ASTM D3836-1994(2007) Standard Practice for Evaluation of Automotive Polish《汽车抛光剂的评定的标准操作规程》.pdf

《ASTM D3836-1994(2007) Standard Practice for Evaluation of Automotive Polish《汽车抛光剂的评定的标准操作规程》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM D3836-1994(2007) Standard Practice for Evaluation of Automotive Polish《汽车抛光剂的评定的标准操作规程》.pdf（6页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: D 3836 94 (Reapproved 2007)Standard Practice for Evaluation ofAutomotive Polish1This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 3836; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A n

2、umber in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This practice covers testing properties and apparatusused in evaluating the performance of automotive polishes.This practice is applica

3、ble to products that are commonlyreferred to as car/auto wax, cleaner wax, polish, etc.1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices

4、and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Terminology2.1 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:2.1.1 automotive polishaids in cleaning and improvingthe appearance of automobile finishes.3. Significance and Use3.1 This practice is intended to define the prope

5、rties to betested, the apparatus to use, and the comparisons of productperformance. It is recognized that considerable discretionexists among formulators and marketers of automotive polishon what properties or performance characteristics are best fortheir products. This practice is flexible enough t

6、o honor thisfact within the confines of the automotive polish definitionbelow.3.2 The test methods are subjective and empirical in order toconform to the basic characteristics of the industry and to allowflexibility in testing.4. Apparatus and Materials4.1 Sample of Polish to be tested.4.2 Sample of

7、 Control PolishThe control polish is se-lected subjectively for comparison to the test polish. It may bea competitive product, a modified formulation of the testpolish, etc. It should be recognized that automotive polishes areformulated to perform different functions. This should be takeninto accoun

8、t when interpreting results and choosing the controlpolish.4.3 Test SubstratesThe test substrate shall be one forwhich the test polish is intended (Note 1). The test surface shallbe in good physical condition, not badly cracked, scratched, orotherwise damaged so as to interfere with evaluation of po

9、lishproperties. The minimum test surface area for each sampleshall be 1290 cm2(200 in.2).NOTE 1It is important to select a test substrate for which a particularpolish is intended. For example, if a particular polish is intended for acertain make of car only, then the test substrate should be similar

10、.NOTE 2Standard paint panels that were previously available throughASTM have been discontinued as of January 1, 1988. It became verydifficult to maintain paint panels that were representative of all current andpast paint technologies used to manufacture automotive finishes. Since 4.3requires that th

11、e test substrate be one for which the test polish is intended,it is in the best interest of the user of this practice to determine and obtainthe appropriate test surface or coating, or both.ASTM Committee D-21 onPolishes suggests if further assistance is needed in determining orobtaining appropriate

12、 test substrates that contact be made with automotivepaint manufacturers, automobile manufacturers, and/or re-painting tech-nology specialists.4.4 Polishing ClothThe same type and size of polishingcloth shall be used with each sample tested. Separate clothsshall be used for each sample. Materials su

13、ch as washed cheesecloth, rumple cloth, flannel, cotton diaper cloth, and nonwovenfabrics are suitable for this purpose. Felt or paper shall not beused.4.5 Cleaning Solvent:4.5.1 Aliphatic solvents with kauri butanol values less than38.4.5.2 Water/isopropanol (70/30).4.6 Eye Droppers and Distilled o

14、r Deionized Water.4.7 Masking Tape, with a 9.5-mm (38-in.) width.4.8 Thermometer.4.9 Humidity Gage.5. Test Conditions5.1 The temperature and relative humidity of the test runsshall be measured and recorded. The temperature shall bewithin 13 to 29C (55 to 85F) with a relative humidity of 20to 80 %.5.

15、2 The substrate shall have the same temperature as thesurrounding area.1This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D21 on Polishesand is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D21.04 on Performance Tests.Current edition approved Feb. 1, 2007. Published March 2007. Originallyapprove

16、d in 1979. Last previous edition approved in 1999 as D 3836 94 (1999).1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.6. Personnel and Instructions6.1 The application and evaluation of the test and controlpolishes require four indivi

17、duals. They shall be capable ofmaking discriminating judgements of subjective physical andaesthetic properties. Training and orientation to specific prod-uct performance characteristics may be required.6.2 The four persons each apply the polishes to one of thefour test substrates. All persons then r

18、ate all properties exceptapplication properties on the remaining (three) substrates towhich they did not apply polish. The persons applying thepolishes rate ease of use and other application properties. Thismeans there will be only four readings on application proper-ties. The three rating the other

