFE-7100 Purge Mass Loss Evaluation* 

Purge 

Pressure

MPa (psia)

Pretest 

Temperature

°C (°F)

Pretest 

Mass

(mg)

Posttest 

Mass

(mg)

Mass 

Loss

(mg)

Mass 

Loss 

(%)

Avg. Mass 

Loss

(mg)

Avg. Mass 

Loss 

(%)

Standard 

Deviation

(mg)

AK-225G

0.3

(50)

2.2 (36) 169 149 20 11.8

2.2 (36) 167 151 16 9.6 18.3 10.8 2.1

2.2 (36) 171 152 19 11.1

2.2 (36) 515 497 18 3.5

1.7 (35) 506 484 22 4.3 15 2.9 8.9

1.7 (35) 505 500 5 1.0

6.9

(1000)

2.2 (36) 185 151 34 18.4

3.3 (38) 230 196 34 14.8 31.3 15.2 4.6

-1.1 (30) 210 184 26 12.4

3.9 (39) 519 488 31 6.0

-1.1 (37) 496 457 39 7.9 34 6.8 4.4

3.9 (39) 485 453 32 6.6

13.8

(2000)

0.6 (33) 227 146 103 35.7

2.2 (36) 219 183 81 16.4 58.7 26.4 22.5

3.3 (38) 217 158 36 27.2

-1.1 (30) 482 446 59 7.5

-0.6 (31) 488 445 36 8.8 40.7 8.3 4.0

0.6 (33) 502 459 43 8.6

HFE-7100

0.3 

(50)

0.6 (33) 204 189 15 7.4

-1.1 (30) 214 198 16 7.5 13.3 6.2 3.8

-1.1 (30) 235 226 9 3.8

-1.1 (30) 489 477 12 2.5

-1.1 (30) 516 505 11 2.1 13 2.6 2.6

-1.1 (30) 516 500 16 3.1

6.9

(1000)

-1.1 (30) 230 198 32 13.9

-1.1 (30) 190 167 23 12.1 27 12.5 4.6

-1.1 (30) 226 200 26 11.5

-1.1 (30) 520 507 13 2.5

-1.1 (30) 514 483 31 6.0 25 4.9 10.4

-1.7 (29) 514 483 31 6.0

13.8 

(2000)

-0.6 (31) 219 203 16 7.3

0.0 (32) 223 184 39 17.5 28.3 12.8 11.6

0.6 (33) 223 193 30 13.5

2.8 (37) 507 438 69 13.6

1.7 (35) 513 476 37 7.2 58.3 11.5 18.5

1.1 (34) 509 440 69 13.6 * 100 % oxygen w/ 3 purges

31 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

7.4.3 TEST RESULTS – THERMOCOUPLE PLACEMENT

For thermocouple placement, no effect was observed between 15 and 30 mm, and 

minimal effect was observed at 60 mm. Because changes in thermocouple placement did 

not appreciably influence test results (Table 8), the final AIT test configuration would 

utilize standard thermocouple placement. 

Table 8 

Thermocouple Placement Evaluation*

Placement from Top 

(mm)

Pretest Mass 

(mg)

AIT 

°C (°F)

Average 

°C (°F)

Standard Deviation

°C (°F)

15 505 226 (438)

15 525 230 (446) 230 (446) 4.4 (8) 

15 514 234 (454)

30 521 233 (451) 229 (445) 4.7 (8.5) 30 516 226 (439)

60 509 238 (461)

60 524 243 (470) 241 (466) 2.6 (4.6) 

60 519 242 (467) * AK-225G tests in 100% oxygen @ 13.8 MPa (2000 psia) w/ 3 purges

7.5 MODIFIED TEST METHOD – AIT TESTING

Incorporating the test variable conclusions into a final test method that would adequately 

evaluate the candidate solvents was the ultimate goal of the test variable investigation. As 

a result of the testing described, the final test configuration for each of the solvents 

undergoing evaluation consisted of the following: 

1. Pre-chill the solvent prior to test (record temperature)

2. Use minimum test sample size of 1000 mg, larger if required

3. Maintain standard thermocouple placement 

4. Perform three purges at test pressure prior to pressurization 

5. Perform tests at requisite pressures of 345 kPa (50 psia) and 13.8 MPa (2000 psia), as 

well as 483 kPa (70 psia) 

While performing tests at low pressures, anomalous temperature surges were observed at 

~ 121 °C (250 °F). These exotherms, first thought to be combustion events, proved to be 

decomposition caused by heating. Proof that these temperature surges were not oxidation 

events but rather solvent decomposition was provided by tests in 100 percent nitrogen, in 

which similar temperature surges were observed. Results comparing tests performed in 

32 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

oxygen and nitrogen are presented in Figure 8. Figure 8 also demonstrates the 

effectiveness of purges at low pressure. No AITs were recorded for tests in 100 percent 

oxygen without purges. 

Figure 8 

Exotherm Evaluation 

7.5.1 MODIFIED TEST METHOD – AIT TESTING RESULTS

The results of the modified test method are displayed in Table 9. Tests were successfully 

performed 

33 
Table 9 

Modified Test Method Final AIT Data

 345 kPa

(50 psia)

483 kPa

(70 psia)

1.38 MPa

(200 psia)

13.8 MPa

(2000 psia)

Chilled NC Chilled NC Chilled NC Chilled NC

Mass 

(mg)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Avg 

°C (°F)

SD 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Avg 

°F

SD 

°F

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Avg 

°C (°F)

SD 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Avg 

°C (°F)

SD 

°C (°F)

Test 

°C (°F)

Solvokane

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TL -- -- -- -- --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 147

(296) -- -- -- -- -- 

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 143

(290) -- -- -- -- -- 

1000 268

(515)

260

(500)

244

(472)

258

(496)

12.2

(22)

247

(476)

254

490

238

459

269

517

254

489

16.1

29

256

493 -- -- -- -- -- -- 153(308)

151

(303)

152

(305)

152

(305)

1.7

(3)

149

(301)

Solstice PF

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TL -- -- -- -- --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 192

(378) -- -- -- -- -- 

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 187

(369) -- -- -- -- -- 

1000 245

(473)

246

(474)

230

(446)

240

(464)

8.9

(16) -- 247(476)

244

(471)

251

(484)

247

(477)

3.9

(7) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 192(359)

180

(356)

185

(365)

182

(360)

2.8

(5) -- 

L-14780

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TL -- -- -- -- --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 167

(333) -- -- -- -- -- 

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 168

(334) -- -- -- -- -- 

1000 TL TL TL TL -- -- TL TL TL TL -- -- 234

(454) -- -- 234(454)* -- -- 167(332)

152

(305)

166

(330)

161

(322)

8.3

(15) -- 

AK225G

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TL TL TL TL -- --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 226

(438)

230

(446)

235

(454)

230

(446)

4.4

(8) -- 

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 236

(456) -- -- 236(456) -- -- 

1000 TL TL TL TL -- -- 273

(523)

278

(532)

276

(528)

276

(528)

2.8

(5) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 230(446) -- -- 230(446)* -- 

HFE-7100

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TL TL TL TL -- --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 337

(639)

341

(646)

336

(636)

338

(640)

2.8

(5) -- 

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 327

(620) -- -- 327(620) -- -- 

1000 TL TL TL TL -- -- 381

(718)

392

(738)

393

(740)

389

(732)

6.7

(12) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 332(629) -- -- 332(629)* -- 

TL = Temperature Limit, no AIT detected, heater went to full limit (>8000F,>4250C); SD = Standard Deviation; Avg = average; NC = Not Chilled * Only one test performed

34 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

7.5.2 MODIFIED TEST METHOD – DISCUSSION OF AIT TEST RESULTS 

Three candidate solvents were tested using the modified AIT test protocol. Results are 

displayed in Table 9. Average AITs and standard deviations are displayed in the grey 

boxes for each of the triplicates performed. To ensure safe operation of the test system, 

sample sizes were incrementally increased to 1000 mg when testing at the highest 

pressure, 13.8 MPa (2000 psia). By increasing the sample size while testing at the highest 

pressure, safe operation at lower pressures was ensured. No appreciable differences were 

found between results obtained at 500 and 1000 mg for any of the materials tested. 

