Knot test development CEN/TC 139/WG2 N 348 Peter Svane Coating Consultancy Copenhagen.

Post on 20-Jan-2016

213 views 1 download

Transcript of Knot test development CEN/TC 139/WG2 N 348 Peter Svane Coating Consultancy Copenhagen.

Knot test developmentCEN/TC 139/WG2 N 348

Peter Svane

Coating Consultancy

Copenhagen

Contribution to knot test development

• Starting point Doc. N.303

• Try test method

• Is an internal standard useful?

Coating systems

• 9 WB systems (primer + acrylic paint)

• SB Polyurethane paint (Internal reference)

Exposure time in QUV

Days exposure in QUV - Delta E for Primer 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Del

ta E

1 day

2 days

3 days

A - acrylic B - alkyd/acrylic E - long oil alkyd F - polyurethane

Knots

B-knots vs. C-knotsAverage. B- vs. C-knot - primer 1 - 3 days in QUV

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

Del

ta E

B

C BC

B

C

BC

A - acrylic B - alkyd/acrylic E - long oil alkyd F - polyurethane

B- vs. C-knots

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

B-knots

C-knots

System A

Polyurethane

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

C

B

C- vs. B-knots

Time between machining and coating

12,2

8,7

5

6,6

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Døgn

Del

ta E

Shellac or not

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

K

K

K K

K

B

BB

B

BShellac

No shellac

Gruppe 5. PU vs. acrylic

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

K

KK

K

K

BB

B

B

B

PU

Acrylic

”B-knots”

”C-knots”

Reference

Test system

Matched panels

Suggested setup using matched panels and an internal reference coating

Colour measurement on knots"Worst" vs. mean

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

19 B 19 K 78 B 78 K 79 B 79 K 164 B 164 K 165 B 168 K

Del

ta E

"worst"

Coating system A

"mean"

Primer 1 vs. PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

PU

Acrylic

Primer 3 vs. PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

PU

Acrylic

Primer 4 vs. PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

Acrylic

PU

Primer 5 contra PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

1 2 3 4 5 6

Del

ta E

PU

Acrylic

Comments

• Conditioning: 50 %RH → 65 %RH• Weather-Ometer → QUV (?)• Panel dimensions acc. to exposure apparatus• Black panel temp. 60 °C → 40 °C (?)• Time from machining to coating strongly influences

staining• Time from machining to coating: 2 weeks• Staining should be measured as the worst

discolouration on a knot• Internal reference concept works, but is it

worthwhile?

Consequences

• Doc. N 303 revised

• Present version is N 341

• Further experiments

Primer 6 vs PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

Del

ta E

Primer 6

PU

Primer 7 vs PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

Del

ta E

P

Primer 7

Primer 8 vs PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

Del

ta E

Primer 8

PU

Primer 9 vs PU

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

Del

ta E

PU

Primer 9

Comments II

• Graphs for test systems and references have the same shape. Often however one knot gives a much different discolouration

• No influence from the type of knot (“B-” or “C-knot”).

• Whether the concept of using an internal reference is useful calls for statistic evaluation

Statistic evaluation

• Ranking according to draft 927-7 (N341):

9 = 6 = 4 = 2 = 1 < 5 < 3 = 7 < 8 9 < 1

• Ranking with internal reference included:

9 = 4 = 6 = 1 = 2 < 5 < 7 = 3 = 8

6 < 2 7 < 8

Conclusion

• Draft EN 927-7:

• Large variation between individual test panels

• Inclusion of an internal standard apparently does not improve discrimination

Suggestion

• Test procedure should be polished

• Round Robin on draft EN 927-7

• Maybe more test panels