Browse Client Types

Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors

Trial Number 1

Client Number 241

Project Number 1

Trial Purpose:

To compare the effectiveness of the provided aqueous solution for hydrophobic interactions at 0.1% diluted concentration between multiple types of roughed surfaces and smooth surfaced substrates.

Date Run:

10/13/2015

Experiment Procedure:

Three multiple tests trials were conducted in total for 0.1% dilution concentration of BDT Sample 1 (pH 8.0), BDT Sample 2 (pH 9.7) and Solution of BDT (pH 11.0). The diluted solutions at 0.1% were made by diluting 99.9 mL of deionized water with 0.1mL from the full concentration of the samples. The set of three multiple tests was repeated for both roughed and smooth substrate surfaces. In total of 6 tests were conducted. An initial test with 0.1% concentration of BDT Sample 1 (pH 8.0) was tested on a set of three smooth ceramic, aluminum and glass substrate. An initial contact angle of the substrates was obtained using the Video Fta32 Video 2.1 program with a Logitech quick cam pro4000. Apparatus of the machine was set at a constant position for consistency. Contact angles were measured by using a droplet of deionized water onto the surface after ~5 -10 seconds of waiting for stabilization of the water droplet. In the program three sets of points were used to obtain the angle. A baseline reading constituted two points and a third point was measured at the top of the bubble. Application of the solution was done in a gentle manner by using a TX 707A Large Rectangular Head Swab onto the surface of the three ceramic substrates one at a time. After the application of the solution onto one of the ceramic surfaces, a bounty paper towel rinsed with deionized water was gently wiped onto the surface in a circular motion. Thereafter another contact angle was obtained.

The set of ceramic substrates were allowed time for air drying for 5 minutes. Then a new contact angle reading was obtained on a different spot of the surface that has not been used for the prior contact angle readings. A new contact angle was obtained after every 5 minutes of air drying in room temperature. The set of ceramics was allowed to air dry for a total of 30 minutes (a total of 6 readings was done after the initial and after the application of the solution).

The exact same procedure conducted on smooth surfaces is applied for rough substrate surfaces. An additional step prior to measuring the initial contact angles of the substrates. The surfaces of the substrates were roughed up with an aluminum oxide 120 grit rolling sandpaper until noticeable signs of scratches were shown on the surfaces.

Trial Results:

Chemistries Evaluated: 0.1% concentration of BDT Sample 1 (pH 8.0); BDT Sample 2 (pH 9.7); Solution of BDT (pH 11.0)

Surfaces Evaluated: Roughed Ceramic, Aluminum and Glass substrates. Smooth Ceramic, Aluminum and Glass substrates.

In comparison between the surfaces, smooth surfaces were more effective at lowering glass substrate contact angles for diluted concentrations of BDT Sample 1 and BDT Sample 2. In addition to that smooth ceramic surfaces coated with 0.1% concentration of Solution of BDT were more effective than rough ceramic surfaces. In conclusion at a 0.1% concentration, the solutions are more effective on smooth surfaces over a longer period of time.

Success Rating:

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

Conclusion:

 surfaces that were not roughed up and coated with 0.1% dilution are more effective in the long run.

Save Report as a PDF