Browse Client Types

Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors

Trial Number 4

Trial Purpose:

To retest supplied solvents for all purpose testing using manual wiping.

Date Run:

08/05/2010

Experiment Procedure:

The two supplied solvent were used at full strength and at a 50:50 mix with each other. Solvents were compared with Dowanol DPM - dipropylene glycol methyl ether.

Preweighed stainless steel coupons were coated with Hucker's Soil Formulation (Jiffy Creamy Peanut Butter 9.2%, Salted Butter 9.2%, Arrowhead Mills stone ground wheat flour 9.2%, Egg Yolk 9.2%, Evaporated milk 13.8%, Distilled water 45.8%, Printer's ink with boiled linseed oil 0.9%, Shaws saline solution 2.7%) 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 Kimberly-Clark Wypal reinforced paper towel 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 cleaning unit was run for 20 cycles (~33 seconds).

At the end of the cleaning, coupons were observed visual to determine soil removal and/or residue levels. Coupons were then weighed to calculate soil removal amounts. Following this first final weight, coupons were wiped once with a dry paper towel and then weighed on last time to assess the amount of residue and overall efficiencies. A second soil consisting of DCC 17 soil (Mix lard, vegetable oil, vegetable shortening and carbon black) was applied to the same coupon types and cleaned in the same manner as the Hucker’s soil.

Trial Results:

Each of the solvents tested left some residue behind following cleaning. The DPM had the least residue remaining. The 50:50 mix had the most residue. The SG 21000D had slightly less than the SG 22002D. Visually, all four cleaners had removed all of the soil during the manual cleaning. The low efficiency results obtained in previous trials was due to the residue left after cleaning.

Cleaner Initial wt Final wt % Removed Visual Rank
SG21000D        
  0.0239 0.0570 -138.49 2
  0.0227 0.0546 -140.53  
  0.0313 0.0589 -88.18  
SG2200SD        
  0.0363 0.0590 -62.53 3
  0.0374 0.0819 -119.11  
  0.0303 0.0746 -146.20  
50:50 mix        
  0.0247 0.0817 -230.77 4
  0.0392 0.0802 -104.59  
  0.0354 0.0724 -104.52  
DPM        
  0.0363 0.0144 60.33 1
  0.0359 0.0282 21.45  
  0.0381 0.0249 34.65  

With Wipe

Cleaner Initial wt Final wt % Removed
SG21000D Wipe    
  0.0239 0.0020 91.63
  0.0227 0.0027 88.11
  0.0313 0.0015 95.21
SG2200SD Wipe    
  0.0363 0.0017 95.32
  0.0374 0.0041 89.13
  0.0303 0.0027 91.09
50:50 mix Wipe    
  0.0247 0.0055 77.73
  0.0392 0.0035 91.07
  0.0354 0.0072 79.66
DPM Wipe    
  0.0363 0.0020 94.49
  0.0359 0.0017 95.26
  0.0381 0.0019 95.01

Success Rating:

A follow up test, usually based on company input.

Conclusion:

The supplied solvents and the DPM comparison product were found to be successful in removing the Hucker's soil using manual cleaning accompanied with a final dry wipe. The dry wipe was needed to remove the residue that remained from the cleaning solvents.

Save Report as a PDF