LABORATORY DATA
Third-party corrosion, flash point and hazard classification results for the LM fluids.
Each table names the laboratory, the report number and the standard behind it.
Four reports, commissioned by the manufacturer and issued by accredited laboratories, covering uniform corrosion of three metals and the flammability classification of LM-4. The sample, concentration and test conditions are stated with each result because corrosion and flash point both move with concentration.
A test result describes the sample and conditions in the report. Applying it to your loop starts from the model, the dilution and the wetted materials in your system.
CORROSION
The reference rate is the limit in GB/T 50050-2017 for industrial recirculating cooling water. Measured rates sit 180 to 280 times below it on stainless steel and copper, and about 230 times below it on carbon steel.
| Metal | GB/T 50050-2017 reference | LM-4 | LM-8 | LM-4 vs reference | LM-8 vs reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q235 carbon steel | 0.075 | 3.32×10⁻⁴ | 3.16×10⁻⁴ | 226× lower | 237× lower |
| 304 stainless steel | 0.005 | 1.97×10⁻⁵ | 2.78×10⁻⁵ | 254× lower | 180× lower |
| T2 red copper | 0.005 | 1.8×10⁻⁵ | 8.98×10⁻⁵ | 278× lower | 56× lower |
The report records no macroscopic corrosion on any of the three metals in either fluid, within the 174-hour test window. Copper in LM-8 measures 8.98 × 10⁻⁵ mm/a against 1.80 × 10⁻⁵ mm/a in LM-4 — both far below the reference rate, and the one place where the two fluids separate.
REPORTS
HAZARD CLASSIFICATION
GB 30000.1-2013 sets out sixteen physical hazard classes. Each was assessed for the sample and the classification recorded.
| No. | Hazard class | Classification |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Explosives | Not an explosive |
| 2 | Flammable gases | Not applicable |
| 3 | Aerosols | Not applicable |
| 4 | Oxidising gases | Not applicable |
| 5 | Gases under pressure | Not applicable |
| 6 | Flammable liquids | Not a flammable liquid |
| 7 | Flammable solids | Not applicable |
| 8 | Self-reactive substances and mixtures | Not self-reactive |
| 9 | Pyrophoric liquids | Not pyrophoric |
| 10 | Pyrophoric solids | Not applicable |
| 11 | Self-heating substances and mixtures | Not applicable |
| 12 | Substances which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases | Does not emit flammable gases in contact with water |
| 13 | Oxidising liquids | Not an oxidising liquid |
| 14 | Oxidising solids | Not applicable |
| 15 | Organic peroxides | Not an organic peroxide |
| 16 | Corrosive to metals | Not corrosive to metals |
Classification applies to the sample at 55 % as tested. Flash point and flammability classification move with concentration, so a different dilution is classified on its own report. The SDS for the model and concentration in use carries the classification that governs handling and transport.
USING THESE RESULTS
Corrosion in a secondary loop is driven by the fluid, the metals, the water chemistry and the operating temperature together. A laboratory immersion test holds those variables fixed; a working loop does not. The value of the reports above is that they establish the fluid side of the question under a named standard, so the remaining variables are the ones in your system.
Three practical consequences follow. Concentration is a specification item, and the measured rates apply to the dilution tested. Carbon steel is the demanding case: it corrodes roughly an order of magnitude faster than stainless steel or copper in both fluids, so it sets the monitoring interval. Conductivity and pH checks catch the drift that a single corrosion coupon would only reveal after the fact.
For the method behind these figures, see the fluid selection guide. For the fluids themselves, the corrosion protection article sets out how the three kinds of corrosion evidence differ, and the LM-4 and LM-8 pages carry the model data.
LM Series Product CatalogueEnglish · 46 pages · PDF · 2 MB