Download degradation of protective glove materials exposed to commercial

California State University, San Bernardino
CSUSB ScholarWorks
Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations
Office of Graduate Studies
9-2014
DEGRADATION OF PROTECTIVE GLOVE
MATERIALS EXPOSED TO COMMERCIAL
PRODUCTS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF
TENSILE STRENGTH AND GRAVIMETRIC
ANALYSES
Todd B. Pelham
[email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd
Recommended Citation
Pelham, Todd B., "DEGRADATION OF PROTECTIVE GLOVE MATERIALS EXPOSED TO COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS: A
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TENSILE STRENGTH AND GRAVIMETRIC ANALYSES" (2014). Electronic Theses, Projects, and
Dissertations. Paper 107.
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Office of Graduate Studies at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
DEGRADATION OF PROTECTIVE GLOVE MATERIALS EXPOSED TO
COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TENSILE
STRENGTH AND GRAVIMETRIC ANALYSES
A Project
Presented to the
Faculty of
California State University,
San Bernardino
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science
in
Earth and Environmental Science
by
Todd Bracewell Pelham
September 2014
DEGRADATION OF PROTECTIVE GLOVE MATERIALS EXPOSED TO
COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TENSILE
STRENGTH AND GRAVIMETRIC ANALYSES
A Project
Presented to the
Faculty of
California State University,
San Bernardino
by
Todd Bracewell Pelham
September 2014
Approved by:
Dr. Robert N. Phalen, Committee Member, Health Science
Dr. James Noblet, Committee Member, Chemistry
Dr. Renwu Zhang, Committee Member, Chemistry
© 2014 Todd Bracewell Pelham
ABSTRACT
Current glove guides attempt to assist in recommending which type of
glove is appropriate for handling chemicals; however, they include information on
less than 1% of the 89 million chemical products available today.
This study offers a solution by testing five durable polymer materials
against 50 chemicals, using two rapid chemical degradation assessment
techniques. The first technique involves gravimetric analysis of the weight
change following constant immersion against the chemical mixture. The second
method uses tensile strength to assess molecular changes in the polymer
structure.
This study is focused on addressing three issues of concern. First, this
study examines if current degradation testing methods are adequate to
determine chemical resistance against complex mixtures. Secondly, this study
will be used to determine if current degradation information on pure chemicals is
effective in predicting degradation of complex chemical mixtures, based on the
major ingredient(s). Lastly, this study will start a chemical resistance index for
complex mixed chemicals.
The results of this study clearly show that glove recommendations of pure
and mixed chemicals are frequently different. In more than 58.4% of the cases,
the mixed chemical requires a different glove than that of its pure chemical
components. Results also show that glove recommendations based solely on
weight change and/or permeation results are missing important information on
iii
tensile test performance. There are several instances (15.2%) in which the initial
glove recommendation would be changed to a lower recommendation rating if
the results of a tensile test were included.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dr. Robert Phalen PhD, CIH
Kandace Steele
California State University, San Bernardino Carpool Technicians
California State University, San Bernardino Plumbers
California State University, San Bernardino Environmental Health Specialists
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................
v
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................ viii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .............................................................
1
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Background .......................................................................................
6
Current Glove Guides .......................................................................
7
Hypothesis ........................................................................................ 11
CHAPTER THREE: MATERIALS AND METHODS
Polymer Selection ............................................................................. 13
Chemical Selection ........................................................................... 14
Equipment.......................................................................................... 15
Gravimetric Analysis .......................................................................... 15
Tensile Testing ................................................................................. 17
Mixed- and Pure- Chemical Analysis
Determining Pure Chemical Composition Using the SDS ....... 18
Determining Recommendations Using Available
Guidelines ............................................................................... 18
Determining Degradation Based on Tensile Strength ............ 19
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
Gravimetric Analysis Results ............................................................ 21
Tensile Strength Test Results ............................................................ 29
vi
CHAPTER FIVE: DATA ANALYSIS
Organizing Results to Establish a New Library ................................. 38
Pure- and Mixed- Chemical Analysis for Polymer Selection .............. 40
Weight and Tensile Strength Data ..................................................... 43
Weight and Tensile Strength Ratings for Polymer Selection.............. 45
CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION
Pure Chemicals and Mixed Chemicals ............................................. 49
Weight versus Tensile Results .......................................................... 51
More Conservative Polymer Recommendations ............................... 52
CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSIONS .......................................................... 53
APPENDIX A: PROPERTIES OF THE 50 MIXED CHEMICALS
TESTED .............................................................................. 56
APPENDIX B: PROPOSED NEW GLOVE MATERIALS INDEX ................. 59
REFERENCES ............................................................................................ 70
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Gravimetric Analysis Results ......................................................... 22
Table 2. Tensile Strength Test Results ........................................................ 30
Table 3. Weight and Tensile Strength Variances in Polymer
Recommendation ............................................................................ 43
viii
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Gloves can act as both the first and last lines of defense in protecting
individuals from chemical exposure in both industrial and household settings.
Gloves, classified as a type of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), are
designed to provide barriers against potentially dangerous chemicals from having
direct contact or prolonged exposure to skin. According to OSHA, “an estimated
60,000 deaths and 860,000 occupational illnesses per year in the US are
attributed to occupational exposure, a relatively small percentage caused by skin
exposure would represent a significant health risk”.(1) Chemical burns, wounds,
infection, and death could result if a glove were to not effectively protect against
chemical exposure. According to Reuscher (2012), there are several factors to
consider when choosing the right gloves, including: splash or immersion
protection, characteristics of the chemical being handled, temperature and
concentration of the chemical, length of exposure time to chemical, dexterity
needed to do task, and whether disposable or reusable are the best option. (2)
Gloves are not solely used as protection against pure chemicals hazards,
but are frequently used as protection against exposure to industrial or
commercial products, which can include complex mixtures of various chemical
components. Industrial and commercial products will be referred to as ”mixed
chemicals” in this study. These complex mixed chemicals can have very different
1
chemical properties from their pure chemical ingredients. There is currently no
published index enabling consumers to properly identify which glove choice can
best protect against a variety of mixed chemical industrial and commercial
products. This lack of information could lead to undue injury, illness or death.
The wrong glove could be chosen because of the misconception that the
chemical resistance to protect against a mixture is equal to the chemical
resistance of the pure chemical ingredients. This belief in equal chemical
resistance excludes any potential changes in chemical hazard or strength
resulting from the pure chemicals being mixed together.
Gravimetric studies analyze the differences in the weight of the glove
material prior to and after chemical exposure. Variations in weight signify that a
chemical reaction or physical change in the polymer occurred. Procedures for
methods to evaluate weight change as a measure of degradation can be found in
the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method D 471 Standard
Test Method for Rubber Property – Effect of Liquids.(3) Another degradation
standard, the American National Standards Institute’s International Safety
Equipment Association (ANSI/ISEA) Standard 105 Hand Protection Selection
Criterion(4), provides a set of criteria to analyze the puncture resistance of a
polymer glove, which is related to the tensile properties of the material. Analyzing
the tensile properties of a glove material before and after exposure to a chemical
can help determine if a breakdown in the polymer structure has occurred, which
is when the glove material breaks or tears more easily after exposure to a
2
chemical. A significant difference in measurements for either a weight or tensile
test indicates that the glove may not completely protect against the chemical and
a more suitable glove may need to be chosen. However, most current guides
neglect to include information on changes in puncture resistance or tensile
properties, limiting the scope of coverage for the guides, which can potentially
result in the recommendation of an inadequate glove material. Many guides,
such as the Ansell Guide(5) or Forsberg et al. Quick Selection Guide to Chemical
Protective Clothing(6), evaluate permeation data in place of chemical degradation
weight or tensile changes, which further complicates the selection process.
Significant differences are anticipated in comparing the degradation
results of glove material exposed to mixed chemicals to that of the individual pure
chemical ingredients. These differences are worth noting because if a glove is
unable to withstand a chemical, then its use could result in injury, illness or
death. The analysis of weight and tensile strength changes, following exposure to
chemical mixtures, in comparison to their pure chemical components will help
determine if current degradation methods can be used to determine proper glove
choice for chemical resistance.
Current published glove guides are limited in their scope of included
chemicals. The American Chemical Society’s Chemical Abstract Service
database (CAS), includes roughly 89 million chemicals that existence today.(7)
Of the 89 million chemicals in existence, the Ansell Guide lists PPE
recommendations for 167 chemicals(5), and the Forsberg et al. Quick Selection
3
Guide to Chemical Protective Clothing lists PPE recommendations for
approximately 1000 chemicals(6). There are also other smaller database
systems, such as the National Institutes for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) Recommendations for Chemical Protective Clothing: A Companion to
the NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards.(8) The NIOSH guide is also
limited in scope and application for the vast myriad of chemicals on the market
today. It is evident that there is a lack of available information on glove
recommendations for safe chemical handling. There is an estimated one new
chemical discovered or created every 2.3 seconds.(7) However, chemical
resistance data exist for less than 1% of the available chemicals.(7)
This study offers a solution for determining appropriate chemical
protective glove materials used in both industrial and household applications. It
does so by testing five durable polymer materials, common glove materials
available on the market, using two rapid chemical degradation assessment
techniques. The first technique involves gravimetric analysis of the weight
change following constant immersion in the chemical component or mixture, in a
manner similar to ASTM Method D 471.(3) The second method uses tensile
strength to assess molecular changes in the polymer structure, similar to a
previous study by Gao and Tomaovic (2005).(9) A total of 50 chemicals, found in
a variety of industrial and household settings, were used to evaluate the
effectiveness of these methods in determining a polymer material best suited to
resist chemical degradation to complex mixtures and commercial products.
4
This study is focused on addressing three issues of concern. First, this
study examines if current degradation testing methods, which focus on weight
change (and in some cases permeation) are adequate to determine glove
chemical resistance to degradation. Secondly, this study will be used to
determine if current degradation results on pure chemicals are effective in
predicting degradation of complex chemical mixtures, based on the major
ingredient(s). Lastly, this study will start an index and create a chemical guide
that can be used for complex mixed chemicals.
5
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Background
Exposures to chemicals happen every day and in a variety of settings.
Whether at home cleaning or at an industrial work environment, safe practices in
choosing the correct personal protective equipment, such as gloves, can prevent
burns, wounds, infection, and even death. Gloves come in all different types of
materials and thicknesses. They can range in cost between two cents for a
single-use, disposable latex glove to over $110 dollars for a multi-use, heavy
duty polyvinyl chloride glove.
According to Hatada et al. (1996), degradation is defined as the “chemical
changes in a polymeric material that result in undesirable changes in the values
of in-use properties of the material”.(10) Glove degradation is often thought of as
occurring when the polymer material breaks down enough for an unwanted
chemical to come in contact with the skin. This can still occur even if there is no
apparent sign of either holes or tears in the polymer material. To prevent a
potentially harmful chemical coming in contact with skin, one must use a glove
that can offer the best protection for that exact individual application. To
determine if degradation is occurring, one may be able to observe changes
following exposure to a chemical, as a glove may begin to swell, shrink, harden,
stiffen, brittle or blister. According to Chemical Protective Clothing (Anna, 2003),
6
the best way to describe glove degradation is when a glove has lost its ability to
provide adequate protection to the user of the glove.(11) To choose the glove that
offers the best protection, a consumer must first look up the exact individual
chemical ingredients of a product by using the Safety Data Sheets (SDS),(12)
formerly known in the United States as Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS).(13)
One would then have to look up these individual chemical ingredients in a PPE
recommendation guide, such as the Ansell Guide(5) or the Forsberg et al. Quick
Selection Guide to Chemical Protective Clothing(6) to determine which polymer is
the least likely to degrade during chemical exposure. The question that still
remains unanswered is whether or not the selected glove material will provide
the predicted level of protection.
For simplification, in this study, individual chemical ingredients will be
referred to as ”pure chemicals” and complex chemical products will be referred to
as ”mixed chemicals”.
Current Glove Guides
One guide that provides chemical information is the Safety Data Sheets
most commonly known as the SDS. Every commercial chemical in the United
States has an SDS, displaying data on identification, hazard identification,
composition/information on ingredients, first-aid measures, fire-fighting
measures, accidental release measures, handling and storage, exposure
controls/personal protection, physical and chemical properties, stability and
7
reactivity, and toxicological information.(12) There are two main problems with
utilizing the SDS for glove recommendations. First, it is generally written in
language more suited for business applications and the promotion of employee
safety, rather than layman language for individual use. Secondly, the SDS guides
do not often recommend specific glove materials for individual chemicals. To
ensure that the SDS does not give improper regimentations, the print will often
state something vague, such as ”use a chemically resistant glove”.(14) Although
the SDS does not often provide resolution in determining the appropriate glove to
use, it can be utilized to research the pure chemical ingredients contained within
each listed commercial product, as the chemical components are often provided.
