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




Surface Solutions Laboratory

Trial Report



Trial Number 1

(Client Number 334, Project Number 1)

Trial Purpose: To evaluate supplied products for glass cleaning using manual cleaning

Date Run: 08/11/10

Experiment Procedure:
Supplied products were used at room temperature at the requested dilution. Preweighed chrome and three glass coupons were coated with SSL Soil 2 (Glass soap scum: Water 51.5%, Hair gel 25.6%, Toothpaste 10.4%, Shaving cream 5.3%, Hair spray 3.7% and Spray deodorant 3.5%) using a hand held swab and allowed to dry for 24 hours at room temperature. The contaminated coupons were weighed again to determine the amount of soil added.

Three coupons were placed into a Gardner Straight Line Washability unit. A Wypall X60 reinforced wipe was attached to the cleaning sled and soaked with 5-7 sprays of cleaning solutions. Each coupon was sprayed 7-10 times with the same cleaning solution. The solution was allowed to penetrate for 30 seconds followed by cleaning in the SLW unit for 5 cycles (~10 seconds). At the end of the cleaning, coupons were wiped once with a dry paper towel. Final weights were recorded and efficiencies recorded.

Visual observations were made on the coupons for spotting and filming following the general guidelines set forth in the CSPA DCC 09A. Filming is best recognized as "haziness" or overall "milkiness", while streaking is best identified as dried droplets or "spotting", usually found strung together into thin white lines. Each coupon was evaluated separately for filming and streaking, (i.e., product residues without added soil), according to a scale of "1" to "7" with:

Filming Streaking
7 = high filming 7 = high streaking poor (performance)
1 = no visible filming 1 = no visible streaking (excellent performance)

Trial Results
The supplied product worked better the conventional product at removing the glass soap scum and left less spots and film behind on the glass and
mirror surfaces. The table lists the amount of soil added, remaining and efficiency for each coupon cleaned. The table also lists the rating for
spotting and filming.

Cleaner Initial wt  Final wt   % Removed   Spotting  Filming
Windex - glass                                   
        0.0313       0.0013       95.85       2       3
        0.0618       0.0008       98.71       1       3
        0.0593       0.0019       96.80       1       3
Windex - mirror                                   
        0.0622       0.0020       96.78       1       3
        0.0555       0.0017       96.94       1       3
        0.0796       0.0034       95.73       1       2
Windex - chrome                                   
        0.0603       0.0057       90.55              
        0.0769       0.0018       97.66              
        0.0916       0.0032       96.51              
New Leaf Glass Cleaner - glass                                   
        0.0650       0.0037       94.31       1       3
        0.0472       0.0000      100.00       1       2
        0.0533       0.0020       96.25       1       2
New Leaf Glass Cleaner - mirror                                   
        0.0809      -0.0015      101.85       1       3
        0.0505      -0.0003      100.59       1       2
        0.0496       0.0015       96.98       1       2
New Leaf Glass Cleaner - chrome                                   
        0.0640       0.0035       94.53              
        0.0840       0.0034       95.95              
        0.0529       0.0025       95.27


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

Conclusion
The supplied product had an overall average removal efficiency greater than 85% and worked as well as the conventional cleaning product.