Triplicates were performed with 1000 mg of material at each pressure. 

Results for AIT tests conducted with L-14780 were not obtained at 345 kPa (50 psia) or 

483 kPa (70 psia); therefore, pressures were increased to 1.38 MPa (200 psia), at which 

point an AIT was observed. Only one test was conducted at these conditions. As before, 

lower pressures resulted in higher AITs, indicating more energy is required to ignite 

materials. 

Higher AITs indicate less reactive materials. All three candidate materials performed 

more poorly than the two established materials (AK-225G and HFE-7100). The three 

candidate materials ranked similarly, with Solstice PF performing slightly better than 

either Solvokane or L-14780. 

Three extra tests were performed with Solvokane to further investigate the effects of prechilling the solvents prior to test. One test using 1000 mg at each pressure was performed 

with no appreciable change in results, indicating AITs are more dependent on initial 

sample size than pre-chilling of sample material. 

Combustion by-products for each of the solvents resulted in acidic environments that 

degraded the components within the reactions vessel. Some etching of the reaction 

vessels was noted, however not enough to compromise the integrity of the vessel. 

Thermocouples were the most affected components; 1.59 mm (0.0625 in.) sheathed 

thermocouples were used during testing and were often corroded. This corrosion did not 

adversely affect test results, and the thermocouples were routinely replaced. Table 10 

documents the different types of posttest residue observed when testing at various 

conditions. 

35 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 10 

AIT Observed Posttest Residue 

Sample 

Size

345 kPa

(50 psia)

480 kPa

(70 psia)

1.38 MPa

(200 psia)

13.79 MPa 

(2000 psia)

Material (mg) O2 N2 O2 N2 O2 N2 O2 N2

Solvokane

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- W --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- G --

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- G --

1000 B -- Y,B,W,G -- -- -- W,Y,G --

Solstice PF

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- W --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- W --

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- W,G --

1000 B.Y -- Y,G -- -- -- W,G,B --

L-14780

200 -- -- -- -- -- -- W --

500 -- -- -- -- -- -- W --

750 -- -- -- -- -- -- W --

1000 W -- W,R,BR -- W -- W,G --

AK-225G

200 Y,R,W -- Y,R,W -- -- -- W --

500 BR,R,Y -- BR,R,Y -- -- -- W,Y --

750 Y,BR,B -- -- -- -- -- W,Y --

1000 Y,R B Y,R -- -- -- W,Y --

HFE-7100

200 W -- W -- -- -- W --

500 W -- W -- -- -- W --

750 W -- -- -- -- -- W,B --

1000 W,B -- W -- -- W,B --

G-Green, Y-Yellow, R-Red, B-Black, W-White, G-Grey, BR -Brown

7.6 SUMMARY TEST METHOD CONCLUSIONS – AIT TESTING

Successful application of the AIT test method was performed due to some modifications 

to the method. Legacy testing has shown to be incomplete, and a method of mitigating 

shortcomings of the test method has been developed. 

Purging and adequate sample size have shown to play a significant role in the acquisition 

of reliable data. Both practices ensure abundant amounts of either fuel or oxidizer 

required for combustion are available within the reaction vessel at the time of testing. A 

method for obtaining an adequate sample size for testing without compromising system 

or personnel safety was developed and proven successful. 

Pre-chilling of the sample material was shown to be unnecessary for the solvents tested; 

however, this practice is the preferred method as a means of due diligence in obtaining 

quality data. 

36 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

The final method for obtaining reliable AIT data when evaluating volatile solvents should 

follow the steps outlined in Section 7.5 of this report. High pressures should suffice as an 

evaluation tool due to the more severe conditions. If lower pressures are required, some 

thought and effort should be directed to ensure adequate oxygen is available for 

combustion by incrementally increasing the pressure until reactions are observed. 

All results are displayed in Table 9. Results highlighted in yellow are the final results for 

each of the two pressure regimes. In terms of AIT results, Solvokane and L-14780 

performed similarly, with Solstice PF outperforming the two at higher pressures 

(13.8 MPa (2000 psia)). At lower pressures Solstice PF and L-14780 performed similarly, 

with Solvokane performing better. None of the candidate solvents performed as well as 

AK-225G. 

8.0 HEAT OF COMBUSTION TESTING

Heat of combustion is determined in this test method by burning a weighed sample in an 

oxygen bomb calorimeter under controlled conditions. The HOC is computed from 

temperature observations before, during, and after combustion, with proper allowance for 

thermochemical and heat transfer corrections. 

The sample size required was determined by running several tests, varying mass 

quantities to obtain an increase in temperature of approximately 2.6 °C (4.7 °F). This 

increase is approximately equal to the temperature increase observed when testing a 1-g 

capsule of benzoic acid (calibration material). Test samples were not chilled.

8.1 PREPARATION METHOD

Sample preparation proved difficult due to the volatility of the solvents. The use of 

pressure sensitive tape was employed, as recommended in both ASTM D240 and 

D4809,1 with poor results. Test material was not maintained when testing either 

candidate solvent (Solstice PF or L-14780). As solvent evaporated, the pressure increase 

broke the tape/test cup seal. Instead, gelatin capsules were used to perform tests. Sample 

preparation was performed in accordance with ASTM D240 and utilized gelatin capsules 

to maintain test material prior to performing the test. 

1

 ASTM. Standard Test Method for Heat of Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter 

(Precision Method). ASTM D4809. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013.

37 

 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Tests were run using various mass quantities of gelatin capsules to establish a heat of 

combustion of the capsules. A predetermined number of empty gelatin capsules, 

dependent on the solvent, were individually weighed and masses recorded. Identity of 

each of the capsules was maintained. The number of capsules required for each solvent is 

shown in Table 11. 

Table 11

Solvent Sample Preparation Requirements – Heat of Combustion 

Solvent No. of Capsules Target Solvent Mass (g)

AK-225G 3 4.0

Solstice PF 2 2.0

L-14780 3 3.2

Gelatin capsules were filled with solvent and the cap of each was then compressed tightly 

until an audible click was heard; compression of the capsule was continued until the 

edges of the inner portion of the capsule were visibly deformed. Filled capsules were 

weighed and the mass of the solvent was determined. Filled capsules were kept on the 

balance during preparation of the test system. If mass loss of the samples was observed, 

the discrepant capsule was replaced. The mass of the solvent was recorded just prior to 

installing the capsule into the test system, as described in ASTM D240. 

8.2 STANDARD TEST METHOD – HEAT OF COMBUSTION

Testing is outlined in NASA-STD-6001B Heat of Combustion (HOC) Testing (ASTM 

D240). No significant deviation from the standard was required to acquire reliable data. 