The Ansell Chemical Resistance Guide is commonly used in order to
determine whether an Ansell glove product can withstand chemical permeation,(5)
as well as, chemical degradation in some cases. According to Chemical
Protective Clothing (Anna, 2003), permeation is a process that occurs when a
chemical passes through a surface without going through an opening such as a
hole or tear, at a molecular level.(11) The Ansell Guide(5) is a compilation of test
results and charts that assist in determining the degradation of an Ansell glove
product in a hazardous chemical. This helps a consumer decide which Ansell
glove product can work best given the type of pure chemical they will be exposed
to. The Ansell charts use a letter rating system and a color-coded system in
order to show the consumer the recommended rating of each glove material. The
color-coded system is based on chemical permeation. Green colored boxes
8
mean the glove is excellent or good and the permeation breakthrough is 30 min
or longer. Red colored boxes mean that the glove is poor or not recommended
for that chemical. Lastly, yellow colored boxes are used to show that the glove
did not fail the testing, but that material is also not recommended for use with that
chemical. The letter degradation rating is based on the percentage of change in
glove condition, where an excellent rating (E) is based on a change of less than
10%, a good rating (G) is based on a change of between 11-20%, a fair rating (F)
is based on a change of between 21-30%, a poor rating (P) is based on a change
of between 31-50%, and finally if the change of the glove is more than 50% the
glove is not recommended (NR) for that chemical. The Ansell degradation
guideline primarily focuses on which glove is the best against permeation of a
pure chemical using ATSM Method F 739 Standard Test Method for Permeation
of Liquids and Gases through Protective Clothing Materials under Conditions of
Continuous Contact.(15) A critical issue with the Ansell Guide is that many of the
recommendations are based on permeation data only, without consideration of
degradation testing. Because permeation is the molecular movement of
chemicals through the polymer and degradation is the chemical changes of the
polymer itself, the exclusion of degradation data means that if there are chemical
changes, but no increased molecular movement, the recommendations will not
change. The consequence can be the selection of a glove material that can
perform once for 30 plus minutes, but may be unacceptable thereafter. Chemical
9
degradation testing is an essential component of chemically protective glove
performance testing.
The Forsberg et al. Quick Selection Guide to Chemical Protective
Clothing(6) is a guide that shows roughly 1000 general polymer
recommendations. The provided chart also shows the results in a color coded
format dependent on permeation time and degradation rating of a pure chemical
on polymer material. Although, this chart has more data than the Ansell chart, it
is a little harder to use as there is no specific indication of chemical degradation
or permeation data, whereas Ansell does provide separate guidelines and data
for these two parameters, albeit degradation results are often not provided.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
complies a database called Recommendations for Chemical Protective Clothing:
A Companion to the NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards.(8) However, this
guide is limiting in its actual recommendations for skin protection. The guide
often states three levels of recommendations, which do not assist in conclusively
recommending specific glove materials that will prevent skin contact. The first
level of recommendation that the NIOSH uses is ”prevent skin contact”, which is
defined as “wear appropriate personal protective clothing to prevent skin contact.
Suggested barriers for use should be confirmed with the vendor and for
additional information and use limitations”. The second NIOSH recommendation
frequently used is ”Frostbite”, which is defined as “wear appropriate personal
protective clothing to prevent the skin from becoming frozen from contact with the
10
evaporating liquid or from contact with the vessel containing the liquid”. Lastly,
the NIOSH recommendation of ”N.R.“ is defined as “no specific recommendation
can be made. Actual working conditions will determine the need for personal
protective equipment.” These three recommendations do not provide clear
guidelines or appropriate personal protective options. This lack of specificity in
recommendations for determining glove use for skin protection means this
particular guide for chemical protective clothing does not assist in making
appropriate glove decisions.
Polymer recommendations based solely on pure chemical use, mean that
the glove manufacturer (e.g., Ansell), NIOSH, and Forsberg et al. Quick
Selection Guide to Chemical Protective Clothing are limited in usage and do not
benefit those who use complex chemical mixtures, not in pure form.(5,8,4) These
guides do not often publish glove recommendations that include mixed chemical
products for commercial or individual use. Examining the individual pure
chemicals with a chemical mixture (e.g., using SDS information) may also not be
helpful, as combined chemicals may enhance degradation of the gloves. This
lack of mixed chemical and glove data creates an opportunity for further study.
Hypothesis
The MSDS, SDS, NIOSH, Ansell Guide, Forsberg et al. Quick Selection
Guide to Chemical Protective Clothing, etc. all provide basic information on glove
recommendations for primarily pure chemicals.(13,12,8,5,6) The results of the mixed
11
chemical weight and tensile strength tests will be compared with predicted
performance to see if the current accepted standards or guides are adequate in
determining polymer material recommendations. The data in these guides will
also be used as a basis for comparing and contrasting polymer material
recommendations for pure chemicals with complex mixed chemicals. This
comparison will help to determine if current degradation testing methods on pure
chemicals can be used to predict chemical resistance to complex chemical
mixtures. If in comparing polymer material weight and tensile strength to 50
complex-mixed chemical solutions, there are significant differences between the
predicted and actual results, then it would stand to reason that mixed-chemical
testing should be done. If results conclude that degradation of polymer materials
is different than those anticipated based on the pure chemical components, then
additional studies could yield a more in-depth database that includes exposure to
mixed chemical compositions and provides polymer material ratings for improved
glove selection.
12
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Polymer Selection
The five polymer materials tested were butyl, natural latex, neoprene,
nitrile, and vinyl. These materials were chosen because similar non-disposable
multi-use gloves of these same compositions appeal to both industrial workers
and individual consumers, according to the US Department of Energy.(16)
Sheets of the polymer material, rather than actual gloves, were used due to cost
restrictions. Each sheet was 1/16 inch (0.16 cm) thick, which is near the actual
glove thicknesses for similar products. The polymer material sheets were
purchased from MSC Industrial Supply (Melville, NY). Natural latex gloves,
which were 1/32 inch thick (0.32 cm) were used because they were less
expensive than the sheet material. The brand of latex gloves used was Marigold,
Manufacturer model #326Y, purchased from W. W. Grainger, Inc. (Chicago, IL).
Each sheet of polymer material and the natural latex gloves were cut into
3.00 x 0.5 inch (7.62 x 1.27 cm) strips, as 155 strips of each material would be
needed. The strip size was necessary for tensile strength testing according to
methods used by Phalen and Wong (2012).(17) To cut the polymer material into
exact 3.00 x 0.5 inch (7.62 x 1.27 cm) strips, a precision die cutting press made
by W. R. Sharples Company, Inc. (North Attleboro, MA) was used. The die
cutting press was used by placing the polymer materials onto a piece of wood,
13
between layers of paper, and then the die cutting press was placed on top of the
material and struck with a mallet, producing exact 3.00 x .005 (7.62 x 1.27 cm)
inch strips. Once the material was cut into uniform strips they were placed into
humidifiers for a twenty four hour period to ensure uniformity of gravimetric and
tensile testing results throughout the study.
Chemical Selection
Fifty assorted common products (complex mixed chemicals) were chosen.
The product names and corresponding manufacturer, hazardous chemical
composition information, specific health hazards, recommended PPE, and
National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) ratings for health, flammability, and
instability/reactivity are provided in Appendix A. The provided information came
from the SDS for each product. These chemicals were chosen because of their
potential hazard and expansive range in uses, including pest control, cleaning,
degreasing, automotive, and plumbing functions.
The polymer materials and chemicals used were paid for or donated by
private donors, California State University, San Bernardino Carpool Technicians,
California State University, San Bernardino Plumbers, and California State
University, San Bernardino Environmental Health Specialists.
14
Equipment
A Fisher Scientific (Los Angeles, California) ALF104 analytical balance
was used to weigh the strips. A calibrated Marathon Electronic Digital
Micrometer with ratchet torque control (CO 030C25, Fisher Scientific, Los
Angeles, California) was used to measure thickness. Tensile strength was
measured using an Admet Expert 7601 tensiometer (Norwood, Massachusetts)
with an eP2 Digital Controller and mechanical force grips.
Gravimetric Analysis
The test strips of each type of prepared polymer material were weighed using an
analytical balance. Then the thickness was measured at three different places on
the strips using a digital micrometer. The measurements were taken at the top,
middle, and bottom of the strip, with the average of these three measurements
calculated and recorded. As these measurements were taken, the polymer
materials were also labeled using a numbering system that corresponded to the
chemicals that they would be placed in. Five pieces of each polymer were then
marked for use as the control and placed into a humidifier to prevent damage
due to drying out in room temperature air.
The 50 chemicals were poured into separate 15mL glass vials. Each vial
was numbered and catalogued so that the contents could be easily identified. On
the outside of each vial, the number ”1” was placed on the left side, ”2” was
placed on the middle, and ”3” was placed on the right side. Three strips of
15
polymer material samples were then completely submerged into each of the 50
chemically filled 15mL glass vials and the sample polymer material was recorded
according to which vial placement position it was placed in: 1, 2, or 3. The
polymer material samples were then left to soak in the chemical vial for a period
of twenty-four hours.
After twenty-four hours the polymer material samples were removed from
the vials and rinsed off using distilled water. This rinsing process was to prevent
the assigned chemical from continuing to react with the sample and to prevent
other containments from interfering with the study. After the polymer material
samples were rinsed off, they were pat dried with a paper towel and were left for
one hour for the outer surface to air dry.
After the drying process was complete, the samples were again weighed
and measured using the same process as the initial weighing and measuring.
The samples were then placed into a humidifier to prevent further degradation
from occurring due to damage that could be caused by the strips drying out in
room temperature air.
The average of the recorded pre-test weights of each polymer material
sample per assigned chemical was then calculated using the formula, (sample
polymer material 1 + sample polymer material 2 + sample polymer material 3) / 3
= ”Average Pre-Test Material Weight”. This calculation was repeated using the
recorded post-test weights to determine the ”Average Post-Test Weight”. The
percentage change in weight of sample polymer material was then calculated
16
using these calculated average weights and the formula, ((“Average Post-Test
Weight”-“Average Pre-test Weight”) / ”Average Pre-test Weight” = Percentage
Change (%).
Tensile Testing
First, the five controls for each polymer were tested as described by
Phalen and Wong (2011)(18). The controls were taken out of the humidifier and
tested using the tensiometer. The tensiometer digitally displayed the tensile
strength (in MPa) and elongation at break (in percent). The average was
calculated using the formula, (control 1 + control 2 + control 3 +control 4 + control
5) / 5 = “Average Control Tensile Strength”. This data was then recorded.
Upon completion of the controls being tested and recorded, the test strips
of each chemically exposed polymer material were individually tested, and the
tensile strength and elongation at break recorded. The three data points
recorded for each of the 50 chemical and polymer combinations were averaged
using the formula, (sample polymer material 1 + sample polymer material 2 +
sample polymer material 3) / 3 = ”Average Post-Test Tensile Strength”.
The
percentage change in tensile strength of each polymer material sample per
assigned chemical was then calculated using these calculated average posttensile strength data points and the formula, ((“Average Post-Test Tensile
Strength”-“Average Control Tensile Strength”) / ”Average Control Tensile
Strength” = Percentage Change (%).
17
Mixed- and Pure- Chemical Analysis
Determining Pure Chemical Composition Using the SDS
The SDS was used to determine the top three hazardous pure chemical
ingredients contained within each of the 50 mixed chemical products. These
pure chemicals were then recorded and used to predict the chemical resistance
of the polymer material.
Determining Recommendations Using Available Guidelines
The average percent change in weight for each of the 250 combinations of
polymer materials and mixed chemical was compared to the Chemical Protective
Clothing (Anna, 2003)(11) 5-tier rating system, based on ASTM Method F 471:
Excellent (0-10% weight change), Good (11-20% weight change), Fair (21-30%
weight change), Poor (31-50% weight change), and Not Recommended (over
50% weight change). This 5-tier system was used to determine polymer
recommendation ratings for each of the mixed chemicals so there would be a
greater breakdown in performance level than the 3-tier system.
The Ansell Guide(5) and the Forsberg et al. Quick Selection Guide to
Chemical Protective Clothing(6) were both used to research each pure chemical.
These guides use a 3-tier rating systems: Excellent to Good (0-20% weight
change), Fair to Poor (21-50% weight change), and Not Recommended (over
50% weight change) to determine polymer recommendation. They also use
permeation data in their recommendations, but this is a common practice and
18
one that cannot be evaluated separately. These existing systems were used to
determine the polymer recommendation rating for each of the pure chemical
ingredients.
Determining Degradation Based on Tensile Strength
The ANSI/ISEA 105 Standard calculates the performance level of a
material that has undergone puncture resistance testing, which is a form of
tensile testing.(4) An equivalent test was performed using tensile strength
measures instead of puncture resistance measures. The revised rating system
was determined by calculating the average percentage change in tensile strength
for each of the 50 chemical and polymer material experimental groups in
comparison with the appropriate polymer control group. The same rating system
as the ANSI/ISEA 105 standard was used, which was based on a 5-tier
recommendation system: 4 - Excellent (<20% change), 3 - Good (<40% change),
2 - Fair (<60% change), 1 - Poor (<80% change), and 0 – Not Recommended
(>80% change). The average results of the tensile strength tests of the
experimental samples compared to the control group were calculated and
recorded based on this 5-tier system. The 5-tier system was chosen to fulfill two
objectives: 1) evaluating the chemical resistance associated with molecular
changes in the polymer structure that would affect tensile properties and 2)
providing an additional evaluation to gravimetric analysis, which serves to
enhance a correct determination of chemical resistance. Ultimately, both tensile
strength and gravimetric analyses will provide a better indication of chemical
19
degradation and result in a more accurate rating system than those currently in
use.
