1、Designation: D 4330 94 (Reapproved 2002)Standard Practice forEvaluation of Fiberglass Boat Polish and Wax1This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 4330; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last
2、revision. A number 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 the properties to test and theapparatus to use when evaluating the performance of boatpolishes and wa
3、xes, in terms of ease of application, cleaningefficiency, gloss and improvement of aesthetic appearance.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
4、health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:D 2825 Terminology Relating to Polishes and Related Ma-terials23. Significance and Use3.1 Boat polish or wax aids in cleaning and maintaining thesurface of fiberglass bo
5、ats. The function of cleaning is veryimportant.3.2 This practice defines the properties to be tested, theapparatus to use, and the comparisons of product performance.It is recognized that considerable discretion exists amongformulators and marketers of boat polish on what properties orperformance ch
6、aracteristics are best for their products. Thispractice is flexible to honor this fact.3.3 The methods of testing are subjective and empirical inorder to conform to the basic characteristics of the industry andto allow flexibility in testing. Although test panels may be usedfor screening purposes, a
7、ctual boat surfaces should be used forthe final evaluation.4. Apparatus and Materials4.1 Sample of Polish or Wax.4.2 Sample of Control Polish or WaxThe control isselected subjectively for comparison to the test sample. It maybe a competitive product, a modified formulation of the testpolish or wax,
8、and so forth. The control must be of the same orsimilar type as the test sample. It would not be meaningful toselect a paste product as a control for comparison to a liquidtest polish or wax. In addition, polishes to be evaluated shouldbe for the same intended use. Products for below the water linem
9、ay be different than those designed for above the water line.4.3 Test SubstratesThe test substrate3shall be intendedfor the test polish or wax. The test surface shall be in goodphysical condition, not badly cracked, scratched, or otherwisedamaged so as to interfere with evaluations of polish or waxp
10、roperties. The minimum test surface area for each sampleshall be 200 in.2(1290 cm2). Whenever possible, the evaluationof test polish or wax should be made on boats subject to actualuse and exposure to diverse but normal conditions.4.4 Polishing ClothThe same type of polishing cloth shallbe used with
11、 each sample tested. Separate cloths shall be usedfor each sample. Materials such as washed cheese cloth,rumple cloth, flannel, cotton diaper cloth, and nonwovenfabrics are suitable for this purpose. Felt or paper shall not beused.4.5 Cleaning SolventAliphatic solvents with Kauri Bu-tanol values les
12、s than 38.4.6 Eye Droppers and Distilled or Deionized Water.4.7 Masking Tape, with a38-in. (9.5 mm) 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 55 to 85F (13 to 29C)
13、 with a relative humidity of 20to 80 %.5.2 The substrate shall have the same temperature as thesurrounding area.6. Personnel and Instructions6.1 The application and evaluation of the test and controlpolishes or waxes require four individuals. They shall becapable of making discriminating judgements
14、of subjectivephysical and aesthetic properties. Training and orientation tospecific product performance characteristics may be required.6.2 The four persons each apply the polishes or waxes toone of the four test substrates. All persons then rate allproperties except application properties on the re
15、maining three1This 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 Nov. 15, 1994. Published January 1995. Originallypublished as D 4330 84. Last previous edition D 4330 89.2Annua
16、l Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 15.04.3Type of fiberglass, polyester or gel coat, or both.1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.substrates to which they did not apply polish. The personsapplying the polishes or waxes rate eas
17、e of use and otherapplication properties. There will be only four readings onapplication properties. The three rating the other properties donot observe the application because they rate properties of eachpolish or wax “blind.”7. Procedure7.1 Cleaning of Test SubstratesClean the test substratethorou