19、 polish properties do not observethe application because they rate properties of each polish“blind.”NOTE 3For intralaboratory and development work the observations ofan individual experimenter may be substituted as long as the decrease inaccuracy is considered.7. Procedure7.1 Cleaning of Test Substr

20、atesUsing soft cotton towels,first clean the test substrate thoroughly with an aliphaticsolvent having a kauri butanol value less than 38. Wipe dry.Using new soft cotton towels, reclean with a water/isopropanolsolvent mixture (70/30). Wipe dry with a clean soft cottontowel.NOTE 4If polishes containi

21、ng resins or reactive polymers, or both, orunknown polishes have been previously used on the test substrate,preclean with an abrasive cleaner to ensure their complete removal.7.2 Surface SubdivisionDivide the precleaned surface ofeach test substrate and outline by tape with uniform squares.7.3 Appli

22、cation of PolishAssuming the control polish orthe test polish is a commercially available product, follow thedirections on the container so far as is possible. When in doubton the method of use, the directions for similar products maybe used. Equal volumes of control and test polish shall be usedto

23、avoid excessively thin or heavy coats of polish. One or twoapplications may be used depending on the substrate and thediscretion of the tester. The same number of coats must be usedfor both the test polish and the control polish.8. Placement of Polishes8.1 Method AA controlled randomized method layi

24、ng outthe test (X) and control (C) polishes is represented as follows:Test Panel Left Center Right1CXC2CCX3X4XXCThese four positionings should be written on tags and drawnrandomly by each of the four who apply the polishes.8.2 Method BA controlled randomized method of layingout the test (X) and cont

25、rol (C) polishes is represented asfollows:Test Panel Left Right1CX2XC3C4XThese four positionings should be written on tags and drawnrandomly by each of the four who apply the polishes.9. Evaluation9.1 GeneralComparison is made between the test polishand the control.9.2 Application PropertiesDuring t

26、he application of thepolish begin the first phase of evaluation. In each case comparethe test polish and the control. Evaluate all or any number ofthe following properties:9.2.1 Ease of ApplicationDuring the application of thepolishes note the ease of wetting, spreadability, and absence ofdrag.9.2.2

27、 CleaningFollowing the application of the polishesinspect the discoloration, if any, on applicators (towels). Alsonote the effect of applying the polishes on the test surfaces.9.2.3 Drying RateTake readings of time in minutes foreach polish to dry.9.2.4 Ease of Wipe OffNote effort necessary to wipe

28、offeach of the polishes from test substrate.9.2.5 PowderingNote the degree of powdering, if any,during the wipe off of polishes from test substrate.9.2.6 Ease of Rub Up to Maximum Gloss During appli-cation of the polishes, note the time and ease with which eachproduct develops maximum gloss.9.3 Fina

29、l PropertiesFive to ten minutes following thesecond phase of the application of the polishes, begin theevaluation. In each case compare the test polish and thecontrol. Evaluate all or any number of the following properties:9.3.1 GlossEvaluate as depth of gloss.9.3.2 UniformityObserve the surface for

30、 streaks, unpol-ished dry spots, and general uniformity.9.3.3 Distinctness of ImageObserve the clearness orsharpness of an image of an object in the polished surface.Overhead lights, face, hand, or other objects may be used forreflection. This test may be eliminated for low-luster surfacesthat do no

31、t possess mirror-like finishes.9.3.4 Smear and Mar ResistanceSmear is the degree ofoiliness or greasiness after the polish is rubbed up to thedesired polish appearance. Mar is the degree of film damageresulting from a glancing blow to the polish substrate. Checksmear by making a design such as an “S

32、” with a smoothlyrounded object (finger or glass or metal rod) wrapped in a softcotton cloth. A glancing blow with knuckles or a soft objectsuch as a book or magazine may be used for determining thedegree of mar.9.3.5 Film HealingObserve the length of time requiredfor the smear or mar in 9.3.4 to di

33、sappear from the polish film.9.3.6 RebuffabilityObserve the ease and completeness ofrepairability when the smears and mars are buffed with apolishing cloth. Note the amount of physical effort and lengthof time required.9.3.7 CleaningObserve the ease of removal of old polishfilms as well as common so

34、iling materials such as dust, grease,oils, finger marks, tree sap, etc. This may be done either in thelaboratory or during actual use trials of the products. In thelaboratory, removal of old polish may be determined byapplying multiple coats (10 to 20 applications) and determiningpolish buildup. A p

