Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors
To evaluate supplied cleaning equipment for stainless steel polish as compared to conventional products
Nine precleaned coupons were measured using a Spectro Guide Gloss-Color meter from BYK Gardner to evaluate gloss. Baseline gloss readings of the surface were taken in five locations on stainless steel coupons. Coupons were then contaminated with finger oils from three lab staff members. Gloss readings were taken a second time. Cleaning products were then sprayed onto the surface, wiped off with a micro fiber cloth attached to a Garnder Straight-line washability unit and cleaned for 5 cycles. Coupons were then dried with a single pass using a fresh micro fiber cloth. Gloss readings were taken again in the same five locations. The difference in gloss-color was then compared to determine effectiveness. In addition, visual observations were made by at least three lab staff members to determine effectiveness.
The conventional product resulted in the greatest increase in gloss increase following removal of the stainless steel coupons. Based on gloss meter readings, Activeion had the lowest increase in gloss (lower than water). However there was still an increase in gloss (20% increase) from the initial level readings. The table lists the measurements made for initial, dirty and final readings.
|Product||Initial||Average||Dirty||Average||Final||Average||Delta Gloss||% increase|
Visual observations showed that the Activeion cleaned coupons looked the cleanest, free of smudges or other dust particles. Observations and ranking by three lab staff are listed in the next table.
|Product||Visual Observations||Ranking 1||2||3|
|Activeion||Surface looked free of any residual fingerprints/oil following wipe cleaning.||1||1||1|
|Coupons had a brighter look to them|
|Shiela Shine||Surface was free of any residual fingerprints/oil following wipe cleaning.||3||2||3|
|However, surface had significant film left behind from the polish.|
|Overnight the surface was still wet and had started collecting dust particles.|
|Strong odor when product was applied during cleaning.|
|Water||Some signs of fingerprints/oil smudges after cleaning||2||3||2|
|Surface was not as bright as the Activeion cleaned coupons|
Success Rating:A follow up test, usually based on company input.
The Activeion product was effective at removing finger oils from a stainless steel surface using manual wiping. The process improved the shine/gloss by 20 percent.