Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

A Comparative Analysis of Glove Permeation Resistance to Paint Stripping Formulations Jeffrey O. Stull, International Personnel Protection, Inc. Richard.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "A Comparative Analysis of Glove Permeation Resistance to Paint Stripping Formulations Jeffrey O. Stull, International Personnel Protection, Inc. Richard."— Presentation transcript:

1 A Comparative Analysis of Glove Permeation Resistance to Paint Stripping Formulations Jeffrey O. Stull, International Personnel Protection, Inc. Richard W. Thomas, TRI/Austin, Inc. Lawrence E. James, BASF Corporation

2 Scope a multiphase study was undertaken to evaluate how several types of gloves resist multi-chemical based paint stripping formulations

3 Background Paint stripping involves prolonged, continuous contact with chemical solvent mixtures Conventional paint strippers include: –methylene chloride, methanol, isopropanol, acetone and toluene New strippers include less volatile chemicals: –N-methylpyrrolidone, d-limonene, -butyrolactone, and dibasic esters

4 Background Relatively little information is available to guide the end user in selecting the gloves against paint strippers Basing glove selection on individual mixture components does not account for possible synergistic mixture permeation

5 Approach 20 different glove styles evaluated 7 different surrogate formulations created 4 different phases –Phase I: degradation screening –Phase II: continuous contact permeation testing –Phase III: intermittent contact permeation testing –Phase IV: permeation testing against selected actual paint stripping formulations

6 Surrogate Paint Strippers

7

8 Commercial Paint Strippers

9 Glove Selection Criteria Variety of different glove polymers –Butyl rubber– Nitrile rubber –Natural rubber– PVC –Neoprene– Polymer combinations Permeation resistance against paint stripping formulation chemicals Unsupported gloves only Some gloves available to consumers

10 Glove Selection

11 Degradation Testing Industry practice (no standard available) –One sided contact –4-hour exposure –Measurement of weight/thickness changes –Visual observation ratings (swelling, discoloration, curling, delamination, and deterioration) 0 - no effect 1 - mild or moderate effect 2 - severe effect

12 Permeation Testing Standard Test Method –ASTM F 739 (continuous contact) –ASTM F 1383 (intermittent contact) Test Parameters –4-hour duration –room temperature ( o C) –splash collection method –GC/FID for formulations I - III –GC/MS for formulations IV - VII

13 Permeation Testing Intermittent contact approach –5 minutes chemical exposure –10 minutes purge Test measurements –Breakthrough time (normalized) –Permeation rate –Determined for each mixture component Time Permeation Rate

14 Overall Results 7 glove styles show best degradation resistance Continuous permeation testing shows longer BTs for plastic laminate and butyl gloves No improvement for intermittent permeation testing Permeation of gloves by commercial strippers consistent with surrogate strippers Degradation screening Continuous permeation testing Intermittent permeation testing Testing against commercial paint strippers

15 Degradation Criteria Acceptance criteria –Weight change < 25% –Thickness change < 25% –Overall rating < 3 –No penetration of test specimens

16 Degradation Weight Change

17 Degradation Test Results Gloves failing against one formulation –Glove E (4H glove); Glove J (North Butyl B-161), Glove P (Comasec Butyl Plus) Gloves failing against two formulations –Glove S (Guardian Butyl-standard) Gloves failing against four formulations –Glove G (Pioneer Strip&Stain), Glove H (Pioneer Neoprene NS 401), Glove K (Thompson & Formby Refinishing gloves)

18 Permeation Test Results Lowest Breakthrough Time (minutes) E - Safety 4; P - Comasec Butyl Plus; S - Guardian Butyl K - North Butyl B-161, K - Thompson & Formby Refinishing

19 Comparison of Permeation

20 Actual Paint Stripper Results Lowest Breakthrough Times (minutes)

21 Conclusions Multi-stage testing program useful for determining permeation resistance Glove permeation resistance did not always improve with decreasing exposure Surrogate paint strippers do not always emulate actual stripper permeation Paint strippers with volatile solvent permeate quicker than those containing NMP or dibasic esters

22 Acknowledgement This work was supported by a grant from the N-Methylpyrrolidone Producers Group, Inc., Washington, D.C.


Download ppt "A Comparative Analysis of Glove Permeation Resistance to Paint Stripping Formulations Jeffrey O. Stull, International Personnel Protection, Inc. Richard."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google