Document ByGzvr0Kpvwxp4Dqxa2EgMXbE

// Indexed cc: W, P, Fisher, Wilm, F & F (3) F. Backer, Wilm. F & F . D. Lawson, lab. R. B. Davis, Lab, S. L, Godshalk, Lab, R, B. Rolmes, Lab, B. A. Morehead, Lab, Patent Section, Lab. J. P. McAndrews, Lab, Marshall Laboratory Library (6) H. J. Stuart, Lab. J, G, Bryan, Lab, T. J. Moone, Lab. 0. H. Bullitt, Jr. Exp. Sta., Wllm, File: 1810 Marshall.Laboratory January 13, 1955 MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. M-752 PREPARED BY: D. M. WILLIAMS MOT Til CliCllIIil LABORATORY EVALUATION OF A WHITE SAMPLE OF GLIDDEN'S "NUBELON S" ENAMEL A gray sample of Glidden's "Nubelon S" was evaluated and reported In Memorandum Report M-653 by J. P, McAndrews, A white sample of this material was obtained for comparison in this report with du Pont high quality high bake white appliance finishes. (Hidden brochures characterised "Nubelon S,! as a silicone modified enamel of high quality priced at approximately $9.50 a gallon. J \ Systems Tested? 1, A white modification of 828-004 {one coat). 2, "Nubelon SM over an "MD" primer. 3, 704-24494 over 820-002. 4, "Nubelon S" (one coat) 5, 722-24946 over 828-014. 6, "MD enamel over "MD primer. General Conclusions: Glidden's4 "Nubelon S" finish Is a high quality finish In the performance range of our "MD" two coat system. The one coat white modification of 828-004 comes closer to matching the performance of "Nubelon S" than the two other systems currently released for sale that were included In this test, namely, 828-002/7(4-24494 and 828-014/722-24946, N35507 -2- The disadvantages of "Nubelon S" include its high price of about $9-50 per gallon and its high recoinmended bake of approximately 45 minutes at 450P . The weak point of the finish seems to be in soap and detergent re sistance . Its strong point seems to be heat resistance. .I*-- tit Detailed Results: Gloss: "Nubelon S" has gloss comparable'to the all "Iffi^system. This gloss is better than that of 722-24946 and much better than that of 704-24494, The highest gloss however was obtained from white 828-004, Hardness: "Nubelon s" baked at 450F for 45 minutes was harder than the all "MD system and white 828-004. Slightly softer than these two systems was 828-002/704-24494 while 828-014/722-24946 was considerably softer than all other systems. Flexibility ? "Hubelon S" and "MB are approximately equal in fleHBIlTEyT" Both 828-002/704-24494 and 828-03:4/722-24' 946 are poorer while the white 828-004 is poorest in this test. The poor flexibility of 828-004 in this test does not agree with lab experience. Previous tests show 828-004 to have good flexibility. Adhesion: The knife scratch adhesion test failed to differentiae 5 of the 6 systems tested. The 828-014/722-24346 system was equally Inferior to the others. Corrosion Resistance: After a 1000 hour salt spray expo8ure7~Wfiite^28^0047"828-002/704-24494J and 828-014/722- 24946 showed negligible rust creepage from score line while "MB"* "Nubelon S" and "Nubelon ssy"MD" showed no creepage. Stain Resistance: The "MD finish is equally superior to "l'iuHiIoir^tr ahd' wEite 828-004, Both 828-002/704-24494 and 828^014/722-24946 are considerably inferior to the others. Grease Resistance: The grease test of JO days immersion in a ^S/^^^reicici/c11onseed oil mixture at 77F showed 1'BSD" and white 828-004 to be about equal to "Nubelon g" in grease resistance. The 828-002/704-24494 was less resistant and the 828-014/722-24946 system failed on the eighth day. The "MD" softened less than the "Nubelon