Browse Client Types

Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors

Trial Number 1

Client Number 348

Project Number 1

Trial Purpose:

To evaluate supplied products for glass cleaning using manual cleaning

Date Run:

03/26/2012

Experiment Procedure:

The supplied product was diluted with room temperature water to the requested dilution (2.3%).

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 handheld 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" where:

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 removed more than 90% of the glass soap scum using manual cleaning. The product had filming and spotting levels above the acceptable level. The product had better result than the conventional product for filming and streaking. The table lists the amount of soil added, the amount remaining and the efficiency for each coupon cleaned.

Cleaner  Initial wt Final wt % Removed Filming Streaking AveF Ave S
Horizon glass              
  0.0050 -0.0001 102.00 1 1 1.5 1.3
  0.0105 0.0002 98.10 1 1    
  0.0142 0.0005 96.48 1 1    
Horizon chrome              
  0.0127 0.0020 84.25        
  0.0213 0.0010 95.31        
  0.0224 0.0025 88.84        
Horizon mirror              
  0.0237 0.0016 93.25 2 1    
  0.0176 0.0026 85.23 2 1    
  0.0124 0.0008 93.55 2 3    
Windex glass              
  0.0327 0.0070 78.59 3 1 3 2.2
  0.0262 0.0035 86.64 3 1    
  0.0139 0.0028 79.86 3 4    
Windex chrome              
  0.0238 0.0034 85.71        
  0.0165 0.0016 90.30        
  0.0253 0.0006 97.63        
Windex mirror              
  0.0227 0.0022 90.31 3 3    
  0.0148 0.0001 99.32 3 1    
  0.0163 0.0014 91.41 3 3    

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 performed better than the conventional cleaning product. The product had acceptable filming and streaking levels.

Save Report as a PDF