20
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
Gravimetric Analysis Results
In total, 750 polymer material samples were tested in 50 different chemical
products to determine the impact the chemicals would have on weight change.
A significant weight change would indicate a reduction in user protection against
the chemical. Table 1 summarizes the weight test results by categorizing the
”Average Pre-test Weight”, ”Average Post-Test Weight”, ”Percentage Change
(%)“ and organizing it by ”Chemical” and ”Polymer Material Sample Type”. Table
1 also signifies which polymer per assigned chemical had the least percentage
change, by designating the lowest percentage change result with an asterisk (*).
For example, the results for Chemical 1 (Diversey’s Speed Track-Clean &
Burnish Fragrance Free) clearly show that the butyl polymer material sample had
an average pretest weight of 2.0753g, an average posttest weight of 2.0895g,
yielding a percentage change equal to 0.68%. This result shows less change
than the other polymer material samples; neoprene 0.85%, nitrile 1.04%, vinyl
1.28%, and latex 1.87%. This asterisk (*) designation helps to determine which
polymer material option can best resist chemical action of the specific mixed
chemical in comparison to the other polymer materials.
21
Table 1: Gravimetric Analysis Results
Glove
Material
Chemical
Sample
Type
Neoprene
Butyl
1
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
2
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
3
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
4
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
5
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
6
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Average
Pre-Test
Weight
Average
Post-Test
Weight
Percentage
Change (%)
2.2878
2.0753
2.3872
2.2792
1.2224
2.2737
2.0700
2.4226
2.3651
1.1788
2.2820
2.0743
2.4177
2.3387
1.1858
2.2818
2.0816
2.3827
2.2904
1.1174
2.2878
2.0836
2.3706
2.3107
1.1591
2.2736
2.0514
2.3910
2.3230
1.1788
2.3072
2.0895
2.4120
2.3083
1.2453
2.3183
2.1025
2.4618
2.4185
1.4821
2.3147
2.0904
2.4659
2.3034
1.2568
2.2871
2.0999
2.4173
2.3092
1.1260
2.3072
2.1130
2.4173
2.3734
1.2211
2.2766
2.0597
2.4032
2.3441
1.2454
0.85%
0.68%
1.04%
1.28%
1.87%
1.96%
1.57%
1.62%
2.26%
25.73%
1.43%
0.78%
1.99%
-1.51%
5.99%
0.23%
0.88%
1.45%
0.82%
0.77%
0.85%
1.41%
1.97%
2.71%
5.35%
0.13%
0.40%
0.51%
0.91%
5.66%
22
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 1. Continued
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
2.2637
2.1199
2.5414
2.2708
1.1824
2.2686
2.0659
2.5809
2.2560
1.2591
2.2550
2.0584
2.5976
2.2862
1.2557
2.2823
2.0643
2.5204
2.1848
1.2357
2.2696
2.0491
2.4462
2.2722
1.1611
2.2560
2.0464
2.4611
2.2351
1.1870
2.2477
2.0864
2.4381
2.1396
1.1904
2.2730
2.1290
2.5501
2.2825
1.1971
2.2890
2.0673
2.6187
2.3103
1.1780
2.2637
2.0659
2.6469
2.2451
1.2651
2.3041
2.0820
2.5713
2.3072
1.2908
2.2857
2.0610
2.4823
2.2970
1.1898
2.6942
2.4918
2.9571
2.9996
1.7465
2.2590
2.1013
2.4437
2.1963
1.1991
23
0.41%
0.43%
0.34%
0.52%
1.24%
0.90%
0.07%
1.46%
2.41%
-6.44%
0.39%
0.37%
1.90%
-1.80%
0.75%
0.96%
0.86%
2.02%
5.60%
4.46%
0.71%
0.58%
1.47%
1.09%
2.47%
19.43%
21.76%
20.15%
34.20%
47.13%
0.50%
0.72%
0.23%
2.65%
0.73%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 1. Continued
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
2.2645
2.0420
2.4849
2.3007
1.2476
2.2789
2.0635
2.5571
2.2708
1.2267
2.2646
2.0574
2.4756
2.2700
1.2526
2.2721
2.0418
2.4995
2.2640
1.2527
2.2838
2.0754
2.4714
2.2370
1.2388
2.2882
2.0700
2.4883
2.2447
1.3066
2.2598
2.0504
2.5092
2.2630
1.1959
2.2778
2.0469
2.5191
2.2714
1.2733
2.7307
2.2816
3.2846
2.5537
1.6949
2.2841
2.0613
2.4923
2.3542
1.2843
3.3877
2.6353
2.6800
2.6573
2.3850
2.3130
2.7950
2.9832
2.7496
1.3488
3.0410
2.3075
2.5507
2.3664
1.4024
2.3225
2.1444
2.6318
2.3291
1.2100
24
0.59%
0.24%
1.38%
-1.27%
2.06%
19.83%
10.57%
28.45%
12.46%
38.17%
0.86%
0.19%
0.68%
3.71%
2.53%
49.10%
29.07%
7.22%
17.37%
90.38%
1.28%
34.67%
20.71%
22.91%
8.88%
32.90%
11.48%
2.51%
5.42%
7.33%
2.77%
4.59%
4.88%
2.92%
1.18%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 1. Continued
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
2.2923
2.1437
2.4667
2.2030
1.1404
2.2476
2.0828
2.3984
2.2774
1.1739
2.2564
2.1094
2.4892
2.2032
1.1794
2.2715
2.0724
2.5678
2.2597
1.2271
2.2807
2.1925
2.4858
2.3236
1.2678
2.2461
2.0656
2.3853
2.1619
1.2084
2.2536
2.0863
2.4572
2.3097
1.2881
2.3721
2.1986
2.7016
2.3154
1.2654
4.3777
4.3477
4.2786
4.4669
3.2678
2.2881
2.1808
2.5120
2.2661
1.2458
3.2860
3.5388
3.5937
3.0929
3.0459
2.7210
2.3021
2.6027
2.3982
1.5844
2.2588
2.0711
2.3956
2.1724
1.3197
2.2825
2.3805
2.5086
2.3601
1.4245
25
3.48%
2.56%
9.52%
5.10%
10.96%
94.78%
108.74%
78.40%
96.14%
178.37%
1.40%
3.39%
0.92%
2.86%
5.62%
44.66%
70.76%
39.95%
36.87%
148.23%
19.31%
5.00%
4.70%
3.21%
24.97%
0.57%
0.26%
0.43%
0.49%
9.21%
1.28%
14.10%
2.09%
2.18%
10.59%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 1. Continued
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
2.2721
2.0802
2.4183
2.3671
1.2138
2.2381
2.1253
2.4601
2.2323
1.1985
2.2786
2.0523
2.4321
2.2473
1.1984
2.2553
2.0580
2.4232
2.3153
1.1530
2.2621
2.0816
2.4014
2.2854
1.2725
2.2891
2.0464
2.5081
2.2200
1.1880
2.2748
2.0961
2.4783
2.2286
1.1201
2.3071
2.1500
2.5781
2.4448
1.2995
2.3466
2.2794
2.5732
2.3439
1.5742
4.2623
2.7293
3.3599
3.4277
2.1140
2.9274
2.8473
3.0131
2.8783
1.9059
2.2833
2.0937
2.4172
2.2902
1.2999
3.0587
2.7425
2.7847
2.6430
2.6604
3.0039
3.2226
3.4146
3.2887
3.4174
26
1.54%
3.35%
6.61%
3.28%
7.06%
4.85%
7.25%
4.60%
5.00%
31.34%
87.06%
32.99%
38.14%
52.53%
76.40%
29.80%
38.35%
24.35%
24.32%
65.30%
0.94%
0.58%
0.66%
0.21%
2.15%
33.62%
34.02%
11.03%
19.05%
123.95%
32.05%
53.75%
37.78%
47.57%
205.11%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 1. Continued
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
2.2741
2.0731
2.4939
2.2532
1.2246
2.2748
2.1148
2.4668
2.2255
1.1705
2.2649
2.0911
2.5488
2.2914
1.1782
2.2595
2.0858
2.4694
2.2344
1.2771
2.2748
2.0693
2.4867
2.2357
1.2845
2.2607
2.0884
2.4644
2.2601
1.2478
2.2544
2.0646
2.4438
2.2472
1.2884
3.0398
3.1068
3.6566
3.1354
3.4698
2.3754
2.1415
2.5517
2.2950
1.2809
2.2666
2.0916
2.5685
2.2921
1.1820
2.7057
2.7651
2.7719
2.7420
2.1205
2.3920
3.1212
3.1489
3.1291
2.4995
2.5837
2.0916
2.6369
2.4120
2.4372
2.4628
2.2622
2.6776
2.5519
1.5044
27
33.67%
49.86%
46.62%
39.15%
183.34%
4.42%
1.26%
3.44%
3.12%
9.43%
0.08%
0.02%
0.77%
0.03%
0.32%
19.75%
32.57%
12.25%
22.72%
66.03%
5.15%
50.84%
26.63%
39.96%
94.59%
14.29%
0.15%
7.00%
6.72%
95.32%
9.25%
9.57%
9.57%
13.56%
16.77%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 1. Continued
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
2.2618
2.0975
2.4421
2.2557
1.2448
2.2844
2.0876
2.5064
2.1539
1.2146
2.2809
2.0483
2.5036
2.2309
1.1478
2.2611
2.0662
2.5659
2.2378
1.2749
2.2582
2.0272
2.5925
2.1985
1.1611
2.2602
2.0484
2.5358
2.2422
1.2267
2.2933
2.0726
2.5779
2.2707
1.1478
2.3179
2.2439
2.4634
2.3027
2.2781
2.3660
2.1142
2.5690
2.2035
1.3354
2.2998
2.0519
2.5359
2.2427
1.2178
3.4210
2.5608
2.6204
3.4256
4.5149
2.2794
2.0494
2.6435
2.2523
1.2019
2.3116
2.0753
2.5871
2.3535
1.0797
2.5999
3.1307
3.1286
3.4153
3.1645
28
2.48%
6.98%
0.87%
2.08%
83.01%
3.58%
1.28%
2.50%
2.30%
9.94%
0.83%
0.18%
1.29%
0.53%
6.10%
51.30%
23.94%
2.12%
53.08%
254.15%
0.94%
1.10%
1.97%
2.45%
3.51%
2.28%
1.31%
2.02%
4.96%
-11.98%
13.37%
51.05%
21.36%
50.41%
175.71%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 1. Continued
49
50
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
2.2572
2.0769
2.6380
2.2328
1.1478
2.3117
2.0597
2.6160
2.2647
1.2194
2.3282
2.1330
2.6632
2.2866
1.5048
2.3202
2.1390
2.6922
2.3364
1.3340
3.14%
2.70%
0.96%
2.41%
31.11%
0.37%
3.85%
2.92%
3.17%
9.40%
*
*
Tensile Strength Test Results
In total, 750 polymer material samples were tested in 50 chemicals to
determine the impact each chemical would have on a polymer material’s tensile
strength, signifying a reduction in user protection against the chemical.
Table 2 summarizes the tensile strength test results by categorizing the
”Average Pre-test Tensile Strength”, ”Average Post-Test Tensile Strength”,
”Percentage Change (%)“ and organizing it by ”Chemical” and ”Polymer Material
Sample Type”. Table 2 also signifies which polymer had the lowest percentage
change in tensile strength, by designating the lowest percentage change result
with an asterisk (*). For example, the results for Chemical 1 (Diversey’s Speed
Track-Clean & Burnish Fragrance Free) clearly show that the butyl polymer
material sample had an average pretest tensile strength of 5.8283 MPa, an
average posttest tensile strength of 5.8183 MPa, yielding a percentage change
29
equal to -0.17%. This result shows less change than the other polymer material
samples; neoprene 1.96%, nitrile 5.02%, vinyl -6.08%, and latex -3.81%.
