Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors
Trial Purpose:
To evaluate two products for floor cleaning.
Date Run:
03/31/2006Experiment Procedure:
Two supplied cleaning product was diluted to vendor recommended concentrations for bathroom cleaning using DI water (1.56 and 2.34%). Water was used as well. Nine preweighed ceramic, G-10 plastic and plastic counter top coupons were coated with a 20 g per 100 ml mixture of Textile Innovators Corp Synthetic Carpet Soil AATCC Method 122 and water 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 Professional Painter's Rag 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 5 cycles (~9 seconds). At the end of the cleaning, coupons were wiped once with a dry paper towel. Final weights were recorded, efficiencies were calculated and recorded.
Trial Results:
Both supplied products resulted in removing an average 85% of the soil from the three surface materials. However, Perma 180 removed over 85% on two of three substrates and Perma Top #127 removed over 85% on only one substrate. The plastic counter top was the most difficult surface to clean for the products. The Top #127 had the highest efficiency on the G-10 plastic coupons, removing just over 90% of the soil. The water removed just under 60% of the soil mix. The table below lists the amount of soil added, remaining and the efficiency for each coupon cleaned.
Cleaner | Initial wt | Final wt | % Removed | |
Geo 180 | 0.0771 | 0.0055 | 92.87 | Ceramic |
0.0442 | 0.0072 | 83.71 | ||
0.0545 | 0.0083 | 84.77 | ||
Top 127 | 0.0497 | 0.0073 | 85.31 | |
0.0706 | 0.0132 | 81.30 | ||
0.0947 | 0.0139 | 85.32 | ||
Water | 0.0514 | 0.0054 | 89.49 | |
0.0564 | 0.0298 | 47.16 | ||
0.0420 | 0.0135 | 67.86 | ||
Geo 180 | 0.0271 | 0.0026 | 90.41 | Plastic |
0.0398 | 0.0059 | 85.18 | ||
0.0510 | 0.0091 | 82.16 | ||
Top 127 | 0.0569 | 0.0037 | 93.50 | |
0.0570 | 0.0071 | 87.54 | ||
0.0591 | 0.0037 | 93.74 | ||
Water | 0.0895 | 0.0155 | 82.68 | |
0.0384 | 0.0083 | 78.39 | ||
0.0274 | 0.0061 | 77.74 | ||
Geo 180 | 0.0440 | 0.0095 | 78.41 | Plastic counter |
0.0628 | 0.0100 | 84.08 | ||
0.0713 | 0.0127 | 82.19 | ||
Top 127 | 0.0328 | 0.0016 | 95.12 | |
0.0343 | 0.0100 | 70.85 | ||
0.0572 | 0.0167 | 70.80 | ||
Water | 0.0638 | 0.0372 | 41.69 | |
0.0743 | 0.0454 | 38.90 | ||
0.0999 | 0.0841 | 15.82 |
Success Rating:
A follow up test, usually based on company input.Conclusion:
Both Perma products averaged an efficiency of 85% at the concentrations tested. Increasing the cleaning times and or the concentrations should further enhance the performance of these two products.