8.3 HEAT OF COMBUSTION TEST RESULTS

Testing was performed between August 4 and 22, 2014. The results are presented in 

Table 12. Each of the solvents exhibited tightly grouped results. AK-225G resulted in 

lower HOC than either of the prospective replacement solvents. 

A target increase in temperature was ~ 2.6 °C (4.7 °F). Heat of combustion results are 

recorded per unit mass, and therefore are independent of masses tested. The standard 

deviation of each of the solvents is indicative of the volatility of the solvent. The standard 

deviation is inversely proportional to volatility of the solvent. Despite this relationship 

between standard deviation and volatility, results conform to the repeatability required 

within D240. 

38 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 12 

Heat of Combustion Test Results 

Mass Temperature Rise HOC

Average 

HOC

SD

HOC

Material Test (g) (°C) (°F) (cal/g) (cal/g) (cal/g)

AK-225G 

768 4.00 2.58 4.65 1158.2

1151.7 8.6 

769 3.75 2.45 4.41 1154.3

770 3.94 2.54 4.57 1153.9

771 3.97 2.52 4.54 1136.7

772 3.84 2.45 4.41 1155.5

Solstice PF

750 2.03 2.51 4.51 2450.6

2447.7 22.4 

751 1.99 2.48 4.46 2475.1

754 2.10 2.59 4.67 2461.6

756 2.08 2.52 4.54 2431.5

757 2.06 2.52 4.53 2419.5

L-14780 

728 3.73 3.11 5.60 1926.6

1925.3 19.8 

729 3.22 2.68 4.82 1910.9

730 3.14 2.63 4.74 1905.8

734 3.17 2.66 4.79 1926.3

763 2.28 2.27 4.09 1956.7

SD – Standard Deviation

8.4 HEAT OF COMBUSTION TEST CONCLUSIONS

Modifications to the test method were not required to obtain repeatable HOC test results. 

Care was required when preparing test samples due to the volatility of the test material. 

Methods for preparing samples as described in ASTM D240 were adequate to maintain 

material during testing. Mass measurements were taken immediately before testing to 

obtain as accurate a measurement as possible. The grouping of test results for each of the 

test materials adhered to statistical spread described in the standard. 

Both of the final candidate solvents exhibited higher heats of combustion than AK-225G, 

indicating more potential energy when compared to AK-225G.

39 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

9.0 OXYGEN COMPATABILITY ANALYSIS APPROACH

Fires occur in oxygen systems when oxygen, fuel, and heat combine to create a selfsustaining chemical reaction Although oxygen, fuel, and ignition sources are present in 

almost all oxygen systems, fire hazards can be mitigated by limiting the propensity for a 

chemical reaction to occur. Controlling the risk factors associated with the oxygen, fuel, 

or heat will, in turn, prevent the chemical reaction. 

9.1 HISTORICAL APPROACH

As a result of the 1987 Montreal Protocol to phase out CFC-113, Asahi AK-225G was 

selected as a replacement. AK-225G had been a preferred solvent with regard to oxygen 

compatibility for its perceived non-reactivity in the tests used to evaluate potential 

solvents. 

Historically, solvents were found acceptable (non-ignitable) according to the tests used to 

assess the oxygen compatibility, mechanical impact (D2512/G86), and AIT (G72). In the 

past this approach was effective, as some solvents such as AK-225G showed nonignitions during tests. Differentiation between solvents was made simple due to the clear 

distinction between reactive solvents and non-reactive solvents such as AK-225G. 

In this oxygen compatibility analysis (OCA), LOX mechanical impact testing acceptance 

criteria during the last round of solvent evaluations gave preference to solvents exhibiting 

no reactions at 97.6 J (72 ft-lbf). Any solvent passing above 27 J (20 ft-lbf) or showing 

anomalous results was also considered for further testing or evaluation. 

The second portion of the OCA involved AIT testing. Solvents exhibiting non-ignitions 

during standard test configurations were given preference; however, the following 

categories had been laid out for evaluation of solvents that resulted in non-ignitions 

during testing:

Category A AIT < 121 °C (< 250 °F) Not recommended for use in oxygen systems

Category B AIT 121 to 204 °C (250 to 400 °F) Caution when used in oxygen systems

Category C AIT > 204 °C (> 400 °F) Recommended for use in oxygen systems

During this round of assessment all candidate solvents, as well as past proven solvents, 

were found to be flammable in oxygen enriched environments. A clear, distinct 

differentiation between acceptable and non-acceptable solvents was impossible to make; 

therefore, a more rigorous approach was needed. 

40 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

9.2 OCA/NASA STD-6001.B/G63 & G94 APPROACH 

As for analysis of oxygen systems, the NASA STD-6001.B/ASTM G63 and ASTM G94 

approach was used as a basis for evaluating the candidate solvents Solstice PF and 

L-14780. This process is a systematic approach that can be used as both a design guide 

and an approval process for materials components and systems. NASA STD-6001.B 

Section 6.3.1 states that materials, components, and systems used in LOX and GOX 

environments shall be evaluated using the approach shown in Figure 9. 

Performing the tests required by NASA STD-6001.B was not possible due to the physical 

properties of the solvents, and Tests 1 and 17 are meant for the evaluation of solid 

materials. The purpose of the required tests is to establish the flammability of the material 

and to ascertain the conditions at which the candidate materials are flammable. All 

candidate solvents were determined to be flammable during initial testing. NASA 

STD-6001.B 6.3.2 gives further guidance per the following: “If the materials are 

determined to be flammable, an OCA shall be performed in accordance to TM-2007-

213740, Guide for Oxygen Compatibility Assessments and Components and Systems.” 

NASA/TM-2007-213740 uses a system level approach for the determination of 

compatibility in LOX and GOX environments (Figure 9). The solvents will be used in a 

wide variety of systems and this type of assessment would be impossible to capture every 

possible scenario. The essence of NASA/TM-2007-213740 was used to develop the 

following logic: 

1. Is the material flammable?

2. Will it ignite?

3. What is the damage potential? 

4. How does this compare to reference materials that have been successfully used for

historically effective guidelines? 

41 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Figure 9 

NASA-STD-6001.B Oxygen Compatibility Assessment Decision Tree 

9.2.1 FLAMMABILITY/ IGNITABILITY

NASA Standard Tests 13A and AIT tests established that the candidate solvents are 

flammable and will ignite under certain circumstances. 

Reactions were observed during mechanical impact testing. Variables were shown to 

affect the reaction frequency; however, despite the final test method, reactions were 

observed when samples were impacted. While evaluating the candidate materials using 

the AIT test method, reactions were observed only after provisions were made to ensure 

that an adequate amount of test material was present during heating. Despite the deviation 

from the conventional standard, ignition of both candidate materials was observed and 

characterized, establishing the potential ignition through external heating (Table 13). 

