Default object view. Click to create a custom template, Node ID: 6632, Object ID: 6631

Trial #1

Trial #1

To compare new spray delivery system with traditional spray can method for complete surface coating

2002

9

4

125

126

Coupon

06/11/2002

0.00

Low Pressure Spray

Jason Marshall

Wood

Paints

None

None

Gravimetric
Timing

Six preweighed particle board tiles were placed into a spray chamber to be coated one a time.  Three tiles were to be coated with one of the two spray application methods.  The paint spray nozzle was placed 12 inches perpendicular to the tile.  The spray system was operated until the tile was completely coated, moving from left to right and back right to left across the face of the tile.  A stop watch was used to record the time required for the coating process.  After completely coating the surface, the tile was removed from the spray chamber and placed flat to dry.  Once the paint was dry, a second weight was recorded and coating amounts were calculated.  The results of each system were compared.

The Enviro Caddie system (EC system) applied more paint in less time than the Traditional Spray Can system (TSC system). The EC system applied about 2.5 grams of paint in 9 seconds where as the TSC system applied about 1.2 grams of paint in 11 seconds. The TSC system was more consistent in its delivery resulting in a lower standard deviation. Table 1 below lists the calculated delivery amounts for both systems.

Table 1 below lists the weights and calculated delivery rates

System Coupon # Base After Coating Coating Weight Average Wt Std Deviation
Enviro Caddie 11 310.17 313.07 2.9    
  12 306.64 309.05 2.41    
  13 298.61 300.89 2.28 2.53 0.33
Traditional 14 307.01 308.18 1.17    
  15 298.79 299.94 1.15    
  16 303.58 304.7 1.12 1.15 0.03
System Time to Coat Average Time Std Deviation
Enviro Caddie 9    
  10    
  8 9 1
Traditional 10    
  11    
  12 11 1
  Weight/area/time    
System g/mm2/sec Average    
Enviro Caddie 0.061     0.550
  0.046     0.457
  0.054 0.054 0.008 0.433
Traditional 0.022     0.222
  0.020     0.218
  0.018 0.020 0.002 0.213

The EC system produced small craters in the coating surface, where as the TSC system did not. The EC system coating was much darker and shinier than the TSC system. Figures 1 and 2 show the coatings for both systems.

Figure 1. Enviro Caddie System
Figure 2. Traditional Spray Can System

Substrates: Particle Board;
Coating Type: Paint;
Delivery System: Average coating weight per Area per time
Enviro Caddie 0.000537 g/cm2/sec
Traditional Spray Can 0.000199 g/cm2/sec

The Enviro Caddie system provided a heavier coating in less time than the Traditional Spray Can system.  The quality of the coating for  the Enviro Caddie system was questionable due to the appearance of small craters throughout the tile.

No relation

Powered by eZ Publish™ CMS Open Source Web Content Management. Copyright © 1999-2014 eZ Systems AS (except where otherwise noted). All rights reserved.