Ss% but concluded the test In the same hardness range since "Nubelon S" had greater initial hardness. Detergent Resistance; The 828-014/722-24946 system was slightly"superfor^o^S^hd "Nubelon S'1 over an MD primer, "Nubelon S" by itself was distinctly inferior to those systems, falling In three days in the l6oF 1$ Tide solution. The white 828-004 was slightly inferior to "Nubeloh s" while the 828-002/704-24494 system showed poorest of all failing the first day in test. DUP030003767 ~3~ Previous lab experience indicates that the 828-014/ 722-24946 system performed better in this test than would normally fee expected. The Tide test is not always a repro ducible one. i Soap Resistance j The "MD" system and white 828-004 are superToF"'to^B^'Ol4/722-249i!-6 in that order. The 828-002/ 704-24494 finish shows intermediate resistance while "Nubelon S" and "Nubelon S" over the "MD" primer are equally poorest of the systems tested, failing in 7 days in the X~l/2$ Sold Dust solution at 165P. Water Immersion Resistance: Wo large differences between systems were^oBi^vaBTe^aTteFlIY days in the 100F distilled water immersion bath. "Nubelon S" and white 823-004 appeared slightly more blistered than the other systems tested. ii Abrasion Resistance; As expected from its greater hardness, Nubeleh S*1 `^i^'lnore^aBrasion resistant than "MD" However, the white 828-004 is most abrasion resistant despite being softer than "Nubelon S" and equal to MD in hardness. Also the 828- 002/704-24434 was slightly more abrasion resistant than "MD" although It was slightly softer than "MD". As expected, the soft 828-014/722-24946 system was quite poor In abrasion resistance. Other lab tests show "MD" to be slightly more abrasion resistant than 704-Line, so the abrasion resistance difference between "MD" and 704-line is probably negligible for practical purposes. Beat Resistance: A rather severe heat test of 2 hours at 400cF"sTioie<rnfMib,eTon S" to be considerably superior to 828-014/ 722-24946 and MD in that order. Both 828-002/704-24494 and white 828-004 showed extremely bad yellowing. General: Detailed information is in notebook #5878 pages"48T"3n, 51, 60 and 62, Exposure Series #13991 was put out for yellowing data on the systems covered la this report. A one year progress report on Exposure Series #13370 containing the gray "Nubelon 3" # of Memorandum Report M-653 , shows that "Nubelon S" is inferior go a 828-004/752-71668 system in Florida exposure. The gray Nubelon S" shows poorer gloss retention, chalk resistance, and spot rusting resistance. Attached is a rating table for comparison of systems involved, SALES DEVELOPMENT BMW:pc 1/10/55 DONALD M, WILLIAMS DUP030003768 " in 03 O in in squxoj oCM od o f) r-i cM i--1 H 1.0 03 rH 03 Os 4sxsaa 92H 3,sxssa 12TS^S o r-J tA CO OS o\ 4SxeaH aea<zg> m in 03 C3 4sxsaa iteadg 4X8S in cn orH 6 00 H in . 03 r-5 tn <n o H o rt O ri 03 m in '' o* to rn oo in in Q\ 03 3SXS3H ^uaS^43<I in 1.0 in , 03 03 a in 'MSBELON SM EVALUATION * 4ts3H dsog 'qsxsaa uoxs -aaiauii m 03 mm .<* < <33 '4SXSSH woxs -S.IQV o 03 i-i n *' t~ O 00 , oo r* n in n <33 03 03 r- .# # 03 03 yo CO SS3U -pzen n CO O r-l n 03 03 SO n ^XtXqXsaM uoxsoqpv SSOX9 in * ts 03 OH 00 CO CO to * oH O!-J o r-l oH b~ op-i n * O in O rt 03 03 03 00 $4 U0 ft--V --*r <2.<.,/ to cy $0 Xi iQ a CQ 0s S5 co c 0 ' & & c-l d s 05 0) o cl ija4 o H El H T< os X? n 03 !"! } & r0&) . dJ3--s5- 03 'pj =s- 0 < n PS--4i <y k Pm OOi t 3 CM. 1i 0 & .sS? $ fc! i23 0 CO CM CM 0.! CO sj CM O 5S 00 K CO is- p DUP030003769