Table 2: Tensile Strength Test Results
Glove
Material
Chemical
Sample
Type
Neoprene
Butyl
1
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
2
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
3
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
4
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
5
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Average
Control
Tensile
Strength
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
Average
Post-Test
Tensile
Strength
4.6680
5.8183
2.5993
4.5283
7.3223
4.2787
5.3547
2.2747
4.0700
6.6987
4.7607
5.8447
2.4133
4.4993
8.2990
4.8153
5.9170
2.5663
4.1123
8.0883
4.0653
6.1580
2.5063
5.3523
6.6743
30
Percentage
Change (%)
1.96%
-0.17%
5.02%
-6.08%
-3.81%
-6.54%
-8.13%
-8.10%
-15.59%
-12.00%
3.99%
0.28%
-2.50%
-6.68%
9.03%
5.18%
1.52%
3.68%
-14.71%
6.26%
-11.20%
5.66%
1.26%
11.01%
-12.32%
*
*
*
*
*
Table 2. Continued
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.7723
5.8773
2.4910
5.9223
9.0487
4.6427
6.3110
2.7050
5.7070
8.6427
4.1807
4.9497
2.5983
3.8457
7.0230
4.3377
6.2650
2.4843
4.3120
7.3650
4.3513
6.6537
2.5410
4.1653
6.0226
4.3427
6.6650
2.6003
4.2607
6.7917
2.3260
6.0440
2.3590
3.7800
5.5045
31
4.24%
0.84%
0.64%
22.83%
18.87%
1.41%
8.28%
9.29%
18.37%
13.54%
-8.68%
-15.08%
4.98%
-20.24%
-7.74%
-5.25%
7.49%
0.37%
-10.57%
-3.24%
-4.96%
14.16%
2.66%
-13.61%
-20.88%
-5.15%
14.36%
5.06%
-11.63%
-10.78%
-49.19%
3.70%
-4.69%
-21.60%
-27.69%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 2. Continued
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.4383
5.7910
2.6157
4.1997
6.7943
4.0310
6.1447
2.5370
4.0303
6.8021
3.4770
5.9840
2.3420
3.9907
6.0083
3.9767
6.1720
2.2737
4.5707
4.1767
2.4010
4.2163
2.3597
4.2743
4.8443
3.8713
4.6670
2.0215
3.0550
6.0610
2.8873
5.6603
2.3777
3.2693
4.3555
32
-3.06%
-0.64%
5.68%
-12.90%
-10.74%
-11.95%
5.43%
2.50%
-16.41%
-10.64%
-24.05%
2.67%
-5.38%
-17.23%
-21.07%
-13.14%
5.90%
-8.14%
-5.20%
-45.13%
-47.56%
-27.66%
-4.67%
-11.35%
-36.36%
-15.44%
-19.93%
-18.33%
-36.64%
-20.38%
-36.93%
-2.88%
-3.94%
-32.19%
-42.78%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 2. Continued
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.1697
5.2650
2.3260
3.7253
6.7103
4.5740
5.5200
2.1280
3.8280
6.5337
0.5910
2.2667
0.3305
1.3693
0.7953
4.6580
6.0703
1.9480
3.8870
7.4953
1.1227
2.4943
0.5140
1.5270
0.8723
2.3347
4.7543
2.5373
4.4110
4.8190
4.3067
5.2880
2.5373
3.3163
7.1290
33
-8.92%
-9.67%
-6.03%
-22.73%
-11.85%
-0.09%
-5.29%
-14.03%
-20.60%
-14.17%
-87.09%
-61.11%
-86.65%
-71.60%
-89.55%
1.74%
4.15%
-21.30%
-19.38%
-1.53%
-75.48%
-57.20%
-79.23%
-68.33%
-88.54%
-49.00%
-18.43%
2.51%
-8.51%
-36.69%
-5.93%
-9.27%
2.51%
-31.22%
-6.35%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 2. Continued
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.0513
5.3453
2.2353
4.1447
7.6572
4.5873
5.0443
2.0307
2.1865
7.5177
3.8757
5.9783
1.6285
2.9840
6.2220
1.4977
4.9823
2.0365
3.1483
5.5925
1.7593
2.7463
2.1070
3.6667
4.1900
4.6480
3.2360
2.4405
3.8133
7.6370
1.7717
4.4057
2.1970
3.0880
3.5995
34
-11.51%
-8.29%
-9.69%
-14.04%
0.59%
0.20%
-13.45%
-17.96%
-54.65%
-1.24%
-15.35%
2.57%
-34.21%
-38.11%
-18.26%
-67.29%
-14.52%
-17.72%
-34.70%
-26.53%
-61.57%
-52.88%
-14.87%
-23.95%
-44.96%
1.52%
-44.48%
-1.40%
-20.91%
0.33%
-61.30%
-24.41%
-11.24%
-35.95%
-52.71%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 2. Continued
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
2.0857
6.2113
1.2313
2.1890
1.4117
2.1637
4.8513
1.0370
2.9050
3.6280
2.3337
5.8560
2.1315
3.6523
5.5863
4.9553
4.2190
2.5560
4.3445
7.4987
2.7307
5.3917
2.2170
3.5553
5.2400
3.5600
6.0350
1.9005
3.6173
5.5840
3.0507
6.0950
1.5750
2.7187
1.3150
35
-54.44%
6.57%
-50.25%
-54.60%
-81.45%
-52.74%
-16.76%
-58.10%
-39.75%
-52.34%
-49.03%
0.47%
-13.88%
-24.25%
-26.61%
8.24%
-27.61%
3.27%
-9.89%
-1.49%
-40.36%
-7.49%
-10.43%
-26.26%
-31.16%
-22.24%
3.55%
-23.22%
-24.97%
-26.64%
-33.37%
4.58%
-36.37%
-43.61%
-82.72%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 2. Continued
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
2.9983
5.7790
2.5540
2.6140
4.2223
3.7003
2.2600
2.2530
2.8410
0.7687
4.0767
4.8803
2.4253
3.7458
6.1627
3.9307
5.6577
2.3030
2.9415
7.2907
3.7087
4.2907
1.4077
1.7203
2.9757
4.5500
4.9803
2.4265
1.6880
7.5480
4.2777
5.1527
2.2567
2.9687
7.1673
36
-34.51%
-0.85%
3.18%
-45.78%
-44.53%
-19.18%
-61.22%
-8.98%
-41.08%
-89.90%
-10.96%
-16.27%
-2.01%
-22.31%
-19.04%
-14.14%
-2.93%
-6.96%
-38.99%
-4.22%
-18.99%
-26.38%
-43.13%
-64.32%
-60.91%
-0.62%
-14.55%
-1.97%
-64.99%
-0.84%
-6.56%
-11.59%
-8.83%
-38.43%
-5.84%
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Table 2. Continued
48
49
50
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Latex
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
4.5782
5.8283
2.4752
4.8214
7.6120
3.5510
4.0557
2.3855
3.2640
5.6417
4.2037
6.1710
2.3347
2.2373
3.3283
3.9547
6.2663
2.4100
3.7997
8.2567
37
-22.44%
-30.41%
-3.62%
-32.30%
-25.88%
-8.18%
5.88%
-5.68%
-53.60%
-56.28%
-13.62%
7.52%
-2.63%
-21.19%
8.47%
*
*
*
CHAPTER FIVE
DATA ANALYSIS
Organizing Results to Establish a New Library
To best determine the most appropriate polymer material to minimize a
chemical exposure, the data sets were reorganized. Appendix B is a proposed
format for a new library that displays both mixed chemical and pure chemical
data results and a polymer recommendation. The 50 mixed chemicals are listed
down the left side of the table. Usually they would be listed in alphabetical order,
but for the ease of data flow within this study they are listed in order of their
assigned sample number. Under each mixed chemical are the most abundant
SDS pure chemical ingredients that are contained within each mixed chemical
product. Across the top of each section are the five polymer material types that
were studied. Under the polymer type the ”Test” preformed and ”Percentage
Change” is listed for each polymer material’s weight, thickness, tensile strength,
and elongation at break. The ”Weight Test” ratings are listed for the polymer’s
change in weight in both the mixed chemical and the corresponding pure
chemicals. Also listed are the tensile strength ratings of each polymer’s tensile
strength test results for each tested mixed chemical.
Appendix B also has a column titled ”Recommendation”. In this column
the overall usage recommendation for chemical resistance to degradation is
listed. To appropriately recommend polymer materials for mixed chemicals, the
38
recommendation is based on a comparison of both the weight test ratings and
the tensile strength test ratings, using the most conservative recommendation
rating. Although elongation to break and thickness measurements are shown on
Appendix B, this data was not used to determine mixed chemical polymer
recommendations, as they could not be compared with preexisting methods
common to industry. These observed mixed chemical recommendations are
based on a 3-tier system:
1. Recommended (both weight and tensile tested at Excellent or
Good),
a. Weight change within 0% to 20% change
b. Tensile strength with Less than 40% change
2. Use Caution (one or both tests received a score rating of Fair or
Poor, but neither test received a rating score of Not
Recommended), and
a. Weight change between 21% and 50%.
b. Tensile strength between 41% and 80% change.
3. Not Recommended (one or both tests received a score rating of
Not Recommended).
a. Weight change greater than 50%.
b. Tensile strength greater than 80% change.
The recommendation level of the polymer material exposed to the pure
chemicals is based on either the Ansell Guide(5) or the Forsberg et al. Quick
39
Selection Guide to Chemical Protective Clothing(6) rating systems. For
clarification purposes, on Appendix B this is designated as ”Pure Chemical
(Index Guide Rating)”, and is based on the corresponding 3-tier system:
Recommended (Excellent to Good, 0-20% weight change), Use Caution (Fair to
Poor, 21-50% weight change), and Not Recommended (Not Recommend, over
50% weight change), or the permeation criteria used by the rating system.
Pure- and Mixed- Chemical Analysis for Polymer Selection
Comparing the recommendation levels of the mixed chemicals to those of
the pure chemical ingredients provides an understanding of how the selection
based on chemical composition can vary between the two data sets. By
analyzing the data in Appendix B, we can compare the ”Recommendation”
values of the mixed chemicals to those of the pure chemical components.
Appendix B shows that there are 104 mixed chemicals (41.6%) whose polymer
material recommendations are the same as the pure chemicals contained within.
However, there are 146 polymer material recommendations (58.4%) that vary
between the mixed- and pure chemical compositions. This illustrates the lack of
agreement between the two methods.
In 108 of the 146 above variances (43.2% overall), mixed chemical
polymer recommendations are more favorable than those of one or more of the
pure chemicals contained within. For example, chemical 1 – Diversey: Speed
Track – Clean & Burnish, Fragrance Free contains both sodium
40
dodecylbenezene sulfonate and alcohol ethoxylate. Latex material has a
recommendation rating of ”Recommended” when exposed to Diversey: Speed
Track – Clean & Burnish, Fragrance Free, whereas, latex has a ”Recommended”
rating when exposed to sodium dodecylbenezene sulfonate and a ”Use Caution”
rating when exposed to alcohol ethoxylate. This more favorable
recommendation rating given to the mixed chemical signifies that the chemical
composition changed drastically when combined and that there is less
degradation with the final mixed chemical product.
In 20 of the 146 above variances (8% overall), the mixed chemical has a
lower and less favorable rating than one or more of the pure chemicals contained
within. For example, chemical 16 – Sevin: Concentrated Bug Killer contains
carbaryl, 1,2-propanediol, and salt. Latex was found to have a ”Use Caution”
recommendation when exposed to Sevin: Concentrated Bug Killer. However, the
latex polymer material has a ”Recommended” rating for use against exposure to
any of the three pure chemical ingredients individually. This lower and less
favorable recommendation rating means that the final mixed chemical product
demonstrates higher degradation than the individual pure ingredients it contains.
It is important to understand the implications of degradation integrity on polymer
materials.(19) The 20 variances in mixed chemical and pure chemical
recommendations that warrant a lower recommendation level are: chemical 16 –
Sevin: Concentrated Bug Killer (latex), chemical 18 – Ranger: Pro-Herbicide
(butyl and vinyl), chemical 22 – Main Tech: Penetrating Oil (neoprene, nitrile, and
41
vinyl), chemical 24 – Winner Industrial Supply: EZ Seal (nitrile), chemical 35 –
Kingsford Charcoal Lighter Fluid (nitrile), chemical 36 – Henry: Easy Release
Adhesive remover (neoprene), chemical 38: Liquid Performance: Spray Cleaner
and Polish (latex), chemical 39 – Truefuel: Truefuel 40:1 Engineered Fuel + Oil
(butyl and nitrile), chemical 40: Craftsman: Fuel Stabilizer (latex), chemical 42 –
Valvoline: DOT 3&4 (butyl and vinyl), chemical 45 – Amazing!: Liquid Fire
(neoprene and butyl), chemical 46 – Clorox: Outdoor Bleach Concentrate (vinyl),
and chemical 48 – White Lightning: Clean Streaks (nitrile and latex).
Finally, in 18 of the 146 above total variances (7.2% overall) the mixed
chemical recommendations were both higher and lower than those of their
corresponding individual pure chemical ingredients. For example, chemical 12 –
Homax: Oops Amazing Remover contains petroleum ether, ethanol, and xylene.
When neoprene is exposed to the mixed chemical it has a recommendation
rating of ”Use Caution”. However, neoprene material exposed to ethanol is rated
at ”Recommended” and both petroleum ether and xylene are rated as ”Not
Recommended”. The 18 variances that have mixed chemical recommendations
that are both higher and lower than their corresponding pure chemical
ingredients are: chemical 12 – Homax: Oops Amazing Remover (neoprene,
butyl, and nitrile), chemical 15 – Jasco: Varnish and Stain Remover (nitrile),
chemical 17 – Jasco: Paint and Apoxy Cleaner (butyl), chemical 29 – Relton:
Rapid Tap (latex), chemical 30 – Weld-On P-70 Primer (butyl), chemical 31 –
Ecoline: Dry Teflon (neoprene and butyl), chemical 34 – WD-40 (nitrile), chemical
42
38 – Liquid Performance: Spray Cleaner and Polish (neoprene, butyl, and vinyl),
chemical 40 – Craftsman: Fuel Stabilizer (vinyl), chemical 41 – Valvoline: Heavy
Duty Brake Parts Cleaner (vinyl and latex), and chemical 49 – Turtle Wax: Bug
and Tar Remover (vinyl and latex).
Weight and Tensile Strength Data
It is important to note differences in polymer material recommendations
between weight and tensile strength tests, in comparison to the other polymer
materials exposed to the same chemical. Table 3 is a compilation of the 36
chemicals whose polymer material recommendation is exclusively dependent on
which test was performed. It is a comparative analysis of the polymer material
recommendations denoted by the asterisks shown in Table 1 and Table 2.