35、olish showing little buildup would be ratedD 3836 94 (2007)2a good cleaner for old polish. Other materials, such as greases,oils, tree sap, etc., should be tested on an individual basis.9.3.8 Water SpottingAt least2h(Note 3) after applicationof the polishes, place at random to the polished surfaces

36、severalspots of water about the size of a penny. Allow the water toremain on the surface for 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, and 1 h. Atprecise intervals, blot the water with a paper towel or otherabsorbent material. DO NOT WIPE. Observe the presence anddegree of film damage. Other materials such as 2 % salt

37、solution, tree sap, etc., may be used to supplement the watertest.NOTE 5Under operating conditions at the extremes specified in 5.1,additional time may be required.9.3.9 Gloss RetentionObserve the degree of gloss of afreshly applied polish film compared to that of an aged polishfilm.9.3.10 Dust Attr

38、actionCarefully remove all dust and dirtfrom the polished substrate. Expose the test substrate toaccumulate dust using a method of choice. Make observationsfor dust buildup after 1, 2, 3, and 7 day aging.10. Report10.1 Method AUsing Method A (8.1), rate all properties 0to 5. A value of 5 equals exce

39、llent and 0 equals completefailure. Values in between are various degrees between theseextremes. This is a judgmental value system for each testsurface evaluated based on each individual raters own refer-ence scale. Since the three individuals rating the final proper-ties do not know the placement s

40、equence, each polished area israted “blind” with no possibility for bias.10.1.1 Fig. 1 shall be used to record the raw data. Fig. 2shall be used to summarize and compare the raw data. Thefollowing calculation provides a rating factor for each propertytested:F = rating factor for test polish,Fc= rati

41、ng factor for control polish,Xproperty= sum of all readings of a specific property forthe test polish,Cproperty= sum of all readings of a specific property forthe control polish,n = number of observations, andF =XpropertynFc=Cpropertyn10.2 Method BUsing Method B (8.2), rate all properties 1to 5 with

42、 the control surface always given a rating of 3regardless of how good or bad it really is. The scale has thefollowing adjectival ratings:1 = significantly poorer than control2 = slightly poorer than control3 = no difference from controlTest Panel Application No. 1 Test Panel Application No. 2Propert

43、ies Left Center Right Left Center RightTest Panel Application No. 3 Test Panel Application No. 4Properties Left Center Right Left Center RightRating Scale: 0 to 55 = excellent 2 = fair4 = very good 1 = poor3 = good 0 = complete failureNOTE 1Designate the position of the product (X or C) in the box d

44、esignating the position on the test panel; for example: left, center,orright.FIG. 1 Automotive Polish EvaluationIndividual Ratings for 10.1.1.D 3836 94 (2007)34 = slightly better than control5 = significantly better than controlThis value system is a paired comparison with the controlsurface always

45、acting as the point of reference. Since the threeindividuals rating the final properties need the control surfaceto be identified, to prevent bias the identification of the controlproduct must not be revealed.10.2.1 Fig. 3 shall be used to record the raw data. Fig. 4shall be used to summarize and co

46、mpare the raw data. Thefollowing calculation provides a rating factor for each propertytested:F = rating factor for test polish,Xproperty= term of all readings for a specific property forthe test polish,N = number of observations, andF =XpropertiesnSpecific properties (Fc) of the control polish are

47、assigned avalue of 3.0.10.2.2 Record temperature and relative humidity whichtests were run.11. Precision and Bias11.1 Method ADue to the subjective nature of this prac-tice, no precision and bias can be established.11.2 Method B(Same as Method A). However, since allthe rating factors are in relation

48、 to the control, the values canbe analyzed statistically to determine if the differences ob-served are significant.12. Keywords12.1 automotive polishProducts ComparedSurfaces Used for TestingTemperature _ Relative Humidity _Date _ Evaluator _Properties Summary of Product (X) Properties Summary of Co

49、ntrol (C) PropertiesnXpropertiesFnCPropertiesFcFIG. 2 Automotive Polish EvaluationsSummary of Individual Ratings for 10.1.1.D 3836 94 (2007)4PropertiesTest Panel Application No. 1 Test Panel Application No. 2Control Test Test ControlPropertiesTest Panel Application No. 3 Test Panel Application No. 4Control Test Test ControlRating Scale: 1 to 55 = significantly better than control4 = slightly better than control3