18、ghly with an aliphatic solvent having a Kauri Butanolvalue less than 38. Soft cotton towels may be used to apply thesolvent to the surface and to wipe it clean. Use new oradequately laundered towels. If previously tested polishescontained resins or reactive polymers or both, or unknownpolishes have
19、been previously used on the test substrate,preclean first with an abrasive cleaner to ensure their removal.7.2 Surface SubdivisionDivide and outline the precleanedsurface of each test substrate by tape with uniform squares.7.3 Application of Polish or WaxAssuming the controlpolish or the test polish
20、 is a commercially available product,follow the directions on the container so far as is possible.When in doubt on the method of use, the directions for similarproducts may be used. Use equal volumes of control and testpolish or wax to avoid excessively thin or heavy coats. One ortwo applications ma
21、y be used depending on the substrate andthe discretion of the tester. The same number of coats must beused for both the test sample and the control.8. Placement of Polishes or Waxes8.1 Method AA controlled randomized method of layingout the test (X) and control (C) polishes or waxes is representedas
22、 follows:TestSubstrate Left Center Right1 CXC2 CCX3 XCX4 XXCThese 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 control (C) polishes is represented asfollows:TestSubstr
23、ate Left Right1 CX2 XC34These four positionings should be written on tags and drawnrandomly by each of the four who apply the polishes.9. Evaluation9.1 General comparison is made between the test polish orwax and the control.9.2 Application PropertiesDuring the application of thepolish or wax the fi
24、rst phase of evaluation is begun. In eachcase comparison is made between the test sample and thecontrol. All or any number of the following properties areevaluated:9.2.1 Ease of ApplicationDuring the application of thepolishes or waxes, note the ease of wetting, spreadability, andabsence of drag.9.2
25、.2 Cleaning Effect of PolishFollowing the applicationof the polishes or waxes, inspect the discoloration, if any, onapplicators (towels). Observe the ease of removal of theoxidized film as well as common fouling agents such as algae,grease, oils, and so forth. This may be done either in thelaborator
26、y or during actual use trials of the products. A goodcleaner usually enhances the appearance of the substrate. Apoor cleaner may leave a dull, soiled, or mottled appearance.9.2.3 Drying RateTake readings of time in minutes foreach polish or wax to dry.9.2.4 Ease of Wipe OffNote effort necessary to w
27、ipe offeach of the samples from test substrate.9.2.5 PowderingNote the degree of powdering, if any,during the wipe off of samples from test substrate.9.2.6 Ease of Rub-up to Maximum GlossDuring applica-tion of the polishes or waxes note the time and ease with whicheach product develops the maximum g
28、loss.9.3 Final PropertiesFive to ten minutes after the applica-tion of the polishes or waxes, begin the second phase of theevaluation. In each case comparison is made between the testsample and the control. All or any number of the followingproperties are evaluated:9.3.1 GlossEvaluate as depth of gl
29、oss (the optical phe-nomenon of relative depth perceived when viewing reflectivesurfaces), or as defined in Terminology D 2825.9.3.2 UniformityObserve the surface for streaks, unpol-ished dry spots, and general uniformity.9.3.3 Film ClarityObserve the clearness or sharpness ofan objects image in the
30、 polished or waxed surface. Overheadlights, face, hands, or other objects may be used for reflection.This test may be eliminated for low luster surfaces that do notpossess mirror-like finishes.9.3.4 Smear and Mar ResistanceSmear is the degree ofoiliness or greasiness after the polish or wax is rubbe
31、d-up to thedesired appearance. Mar is the degree of film damage resultingfrom a glancing blow to the polished or waxed substrate.Check smear by making a design such as an “S” with onesfinger. A glancing blow with ones knuckles or soft object suchas a book or magazine may be used for determining the
32、degreeof mar.9.3.5 Film HealingObserve the length of time requiredfor the smear or mar in 8.3.4 to disappear from the applied film.If either the smear or mar does not disappear after 60 min, thisshould also be noted.9.3.6 RebuffabilityObserve the ease and completeness ofrepairability when the smears