Table 3: Weight and Tensile Strength Variances in Polymer Recommendation
Chemical
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
Best
Best Weight
Tensile
Test Result
Test Result
Butyl
Neoprene
Neoprene
Butyl
Neoprene
Nitrile
Neoprene
Nitrile
Nitrile
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Butyl
Nitrile
43
Table 3. Continued
10
11
12
13
14
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
29
31
32
34
35
37
38
39
41
43
45
47
48
50
Butyl
Butyl
Neoprene
Neoprene
Butyl
Butyl
Nitrile
Latex
Butyl
Nitrile
Nitrile
Vinyl
Vinyl
Butyl
Neoprene
Nitrile
Vinyl
Vinyl
Neoprene
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Neoprene
Neoprene
Butyl
Nitrile
Butyl
Neoprene
Neoprene
Nitrile
Nitrile
Butyl
Butyl
Nitrile
Vinyl
Butyl
Nitrile
Neoprene
Butyl
Latex
Butyl
Nitrile
Nitrile
Latex
Butyl
Nitrile
Latex
Butyl
Butyl
Latex
Butyl
Butyl
Butyl
Nitrile
Neoprene
Latex
Nitrile
Nitrile
Only 14 chemicals (28%) resulted in the same polymer material
recommendations in both the weight and tensile strength testing in comparison to
44
the other polymer materials tested. These 14 chemicals are: chemical 1 –
Diversey: Speedtrack Clean and Burnish, fragrance free, chemical 3 - Practical
Solutions: Reflecta Natural Floor Cleaner, chemical 15 – Jasco: Varnish & Stain
Remover, chemical 17 – Jasco: Paint Epoxy Cleaner, chemical 18 – Ranger: Pro
Herbicide, chemical 28 - Nexgen Chemstar Line: Nexbac, chemical 30 - WeldOn: P-70 Primer, chemical 33 – Maxima: Chain Wax, chemical 36 – Henry: Easy
Release Adhesive Remover, chemical 40 – Craftsman: Fuel Stabalizer, chemical
42 – Valvoline: Dot 3 & 4, chemical 44 – Clorox: Liquid Plumber, chemical 46 –
Clorox: Clorox Bleach, and chemical 49 – Turtle: Bug and Tar Remover.
The 36 chemical and polymer material recommendation results, that are
dependent on which test was preformed, need to be better analyzed to make a
more informed choice for polymer material selection. For example, Table 3
shows that for chemical 2, butyl had the best weight test result, but neoprene had
the best tensile test result. Because both weight and tensile strength changes
are indicators of degradation and chemical action, it stands to reason that both
are important considerations when selecting a polymer material for chemical
resistance.
Weight and Tensile Strength Ratings for Polymer Selection
The mixed chemical polymer recommendations in Appendix B are
conservative recommendations based on the lesser (more conservative) rating
received from either the weight test rating or the tensile strength test rating. Table
45
3 is a compilation of the 36 chemicals whose polymer material recommendation
is dependent on the results of either the weight test or the tensile test
independently, not a comparison of the test results with each other. It does not
indicate which test result has the better recommendation level and therefore
cannot be used to determine which polymer should be used as PPE when
handling that chemical. For example, chemical 24 in Table 3 shows that the
polymer with the least percentage of change based solely on the results from the
weight test was vinyl and based solely on the results of the tensile test was butyl.
To determine which polymer material should be considered, one must also know
which test result had the best recommendation, which can be seen in Appendix
B. With Appendix B, the weight test rating recommendation for the use of vinyl
material in the weight test is ”Poor”, but the tensile strength test rating
recommendation for the use of butyl in the tensile test is ”Fair”. By looking at
these test results independently you may chose the wrong polymer and chose
Butyl. By looking at the overall recommendation column in Appendix B, it can be
observed that the recommendation level of butyl is actually ”Not Recommended”,
which would mean that the vinyl polymer is likely a more appropriate choice for a
PPE. This is because the comparison of the weight test and the tensile test
results are independent of each other and do not exclusively determine the best
choice in polymer material. To determine which material is the most appropriate
PPE with regards to chemical degradation resistance, one must consider both
the weight and tensile strength test results for each of the polymer materials.
46
In this study there were 45 combinations (18% overall) that resulted in a
lower (less favorable) weight test rating than tensile strength rating, meaning that
the recommendation was lowered because of a higher percent change in weight
than tensile strength. The 45 mixed chemical and polymer material combinations
that were affected by the lower weight test rating, and therefore lower
recommendation, are: chemical 2 - Practical Solutions: Power Bolt Spray(latex),
chemical 12 - Homax: Oops Amazing Remover (butyl, nitrile, vinyl, and latex),
chemical 15 – Jasco: Varnish & Stain Remover (nitrile and latex), chemical 17 –
Jasco: Paint and Epoxy Cleaner (butyl and latex), chemical 18 – Ranger: ProHerbicide (butyl and vinyl), chemical 19 – Kimball Midwest: Inter-lube Penetrating
Grease (neoprene), chemical 22 - Main Tech: Penetrating Oil (butyl and latex),
chemical 24 - Winner Industrial Supply: EZ Seal (butyl), chemical 29 – Relton:
Rapid Tap (latex), chemical 30 – Weld-On P-70 Primer (neoprene, butyl, nitrile,
vinyl, and latex), chemical 31 – Ecoline: Dry Teflon (nitrile, vinyl, and latex),
chemical 33 – Maxima: Chain Wax (butyl and latex), chemical 34 – WD40 (butyl),
chemical 35 – Kingsford: Charcoal Lighter Fluid (butyl, vinyl, and latex), chemical
38 – Liquid Performance: Spray Cleaner and Polish (butyl, vinyl, and latex),
chemical 39 – Truefuel: Truefuel 40:1 Engineered Fuel + Oil (butyl, nitrile, vinyl,
and latex), chemical 45 – Amazing! Liquid Fire (neoprene, butyl, vinyl, and latex),
and chemical 48 – White Lightning: Clean Streaks (butyl, nitrile, vinyl, and latex).
There were 14 combinations (5.6% overall) which resulted in a lower (less
favorable) tensile strength rating than weight test rating, meaning that the
47
recommendation was lowered because of a higher percent change in tensile
strength than weight. The 14 mixed chemical and polymer material combinations
that were affected by the lower tensile strength test rating, and therefore lower
recommendation, are: chemical 12 – Homax: Oops Amazing Remover
(neoprene), chemical 16 – Sevin: Concentrated Bug Killer (latex), chemical 19 –
Kimball Midwest: Inter-lube Penetrating Grease (latex), chemical 25 – Oaty: ABS
Cement (neoprene), chemical 36 – Henry: Easy Release Adhesive Remover
(neoprene), chemical 40 – Craftsman: Fuel Stabilizer (vinyl), chemical 41 –
Valvoline: Heavy Duty Brake Parts Cleaner (vinyl and latex), chemical 42 –
Valvoline DOT 3&4 (butyl and vinyl), chemical 43 – Easy Off: Oven Cleaner
(vinyl), chemical 45 – Amazing!: Liquid Fire (nitrile), chemical 46 – Clorox:
Outdoor Bleach Concentrate (vinyl),and chemical 49 – Turtle Wax: Bug and Tar
Remover (vinyl).
Out of a possible 250 polymer material and mixed chemical combinations,
191 combinations (76.4% overall) resulted in equal weight and tensile strength
ratings, which indicates that there is a level of agreement between the two
methods. However, the combined use of both weight change and tensile
strength change data has distinct advantages when evaluating resistance to
chemical degradation. It is a conservative approach that takes into account the
various changes occurring within the polymer that could indicate chemical
degradation. The results of this study support this notion.
48
CHAPTER SIX
DISCUSSIONS
Pure Chemicals and Mixed Chemicals
By comparing the recommendation levels, 38 of the 250 mixed chemicals
(15.2%) have higher degradation ratings (less favorable) than their respective
pure chemicals, and the need for a new library index is made immediately clear.
In 104 of the polymer material recommendations that are the same (41.6%), the
mixed chemical and corresponding pure chemicals would not alter the final
decision on which polymer material to use as a PPE. In 108 of the polymer
materials (43.2%) whose mixed chemical recommendation ratings are higher
(more favorable) than those of its pure chemicals, we would have less need for
caution in glove recommendation. This last scenario is likely due the fact that the
pure chemical components in a commercial product are often present at lower
concentrations and not in a pure form. Nevertheless, the need for a new index is
made clear when comparing the 146 variations that were observed between the
predicted ratings using pure chemical components and the actual degradation
results for the mixture.
The importance of analyzing the 38 combinations that have higher
degradation ratings (less favorable recommendations) than their respective pure
chemicals is that someone could improperly identify a polymer material to use for
a specific chemical product by researching the pure chemical ingredients as they
49
are provided in the Ansell Guide(5) or the Forsberg et al. Quick Selection Guide to
Chemical Protective Clothing(6). This means that a polymer deemed as
”Recommended” based on its pure chemical composition may in fact have a
recommendation rating of ”Use Caution” or ”Not Recommended” as a mixed
chemical in its final product form. This altered chemical composition and
increased degradation of the polymer material could result in harmful exposure to
the skin if the incorrect material was chosen as a PPE. For example, chemical
46 – Clorox: Outdoor Bleach Concentrate is made up two main pure chemical
components according to the SDS: sodium hypochlorite and sodium hydroxide.
Individually, the ratings for these two pure chemicals would indicate a
recommendation of vinyl gloves. However, actual degradation testing for Clorox:
Outdoor Bleach Concentrate results in a vinyl glove listed as ”Use Caution”. This
lower recommendation level is likely because of the chemical reaction that
occurs when sodium hypochlorite and sodium hydroxide combine. When these
two chemicals are combined together sodium hydroxide slows the decomposition
of sodium hypochlorite, it also results in a more caustic final chemical with
quickened PPE material degradation. This explains why the vinyl polymers
showed a greater percent change for both tests after continuous exposure to the
final product, rather than the recommendation made by the weight test (or
potentially permeation). Without a new rating system, there is no way to foresee
that the degradation of the final mixed bleach product is more hazardous to vinyl
polymers than its pure chemical ingredients individually. This lack of final mixed
50
chemical information could lead to the use of the wrong polymer materials and
result in undue injury, illness or death.
Weight versus Tensile Results
The Ansell Guide(5) and the Forsberg et al. Quick Selection Guide to
Chemical Protective Clothing(6) index systems determine which polymer materials
act as the best PPE based primarily on pure chemicals and their corresponding
weight and/or permeation test results. The current indexes also do not account
for other testing methods, such as the tensile strength tests, which could provide
valuable information on the molecular changes occurring within the polymer.
Fourteen of the 250 recommendations (5.6%) made for polymer material and
mixed chemicals combinations completed in this study were changed due to the
tensile strength test results. This demonstrates that tensile strength can play a
vital role in choosing the most appropriate polymer material to use when handling
a chemical hazard. The Ansell Guide(5) and the Forsberg et al. Quick Selection
Guide to Chemical Protective Clothing(6) index systems do not effectively take
into account the results of tensile tests and other test methods. This lack of
information results in an index that is limited in its scope of PPE
recommendations. The more conservative the data sets are that are taken into
consideration for PPE recommendations, the less likely that the improper PPE
will be chosen.
51
More Conservative Polymer Recommendations
The use of conservative recommendations provide improved safety and
health standards of practice, more so than those currently implemented in most
chemical resistance glove indexes. Additional test results provide for a more
accurate and appropriate recommendation of chemical degradation resistance.
For example, the butyl polymer material sample gave conflicting results when
tested in chemical 24 - Winner Industrial Supply’s EZ Seal. Butyl’s weight test
rating is ”Not Recommended” due to a test result of having over 50% change in
weight; however, the tensile strength test rating is ”Fair” due to having less than
60% change in tensile strength. Given the knowledge that the polymer material
was ”Not Recommended” because of weight test results, the overall
recommendation for the polymer is ”Not Recommended” regardless of the ”Fair”
tensile strength recommendation. This conservative approach allows for a more
practical and protective recommendation, so that a consumer can make a more
appropriate decision on the polymer material best for the exposure scenario.
Conservative polymer material selection offers the consumer a “safer” glove and
more appropriate PPE recommendation.
52
CHAPTER SEVEN
CONCLUSIONS
The current polymer material indexes on chemical resistance and
degradation are lacking critical information and are limited in scope. According to
the American Chemical Society, there have been about 89 million chemicals that
have been found or manufactured by humans, most of which have been
developed in the past several decades.(7) Each of these chemicals must have an
SDS sheet that can provide information as to the chemical composition of the
product. However, the Ansell Guide has only 167 chemicals listed in its 8th
edition,(5) and the Sixth edition Forsberg et al. Quick Selection Guide to Chemical
Protective Clothing boasts that it includes information on over 1000 chemicals(6).
It is easy to see that there is a large gap between the quantity of products that
exist and the number of chemicals that offer PPE recommendations.