42 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Table 13 

Solvent Assessment and Comparison Materials

Solvent

GOX Impact 

Pressure

Threshold

LOX Impact 

Energy Thresh

Modified Method

Standard Method

LOX 

Impact 

Results 

@ 97.6 J

(72 ft-lbf)

AIT @ 345-1379 kPa

(50-200 psi) 

Modified Method

Standard Method

AIT @ 13.79 MPa 

(2000 psi) 

Modified Method

Standard Method @ 1500psi

HOC 

MPa psi J ft-lbf °C (SD) °F (SD) °C (SD) °F (SD) cal/g (SD)

FlrGr >4415b N/P 479a 248a 2400a

PTFE >7415c (1/60) N/P 434a 223a 1700a

PCTFE 6615d N/P 377a 192a 2557a

IPA N/P 7165a

Solstice PF 52 7500 97.6 72 N/P 464 (29) 240 (16) 360 (9) 182 (5) 2448 (22)

(0/20)(1/61) @ 345 kPa (50 psi)

477 (13) 247 (7)

@ 480 kPa (70 psi)

L-14780 52 7500 97.6 72 0/20 454* 234* 322 (27) 161 (15) 1925 (20)

(0/20)(0/70) @ 1.38 MPa (200 psi)

AK-225G 97.6 72 9-0/20 528* 276* 446 230 1153 (11)

(0/20) 1-2/43 @ 480 kPa (70 psi)

1-6/60

1-3/60

2-0/60 a ASTM Manual 36, 2nd edition b WSTF No. 05-39250, FlrGr E600 c WSTF No. 01-56989, PTFE d WSTF No. 12-45752, PCTFE P/N 16041-1000, no reactions @ 100% GOX and 20ft-lbf 

*single data point

43 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

9.2.2 DAMAGE POTENTIAL

A quantitative comparison of the damage potential of each of the candidate solvents to 

AK-225G was achieved by performing HOC testing (ASTM D240). The average HOC

and standard deviations (SDs) are presented in Table 13. Heat of combustion data are 

presented as the energy output per unit mass. Solvents are anticipated to reside within a 

system’s crevices in low mass quantities, making the damage potential small relative to 

most soft goods that have a long track record of safe use in oxygen systems. 

9.2.3 COMPARISON TO REFERENCE MATERIALS

Results from HOC testing convey the damage potential per unit mass of any material. For 

illustrative purposes, the candidate solvents, AK-225G, and ‘good compatible’ materials 

have been placed in Figure 10 for direct comparison. Figure 10 contains values for HOC 

and AIT as a means of assessing damage potential and ignitability simultaneously. Larger 

values for AIT and smaller values for HOC are preferred. 

Note: AIT data shown in Figure 10 for isopropyl alcohol (IPA) were obtained using 

ASTM E659, not ASTM G72. Tests in adherence to ASTM G72 are performed in 

100 percent oxygen at 10.3 MPa (1500 psia), while tests in adherence to ASTM E659 are 

performed in ambient conditions (20.9 percent oxygen and 101.4 kPa (14.7 psia)). 

Isopropyl alcohol AIT test results performed in adherence to ASTM G72 generally tend 

to be much lower. Therefore, no direct comparison can be made between the IPA data 

presented in Figure 10 and the rest of the results presented. 

44 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Figure 10

HOC and AIT for Common Oxygen System Materials

No direct correlation between energy potential and ignition susceptibility can be inferred 

from Figure 10, and testing should be conducted to verify unknown material properties. 

Both L-14780 and Solstice PF were poorer performers relative to AK-225G and ranked 

well compared to preferred soft good materials such as Teflon®1

 and Fluorogreen. Poorer 

performance compared to AK-225G coincides with both AIT and mechanical impact 

testing. Both candidate solvents are comparable to each other and are much better 

performers (lower HOC) than IPA. Isopropyl alcohol is considered a good solvent; 

however, post rinse procedures are required after use. 

Procedural controls have been used to mitigate the oxygen compatibility hazards 

associated with IPA. The successful use of IPA as a solvent in oxygen systems, despite 

its high HOC relative to the two candidate solvents, is proof of the significance of 

thoughtful use of materials as means of risk management as opposed to the pursuit of a 

non-flammable alternative. Proper evaluation of materials and consideration before use 

should be required to prevent a false security of use provided by incomplete data. 

1 Teflon® is a registered trademark of E. I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company, Wilmington, DE.

45 

 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

Another example of energetic and ignitable materials being used with wide success in 

oxygen systems is Nylon 6/6. Nylon 6/6 is relatively energetic, readily burns in air and is 

commonly used in oxygen regulators. The reason for its success is its end use 

configuration. Despite its flammability characteristics, it is not flammable in its 

configuration due to the lack of ignition hazards. Both candidate solvents are less 

energetic per unit mass than Nylon 6/6. 

9.3 OXYGEN COMPATABILITY ANALYSIS CONCLUSION

Materials can be used safely and successfully when proper attention is given to how and 

when they are used. The Solstice PF and L-14780 solvents were found to be flammable in 

enriched oxygen environments, and plausible ignition mechanisms have been 

demonstrated; however, that does not preclude the safe use of these solvents in oxygen 

systems. 

The volatility of these two solvents provided a challenge in their evaluation; however, 

this characteristic will also aid in the safe use of the materials. Regardless of the ignition 

method, sufficient material is required for ignition, making for an unlikely scenario. In 

the event of ignition, testing has shown the energy released upon combustion is most 

likely insufficient to kindle to soft goods. 

10.0 SUMMARY OF SOLVENT INVESTIGATION

Historic methods for assessing the compatibility of solvents for use in oxygen systems 

utilized test methods for evaluating ignition susceptibility. While both AIT and 

mechanical impact testing have a long track record of use within NASA, these test 

methods alone do not fully characterize the safe use of solvent materials within oxygen 

systems. A more systematic approach, which takes into consideration the damage 

potential of such materials (i.e., heat of combustion data), was required in conjunction 

with ignition susceptibility tests to perform a more complete evaluation. 

Favorable results in both AIT and mechanical impact testing indicated inadequate test 

conditions rather than superior materials. The volatility of the materials as well as the 

interaction with environmental variables presented a challenge to the evaluation of the 

materials. Care should be exercised when testing these types of materials to ensure proper 

test conditions as outlined in this report. All materials will react in the right conditions. 

To perform a proper assessment of materials, effort should be focused on achieving 

reactions in tests such as AIT to gain an understanding of the reactivity of materials 

relative to one another. 

46 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

The methods described in this report outline the logic used to assess and compare the 

solvent materials for safe use in oxygen systems. All materials were shown to be 

flammable in oxygen enriched environments and therefore pose some risk when being 

used in oxygen systems. No material is completely benign, and caution should be 

exercised when using these materials for cleaning. With proper checks and controls these 

materials, in the configurations tested, can be used safely in oxygen systems. 

47 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 
NASA WHITE SANDS TEST FACILITY

SOLVENT INVESTIGATION 

SPECIAL TEST DATA REPORT

WSTF # 15-46483 

February 20, 2015 

APPENDIX A

WSTF Forms 514 Test Request and Special Instructions A-1 
A-1 
S

A-2 
A-3 
A-4 
A-5 
10

APPENDIX J—REPORTS FROM ON-SITE VENDOR DEMONSTRATIONS

The following on-site vendor demonstration reports can be found in sections J.1 and J.2:

J.1 Honeywell’s Precision Cleaning Demonstration at the SSC Component Facility 

Using Solstice PF, September 19, 2013

J.2 Summary of an on-site demonstration of Honeywell Solstice PF solvent 

at Marshall Space Flight Center Propulsion Test Laboratories, 

November 4–6, 2013 
SSC Gas & Materials Science 1

Honeywell’s Precision Cleaning Demonstration 

at the SSC Component Facility Using Solstice PF

Sampling Assistance Provided 

by the Component Processing Facility, B2204

Sept. 19, 2013

SSC Gas & Materials Science 3

Two SST braided, 6’ x 1⁄4” Teflon-lined hoses were doped with 

mineral oil (mixed aliphatics) as the representative NVR. Hose 1 

and Hose 2 were doped with 2.4mg and 4 mg of mineral oil 

respectively.

