Report for : LIQUID GLOVE / HANDS+ DR. RENE AUGUSTYN. Subject : PRACTICAL EVALUATION ON BARRIER CREAM

Transcription

1 INSPECTORATE M&L (PTY) LTD [Reg. No. 89/03086/07] Consulting Industrial Chemists, Analysts and Samplers 1 DATA STREET, ORMONDE, JOHANNESBURG TEL: (011) FAX: (011) Postal Address: P. O. Box 3344, Johannesburg, 2000, South Africa. Your Ref: Our Ref: B DH/st Date : Report for : LIQUID GLOVE / HANDS+ DR. RENE AUGUSTYN Subject : PRACTICAL EVALUATION ON BARRIER CREAM Instructed by : Dr. Rene Augustyn Summary : One sample of Barrier Cream in liquid form was received for practical evaluation. Practical tests were carried out on the above. Assessment was based on visual removal of the soilant and an estimate thereof was made. All tests were performed under the same conditions. Our report reflecting the test procedures employed and conclusions are attached.

2 Practical Evaluation on Barrier Cream- Liquid Table of Contents Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. OBJECTIVE 1 3. TEST SAMPLES 1 4. TEST PROCEDURES APPLICATION AND REMOVAL SOILANTS EVALUATION 2 5. CONCLUSIONS 2 APPENDIX I PROTECTIVE CAPACITY 3

3 1. INTRODUCTION PRACTICAL EVALUATION ON BARRIER CREAM- LIQUID As instructed by Dr. R Augustyn practical testing on Barrier Cream in Liquid form has been conducted on the premises of Inspectorate M&L (PTY) Ltd. 2. OBJECTIVE The objectives were to: i) Evaluate the protective properties. ii) Confirm the proposed packaging claim in respect of the product. 3. TEST SAMPLE A sample of Barrier Cream in Liquid form was submitted by Dr. Augustyn, this sample being employed throughout the test programme. 4. TEST PROCEDURE 4.1 Application and Removal 3 ml of liquid sample was applied to the hands uniformly and allowed to dry. Soilant was applied and allowed to dry, hands wiped with paper towel and washed with cold water and scrubbed with a sponge to aid removal. No other additional soap or other cleaning agents were employed in the removal process. 4.2 Soilants Used i) Bumper Dye ii) RSA Printing ink (oil + solvent based) iii) Spraypaint iv) Diesel Oil v) Shoe Polish vi) Glue vii) Tincture of Iodine viii) Epoxy Resin with Hardener ix) 10% Hydrochloric Acid x) Printing Ink (solvent based) xi) Potassium Permanagnate

4 4.3 Evaluation Efficiency was evaluated on the percentage removal by visual estimation once hands are wiped off with the paper towel and after being rinsed off with water and scrubbed with a sponge. The porcelain basins were also examined for staining after water rinsing. Our findings are reflected in Appendix I. 5. CONCLUSION Based on the pre-described test conditions, as performed by Inspectorate M&L we are of the opinion that: 1) The protective ability of the liquid sample is satisfactory. 2) The label claims are justified. Yours Faithfully, For INSPECTORATE M&L (PTY) LTD Drew Henderson Manager Environmental Services

5 APPENDIX I Protective Capacity- Liquid Form SOILANT VISUAL REMOVAL WITH PAPER TOWEL VISUAL REMOVAL AFTER WASHING IN WATER 1. Bumper Dye 50% removal 100% removal with slight scrubbing 2. RSA Printing Ink (Oil Solvent Based). 40% removal 100% removal with slight scrubbing 3. Spraypaint 80% removal 100% removal 4. Diesel Oil 80% removal 100% removal 5. Shoe Polish 80% removal 100% removal 6. Glue 80% removal, stickiness still present. 100% removal and no stickiness present. 7. Epoxy Resin with Hardner 90% removal 100% removal and some scrubbing required. 8. Tincture of Iodine 10% removal 100% removal, considerable, scrubbing required. 9. Printing Ink 60% removal 100% removal % Hydrochloric Acid 100% removal 100% removal 11. Potassium Permanganate 0% removal 100% removal, scrubbing is required to aid in removal. N.B.: Hands are left smooth without any signs of physical abuse after each wash. No residual staining was observed in the porcelain basins.