33、 and mars are buffed with apolishing cloth. Note the amount of physical effort and lengthof time required.9.3.7 Gloss RetentionObserve the degree of gloss of afreshly applied film compared to that of an exposed polish orwax.10. Report10.1 Method AUsing “Placement of Polishes or WaxesAlternate A,” ra
34、te all properties 0 to 5. A value of 5 equalsexcellent and 0 equals complete failure. Values in between arevarious degrees between these extremes. This is a monadicD 4330 94 (2002)2value system for each test surface evaluated based on eachindividual raters own reference scale. Because the threeindiv
35、iduals rating the final properties do not know the place-ment sequence, each polished area is rated “blind” with nopossibility for bias.10.1.1 Fig. 1 shall be used to record raw data. Fig. 2 shall beused to summarize and compare the raw data. The followingcalculation provides a rating factor for eac
36、h property tested:F = rating factor for test polish or wax,Fc= rating factor for control polish or wax,xproperty= sum of all readings of a specific property forthe test polish or wax,cproperty= sum of all readings of a specific property forthe control polish or wax,n = number of observations,F = X p
37、roperty/n, andFc= C property/n.10.2 Method BUsing“ Placement of Polishes or WaxesAlternate B,” rate all properties 1 to 5 with the control surfacealways giving a rating of 3 regardless of how good or bad itreally is. The scale has the following adjectival ratings:1 = significantly poorer than contro
38、l.2 = slightly poorer than control.3 = no difference from control.4 = slightly better than control.5 = significantly better than control.10.2.1 This value system is a paired comparison with thecontrol surface always acting as the point of reference. Becausethe three individuals rating the final prop
39、erties need the controlsurface to be identified, the identification of the control productmust not be revealed to prevent bias.10.2.2 Fig. 3 shall be used to record the raw data. Fig. 4shall be used to summarize and compare the raw data. Thefollowing calculation provides a rating factor for each pro
40、pertytested.F = rating factor for test polish or wax,xproperty= sum of all readings for a specific property forthe test polish or wax,n = number of observation, andFx= X property/n.Specific properties (Fc) of the control are assigned a value of3.0.Properties Test Panel Application No. 1 Test Panel A
41、pplication No. 2Left Center Right Left Center RightProperties Test Panel Application No. 3 Test Panel Application No. 4Left Center Right Left Center RightRating Scale: 0 to 55excellent 2fair4very good 1poor3good 0complete failureNOTE 1Designate position of product (X or C) in box designating positio
42、n on test panel; that is, left, center, or right.FIG. 1 Fiberglass Boat Polish and Wax EvaluationIndividual Ratings for 9.1.1.D 4330 94 (2002)3Products Compared _Surfaces Used for Testing _Temperature _ Relative Humidity _Date _ Evaluator _Properties Summary of Product (X) Properties Summary of Cont
43、rol (C) PropertiesnxProperties F ncProperties FcFIG. 2 Fiberglass Boat Polish and Wax EvaluationsSummary of Individual Ratings for 9.1.1.Properties Test Panel Application No. 1 Test Panel Application No. 2Control Test Test ControlProperties Test Panel Application No. 3 Test Panel Application No. 4Co
44、ntrol Test Test ControlRating Scale: 1 to 55significantly better than control4slightly better than control3no difference from control2slightly poorer than control1significantly poorer than controlFIG. 3 Fiberglass Boat Polish and Wax EvaluationIndividual Ratings for 9.2.1.D 4330 94 (2002)410.3 Recor
45、d temperature and relative humidity at time testswere 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 BDue to the subjective nature of this prac-tice, no precision and bias can be established. However,because
46、 all the rating factors are in relation to the control, thevalues can be analyzed statistically to determine if the differ-ences observed are significant.12. Keywords12.1 buffability; gloss; gloss retention; heal; polish; polish-ing cloth; powdering; smear; waxASTM International takes no position re
47、specting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentionedin this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the riskof infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years andif not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standardsand should