The demonstration was performed in the clean line area near an 

open high bay door. At the time of the test, the temperature was 86 

deg F and the relative humidity was 72%.

Honeywell also demonstrated rough cleaning of the exterior 

surface of an A/N Fitting that was grossly contaminated with a 

fluorocarbon grease. 

Cleaning Demonstration at the Component 

Processing Facility Using Solstice PF
SSC Gas & Materials Science 4

Solstice PF flush & sample 

collection from Flexhose “1” 

that was doped with 2.4mgs of 

NVR. SSC uses 200ml solvent 

per sq. ft.

Honeywell Chemist

CPF Tech
SSC Gas & Materials Science 5

Pressure & flow rates could be 

adjusted (reduced) to 

minimize the cooling effects 

from cleaning and sampling.

Frost formed on the bottle 

due to the cooling from 

rapid solvent expansion -

the warm temperature 

combined w/ the high 

humidity acerbated this 

condition.
SSC Gas & Materials Science 6

Solstice PF Flowing thru 

the Flex Hose and 

Collected in a Catch Pan

SSC Gas & Materials Science 8

Sample 1: Flexhose doped with 2.4 mgs of 

NVR (Mineral Oil)

1

st Solstice Sample, NVR, 2.27 mgs

2

nd Solstice Flush (Catch Pan - No NVR Sample)

3

rd Solstice Sample Flush - NVR 0.46 mgs

Background (Solvent) NVR / 200ml = 0.4mgs.

Final AK225g Flush = 0.01mgs 

Solstice PF Removal Efficiency > 99.9%

Sample 2: Flexhose doped with 4 mgs of NVR 

(Mineral Oil)

1

st Solstice Sample, 2.6 mgs

2

nd Solstice Flush (Catch Pan - No NVR Sample )

3

rd Solstice Sample Flush, 0.5 mgs

Background NVR /200ml = 0.4 mgs.

Final AK225g Flush 0.2mgs

3.8 mgs of NVR removed with Solstice PF 

Flushes or a 95% Removal Efficiency

Quick Summary of the Field Cleaning (Flexhose) Results Using 

Solstice PF
SSC Gas & Materials Science 9

Threaded areas were 

contaminated with 

Christo lube MCG 111 

Grease. Solstice PF 

was flowed across the 

exterior surface and 

collected in a SST pan.

Fitting from the SSC CPF 

9/19/2013

Pre Solstice PF Flush - A/N Fitting Contaminated with 

Fluorocarbon Grease
10

Post Flush (Rough) Cleaning of an A/N Fitting 

that was grossly coated with Christo lube 

MCG111 grease ( similar to Krytox 240 AC)

Performed at the SSC CPF 

on 9/19/2013

Appearance of the fitting 

following rough cleaning 

with Solstice PF.

The vapor pressure 

developed in the head 

space of the Solstice PF 

cylinder produced a 

solvent flow rate that 

resulted in a moderate 

impingement on the 

surface of the fitting.

SSC Gas & Materials Science
Summary of an on-site demonstration of Honeywell Solstice PF solvent at Marshall Space Flight Center 

Propulsion Test Laboratories, November 4-6, 2013.

Representatives of Honeywell visited MSFC on November 4-6, 2013 to demonstrate use of their new 

cleaning solvent Solstice PF, trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene or 1233zd(E), CAS No. 102687-65-0, 

for precision cleaning and field cleaning of propulsion oxygen system components and associated 

ground test systems as a potential replacement for Asahiklin AK-225G. 

This was a follow-up to the Honeywell demonstration of Solstice PF at Stennis Space Center (SSC) on 

September 18-19, 2013. Representatives from SSC and White Sands Test Facility were invited to this 

demonstration but were unable to attend.

Visitors from Honeywell were:

 Jon Herdlein – Solstice PF chemist

 Diana Mercier – Marketing manager

Monday, November 4:

 Jon and Diana arrived in the afternoon to set up a portable Crest Ultrasonics degreaser that was 

shipped by Honeywell to MSFC the previous week for this demonstration. Ten pound and 50 pound 

pressure cylinders of Solstice PF, and supporting equipment, were also supplied by Honeywell for this 

demonstration. The degreaser was set up in the building 4653 Valve and Component Lab alongside the 

existing AK-225G degreaser system. Richard Joye (ET02/METTS), Mark Mitchell (EM50), and Nikki 

Lowrey (EM50/Jacobs ESSSA) were present during set up. 

 The Crest Ultrasonics degreaser was a portable unit on wheels, custom designed by Honeywell 

and Crest for use with Solstice PF solvent. The degreaser included a heated boil sump; a chilled 132 kHz 

ultrasonic immersion sump; a vapor phase chamber with dual layer cooling coils, tall freeboard, and 

sliding cover for solvent containment; an automated basket to lower and raise parts from the immersion 

sump; a filtration system; a water separation system; and touch-screen electronic controls. To fill the 

system, 50 pound cylinders with a dip tubes were connected, one at a time, via a Teflon or braided hose 

and a small pump to fill the sumps. (The same system was also used later to drain the degreaser, with 

the cylinder vented back into the chilled immersion sump for recapture of the vent vapors.) A simple 

heating blanket was wrapped around the cylinder to generate pressure to help drive the solvent into the 

sump. The cylinder was placed on an electronic scale to weigh the solvent during fill and drain to gauge 

solvent quantity. A 50 pound cylinder filled with Solstice PF weighs approximately 80 pounds.

 Honeywell noted that they have also worked with Branson and Ultracool to design vapor 

degreaser systems to use Solstice PF. [Later contact indicated that Baron Blakeslee could also supply a 

vapor degreaser designed to use Solstice PF.]

Tuesday November 5 – Vapor degreaser demonstration in Building 4653:

MSFC Participants:

Mark Mitchell (EM50)

Nikki Lowrey (EM50/Jacobs ESSSA)

DeWitt Burns (EM50)

Buford Moore (EM50/METTS)

Steve Gentz (NESC)

Richard Joye (ET02/METTS)

Stefanie Wallburg (ES23/METTS)

Wayne Ellenburg (ES23/METTS)
Garry McGuire (ES43)

Adam Gowan (ES43)

MSFC Audio Visual Information Services (AVIS) filmed the Tuesday demonstrations.

Demonstration Series 1: Valve and Component Lab Parts supplied by R. Joye

Unless otherwise noted, all test items were cleaned in the immersion sump with ultrasonics for 5 

minutes, drained in the vapor chamber, removed and air dried. It was noted that 132 kHz is a high 

frequency for ultrasonics and is less aggressive than more typical 40 kHz or 47kHz ultrasonic baths used 

to clean metal parts. Parts quantitatively tested for contamination were analyzed using standard Valve 

Lab procedures with AK-225 as the verification flush solvent. 

 Test 1 – Three Poppets from a relief valve were cleaned with Solstice and tested by S. 

Wallburg for particulate and NVR. They passed MSFC criteria for oxygen or hydrogen 

systems for particulate and NVR.