Singularly depending on weight test results, or permeation data for that
matter, for polymer recommendation ratings is not appropriate. If degradation
testing of final mixed chemical products were added into the current library
system of testing and identifying appropriate PPE materials, then it would still
continue to implement mostly weight test based recommendations. By failing to
include tensile strength test recommendations, there were 14 combinations
(5.6%), out of 250, whose polymer recommendation could have led to injury,
illness or death due to the original test results indicating a higher chemical
53
resistance rating and recommendation than the tensile test results warranted.
Ultimately, the material was likely affected by the chemical mixture, but this was
not detected by gravimetric analysis. Because many of the chemical protective
glove products are re-used, tensile testing becomes an important evaluation tool
for chemical resistance and degradation.
Relying solely on the SDS and the resulting pure chemical compositions to
determine polymer recommendation also leads to false polymer recommendation
information. By cataloguing pure chemicals and not evaluating the final mixed
chemical products, 38 total polymer recommendations out of 250 studied would
have been changed. The fact that 15.2% of the polymer material
recommendations would change, because the final mixed chemical product has
different chemical properties, shows that there is something glaringly wrong with
the current system.
This study was successful in showing that there are many issues with both
the Ansell Guide(5) and the Forsberg et al. Quick Selection Guide to Chemical
Protective Clothing(6) glove guide index systems. The new proposed library takes
into consideration two types of recommendations: weight and tensile strength.
However, the index should be expanded to include known chemical hazards,
especially common commercial products and complex mixtures. There is an
opportunity for more research and experimental testing methods to minimize
chemical exposures and improve the PPE recommendations. The risk for
54
chemical exposure is significant, and can lead to permanent injury, illness or
death, so there is urgency in the creation of a new, more inclusive database.
55
APPENDIX A
PROPERTIES OF THE 50 MIXED CHEMICALS TESTED
56
Amount of
Chemical Product
Vial # Chemical
Name
Used
1
15ml
Speedtrack Clean
& Burnish
(fragrance free)
2
15ml
Power Bolt Spray
Cleaner
3
15ml
4
15ml
5
15ml
6
15ml
7
15ml
8
15ml
9
15ml
10
15ml
11
15ml
12
15ml
13
15ml
14
15ml
15
15ml
16
15ml
17
Chemical
Manufacturer
Hazardous Chemicals (weight %)
NFPA NFPA
NFPA
Specific Hazards
Health Flammability Instability
Recommended PPE
Diversey
Sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, Alcohol
ethoxylates
2
0
0
Practical
Solutions
Alcohol ethoxylates, Monoethanolamine,
Propylene glycol
3
0
0
Reflecta Neutral
Floor Cleaner
Ramsey Wide
Rance II (nonacidic washroom
cleaner,
concentrated)
Speedball 200
(heavy duty spray
cleaner,
concentrated)
Virex II 256 (one
step disinfectant
cleaner and
deoderant)
Foaming Acid
Restroom Cleaner
Practical
Solutions
Practical
Solutions
Sodium xylene sulfate, Alcohol ethoxylates
2
0
0
Octyl decyl dimethyl ammonium chloride,
n-Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride,
Nonylphenol ethoxylate, Tetrasodium
3
1
0
Diversey
Benzyl alcohol, 2-Butoxyethanol, Diethykene
glycol momoethyl ether
1
1
0
eye and skin irritant none required
Diversey
N-Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride,
Didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride, Ethyl
alcohol
3
1
0
Corrosive, eye and Chemical resistant:
skin burns, Harmful Goggles, gloves and
or fatal if swallowed shoes
Diversey
Diethylene glycol butyl ether
3
0
0
Strip and
Wallpaper and
Paste Remover
409 (all purpose
cleaner)
Tile and Vinyl (floor
cleaner)
Resolve Triple Oxy
Advance
Oops Amazing
Remover
Super Algea Guard
Romans golden Diethylene glycol, Alcohols ethoxylated,
Harvest
Sorbitol, Sodium benzoate
2
1
0
Corrosive, eye and
skin burns, Harmful
or fatal if swallowed
Eye, skin and
Inhalation
Alkyl, Dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride,
Lauramine oxide
Modified Acrylic Polymer, Ethoxylated linear
alcohol, Ammoium hydroxide
Alcohol ethoxylate, Hydrogen peroxide, Sulfuric
acid
petroleum ether, xylene, ethanol
1
0
0
1
0
0
eye and skin iritation Chemical resistant
goggles and gloves
eye irritation
Goggles
2
2
0
Skin and eye irritant goggles
3
3
0
Quaternary ammonium compounds, Alkyl
dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride,
Alcohol denat.
3
1
0
Eye, skin and
Gloves, goggles and
Inhalation
respiratory protection
Skin and eye irritant Eye, skin, and
respiratory protection
Super Water
clarifier
Varnish & Stain
Remover
aqua chem
Clorox
Armstrong
Resolve
Homax
Products, Inc.
HTH
Eye and Skin
irritant. May cause
burns
Corrosive, eye and
skin burns, Harmful
or fatal if swallowed
Skin and eye irritant
Chemical-splash
goggles and Chemical
resistant Gloves
Chemical resistant:
Goggles, gloves and
shoes
None under normal use
conditions
Eye and Skin Burns Chemical resistant
goggles and gloves
Chemical resistant
goggles and gloves
Gloves, goggles and
respiratory protection
Sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium Hydroxide
(caustic soda)
Toulene, Methanol, Dichloromethane
3
1
0
3
3
0
Concentrated Bug Sevin
Killer
Carboyl, 1,2-Propanediol, Salt
2
1
1
15ml
Paint Apoxy
Cleaner
Jasco
Dichloromethane, Methanol, Stoddard solvent 2
1
0
18
15ml
Pro Herbecide
Ranger
Isopropylamine Salt of Glyphosate , Surfactent 2
1
1
19
15ml
Inter-lube
Kimball Midwest Paraffinic petroleum distillates, Hexane, Glycol 1
Penetrating Grease
0
0
Skin and eye irritant Eye protection,
protective gloves,
respiratory equipment
Skin and eye irritant Gloogles, protective
clothing
Skin and eye irrirtant Gloves and goggles
20
15ml
Hydraulic Oil
Olympus
Petroleum distillates, Hydrotreated heavy
paraffinic, Zinc alkyl dithiophosphate
1
1
0
Skin, eye,
21
15ml
Sizzle
Hercules
Hydrogen Chloride, Water
3
0
2
Inhalation, eye and
skin
22
15ml
Penetrating Oil
23
24
15ml
15ml
Cold Shield
EZ Seal
Main
Techllc(MT)
MT
Winner
Industrial Supply
Petroleum distillates, Sodium sulfate alkyl
ether, Polyetoxilated stearilic ether
Water, clay mineral, salt
Bentonite, Hydrotreated light petroleum
distillate
25
15ml
ABS Cement
Oaty
Methyl ethyl ketone, ABS resin, Acetone
Jasco
57
Skin and eye irritant Eye, skin, and
respiratory protection
Skin and Eye Burns Eye, skin, and
respiratory protection
and other protective
clothing
Eye, skin and
Nitile Gloves, chemical
Inhalation
restistant goggles, tight
fitting clothing
Nitrile or neoprene
gloves, Chemical
Restistant goggles
rubber or plastic gloves,
full resperator and
chemical restistant
gloves
Gloves and goggles
1
4
0
Skin, eye irrantant
0
1
0
0
0
0
Skin and eye
Skin and Eye
irratent
Gloves and goggles
Gloves and goggles
2
3
1
Eyes, skin and
inhalation
Rubber gloves, Safety
goggles and respirator
Amount of
Chemical Product Chemical
Vial # Chemical
Name
Manufacturer
Used
26
15ml
Germicidal Bleach Clorox
Hazardous Chemicals (weight %)
NFPA NFPA
NFPA
Specific Hazards
Health Flammability Instability
Sodium hypochlorite, Sodium hydroxide
1
0
0
Eyes and skin
irrantant
2‐Butoxyethanol,
1
Ethoxylated alcohol, Tetrapotassium pyrophos
phate no hazardous material
1
0
0
Eye and Skin
0
0
Eyes and skin
3
1
1
Eyes and Skin
2
3
0
Eyes and Skin
Recommended PPE
Rubber gloves or
neoprene gloves and
safety glasses
protective gloves,
protective glasses
27
15ml
All Purpose
Cleaner
Simply Green
28
15ml
Nexbac
29
15ml
Rapid Tap
30
15ml
P-70 Primer
Nexgen
Chemstar Line
Relton
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane (methyl chloroform),
Glycol Methylene Ether, sec Butanol
Weld-On
Tetrahydrofuran (THF), Methyl ethyl ketone
(MEK), Cyclohexanone
31
15ml
Dry Teflon
Ecoline
Isopropyl alcohol, heptane, Isopropyl alcohol
1
3
0
Eyes and Skin
32
15ml
Oasis 266
Ecolab
0
0
Inhalation, eye and
skin irritant
33
15ml
Chain Wax
Maxima
poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), alpha-(nonylphenyl)- 1
omega-hydroxy-acetic acid, sodium salt, tetra(ethylenedinitrilo)tetrasodium salt
Liquified petroleum, n-Hexane, 2-Propanone
2
3
0
34
15ml
WD-40
WD-40
4
0
35
15ml
Kingsford
2
0
36
15ml
Henry
Ethanolamine, 2-butoxyethanol
3
0
0
37
15ml
38
15ml
39
15ml
40
15ml
Charcoal Lighter
Fluid
Easy Realease
Adhesive Remover
Mole and Gopher
Repellent
Spray Cleaner and
Polish
Tru Fuel 40:1
Engineered Fuel +
Oil
Fuel Stabilizer
Aliphatic hydrocarbon, Petroleum base oil, lvp 1
aliphatic hydrocarbon
Aliphatic petroleum solvent (100%)
2
eye and skin irritant Chemical resistant:
Goggles, gloves and
shoes
Inhalation, eye and Eye, skin, and
skin irritant
respiratory protection
Inhalation, eye and Chemical resistant
skin irritant
goggles and gloves
Inhalation, eye and Chemical resistant
skin irritant
goggles and gloves
Inhalation, eye and Chemical resistant
skin irritant
goggles and gloves
Inhalation, eye and Chemical resistant
skin irritant
goggles and gloves
Inhalation, eye and Chemical resistant
skin irritant
goggles and gloves
41
15ml
15ml
Heavy Duty Brake
Parts Cleaner
Dot 3 & 4
Valvoline
42
43
15ml
oven cleaner
44
15ml
45
15ml
46
Rubber gloves, Safety
goggles if desired
None needed
Butyl rubber gloves,
chemical restant
goggles
Chemical resisant
gloves, chemical
goggles
Chemical resistant
goggles and gloves
Sweeney's
Caster oil (100%)
2
0
0
Liquid
Performance
Trufuel
Heptane, Acetone, Carbon dioxide
2
2
0
Petroleum distillates, Octane, Pentane
3
2
0
Craftmen
Hydrotreated naphthenic oil, Hydroxyethylated 1
aminoethylamide proprietary, Petroleum
naphtha
xylene, methyl alcohol, carbo dioxide
2
1
0
Inhalation, eye and
skin irritant
Chemical resistant
goggles and gloves
1
0
1
0
Inhalation, eye and
skin irritant
Inhalation, eye and
skin irritant
Eye, skin, and
respiratory protection
Chemical resistant
goggles and gloves
Easy Off
Triethylene glycol monobutyl ether,Diethylene 1
gylcol monobutyl ether, Diethylene glycol
monopropyl ether
Ethanol, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy), Petroleum gases 3
2
0
Liquid Plummer
Clorox
Sodium hypochlorite, Sodium hydroxide
3
0
1
Liquid Fire
Amazing!
