Trial Purpose:
To test the efficiency of BWG Amazing Glass Cleaner against Windex at removing Glass Soap Scum Soil from various substrates.
Date Run:
07/07/2025Experiment Procedure:
Twelve pre-weighed coupons, six per substrate per cleaner, were contaminated with 0.5 g of Glass Soap Scum Soil composed of (INSERT INGREDIENTS). Coupons dried at room temperature (68°F) for 24 hours before their dirty weights were recorded. Three coupons of the same substrate were placed in a Single Line Washing Unit (SLW) with a Wypall X60 wipe attached to the cleaning sled. The wipe and coupons were sprayed two times with the cleaner and soaked for 10 seconds. The SLW was then run for 20 cleaning cycles (30 seconds of manual cleaning). Coupons dried overnight at room temperature before final weights were recorded.
Trial Results:
| Substrate | Cleaner | Coupon # | Initial wt. | Cont. wt. | Clean wt. | Initial wt of cont. | Final wt of cont. | %Cont Removed | Average % Removal | Average Cleaner % |
| Mirror | BWG Amazing | 21 | 37.0458 | 37.1381 | 37.0816 | 0.0923 | 0.0358 | 61.21 | 70.87 | 80.38 |
| 4 | 37.3081 | 37.4149 | 37.3367 | 0.1068 | 0.0286 | 73.22 | ||||
| 10 | 37.4129 | 37.5274 | 37.4379 | 0.1145 | 0.025 | 78.17 | ||||
| Windex | 9 | 37.6894 | 37.7851 | 37.6983 | 0.0957 | 0.0089 | 90.70 | 89.90 | ||
| 15 | 37.3152 | 37.4127 | 37.3266 | 0.0975 | 0.0114 | 88.31 | ||||
| 6 | 37.9143 | 38.013 | 37.9235 | 0.0987 | 0.0092 | 90.68 | ||||
| Glass | BWG Amazing | 45 | 37.4369 | 37.5238 | 37.4472 | 0.0869 | 0.0103 | 88.15 | 87.58 | 90.12 |
| 35 | 37.7007 | 37.8205 | 37.7174 | 0.1198 | 0.0167 | 86.06 | ||||
| 41 | 37.6404 | 37.746 | 37.6525 | 0.1056 | 0.0121 | 88.54 | ||||
| Windex | 15 | 37.5616 | 37.6676 | 37.5759 | 0.106 | 0.0143 | 86.51 | 92.65 | ||
| 14 | 37.7987 | 37.9048 | 37.8034 | 0.1061 | 0.0047 | 95.57 | ||||
| 7 | 37.6119 | 37.7161 | 37.6162 | 0.1042 | 0.0043 | 95.87 |
| Rating | Cleanliness |
| 1 | No Visible Filming/ Streaking (Excellent Performance) |
| 2 | Minimal Filming/ Streaking |
| 3 | Slight Filming/ Streaking |
| 4 | Noticeable Filming/ Streaking |
| 5 | Considerable Filming/ Streaking |
| 6 | Severe Filming/ Streaking |
| 7 | High Filming/ Streaking (Poor Performance) |
| Cleanliness | |||||||
| Cleaner | Substrate | Coupon | 1 | 2 | 3 | Average | Product Avg |
| BWG Amazing | Mirror | 21 | 6 | 5.5 | 6 | 5.06 | 4.20 |
| 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | ||||
| 10 | 4 | 5 | 4 | ||||
| Glass | 9 | 3.5 | 4.5 | 4 | 4.06 | ||
| 15 | 3.5 | 5 | 4 | ||||
| 6 | 3 | 5 | 4 | ||||
| Windex | Mirror | 45 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3.50 | 3.00 |
| 35 | 4 | 3.5 | 4.5 | ||||
| 41 | 3.5 | 3 | 3 | ||||
| Glass | 15 | 4 | 3.5 | 5 | 3.00 | ||
| 14 | 3.5 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| 7 | 3 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| Filming | |||||||
| Cleaner | Coupon | 1 | 2 | 3 | Average | Product Avg | |
| BWG Amazing | Mirror | 21 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6.00 | 5.59 |
| 4 | 6 | 6 | 6 | ||||
| 10 | 6 | 6 | 6 | ||||
| Glass | 9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6.22 | ||
| 15 | 6 | 7 | 6 | ||||
| 6 | 6 | 7 | 6 | ||||
| Windex | Mirror | 45 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4.56 | 4.61 |
| 35 | 4 | 5 | 5 | ||||
| 41 | 4 | 4 | 5 | ||||
| Glass | 15 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 4.61 | ||
| 14 | 3 | 5 | 5 | ||||
| 7 | 3.5 | 6 | 4 | ||||
| Streaking | |||||||
| Cleaner | Substrate | Coupon | 1 | 2 | 3 | Average | Product Avg |
| BWG Amazing | Mirror | 21 | 7 | 6.5 | 6 | 6.28 | 6.20 |
| 4 | 7 | 5 | 6 | ||||
| 10 | 7 | 6 | 6 | ||||
| Glass | 9 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6.56 | ||
| 15 | 7 | 7 | 6 | ||||
| 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | ||||
| Windex | Mirror | 45 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 5.78 | 6.56 |
| 35 | 7 | 5 | 5 | ||||
| 41 | 7 | 5 | 5 | ||||
| Glass | 15 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6.56 | ||
| 14 | 7 | 7 | 6 | ||||
| 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 | ||||
Success Rating:
Preliminary compatibility tests on substrate coupons encouraging for at least one cleaning chemistry. More in-depth laboratory testing necessary.Conclusion:
Windex was more effective than BWG Amazing Glass Cleaner on mirror and glass. Windex had better average product ratings for efficacy in both cleanliness and filming. BWG had a better average product rating for efficacy in streaking only.
