Trial Purpose:
To evaluate three all-purpose cleaners supplied products for DCC-17 removal from various surfaces.
Date Run:
01/07/2016Experiment Procedure:
Three cleaners were supplied by Envirox for testing, Soap Scum, Soap Scum Conc. and Wall Glide Plus. Soap scum was provided ready to use. Recommended dilutions for Soap Scum Conc. (1:6.4) and Ecolab Wall Glide Plus (2oz/128) were made tap water at room temperature (68˚F). Nine pre-weighed coupons per cleaner (three Ceramic, three Plastic and three Painted steel) were coated with one gram of DCC-17 at room temperature using a handheld swab. The contaminated coupons were air dried for 24 hours at room temperature and weighed again to determine the amount of soil added the next day.
Three coupons of each substrate were placed in the SLW equipment, and a KC Wypal reinforced paper towel was attached to the cleaning sled and soaked with two sprays of cleaning solution. Each coupon was sprayed twice with the same cleaning solution. The cleaning unit was run for 20 cycles (30 sec). At the end of the cleaning cycle, the coupons were wiped once with a dry paper towel. Coupons dried overnight and final weights were recorded. Efficiencies were calculated and recorded.
Cleaners evaluated: Soap Scum RTU by EnvirOx; Soap Scum Conc. by EnvirOx; Wall Glide Plus by Ecolab Inc.
Trial Results:
The ready to use version of Soap Scum cleaner was the least effective after 30 seconds of cleaning, especially on the ceramic coupons. Soap Scum Concentrate was slightly lower in removal percentage than the Wall Glide Plus, but when reviewing the standard deviation of the two cleaners, there was no difference between them. Although none of the cleaners had performed to laboratory standard of effectiveness of 85%, Soap scum concentrate performs as well as the competitor product tested.
| Cleaner | Substrate | Initial wt | Final wt | % Removed | %Average | %Overall Ave |
| Soap Scum RTU | Ceramic | |||||
| 1.010 | 0.478 | 52.63 | 58.47 | 74.65 | ||
| 1.004 | 0.336 | 66.51 | ||||
| 1.024 | 0.448 | 56.28 | ||||
| Polycarb | ||||||
| 1.019 | 0.091 | 91.07 | 83.34 | |||
| 1.113 | 0.116 | 89.57 | ||||
| 1.077 | 0.330 | 69.39 | ||||
| Painted Steel | ||||||
| 1.041 | 0.232 | 77.77 | 82.13 | |||
| 1.012 | 0.089 | 91.23 | ||||
| 1.057 | 0.239 | 77.40 | ||||
| Soap Scum Conc. (1:6.4) | ||||||
| Ceramic | ||||||
| 1.020 | 0.159 | 84.40 | 81.08 | 82.81 | ||
| 1.097 | 0.300 | 72.64 | ||||
| 1.004 | 0.138 | 86.21 | ||||
| Polycarb | ||||||
| 1.065 | 0.109 | 89.77 | 83.53 | |||
| 1.047 | 0.188 | 82.03 | ||||
| 1.040 | 0.221 | 78.79 | ||||
| Painted Steel | ||||||
| 1.020 | 0.163 | 83.99 | 83.81 | |||
| 1.011 | 0.102 | 89.95 | ||||
| 0.990 | 0.223 | 77.48 | ||||
| Ecolab Wall Glide | ||||||
| Ceramic | ||||||
| 1.052 | 0.146 | 86.13 | 78.49 | 83.31 | ||
| 1.049 | 0.359 | 65.82 | ||||
| 1.014 | 0.167 | 83.53 | ||||
| Polycarb | ||||||
| 1.024 | 0.087 | 91.52 | 87.88 | |||
| 1.038 | 0.134 | 87.06 | ||||
| 1.091 | 0.163 | 85.07 | ||||
| Painted Steel | ||||||
| 1.013 | 0.099 | 90.27 | 83.56 | |||
| 1.041 | 0.197 | 81.11 | ||||
| 1.003 | 0.208 | 79.32 | ||||
Success Rating:
Results successful using TACT (time, agitation, concentration, and temperature, as well as rinsing and drying) and/or other cleaning chemistries examined.Conclusion:
At the end of the cycle (30 sec), Soap Scum RTU had an average overall cleaner percentage of 74.65%. When observing substrates individually, Soap Scum Conc. had the best success at removing most of DCC-17 from all substrates. Overall, Soap Scum Conc. had 0.5% less removal of the overall cleaner compared to Wall Glide Plus.
