Seven chemistries were selected for testing. In addition to the chemistries, Acetone was used to give a baseline level to compare the alternatives to. The chemistries selected were:
| Company
|
Tradename
|
Concentration
|
| Brulin & Company
|
Compliance Blend
|
50%
|
| AW Chesterton
|
803
|
100%, 50%
|
| MacDermid
|
ND-17
|
50%
|
| Isopropyl Alcohol
|
ISP
|
100%
|
| Polychem
|
P.X.P.
|
100%
|
| Easter Color
|
Eccobrite Cleaner AK
|
100%
|
| Terpene Technology
|
HTF 85B
|
100%
|
The cleaners were applied to the sample using a saturated paper towel. The time and effort required to clean the contaminant were observed and noted. These two factors were then used to construct a table of cleaning effectiveness.
SUBSTRATE MATERIAL: Plastic
CONTAMINANTS: 3M contact cement--30NF
| Cleaner
|
Rating
|
| Compliance 50%
|
poor
|
| 803 100%
|
okay/fair
|
| 803 50%
|
okay
|
| ND-17 50%
|
fair/poor
|
| ISP 100%
|
good/excellent
|
| P.X.P. 100%
|
poor
|
| Eccobrite 100%
|
Excellent
|
| HTF85B 100%
|
Excellent
|
| Acetone
|
Excellent
|
Excellent->Good->Okay->Fair->Poor
From the results obtained in the previous trial and from this trial, there were five possible alternatives for acetone. These cleaners were: Loctite 7360, Brulin Compliance 100%, Terpene Technology HTF 85B, Eastern Color & Chemical Company Eccobrite Cleaner AK and Isopropyl Alcohol. A table with more information on each cleaner was constructed to aid in the selection process.
It should also be noted that Isopropyl alcohol is flammable. In using IPA as a replacement, the current hazard may be eliminated; However, a different hazard comes into existence.
After trying several chemicals, five cleaners showed excellent removal of the contaminant. Additional information on these chemistries were provided to help aid the client in the selection of an appropriate substitution for Acetone.