ASTM D4488-95

Standard Guide for Testing Cleaning Performance of Products Intended for Use on Resilient Flooring and Washable Walls

SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers the evaluation of the cleaning per- formance of products intended for use on resilient flooring or washable walls. Such evaluations specifically exclude windows, mirrors, carpets, ceramic tiles, and laminated counter tops. This guide provides techniques for soiling, cleaning, and evaluating performance of detergent systems under con- trolled, but practical, hard-surface cleaning conditions.  
1.2 Such systems include any detergent intended for clean- ing hard surfaces such as resilient flooring, washable wall surfaces, and other hard surfaces, but excluding glass, ceramic, or other glossy surfaces. They may consist of solutions of soluble powdered detergent, dilutions of concentrated liq- uid detergent, or products intended to be used full strength, for example, foams, sprays, liquid, or paste.  
1.3 There is no universal soil/substrate combination that is representative of the many soil-removal tasks required of this type of cleaner in actual use conditions. Choice of soil/ substrate and cleaning conditions should be by agreement between the testing laboratory and those using the data to evaluate cleaning performance relative to user experience.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Material Safety Data Sheets are available for reagents. Review them for hazards prior to usage. Specific precautionary statements are given in Note 2.

General Information

• Status: Historical
• Publication Date: 31-Dec-1994
• Technical Committee: D12 - Soaps and Other Detergents
• Drafting Committee: D12.16 - Hard Surface Cleaning

Relations

• Replaced By: ASTM D4488-95(2001)e1 - Standard Guide for Testing Cleaning Performance of Products Intended for Use on Resilient Flooring and Washable Walls (Withdrawn 2009)
• Effective Date: 15-Apr-1995

Standards Content (Sample)

NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information.
Designation: D 4488 – 95
Standard Guide for
Testing Cleaning Performance of Products Intended for Use
on Resilient Flooring and Washable Walls
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 4488; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope cleaned using a straight-line washability apparatus, and the
cleaned substrates are evaluated instrumentally or visually by a
1.1 This guide covers the evaluation of the cleaning perfor-
panel of judges.
mance of products intended for use on resilient flooring or
washable walls. Such evaluations specifically exclude win-
4. Significance and Use
dows, mirrors, carpets, ceramic tiles, and laminated counter
4.1 This guide suggests methodology for cleaning tests.
tops. This guide provides techniques for soiling, cleaning, and
Soil/substrate combinations are generally designed to be analo-
evaluating performance of detergent systems under controlled,
gous to soiled surfaces commonly encountered. This method-
but practical, hard-surface cleaning conditions.
ology can be used with most soil/substrate combinations. Some
1.2 Such systems include any detergent intended for clean-
example test methods that have worked well in other labs are
ing hard surfaces such as resilient flooring, washable wall
provided in the annexes. There is no requirement for using the
surfaces, and other hard surfaces, but excluding glass, ceramic,
soils listed in the annexes. It is the responsibility of the user to
or other glossy surfaces. They may consist of solutions of
select the appropriate battery of tests for the desired end
soluble powdered detergent, dilutions of concentrated liquid
results.
detergent, or products intended to be used full strength, for
4.2 The results of tests based on this guide are regarded as
example, foams, sprays, liquid, or paste.
diagnostic screening values useful in formulation studies,
1.3 There is no universal soil/substrate combination that is
quality control, and ingredient raw material qualification. This
representative of the many soil-removal tasks required of this
guide is intended to allow a choice in test conditions and
type of cleaner in actual use conditions. Choice of soil/
soil/substrate combinations appropriate to the evaluation at
substrate and cleaning conditions should be by agreement
hand. For interlaboratory comparisons, exact test conditions
between the testing laboratory and those using the data to
must be established before test results are compared.
evaluate cleaning performance relative to user experience.
4.3 This guide is applicable to testing all types of multipur-
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the
pose household cleaners, whether the detergent is prepared by
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
dissolving a soluble powder, a dilutable liquid, or is a pre-
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
diluted product. It may also be useful for evaluation of
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
products or conditions normally associated with industrial or
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use. Material Safety
institutional cleaners.
Data Sheets are available for reagents. Review them for
hazards prior to usage. Specific precautionary statements are
5. Preparation of Soil/Substrate Combinations
given in Note A3.2.
5.1 Cleaning performance of a test product depends on the
particular combination of test soil and substrate. Soils and
2. Terminology
substrates to be cleaned should be selected as pairs. The usual
2.1 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
criteria for appropriate soil/substrate combinations are: relative
2.1.1 soil—in hard surface cleaning, foreign matter on a
ease of discriminability among cleaners to be tested; reproduc-
hard surface.
ibility of the test performed; and correlation of test results with
2.1.2 substrate—the soiled surface that is being cleaned.
consumer experience.
3. Summary of Guide 5.1.1 While it may be reasonable to assume that lab tests
using soil/substrate combinations found in normal practice
3.1 Soils are artificially applied in a standardized manner to
should correlate with actual cleaning experience, no particular
specified floor or wall substrates. The soiled surfaces are
soil/substrate combination is sufficiently representative by
itself to provide a reliable index of cleaning performance for all
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D-12 on Soaps and
cleaning tasks. Also, lab screening systems are usually much
Other Detergents and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D12.16 on Hard
more heavily soiled than those found under real-use conditions,
Surface Cleaning.
Current edition approved April 15, 1995. Published June 1995. Originally
in order to optimize discriminability. It is possible, however,
published as D 4488-85. Last previous edition D 4488-89.
Copyright © ASTM, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
D 4488
that soil/substrate combinations not actually found in normal 6.4 Appropriate controls should be considered when testing.
usage may provide a test system that correlates well with some For example, a test control could be a commercial liquid
actual cleaning conditions. detergent for which the test lab has established some index of
5.1.2 Preparation of the substrate, such as abrading finished cleaning performance prior to the test at hand. Another control
floor tiles, may be necessary. could be water without detergent.
5.1.3 Natural or accelerated aging of soil, such as baked-on
6.5 Test conditions that should normally be reported in all
greasy soil, may be desirable for the purposes of enhanced
tests include the following:
discrimination or better correlation of actual home-use condi-
6.5.1 Conditions pertinent to scrubbing apparatus, for ex-
tions.
ample, weights (if any), cycles per test, brushes, sponges, or
5.2 For reliable test results, and to obtain the most informa-
other scrubbing substrate used (specify).
tion from lab testing, details of soiling and substrate prepara-
6.5.2 Water used for dilution, if any, including temperature
tion should be documented for appropriate reporting of final
and hardness.
results.
6.5.3 Use-dilution of detergent with water.
6. Experimental Cleaning Test Procedure
7. Performance Evaluation
6.1 Replication is essential for generation of reliable hard-
7.1 Cleaning performance is frequently taken as a linear
surface cleaning test results. The number of replicate runs
function of reflectance using a reflectometer, color difference
required depends on the soil/substrate combination selected, as
meter, or gloss meter (specify). Other methods such as visual
well as the intended use of the results.
rating may be useful, depending on the needs and capabilities
6.2 Experimental design may range from a simple paired
of the lab. See the examples in the annexes.
comparison with three replicate runs using three tiles to
multiple comparisons extending over days of testing.
8. Statistical Evaluation and Interpretation of Results
6.3 A complete cleaning evaluation will usually require
