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




Surface Solutions Laboratory

Trial Report



Trial Number 3

(Client Number 275, Project Number 2)

Trial Purpose: To evaluate the supplied product for carpet cleaning as compared to an industry standard product.

Date Run: 01/22/16

Experiment Procedure:
The procedure followed is a modified version of the Institute of Inspection Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC) Standard and Reference Guide S100. Much of the testing was modeled after Appendix D, IICRC Carpet Cleaning MethodsTesting Protocol. The carpet substrate was donated by Shaw Industries of Dalton, GA.
This carpet type is specifically designated in the IICRC Appendix method. An AATCC (Research Triangle Park, NC) soil was obtained from Textile Innovators, a division of SDL Atlas of Charlotte, NC, as suggested by DuPont Antron of Kennesaw, GA. Prior to soiling, a BYK spectro-guide color/gloss meter was used to establish a baseline L-value from the surface of the carpet. Each carpet was marked-off into six sections measuring 3.5 in wide and 6 in long. (The carpet was not cut into individual pieces as it would be too difficult to physically soil and clean smaller carpet sections.)
Six readings were taken in each grid area to obtain baseline readings. Modifications to the above mentioned standard included: (1) omitting the use of milling stones and (2) replacing the Zytel Type 6,6 nylon pellets with Nalgene tubing cut into 1/8 inch pieces, or ?pellets?. According to the standard, approximately 1000 grams of pellets should be used for every 12 grams of soil or, 83 grams of
pellets used per gram of soil. S100 also suggests using 500 grams of pellets for each soil under investigation (in this case, one) for carpet measuring 10.375 inch x 39.375 inch (408.5 sq. in.). This equals 1.22 (500/408.5 = 1.22) grams of pellets per square inch of carpet. Since the Lab had 174 grams of tubing/pellets at its disposal, two grams of the AATCC soil were needed to artificially contaminate the carpet. The carpet was cut into 7.375 inch x 19.6 inch (144.54 sq. in.) pieces. The carpet pieces were soiled by placing one piece of carpet into a one gallon can, making sure the carpet lined the inner wall of the can.The plastic-tubing pieces were poured into the bucket and the soil was distributed along the width of the can. The can was lidded and placed into a harness attached to a crank shaft. The crank was turned at an average rate of 42 rpm by hand for five minutes in one direction, followed by 5 minutes of rotation in the opposite direction. At the end of the 10-minute soiling regime, the carpet was placed onto a carpet template and vacuumed with a
vacuum cleaner for three strokes in the forward direction followed by 3 strokes in the backward direction. The carpet pieces were evaluated again for L-value levels. The carpet sections were then cut down the middle, length-wise to allow carpet samples to fit into the Gardner Straight Line Washability Unit. Each piece was marked-off into three sections. Each section was sprayed 10 times with the ready to use diluted cleaning products and allowed to soak for 30 seconds. A Kimberly-Clark Wypall reinforced paper towel was attached to the cleaning sled. The carpet sections were then dabbed with the towel 10 times each and given 24 hours to dry. After Drying the Carpet was again subjected to gloss readings. The carpet was also subjected to visual ratings from three individuals for further analysis using the scale listed below.

Visual Rating Key
5 Very dirty
4 Dirty
3 Noticeably Dirty
2 Mildly Dirty
1 Clean

Trial Results
Cleaner         Initial        Dirty        Clean     % Original
                   L             L            L            L                
PC 120

                   65.31        31.47        32.72        49.9                
                   65.31        31.47        39.48        39.5                
                   65.31        31.47        32.57        50.1                
                   65.31        31.47        28.72        56.0                
                   65.31        31.47        31.06        52.4                
                   65.31        31.47        30.29        53.6                

Fibermaster All in 1

                   65.31        31.47         31.52       51.7                
                   65.31        31.47         32.93       49.6                
                   65.31        31.47         31.45       51.8                
                   65.31        31.47         29.45       54.9                
                   65.31        31.47         35.92       45.0                
                   65.31        31.47         39.38       39.7   

Cleaner        Rating 1        Rating 2        Rating 3
PC 120
                  5               3.5            3.5
                  4               4              3
                  2.5             3              3
                  3.5             4              5
                  4.5             5              5
                  2.5             2.5            2.5
                         
Fibermaster All in 1        
                 
                  5               2.5            3
                  2.5             3              4
                  2.5             3              3.5
                  3               3.5            5
                  3.5             3.5            4
                  3               2              2


Success Rating
Results successful using TACT (time, agitation, concentration, and temperature, as well as rinsing and drying) and/or other cleaning chemistries examined.

Conclusion
To effectively compare the cleaners, we determined the percent of the gloss remaining for each carpet. This was done by taking the initial, dirty, and clean readings for the carpet. The dirty and clean readings were then divided by the initial readings to determine a percent restoration to the initial. (Since the carpet sections came from the same source and they were soiled all in one piece, the initial and dirty values were taken as an average of all the carpet sections combined).