CleanerSolutions Database
Toxics Use Reduction Institute · Surface Solutions Laboratory
 
Toxics Use Reduction Institute




Surface Solutions Laboratory

Trial Report



Trial Number 18

(Client Number 244, Project Number 1)

Trial Purpose: To evaluate rolling load resistance for additional floor finishes.

Date Run: 09/07/05

Experiment Procedure:
Control of Moisture Content and Temperature
The moisture content at the time of testing will influence results due to the hydroscopic nature of the base materials. Therefore, efforts must be taken to ensure that the moisture content and temperature remain constant during the evaluation period. Ideally, the sample floor should be kept at 65+/-1% relative humidity and 68+/-6 F.

During laboratory testing, conditions were slightly drier, 40% relative humidity, but the temperature was within the given temperature range ~70 F).

Sample Preparation
The flooring material supplied was Hardwood flooring made from Red Oak. The boards were ?? thick, 2 ?? wide and cut into 8? sections. Some pieces of the flooring had to be sanded prior to making initial thickness readings to remove residual packing tape adhesive. With the boards cut into 8? coupons, three readings were made using a Brown & Sharpe Micrometer to measure each coupons initial board thickness. Each reading was made to 0.001? and the three values were averaged to give a baseline thickness for the coupons. In addition to the thickness baseline, baselines were established for Gloss, Coefficient of Friction, Impact, Small Area Loads. Procedures for each baseline measurements followed the procedures to be outlined.

Following the establishment of the baselines, three coupons were coated with a supplied floor finish according to the manufacturers? specifications. The finish was applied using a 1? Pure Bristle 1500 paint brush. To ensure consistent coating application, the finish was leveled off using a 10 mils Precision Gage & Tool Co Dow Film Caster. Three coats were used for each floor finish as this was common number of coating layers suggested by the various manufacturers. Each coating layer was allowed to dry for 2 hours prior to the application of the next coat. Completed coupons were allowed to sit for a minimum period of 24 hours before performance evaluations were conducted.

Rolling Load
Measurements made during the rolling load will reveal damage to the coupon surface from repeated rolling forces, simulating heavy castored loads such as beds, desks and appliances. Coupons were placed into a holding device and clamped to restrict movement of the coupon. A load sled was constructed using a wood plank and three castor wheels. The round, hard wheels were 2? in diameter and 1? wide. The sled was loaded with 200 pounds. Figure 3 shows the sled passing over the surface of the finished coupon.

Figure 3. Rolling Load Apparatus

Ten passes (5 cycles) were completed and the three measurements were made along the path of the sled wheel. An additional 15 passes were made with three more measurements made. Following the 25 passes, another 25 passes were made with the deformation measurements. The averages for the three sets of passes were calculated. Any notable surface changes were recorded. The results for each floor finish were compared to the other finishes.

Trial Results
Rolling Load Resistance
Initial Readings                                        Final readings         
Coating     Coupon   #passes  Mid    End1   End2   Ave    Mid   End1   End2     Ave
Kiilto      G         10      7.609  7.639  7.573  7.607  7.561 7.586  7.458    7.535
                      25                    7.524  7.550  7.433 7.502
                      50                    7.488  7.523  7.372 7.461
            H         10      7.575  7.653  7.554  7.594  7.573 7.634  7.490    7.566
                      25                    7.525  7.611  7.469 7.535
                      50                    7.506  7.582  7.457 7.515
            I         10      7.615  7.632  7.588  7.612  7.582 7.575  7.560    7.572
                      25                    7.553  7.549  7.545 7.549
                      50                    7.521  7.538  7.521 7.527
with primer P         10      7.569  7.553  7.587  7.570  7.555 7.547  7.569    7.557
                      25                    7.534  7.524  7.537 7.532
                      50                    7.527  7.483  7.526 7.512
            Q         10      7.611  7.628  7.585  7.608  7.502 7.575  7.517    7.531
                      25                    7.476  7.543  7.500 7.506
                      50                    7.465  7.498  7.482 7.482
            R         10      7.592  7.623  7.576  7.597  7.548 7.558  7.532    7.546
                      25                    7.534  7.546  7.514 7.531
                      50                    7.511  7.511  7.495 7.506

Summary Rolling Load Resistance
                     Number of Passes        Total       Rank 
                     10      25      50      Depression 
Floor Coating                                Depth
Polyurethane Gloss   0.036   0.028   0.010   0.074        4
WB Polyurethane      0.003   0.011   0.014   0.028        1
WB Sanding Sealer    0.030   0.039   0.006   0.075        5
Aqua Deva Metro      0.077   0.018   0.000   0.095        7
Hydro 202 Satin      0.023   0.039   0.031   0.093        6
SafeCoat Satin       0.017   0.041   0.016   0.073        3
SafeCoat Gloss       0.074   0.042   0.054   0.171        9
Kiilto               0.049   0.029   0.028   0.106        8
Kiilto w/Primer      0.025   0.022   0.023   0.070        2


Success Rating
A follow up test, usually based on company input.

Conclusion
The Kiilto with primer was the second most resistant coating. The Kiilto by itself was second least resistant coating.