 Test 2 – A spindle was cleaned with Solstice and tested by S. Wallburg for particulate and 

NVR. It passed MSFC criteria for oxygen or hydrogen systems for particulate and NVR.

 Test 3 – A half valve body, 300 series stainless steel, contaminated with gross environmental 

soils, was obtained from an exterior storage rack behind 4653. Items such as this would 

normally be precleaned in the Valve Lab to remove gross soils and fibers. For a severe test, 

this item was cleaned in the Solstice PF degreaser as-is and then tested by S. Wallburg for 

particulate and NVR. The item passed MSFC NVR criteria for oxygen systems. It nearly 

passed the particulate criteria for hydrogen system. Two particles were found in the rinse 

sample that exceeded the 400 micron limit. It was noted that these were fibers that would 

have been removed in the standard precleaning operation. 

Demonstration Series 2: Removal of miscellaneous Valve and Component Lab soils from 2.5 inch x 6 

inch 2219 aluminum panels with a smooth surface finish. The test panels were provided by EM50. A 

variety of spray cans and grease tubes were gathered from around the lab and applied by spraying or 

smearing the contents on individual test panels. Contaminated test panels were cleaned one at a time 

in the degreaser. Cleanliness verification was to Visually Clean Sensitive plus ultraviolet. Contaminants 

tested were:

 Fingerprints

 LPS KB 88 Penetrant – NASA Stock Number 12584

 Mineral Oil – NASA Stock Number 152

 SiliKroil Penetrating Oil – NASA Stock Number 276

 M1 All Purpose Lubricant – NASA Stock Number 1711

 Mil-G-47219A Halocarbon 25-5S grease – NASA Stock Number 105

 Tri-Flow Industrial Lubricant – NASA Stock Number 8616

 Slic Tite lubricant – NASA Stock Number 9954

 Loctite silicone – NASA Stock Number 11348

 Fabulous PB Blaster penetrant – NASA Stock Number 12811

 CRC Duster (1,1,1,2 tetrafluoroethane) 14085 – NASA Stock Number 9065

All of these panels passed VC Sensitive + UV inspection criteria after cleaning.

Demonstration Series 3: Removal of difficult soils identified in the MSFC/SSC AK-225 solvent 

replacement test plan. These soils were provided by the EM50 Contamination Lab. Test panels, 

application methods, and inspection criteria were the same as demonstration series 2. Contaminants 

tested were:
 Di (2-ethyl hexyl) sebacate (gauge calibration oil) – NASA Stock Number 3293

 Big Red crane grease – NASA Stock Number 8712

 Krytox 240AC oxygen compatible grease – NASA Stock Number 2527

All of these panels passed VC Sensitive + UV inspection criteria after cleaning.

Demonstration Series 4: Removal of mixed contaminant as required by ADS-61A-PRF, Performance 

Specification for Army Aircraft Cleaners, Aqueous and Solvent, section 4.5.1 Standard contaminant. This 

contaminant mix was used for a previous study of vapor degreaser solvent alternatives performed for 

the Army Research Lab in 2011-2012. The contaminant was:

(1) MIL-PRF-83282 Hydraulic Fluid – Radcolube FR282, Radco Industries, Inc. (two parts by 

weight)

(2) MIL-PRF-81322G Grease- Aeroshell Grease 22, Shell Aviation Ltd. (one part by weight) [a 

highly fluorescent grease]

(3) Powdered carbon black ASTM D1765 grade N990, sieved just prior to use (one tenth part by 

weight) [a visual indicator]

 The contaminant mix was applied by brush onto eight 2.5 in x 6 in 2219 aluminum panels, two 

with smooth surfaces and six with grit blasted surfaces. The contaminated panels were based for two 

hours at 130oF (55oC). All eight panels were hung in parallel and spaced on a cleaning rack and cleaned 

together. The smooth panels appeared clean under visual and UV inspection. All of the grit blasted 

panels appeared clean under UV inspection but some appeared to have trace carbon black 

contamination. One grit blasted panel with apparent trace carbon residual and one smooth, visually 

clean panel were analyzed quantitatively by S. Wallburg for contamination. These passed the 

particulate and NVR criteria for oxygen or hydrogen systems (Table 1).

Wednesday Morning, November 6 – Field cleaning demonstrations in the West Test Area 

MSFC Participants:

Mark Mitchell (EM50)

Nikki Lowrey (EM50/Jacobs ESSSA)

 Tim Gautney (ET10) [present for initial introductions and demonstration kick-off]

DeWitt Burns (EM50)

Buford Moore (EM50/METTS)

Daniel Clanton (ET10/METTS)

Chris Smith (ET10/METTS)

Kevin Thompson (ET10/METTS)

Tim Gautney escorted us into the West Test Area and tasked Daniel Clanton to lead the cleaning 

trials. Daniel was asked to select a variety of cleaning challenges where AK-225G is currently being 

used. Solstice PF in 10 pound cylinders was used with a variety of high and low pressure spray nozzles 

provided by Honeywell, in combination with wipers (Kimwipes or equivalent) supplied by ET10. AK225G in a pressurized Sure Shot spray can was used during these trials for comparison. The weather was 

moderate with no precipitation. 

NOTE: We were unable to perform field cleaning tests on propulsion test stand 4670 due to 

asbestos remediation activity in progress.

The Solstice PF cylinders used in this trial included a cylinder containing only Solstice PF, modestly 

pressurized by evaporation, and a cylinder containing Solstice PF Spray Cleaner pressurized with 

Honeywell Solstice 1234ze propellant. Solstice 1234ze, trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoroprop-1-ene, CAS 29188-

24-9, is a related hydrofluoro-olefin (HFO) that is also non-ozone depleting, VOC exempt, very low global 
warming, and also has a time weighted average exposure guideline of 800 ppm. It has a boiling point of 

-19oC (-2.2oF) 

 NOTE: Solstice 1234ze has not been tested for compatibility with liquid or gaseous oxygen. It 

has no flash point. 

For these field cleaning trials, an ultraviolet LED flashlight provided by EM50 was used in addition to 

standard visual inspection to assess performance. No quantitative analyses were performed.

First Trial Set – at the 4699 Cryogenic Structural Test stand.

1. We went inside an adjacent shed containing a hydraulic pump system. The aged MIL-PRF-5606 

hydraulic fluid found here was reported to be a difficult contaminant to remove. Daniel used a 

low pressure spray of Solstice PF and Kimwipes to clean hydraulic fluid drips and coated 

surfaces. The Solstice PF appeared to perform well. Only slight cooling of surfaces was noted, 

with no condensation. 

NOTE: During this cleaning process, some Solstice PF dripped on a painted structure supporting 

the hydraulic system. When wiped off, it was noted that the Solstice PF appeared to remove 

some of the paint. The technicians remarked that AK-225G is not normally used to clean 

painted surfaces so this should not be held against the Solstice PF. A cautionary note might be in 

order that Solstice PF may remove paint. 

2. A high pressure spray nozzle, similar to those found on aerosol cans, was used with the Solstice 

PF Spray Cleaner cylinder (containing 1234ze propellant) to clean hydraulic system external 

surfaces. AK-225G in a Sure Shot sprayer, pressurized with High Purity Air (HPA) to 

approximately 90 psi, was tried for comparison. Cleaning performance was comparable. It was 

also noted that both cleaning systems cooled the part being cleaned, with the resulting 

temperatures subjectively the same. Condensation was not observed.