Sulfuric Acid, Rodine 31A
3
0
2
15ml
Clorox Bleach
Clorox
Sodium hypochlorite, Sodium hydroxide
1
0
0
Eye, skin and
Inhalation
Eye, skin and
ingestion
Eyes, skin and
inhalation
Eyes, skin and
inhalation
Long Rubber gloves and
safety glasses
Safety glasses and
gloves
Rubber Gloves gloves
and safety glasses
Rubber or nitrile gloves
and safety googles
47
48
15ml
15ml
Spray and Wash
Cleans Streaks
Reckitt
White
Lightening
Hydrogen peroxide, Alcohol ethoxyl
Heptane, Propane, Isobutane
2
1
0
0
1
0
49
15ml
Bug and Tar
Remover
Turtle
Petroleum disillates, Isopropyl alcohol,
Ethylene glycol mono butyl ether
1
2
0
50
15ml
3:1 Oil
WD-40
paraffinic petroleum distillate, Naptha,
petroleum
1
2
0
Valvoline
58
Eye and skin irritant None needed
Eyes, skin and
Rubber, nitrile, neoprene
inhalation
gloves and safety
googles
Eyes and skin
solvent resistant gloves
irritant
and safety googles
eye and skin irritant Gloves and goggles
APPENDIX B
PROPOSED NEW GLOVE MATERIAL INDEX
59
60
Recommended
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
Use Caution
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
2-Butoxyethanol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Diethylene monoethyl ether
Recommended
Use Caution
Recommended
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
(0-10%)
Excellent
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Use Caution
(<20%)
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
(<20%)
Excellent
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
1.41%
0.84%
5.66%
1.99%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
1.27%
1.52%
-6.33%
Excellent
Excellent
(<20%)
(<20%)
Excellent
Recommended
Use Caution
-1.14%
3.68%
5.95%
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.45%
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
(<20%)
Excellent
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Use Caution
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
(<20%)
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Use Cation
Not
Recommended
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
(<20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
Excellent
Use Caution
Use Cation
Not
Recommended
(<20%)
Excellent
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
Latex
Percent Change (%)
0.77%
0.23%
6.26%
-1.73%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
5.99%
3.60%
9.03%
6.15%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
(<20%)
(<20%)
Excellent
Latex
Percent Change (%)
5.35%
4.70%
-12.32%
-2.00%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Use Caution
Use Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Latex
Percent Change (%)
25.73%
2.41%
-12.00%
-2.99%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Fair
Use Caution
(21-30%)
(<20%)
Fair to Poor
Use Caution
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
Use Caution
(21-50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
Latex
Percent Change (%)
1.87%
1.58%
-3.81%
-0.27%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.71%
-0.16%
11.01%
9.21%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
-1.51%
-0.77%
-6.68%
4.31%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.97%
-0.62%
1.26%
6.56%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.99%
-0.27%
-2.50%
0.12%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.26%
0.14%
-15.59%
-5.03%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
Use Cation
(21-50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
1.28%
0.59%
-6.08%
-5.66%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
0.82%
-0.45%
-14.71%
-3.42%
Recommendatio
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.88%
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Test
Weight
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.78%
1.08%
0.28%
13.21%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.62%
-0.62%
-8.10%
-8.96%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.04%
-0.99%
5.02%
0.55%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
1.57%
1.04%
-8.13%
3.78%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.68%
0.11%
-0.17%
-12.33%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Excellent
(<20%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.85%
1.17%
-11.20%
-3.15%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
Weight Test Rating
0.00%
5.18%
-1.55%
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.23%
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Benzyl alcohol
Mixed Chemical:
Diversey: Speedball 200-Heavy Duty Spray Cleaner
Conc
Diversey: Speedball 200-Heavy Duty Spray Cleaner
Conc
(Experimental Chemical 5)
Mixed Chemical:
Practical Solutions: Ramsey Wide RangeII Non Acidic
Washroom Cleaner Conc
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Octyl Decyl Dimethyl Ammonium-Chloride
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
N-Alkyl dimethyl benzylammonium-chloride
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Practical Solutions: Ramsey Wide RangeII Non Acidic
Washroom Cleaner Conc
(Experimental Chemical 4)
Test
Weight
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Mixed Chemical:
Practical Solutions: Reflecta Neutral Floor Cleaner
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohol ethoxylate
Mixed Chemical:
Practical Solutions: PowerBolt Spray
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohol ethoxylate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Monoethanolamine
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Propylene glycol
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
1.43%
1.10%
3.99%
11.01%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
(<20%)
Excellent
Practical Solutions: Reflecta Neutral Floor Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 3)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
1.96%
1.68%
-6.54%
-4.16%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Use Caution
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.8509
1.168
1.96%
-0.31%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Practical Solutions: PowerBolt Spray
(Experimental Chemical 2)
Mixed Chemical:
Diversey, Speed Track-Clean & Burnish Fragrance
Free
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohol ethoxylate
Diversey, Speed Track-Clean & Burnish Fragrance
Free
(Experimental Chemical 1)
61
Recommended
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ethoxylated linear alcohol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ammoium hydroxide
Modified acrylic polymer
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Mixed Chemical:
Armstrong: Tile and Vinyl Floor Cleaner
Armstrong: Tile and Vinyl Floor Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 10)
Mixed Chemical:
Clorox: 409 All Purpose Cleaner
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alkyl
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Lauramine oxide
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.39%
0.01%
-5.25%
9.00%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Clorox: 409 All Purpose Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 9)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Not
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
-20.85%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
(0-10%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
(<20%)
Elongation
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Test
0.86%
0.66%
14.16%
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
(<20%)
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
(<40%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
(<20%)
Elongation
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Test
5.60%
0.95%
-13.61%
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Elongation
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Test
Excellent
(<20%)
4.34%
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
4.46%
1.89%
-20.88%
Excellent
(<20%)
Good
(<40%)
Tensile Test Rating
Latex
Percent Change (%)
Not
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
Use
Caution
(21-50%)
Fair to Poor
Use
Caution
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Not recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
(Over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
-6.44%
2.97%
-7.74%
-1.62%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not recommended
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
(<40%)
(<20%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
0.75%
0.33%
-3.24%
2.67%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Latex
Percent Change (%)
1.24%
0.15%
13.54%
-8.42%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
5.66%
25.52%
18.87%
-5.08%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
-1.80%
-0.09%
-10.57%
-11.31%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.41%
0.92%
-20.24%
-26.67%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
210.84%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
2.02%
-0.15%
2.66%
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Test
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.90%
0.16%
0.37%
6.38%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.46%
-0.19%
4.98%
6.74%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Use
Caution
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
0.52%
0.14%
18.37%
-10.36%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
(<20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
0.91%
48.73%
22.83%
-1.25%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Use
Caution
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.34%
-0.25%
9.29%
17.61%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
(0-10%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.51%
-0.48%
0.64%
-4.22%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
35.02%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Not recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
Use
Caution
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.37%
0.93%
7.49%
6.63%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.07%
0.39%
-15.08%
1.56%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.43%
0.58%
8.28%
11.79%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(0-10%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.40%
0.15%
0.84%
1.03%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
5.15%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
(<20%)
(0-10%)
0.96%
0.40%
-4.96%
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
Test
Excellent
Recommended
(0-10%)
Not
Not recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohols ethoxylated
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium benzoate
Recommended
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.90%
1.24%
-8.68%
20.66%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Mixed Chemical:
Romans Golden Harvest: Strip and Wall Paper &
Paste Remover
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Diethylene glycol
Romans Golden Harvest: Strip and Wall Paper &
Paste Remover
(Experimental Chemical 8)
Recommended
Mixed Chemical:
Diversey: Foaming Acid Restroom Cleaner
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Diethylene glycol butyl ether
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Phosphoric acid
Excellent
(<20%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.41%
-0.03%
1.41%
17.28%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Diversey: Foaming Acid Restroom Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 7)
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ethyl alcohol
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
(0-10%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.13%
-0.46%
4.24%
1.05%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
N-Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride
Mixed Chemical:
Diversey: Virex II 256 One Step Disinfectant Cleaner
and Deoderant
Diversey: Virex II 256 One Step Disinfectant Cleaner
and Deoderant
(Experimental Chemical 6)
62
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
19.83%
8.99%
-24.05%
-12.55%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Good
Recommended
Good
(11-20%)
(<40%)
Fair to Poor
Use Caution
(21-50%)
Data
Fair to Poor
Use Caution
(21-50%)
Data
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohol denat
Jasco: Varnish & Stain Remover
(Experimental Chemical 15)
Mixed Chemical:
Jasco: Varnish & Stain Remover
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Toulene
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Methanol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Dichloromethane
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alkyl dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Mixed Chemical:
Aqua Chem: Super Water Clarifier
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Quaternary ammonium compounds
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
0.11%
5.43%
19.96%
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
10.57%
5.75%
2.67%
-17.33%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Good
Recommended
Excellent
(11-20%)
(<20%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
1.47%
-0.15%
5.06%
16.92%
Excellent
(<20%)
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
28.45%
5.54%
-5.38%
-2.61%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Fair
Use
Excellent
(21-30%)
Caution
(<20%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
-1.71%
2.50%
8.94%
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
34.20%
17.97%
-21.60%
-6.89%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
n
Use
Good
Caution
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
No
Data
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
No
Data
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
12.46%
1.90%
-17.23%
-27.90%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Good
Recommended
Excellent
(11-20%)
(<20%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
Test
Weight
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
Excellent
(<20%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
47.13%
14.22%
-27.69%
-19.96%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
n
Use
Good
Caution
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
No
Data
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
No
Data
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
Latex
Percent Change (%)
38.17%
12.48%
-21.07%
-21.50%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Good
(31-50%)
Caution
(<40%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Poor
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
Latex
Percent Change (%)
2.06%
1.62%
-10.64%
-19.18%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Poor
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
Latex
Percent Change (%)
0.73%
0.08%
-10.74%
-11.55%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Poor
(31-50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Weight Test Rating
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Latex
Percent Change (%)
2.47%
1.32%
-10.78%
-4.09%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.65%
-0.60%
-12.90%
-21.70%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Poor
(31-50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Weight Test Rating
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
1.09%
0.55%
-11.63%
-10.07%
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
-1.27%
Thickness
-0.42%
Tensil
-16.41%
Elongation
-8.49%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.38%
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Recommended
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.23%
-1.20%
5.68%
6.25%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
20.15%
10.37%
-4.69%
-2.20%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Fair
Use
Excellent
(21-30%)
Caution
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Not
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.24%
Recommended
Use
Caution
No
Data
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.72%
-0.77%
-0.64%
25.63%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
21.76%
12.02%
3.70%
28.20%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Fair
Use
Excellent
(21-30%)
Caution
(<20%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
0.58%
0.55%
14.36%
7.96%
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
(<20%)
(0-10%)
No
No
Data
Data
0.51%
-11.95
-26.13%
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
(0-10%)
No
No
Data
Data
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.59%
Recommended
Recommended
No
Data
Recommended
Test
Weight
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Aqua Chem: Super Water Clarifier
(Experimental Chemical 14)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohol denat
Excellent
(0-10%)
No
Data
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.50%
-0.36%
-3.06%
-2.71%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alkyl dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride
Mixed Chemical:
HTH: Super Algea Guard
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Quaternary ammonium compounds
HTH: Super Algea Guard
(Experimental Chemical 13)
Mixed Chemical:
Homax: Oops Amazing Remover
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum ether
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ethanol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Xylene
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
19.43%
9.61%
-49.19%
-28.78%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Good
Use
Fair
(11-20%)
Caution
(<60%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(<20%)
Homax: Oops Amazing Remover
(Experimental Chemical 12)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
0.71%
0.49%
-5.15%
15.37%
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Weight Test Rating
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
Test
Mixed Chemical:
Resolve: Triple Oxy Advance
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohol ethoxylate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hydrogen peroxide
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Salts
Resolve: Triple Oxy Advance
(Experimental Chemical 11)
63
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Mixed Chemical:
Olympus: Hydrolic Oil
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum distillates
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hydrotreated heavy paraffinic petroleum
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Zinc alkyldithiophosphate
Recommended
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
2.77%
1.09%
-8.92%
-20.39%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Olympus: Hydrolic Oil
(Experimental Chemical 20)
Mixed Chemical:
Kimball Midwest: Inter-lube Penetrating Grease
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Paraffinic petroleum distillate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hexane
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Glycol
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
32.90%
9.65%
-36.93%
-33.34%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Good
(31-50%)
Caution
(<40%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Kimball Midwest: Inter-lube Penetrating Grease
(Experimental Chemical 19)
Mixed Chemical:
Ranger: Pro-Herbecide
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Isopropylamine salt of glyphosate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Surfactants
Use
Caution
Use
Caution
Fair
(<60%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
1.28%
0.33%
-15.44%
-31.87%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Stoddard solvent
Ranger: Pro-Herbicide
(Experimental Chemical 18)
Use
Caution
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Poor
(31-50%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
49.10%
16.97%
-47.56%
-24.71%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.86%
1.46%
-13.14%
-36.09%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Methanol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Dichloromethane
Jasco: Paint and Epoxy Cleaner
Mixed Chemical:
Jasco: Paint and Epoxy Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 17)
Mixed Chemical:
Sevin: Concentrated Bug Killer
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Carboyl
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
1,2-Propanediol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Salt
Sevin: Concentrated Bug Killer
(Experimental Chemical 16)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Good
(<40%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
11.48%
4.26%
-2.88%
2.48%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
Recommended
(0-10%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Excellent
(<20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
4.59%
2.28%
-9.67%
-10.86%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Good
(11-20%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Weight Test Rating
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
34.67%
26.10%
-19.93%
10.55%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Excellent
(31-50%)
Caution
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
Use Caution
(21-50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair
(21-30%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
29.07%
21.22%
-27.66%
30.85%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.19%
0.07%
5.90%
16.80%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
4.88%
0.22%
-6.03%
52.92%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
2.51%
-1.12%
-3.94%
23.64%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
20.71%
1.03%
-18.33%
-8.25%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Good
Recommended
Excellent
(11-20%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
7.22%
0.44%
-4.67%
21.00%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.68%
-0.39%
-8.14%
16.44%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.92%
0.04%
-22.73%
-23.11%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
5.42%
0.97%
-32.19%
-35.12%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
22.91%
2.16%
-36.64%
-28.22%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Good
(31-50%)
Caution
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
Use Caution
(21-50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Good
(11-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
17.37%
-0.60%
-11.35%
-26.04%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
3.71%
0.45%
-5.20%
-10.52%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
