Browse Client Types

Browse past lab clients by general industry sectors

Trial Number 1

Client Number 232

Project Number 1

Trial Purpose:

To evaluate supplied product in dishwashing and compare to leading industry product.

Date Run:

11/18/2004

Experiment Procedure:

Three substrates were selected to represent possible materials that would be cleaned in a dishwasher. Two cleaning products were tested and compared to each other and to water. One scoop of a product was added to the Miele Automatic G7735 Spay Wash Unit. Jet-Dry rinse aid was added to the machine.

Six coupons of each substrate were contaminated with Hucker's soil using a hand held swab and allowed to sit for 24 hours. A second set of weights were recorded to determine the amount of soil added to each coupon. In addition to the six coupons that were contaminated, three uncontaminated coupons were included in the washing cycle as a way to determine redeposition of the contaminant onto the surface of the coupons. Therefore nine coupons per substrate were cleaned in the Miele unit (27 total). The cleaning cycle operated at 150 F and run for 26 minutes. At the end of the cleaning/rinsing, the coupons were removed from the unit and allowed to air dry for 48 hours. At the end of the air drying, final weights were recorded and efficiencies were calculated.

Trial Results:

Both products removed more Hucker's soil than the water alone on all three substrates. The table lists the amount of soil added, the amount remaining and the efficiency for each coupon and substrate cleaned.

Cleaner Initial wt Final wt Ceramic % Initial wt Final wt Glass % Initial wt Final wt Plastic%
Water 0.0972 0.0245 74.79 0.1590 0.0027 98.30 0.1278 0.0086 93.27
  0.5095 0.1632 67.97 0.1101 0.0023 97.91 0.1254 0.0043 96.57
  0.2572 0.0558 78.30 0.1431 0.0030 97.90 0.0933 0.0067 92.82
  0.1898 0.0498 73.76 0.1544 0.0028 98.19 0.1409 0.0039 97.23
  0.5904 0.2679 54.62 0.1601 0.0035 97.81 0.1357 0.0037 97.27
  0.6735 0.2236 66.80 0.0892 0.0026 97.09 0.1775 0.0147 91.72
Cascade 1.1562 0.2827 75.55 0.1809 0.0020 98.89 0.2226 0.0050 97.75
  0.5664 0.1183 79.11 0.1411 0.0012 99.15 0.0774 0.0014 98.19
  0.1226 0.0258 78.96 0.1664 0.0034 97.96 0.1300 0.0036 97.23
  1.7145 0.3298 80.76 0.1668 0.0030 98.20 0.2131 0.0106 95.03
  0.1543 0.0355 76.99 0.1406 0.0032 97.72 0.2545 0.0057 97.76
  2.5877 0.4597 82.24 0.1903 0.0000 100.00 0.2490 0.0012 99.52
Cogent 0.2088 0.0047 97.75 0.2567 -0.0005 100.19 0.1745 0.0059 96.62
  0.1760 0.0022 98.75 0.4198 0.0007 99.83 0.2721 0.0012 99.56
  0.0833 0.0157 81.15 0.1738 0.0001 99.94 0.1202 0.0020 98.34
  0.2882 0.0203 92.96 0.1709 -0.0004 100.23 0.1759 0.0071 95.96
  0.1562 0.0043 97.25 0.1208 -0.0002 100.17 0.1268 0.0041 96.77
  0.5788 0.0211 96.35 0.1516 -0.0003 100.20 0.1762 0.0052 97.05

Averages by Substrate

  Ceramic % Glass % Plastic %
Water 69.38 97.87 94.81
Cascade 78.94 98.65 97.58
Cogent 94.03 100.09 97.38

The only set of uncontaminated control coupons to gain a substantial amount of weight were the Cascade ceramic coupons. The table below lists the average weight change for the control coupons.

  Ceramic Glass Plastic
Water 0.053 0.0026 0.0043
Cascade 0.3982 0.0027 0.0002
Cogent 0.0013 -0.0001 0.0006

Success Rating:

Results successful using TACT (time, agitation, concentration, and temperature, as well as rinsing and drying) and/or other cleaning chemistries examined.

Conclusion:

The Cogent and Cascade products compared fairly closely to each other when cleaning was conducted in the Miele dishwasher. The Cogent product worked slightly better on the ceramic coupons. The same products will be tested under a similar procedure using a Maytag home dishwasher.

Save Report as a PDF