3. Kevin filled a small cap fitting, about 2 inches in diameter, with Solstice PF to observe 

evaporation. He commented that parts are sometimes soaked in AK-225G for a few minutes to 

loosen heavy soils. The solvent stayed in the liquid form and technicians agreed that it would be 

suitable for part soaking for the amount of time they usually require.

4. We went outside to the test stand where Daniel wiped several fittings and a mounting panel 

with Solstice PF and Kimwipes. These parts had gross accumulated environmental 

contamination – dirt, pollen, etc. This cleaning performance was judged to be comparable to AK225G.

Second Trial Set – Field Shop cleaning in West Test Area building 4671. In this facility, a wide variety of 

test fixtures are manually cleaned and assembled. Clean aluminum foil is placed on a table for a 

temporary clean surface on which to place parts.

1. A union fitting contaminated with Christo-lube III (a fluorocarbon grease equivalent to Krytox) 

was selected. One side of the union was cleaned by flushing and wiping with Solstice PF and the 

other side was cleaned with AK-225G. Cleaning was judged to be comparable.

2. A cap contaminated with halocarbon grease was cleaned with Solstice PF. The solvent removed 

this contaminant well.

3. Three o-rings were placed in a Ziploc bag with Solstice PF and soaked for about three minutes to 

evaluate whether the solvent would dry or crack the o-ring materials. O-rings are frequently 

cleaned in this manner in 4671. The materials tested were Viton, Buna rubber, and Teflon. Each 

o-ring was flexed and stretched after the soak. No stiffness or cracking was observed.

4. A crush washer was sprayed and wiped to remove an unknown contaminant. The contaminant 

was effectively removed.
5. Back-to-back compression fittings of three different sizes were effectively cleaned.

6. Another union fitting with Christo-lube and environmental contamination was effectively 

cleaned.

7. A flange with a Gylon gasket was disassembled and wiped clean. The Gylon appeared to be 

unharmed.

8. Anodized 6061 aluminum back plates are used in the test area for mounting of fittings and 

instrumentation. One of these was sprayed and wiped with Solstice PF to observe any effect on 

the aluminum. The back plate appeared to be unaffected.

Note: The o-ring and gasket materials mentioned here, as well as 6061 aluminum and other metals 

used for construction of the parts tested here, are being tested in the lab for compatibility with 

Solstice PF as a part of MSFC/SSC joint AK-225G replacement test plan. The compatibility of Solstice 

PF with Ziploc bags is not a part of this test plan.

The general feedback from the West Test Area technicians was that Solstice PF cleaned just as well as 

AK-225G. No objections were raised with regard to odor, condensation, or other handling issues. The 

technicians commented that they would be willing to use the Solstice directly from the 10 pound 

cylinders in lieu of the Sure Shot sprayers.

During these trials, Jon also demonstrated a configuration for a spray catch basin system, based on a PIG 

Corporation Poly Drum Funnel, which could be used to recapture and recycle solvent during part 

flushing operations. He also discussed recommended filling and handling practices for Solstice PF in 10 

pound, 50 pound, and 500 pound cylinders.

Conclusions:

Workers in the Valve and Component Lab and in the West Test Area judged Solstice PF to be 

comparable to (or better-for Krytox/Christo-lube) AK-225G for their cleaning applications for propulsion 

test systems. The handling requirements for Solstice PF pressure cylinders appeared to be quite 

manageable. There were no objections regarding odor, condensation, or other handling issues. 

Solstice PF attacked the paint on a support stand. This may require a usage precaution to avoid 

exposure to painted surfaces. It might be useful to investigate Solstice PF for paint removal. 

Nikki M. Lowrey

Senior Contamination Control Engineer

Jacobs Technology, Inc./ Jacobs ESSSA Group

Materials & Processes, Environmental Effects Branch 

NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center 
Table 1. Results from testing of Solstice PF during the Honeywell Demonstration on 11/5/2013 in the 

valve lab. All results are comparable to what would be expected from cleaning with AK-225G

Sample Description Contaminants & 

Treatment

**Clean time 

immersion

Particulate 

(microns)

NVR 

(mg)

Poppets

Contaminants from 

routine process in 

valve lab, Precleaned

10 minutes

100-175 2

0.029 175-400 0

>400 0

Spindle

Contaminants from 

routine process in 

valve lab, no Preclean

10 minutes

100-175 6

0.049 175-400 1

>400 1

Valve outer body part

Excessive 

contamination from 

outdoor exposure, 

no pre-clean

10 minutes

100-175 6

0.035

175-400 4

>400 2

Fibers 7

SP Alum. 2219 coupon

*2 parts hydraulic 

fluid, 1 part 

lubricating 

grease, 1 tenth 

carbon black, baked 

2 hours 55°C

5 minutes N/A N/A 0.156

GB Alum. 2219 

coupon

*2 parts hydraulic 

fluid, 1 part 

lubricating 

grease, 1 tenth 

carbon black, baked 

2 hours 55°C

5 minutes N/A N/A 0.206

* Contaminant mix as specified in ADS-61A-PRF, Performance Specification for Army Aircraft Cleaners, 

Aqueous and Solvent, February 4, 2002

** Ultrasonic vapor degreaser, operated at 132 kHz.

Test results by Stefanie Wallburg - Chemist, InfoPro Corporation - MSFC, METTS
11

APPENDIX K—COMPONENT LEVEL CLEANING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Appendix K contains the Efficiency of Solstice PF and L-14780 to Remove NVR from Components, AK225G Replacement Effort, NASA Stennis Space Center SSC Gas & Materials Science, 

October 24, 2014.
Efficiency of Solstice PF & L-14780 to 

Remove NVR from Components

AK225G Replacement Effort

NASA Stennis Space Center

SSC Gas & Materials Science

October 24, 2014
Purpose

Determine the cleaning efficiency of Solstice PF and 3ML14780 to remove various NVR materials from components. 

The test results will be compared to AK225G ( the baseline 

solvent). 
Doping Components with Known Amounts of NVR

Components - Flex hoses and rigid tubing w/ multiple 900 bends

• Prepare the following non-volatile residue (NVR) solutions 

– 100mg of mineral oil in 100mL of AK225G.

– 100mg of 85W-140 gear oil in 100ml of AK225G

• Label the NVR solutions “1mg /ml” for each NVR type 

• Clean two SST flex hoses and two SST tubing sections that have ten 90 degree 

bends (zig-zag tubing) to level 400A.