analysis of an appropriate composite result, taking into account 8.1 It is strongly recommended that appropriate statistical
several different soil/substrate combinations, and possibly analysis of test results be conducted to establish confidence
more than one set of test conditions, for example, usedilution, limits on test results and to establish a basis for comparison
water hardness, etc. with subsequent or previous test results.
ANNEXES
(Mandatory Information)
A1. GENERAL
A1.1 The following procedures are included as an aid to the other laboratories. For inter-laboratory tests, exact test condi-
development of uniform methodology for lab cleaning tests. tions, including preparation of soils and substrates, must be
The methods described below have been found to work well in specified.
A2. GREASY SOIL/PAINTED MASONITE WALLBOARD TEST METHOD
A2.1 Summary of Test Method—Latex painted masonite A2.2.1 Reflectometer, any photometer capable of accu-
wallboard is soiled with a mixture of melted, oily soils rately measuring changes to substrate reflectance. See Fig.
A2.1.
containing a small amount of carbon black, and allowed to set
A2.2.2 Template, see Fig. A2.1.
overnight. The detergent is applied to a sponge that scrubs half
A2.2.3 Straight-Line Washability Apparatus.
the soiled substrate using a straight-line washability apparatus.
A2.2.4 Graduated Cylinder, calibrated to deliver 100 mL,
The other half of the soiled substrate is scrubbed with a second
and
detergent. Cleaning performance is taken as a linear function of
A2.2.5 Graduated Volumetric Pipet,10mL.
reflectance value.
A2.3 Materials and Manufacture:
A2.2 Apparatus:
Photovolt Model 670 with Search Unit 610Y and Green Tristimulus, or its
equivalent, has been found suitable for this purpose. Available from Photovolt, Inc.
NY, NY.
Johnson, M. A., “A Greasy Soil Hard Surface Cleaning Test,” Journal Am. Oil
BYK-Gardner Model AG-8100 available from BYK-Gardner USA, Silver
Chem. Soc., Vol 61, 1984.
Spring, MD, or the Gardco D-10 available from the Paul N. Gardner Co., Pompano
Beach, FL, or equivalents, have been found suitable for this purpose.
D 4488
FIG. A2.1 Template for Use With Reflectometer
1 1
A2.3.1 Masonite Wallboard Tiles— ⁄8 in. thick, cut 4- ⁄2 by A2.4.1 Tile Preparation—Double-coat masonite tiles with
4- ⁄2 in. latex paint using a paint roller, and allow to set overnight. Cure
A2.3.2 Latex Paint —non-yellowing flat white. tiles at 45°C for 24 h.
A2.3.3 Vegetable Shortening —from local grocery store.
A2.4.2 Soil Preparation—Blend a melt of 33 g vegetable
A2.3.4 Lard.
shortening, 33 g lard, and 33 g vegetable oil with 1 g carbon
A2.3.5 Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil —with polyg-
black on a steam bath. Prepare fresh soil each day.
lycerol esters of fatty acids added.
A2.4.3 Soil Application—Fold the cheesecloth in half sev-
A2.3.6 Carbon Black.
eral times to end up with a 2 ⁄2 by 2 in. piece. Put the binder
3 5
A2.3.7 Sponges —cellulose sponge cut to size, 1 ⁄4 by 3 ⁄8 1
clip on the open 2 ⁄2 in. long edge of the folded cheesecloth.
by 1 ⁄2 in.
Using the clip as a handle, soak the cheesecloth in the hot soil
A2.3.8 Tap Water—80 ppm hardness, as CaCO .
3 and apply the soil to the white-painted masonite wallboard tiles
A2.3.9 Cheesecloth Wipes, 18 by 36 in.
using six strokes. (see Fig. A2.2). The soil temperature should
A2.3.10 Large Binder Clip, 1 in. capacity.
be maintained and the soil should be stirred throughout the
application process. Allow the soiled substrate to dry overnight
A2.4 Procedure:
at room temperature.
A2.4.4 Cleaner Preparation—Prepare all cleaner dilutions
volumetrically as necessary. Water is at an ambient temperature
California Paints, or equivalent, have been found suitable for this purpose.
Crisco, or equivalent, has been found suitable for this purpose (trademark of
(20 to 30°C) and a specified hardness.
Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH).
A2.4.5 Cleaning Test— Use a new (previously unused)
Armour lard, or equivalent, has been found suitable for this purpose (trade mark
sponge for each cleaning procedure. Weigh 15 g of cleaner
of Armour Co., Phoenix, AZ).
Pathmark vegetable oil, or equivalent, has been found suitable for this purpose
solution onto a pre-wet sponge that has been thoroughly
(trademark Supermarkets General, Woodbridge, NJ).
pressed by wringer to remove most of the water then placed in
Neo Spectra Mark II Powder, or equivalent, has been found suitable for this
the straight-line washability apparatus without weights.
purpose (trademark of Cities Service Co., Tulsa, OK).
Sponge and holder weigh about 350 g. Place sponge so that the
Shop-Rite brand sponges, or equivalent, have been found suitable for this
purpose (trademark of Wakefern Corp., Elizabeth, NJ).
manufactured edge, not a face or edge that has been cut, is the
VWR catalog No. 21910-105, or equivalent, has been found suitable for this
scrubbing surface. Place the tile in the apparatus so that
purpose. Available from VWR Scientific, Plainfield, NJ.
scrubbing action is perpendicular to the direction of soiling
ACCO brand, No. 72100, or equivalent, has been found suitable for this
purpose. (see Fig. A2.2). Set the test apparatus at the predetermined
D 4488
FIG. A2.2 Soiled Tile After Cleaning
number of cycles established according to the procedure A2.4.7 Reflectometer Measurements—After zeroing the in-
described in A2.4.6. Operate the wash apparatus over one of strument, adjust reflectance to 100 on a standard white reflec-
the soiled areas. Shift the scrubber table and repeat the washing tance and color tile. For example, one that has workedwell has
test over the remaining soiled area with the second detergent the following values: 76.3 % y, 77.6 % x, and 76.6 % z. Place
and a new sponge. a template (Fig. A2.1) over a scrubbed board so that only the
A2.4.6 Establishing a Standard Number of Cycles for Test scrubbed area to be measured shows through the cut-out
Product Evaluation—Place tiles in the washability apparatus portions. Take three readings in each cut-out portion, moving
with the line of soil on the tile running perpendicular to the from one end to the other. Estimate readings to the nearest
cleaning direction of the scrubbing apparatus. Using extra tiles, tenth reflectance unit. Record and average these three readings.
run standard products to determine product performance pro-
A2.5 Data Handling.
files. It is suggested that the standard reference products
remove approximately 75 % of the soil, in order to allow for A2.5.1 Record reflectance values (three per cleaned area)
maximum product differentiation. Identify the cycle number at and established and compared mean values using appropriate
which maximum differences in product performance are dem- statistical methods. Paired comparisons may use a simple
onstrated. Run all test products with this predetermined stan- T-test. Multiple comparisons require some multi-variate statis-
dard number of cycles. tical analysis.
A3. IRON OXIDE PIGMENT/LINOLEUM TEST METHOD
A3.1 Summary of Test Method—Linoleum is soiled with an ated by comparing reflectance measurements made on the
iron oxide pigment dispersed in an oil-solvent system. Soil is clean, unsoiled test panel and on the soiled panel afte
...