1mg/mL

1/2” x 4’ Flex Hose 3/8” x 92” Zig Zag Tubing w/ “ten” 900 bends

SSC Gas & Materials Science


NVR (Mineral Oil) Removed w/ 3M L-14780

NVR Added (mg) 

to Component

Component NVR Removed (mgs) 

with 100 mL flush 

of L14780

NVR removed (mgs) 

from 2 0 Flush 

(100mL AK225G)

% NVR Removal

Efficiency 

L14780

1.87 mg Flex hose 1.853 0.019 98.98

3.78 mg Flex hose 3.746 0.036 99.04

1.83 mg Zig zag tubing 1.834 -0.002 100

3.77 mg Zig zag tubing 3.770 -0.003 100

NVR Added (mg) 

to Component

Component NVR Removed (mgs) 

with 100 mL flush 

of Solstice PF

NVR removed (mgs) 

from 2 0 Flush 

(100mL AK225G)

% NVR Removal

Efficiency 

Solstice PF

1.81 mg Flex hose 1.772 0.037 97.95

3.58 mg Flex hose 3.558 0.024 99.33

1.75 mg Zig zag tubing 1.749 -0.003 100

4.0 mg Zig zag tubing 3.990 0.006 99.85

NVR (Mineral Oil) Removed w/ Solstice PF

SSC Gas & Materials Science
NVR (85W-140 Gear Oil) Removed w/ 3M L-14780

NVR Added (mg) 

to Component

Component NVR Removed 

(mgs) with 100 mL

flush of L14780

NVR removed (mgs) 

from 2 0 Flush 

(100mL AK225G)

% NVR Removal

Efficiency

L14780

2.04 mg Flex hose 2.004 0.034 98.3

3.79 mg Flex hose 3.762 0.029 99.24

1.94 mg Zig zag tubing 1.940 0.002 99.9

3.74 mg Zig zag tubing 3.732 0.004 100

NVR Added (mg) 

to Component

Component NVR Removed 

(mgs) with 100 mL

flush of Solstice PF

NVR removed (mgs) 

from 2 0 Flush 

(100mL AK225G)

% NVR Removal

Efficiency 

Solstice PF

1.95 mg Flex hose 1.877 0.069 96.4

3.78 mg Flex hose 3.760 0.024 99.4

1.97 mg Zig zag tubing 1.960 0.009 99.5

4.16 mg Zig zag tubing 4.150 0.010 99.8

NVR (85W-140 Gear Oil ) Removed w/ Solstice PF 

SSC Gas & Materials Science
Experiment and Test Details

Dope A/N fittings w/ Krytox Grease:

• Obtain three 1/4” to 1/2” AN fittings.

• Clean the fittings to level “400A”. 

SSC Gas & Materials Science
Experiment and Test Details

• Apply 500mg of Krytox grease to each fitting.

• Coat grease evenly through out the 1/2” threads.

SSC Gas & Materials Science
Experiment and Test Details

• Gravity rinse one side of each fitting with 50mL, rotate the fitting 180 degrees and 

perform a 2nd 50 ml rinse. Measure the NVR removed from each fitting . 

SSC Gas & Materials Science
Test Results

• AK225G is tested as the control. 

AK225G Control 3M L-14780 Solstice PF

58.5% 56.9% 51.2%

SSC Gas & Materials Science

NVR Removal Efficiency 

Mechanical Energy e.g. impingement, ultrasonics, etc. must be used in conjunction 

with the solvents to remove Krytox or other fluorocarbon-based greases.
12

Threaded areas were 

contaminated with 

Christo lube MCG 111 

Grease. Solstice PF 

was flowed across the 

exterior surface and 

collected in a SST pan.

Fitting from the SSC CPF 

9/19/2013

Pre Solstice PF Flush - A/N Fitting Contaminated with Christolube MCG 111 

Fluorocarbon Grease (similar to Krytox 240 AC)

SSC Gas & Materials Science
13

Post Solstice PF Flush

(Rough) Cleaning of an A/N Fitting that was 

grossly coated with Christo lube MCG111 

grease (similar to Krytox 240 AC)

Performed at the SSC CPF 

on 9/19/2013

Passed Cleanliness Level 

“VC” .

The vapor pressure 

developed in the head 

space of the Solstice PF 

cylinder produced a 

solvent flow rate that 

resulted in a moderate 

impingement on the 

surface of the fitting.

SSC Gas & Materials Science
54

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining 

the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing 

this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operation and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid 

OMB control number.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING REPORT NUMBER

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE

17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT 18. NUMBER OF

 PAGES

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18

Replacement of Hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225 Solvent for Cleaning

and Verification Sampling of NASA Propulsion Oxygen Systems

Hardware, Ground Support Equipment, and Associated Test Systems

H.D. Burns, M.A. Mitchell, J.H. McMillian, B.R. Farner,* S.A. Harper,**

S.F. Peralta,** N.M. Lowrey,*** H R. Ross,† and A. Juarez‡

George C. Marshall Space Flight Center

Huntsville, AL 35812

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546–0001

Unclassified-Unlimited

Subject Category 23 

Availability: NASA STI Information Desk (757–864–9658)

Prepared by the Materials & Processes Laboratory, Engineering Directorate

*Stennis Space Center, **JSC-WSTF, ***Jacobs Technology, Inc./Jacobs ESSSA Group, Huntsville, AL, †A2 Research, 

‡Jacobs Technology, Inc./MEI Technologies, JSC-WSTF

M–1396

Technical Publication

NASA/TP—2015–218207

solvent, oxygen cleaning, launch vehicle, ozone depletion, HCFC-225, cleanliness verification, nonvolatile residue

01–04–2015

UU 521

NASA

U U U

Since the 1990’s, NASA’s rocket propulsion test facilities at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Stennis Space

Center (SSC) have used hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225 (HCFC-225), a Class II ozone-depleting substance, to safety clean

and verify the cleanliness of large scale propulsion oxygen systems and associated test facilities. In 2012 through 2014, test

laboratories at MSFC, SSC, and Johnson Space Center-White Sands Test Facility collaborated to seek out, test, and qualify

an environmentally preferred replacement for HCFC-225. Candidate solvents were selected, a test plan was developed,

and the products were tested for materials compatibility, oxygen compatibility, cleaning effectiveness, and suitability for

use in cleanliness verification and field cleaning operations. Honewell SolticeTM Performance Fluid (trans-1-chloro-3,3,

3-trifluoropropene) was selected to replace HCFC-225 at NASA’s MSFC and SSC rocket propulsion test facilities.

STI Help Desk at email: help@sti.nasa.gov

STI Help Desk at: 757–864–9658
The NASA STI Program...in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) 

Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA 

maintain this important role.

The NASA STI Program Office is operated by 

Langley Research Center, the lead center for 

NASA’s scientific and technical information. The 

NASA STI Program Office provides access to 

the NASA STI Database, the largest collection of 

aeronautical and space science STI in the world. 

The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional 

mechanism for disseminating the results of its 

research and development activities. These results 

are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report 

Series, which includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major significant 

phase of research that present the results of 

NASA programs and include extensive data 

or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations 

of significant scientific and technical data 

and information deemed to be of continuing 

reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peerreviewed formal professional papers but has less 

stringent limitations on manuscript length and 

extent of graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific 

and technical findings that are preliminary or of 

specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports, 

working papers, and bibliographies that contain 

minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive 

analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and 

technical findings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientific and technical conferences, 

symposia, seminars, or other meetings sponsored 

or cosponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, technical, 

or historical information from NASA programs, 

projects, and mission, often concerned with 

subjects having substantial public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. 

English-language translations of foreign 

scientific and technical material pertinent to 

NASA’s mission.

Specialized services that complement the STI 

Program Office’s diverse offerings include creating 

custom thesauri, building customized databases, 

organizing and publishing research results...even 

providing videos.

For more information about the NASA STI Program 

Office, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

<http://www.sti.nasa.gov>

• E-mail your question via the Internet to 

<help@sti.nasa.gov>

• Phone the NASA STI Help Desk at 

757–864–9658

• Write to:

NASA STI Information Desk

Mail Stop 148

NASA Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681–2199, USA
National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

IS20

George C. Marshall Space Flight Center

Huntsville, Alabama 35812