1.18%
8.30%
-11.85%
-13.78%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
7.33%
2.84%
-42.78%
-9.30%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Use
Fair
(0-10%)
Caution
(<60%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
8.88%
1.43%
-20.38%
-18.24%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
90.38%
8.50%
-36.36%
1.84%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Good
(over 50%)
Recommended
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
2.53%
2.39%
-45.13%
-10.79%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Use
Fair
(0-10%)
Caution
(<60%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
64
Use
Caution
No
Data
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Not Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Not Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Acetone
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
ABS resin
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair
(<60%)
3.17%
-18.43%
-42.97%
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Use
Caution
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not Recommended
(>80%)
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
No
Data
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
-3.34%
2.51%
36.88%
Poor
(<80%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Poor
(<80%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Poor
(31-50%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Use
Caution
No
Data
Poor
(<80%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
36.87%
7.21%
-68.33%
-53.68%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.86%
-0.89%
-19.38%
-11.36%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
96.14%
20.84%
-71.60%
-63.96%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
5.10%
3.88%
-20.60%
-24.72%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
3.21%
1.27%
-8.51%
-3.53%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
4.70%
No
Data
Use
Caution
No
Data
Poor
(31-50%)
No
Data
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
39.95%
-0.96%
-79.23%
-67.66%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
5.00%
Excellent
(<20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.92%
1.56%
-21.30%
26.76%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Good
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Poor
(<80%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
78.40%
-2.80%
-86.65%
-71.41%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
9.52%
7.08%
-14.03%
5.02%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
Not
Data
Not
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
70.76%
12.93%
-57.20%
-57.82%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Fair
(<60%)
(over 50%)
Recommended
No
No
Data
Data
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
No
Data
Data
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Poor
(<80%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
3.39%
-1.14%
4.15%
-8.96%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Not Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Good
(11-20%)
Recommendatio
n
Use
Caution
10.32%
-49.00%
-31.19%
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Weight Test Rating
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
19.31%
Test
Weight
Not Recommended
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
No
Data
Data
Poor
(31-50%)
No
Data
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
44.66%
4.98%
-75.48%
-69.61%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
108.74%
33.05%
-61.11%
-51.03%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
2.56%
0.90%
-5.29%
8.23%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Methyl ethyl keytone
Mixed Chemical:
Oaty: ABS Cement
Oaty: ABS Cement
(Experimental Chemical 25)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hydrotreated light petroleum distillate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Crystalline silica
Winner Industrial Supply: EZ Seal
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Bentonite clay
Mixed Chemical:
Winner Industrial Supply: EZ Seal
(Experimental Chemical 24)
Mixed Chemical:
MT: Cold Shield
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Clay material
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Salt
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
1.40%
0.68%
1.74%
-14.39%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
MT: Cold Shield
(Experimental Chemical 23)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Polyetoxilated stearilic ether
Not Recommended
(>80%)
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum distillate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium sulfate alkyl ether
Penetrating Oil
Mixed Chemical:
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
94.78%
14.47%
-87.09%
-78.01%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Main Tech LLC: Penetrating Oil
(Experimental Chemical 22)
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Mixed Chemical:
Hercules: Sizzle
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hydrogen chloride
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Water
Recommended
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
3.48%
2.35%
-0.09%
-5.36%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Hercules: Sizzle
(Experimental Chemical 21)
No
Data
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Data
Not
Recommended
Not Recommended
(>80%)
Fair
(21-30%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Fair
(<40%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
24.97%
12.97%
-36.69%
-8.07%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
148.23%
-8.49%
-88.54%
-75.97%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Not Recommended
(>80%)
(over 50%)
Recommended
No
No
Data
Data
Not
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
No
No
Data
Data
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
5.62%
3.00%
-1.53%
-8.76%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
178.37%
26.95%
-89.55%
-76.39%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Good
(11-20%)
No
Data
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
10.96%
6.90%
-14.17%
-11.21%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
65
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
4.85%
1.76%
-15.35%
-25.80%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Relton: Rapid Tap
(Experimental Chemical 29)
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Weld-On P-70 Primer
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Tetrahydrofuran (THF)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Methy ethal keytone (MEK)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Cyclohexanone
Mixed Chemical:
Poor
(<80%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
87.06%
29.47%
-67.29%
-59.47%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Weld-On P-70 Primer
(Experimental Chemical 30)
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sec butanol
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
1,1,1-Trichloroethane (methyl chloroform)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Glycol methylene ether
Mixed Chemical:
Relton: Rapid Tap
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Mixed Chemical:
Nexgen Chemstar Line: Nexbac
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
No hazardous materials
Excellent
(<20%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
1.54%
-0.02%
0.20%
-9.54%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nexgen Chemstar Line: Nexbac
(Experimental Chemical 28)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Use
Caution
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ethoxylated alcohol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Tetrapotassium pyrophoshate
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
1.28%
0.95%
-11.51%
5.97%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.57%
0.06%
-5.93%
-11.94%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
2-Butoxyethanol
Mixed Chemical:
Simply Green: All Purpose Cleaner
Simply Green: All Purpose Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 27)
Mixed Chemical:
Clorox: Germicidal Bleach
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium hypochlorite
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium hydroxide
Clorox: Germicidal Bleach
(Experimental Chemical 26)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Poor
(31-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Excellent
(<20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
32.99%
10.27%
-14.52%
-3.01%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
7.25%
1.44%
2.57%
0.29%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
3.35%
1.28%
-13.45%
-15.12%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
14.10%
3.13%
-8.29%
-12.33%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Good
Recommended
Excellent
(11-20%)
(<20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.26%
-0.19%
-9.27%
-8.78%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Poor
(31-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Execellent
(<20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
38.14%
16.03%
-17.72%
27.13%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
4.60%
1.73%
-34.21%
26.16%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
6.61%
0.32%
-17.96%
16.41%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
2.09%
1.86%
-9.69%
1.55%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.43%
0.01%
2.51%
33.58%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
52.53%
20.05%
-34.70%
-24.87%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Good
(over 50%)
Recommended
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
5.00%
0.91%
-38.11%
-37.70%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
3.28%
0.62%
-5.47%
-6.37%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.18%
0.54%
-14.04%
-6.94%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
0.49%
-0.06%
-31.22%
-41.31%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Use
Caution
Excellent
(<20%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
76.40%
25.17%
-26.53%
12.62%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Good
(over 50%)
Recommended
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Poor
(31-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
31.34%
5.52%
-18.26%
-17.29%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
7.06%
0.76%
-1.24%
-9.78%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
10.59%
1.58%
0.59%
7.71%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Good
Recommended
Excellent
(11-20%)
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
9.21%
0.23%
-6.35%
-0.76%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
66
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
33.67%
12.78%
-52.74%
-56.23%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Fair
(31-50%)
Caution
(<60%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Kingsford: Charcoal Lighter Fluid
(Experimental Chemical 35)
Mixed Chemical:
Kingsford: Charcoal Lighter Fluid
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Aliphatic hydrocarbon
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum Solvents
Poor
(31-50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Mixed Chemical:
WD-40
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Aliphatic hydrocarbon
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum base oil
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ivp aliphatic hydrocarbon
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair
(<60%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
32.05%
6.80%
-54.44%
-30.19%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
WD-40
(Experimental Chemical 34)
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum hydrocarbon
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Poor
(<80%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Fair
(<60%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Recommendatio
n
Good
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
49.86%
14.89%
-16.76%
-10.84%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Excellent
(31-50%)
Caution
(<20%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Use
Caution
Excellent
(<20%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Use
Caution
Recommended
Fair
(<60%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
46.62%
3.52%
-58.10%
-42.56%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Fair
(31-50%)
Caution
(<60%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Poor
(31-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Good
(<40%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Good
(<40%)
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Fair
(<60%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
39.15%
12.19%
-39.75%
-29.02%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Poor
Use
Good
(31-50%)
Caution
(<40%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Poor
(31-50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Fair
(<60%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Fair
(<60%)
Tensile Test Rating
Excellent
(<20%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Weight Test Rating
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not recommended
(over 50%)
Not Recommended
(>80%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
183.34%
14.17%
-52.34%
29.20%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
n
Not
Fair
Recommended
(<60%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Latex
Percent Change (%)
205.11%
3.67%
-81.45%
-50.89%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
123.95%
51.40%
-52.71%
34.85%
Latex
Percent Change (%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Latex
Percent Change (%)
2.15%
1.84%
0.33%
-4.60%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
65.30%
42.98%
-44.96%
2.79%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Excellent
(<20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
47.57%
13.41%
-54.60%
-49.51%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Good
(11-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
19.05%
18.87%
-35.95%
-20.95%
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
Use
Caution
Caution
Recommended
Use
Recommended
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
0.21%
0.08%
-20.91%
-15.06%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Fair
(21-30%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
24.32%
15.13%
-23.95%
-2.69%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Excellent
(<20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
37.78%
-1.61%
-50.25%
-19.69%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Good
(11-20%)
11.03%
8.74%
-11.24%
16.75%
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
Use
Caution
Caution
Recommended
Use
Recommended
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.66%
0.34%
-1.40%
19.72%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair
(21-30%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
24.35%
13.70%
-14.87%
23.16%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Excellent
(<20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
53.75%
23.44%
6.57%
-2.39%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Poor
(31-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
34.02%
20.29%
-24.41%
-19.37%
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
Recommended
Caution
Recommended
Use
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.58%
-1.20%
-44.48%
-18.28%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Poor
(31-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
38.35%
20.50%
-52.88%
-24.46%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Use
Caution
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
N-Hexane
Poor
(31-50%)
Recommendatio
n
33.62
15.35%
-61.30%
-41.11%
Weight Test Rating
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Test
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Liquefied petroleum
Maxima: Chain Wax
Mixed Chemical:
Maxima: Chain Wax
(Experimental Chemical 33)
Tetra-(ethylenedinitrilo)tetrasodium salt
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium salt
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good
Mixed Chemical:
Ecolab: Oasis
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), .alpha.-(nonylphenyl).omega.-hydroxy-acetic acid
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.94%
1.19%
1.52%
-11.47%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Ecolab: Oasis
(Experimental Chemical 32)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Isopropyl alcohol
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Poor
(<80%)
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Use
Caution
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Heptane
Fair
(21-30%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
29.80%
14.66%
-61.57%
-41.53%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Isoparaffinic hydrocarbon
Ecoline: Dry Teflon
Mixed Chemical:
Ecoline: Dry Teflon
(Experimental Chemical 31)
67
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum naphtha
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hydrotreated naphthetic oil
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hydroxyethylated aminoethylamide proprietary
Craftman: fuel stabilizer
Mixed Chemical:
Craftman: fuel stabilizer
(Experimental Chemical 40)
Use
Caution
Good
(<40%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Use
Caution
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Good
(11-20%)
Good
(<40%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
14.29%
7.02%
-33.37%
-37.95%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Pentane
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Octane
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum distillates
Truefuel: Truefuel 40:1 Engineered Fuel + Oil
Mixed Chemical:
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
5.15%
1.70%
-22.24%
-5.94%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Truefuel: Truefuel 40:1 Engineered Fuel + Oil
(Experimental Chemical 39)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Acetone
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Carbon dioxide
Poor
(31-50%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Heptane
Liquid Performance: Spray Cleaner and Polish
Mixed Chemical:
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair
(<60%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
19.75%
6.32%
-40.36%
-37.20%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Liquid Performance: Spray Cleaner and Polish
(Experimental Chemical 38)
Mixed Chemical:
Sweeney's: Mole and Gopher Repellant
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Caster oil
Use
Caution
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.07%
-1.17%
4.95%
36.88
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent to Good Recommended
Excellent
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Sweeney's: Mole and Gopher Repellant
(Experimental Chemical 37)
Mixed Chemical:
Henry: Easy Release Adhesive Remover
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ethanolamine
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
2-Butoxyethanol
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
4.42%
2.24%
-49.03%
-47.93%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Use
Fair
(0-10%)
Caution
(<60%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Henry: Easy Release Adhesive Remover
(Experimental Chemical 36)
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Excellent
(<20%)
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.15%
-1.73%
4.58%
1.24%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
50.84%
19.44%
3.55%
7.64%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Excellent
(over 50%)
Recommended
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Poor
(31-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
32.57%
4.65%
-7.49%
9.63%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.02%
-2.17%
-27.61%
-26.57%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent to Good Recommended
Good
(0-20%)
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
1.26%
0.38%
0.47%
1.42%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
7.00%
0.73%
-36.37%
-15.47%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair
(21-30%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
26.63%
4.41%
-23.22%
-3.11%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Good
(11-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
12.25%
-4.55%
-10.43%
32.03%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.77%
-1.08%
3.27%
41.74%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent to Good Recommended
Excellent
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
3.44%
0.74%
-13.88%
19.74%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Good
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Use
Caution
Good
(<40%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Use
Caution
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Use
Caution
Fair
(<60%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
6.72%
2.23%
-43.61%
-38.48%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Poor
(31-50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
39.96%
14.92%
-24.97%
-15.84%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair
(21-30%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
22.72%
5.06%
-26.26%
-16.55%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
0.03%
-1.41%
-9.89%
-5.93%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent to Good Recommended
Excellent
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
3.12%
0.56%
-24.25%
-12.63%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Use
Caution
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
95.32%
3.04%
-82.72%
-53.90%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Not Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
(>80%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
94.59%
28.26%
-26.64%
-11.47%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Not
Recommended
Not
Good
(over 50%)
Recommended
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
66.03%
13.85%
-31.16%
-12.81%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
0.32%
-6.89%
-1.49%
-4.49%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent to Good Recommended
Excellent
(0-20%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
9.43%
5.51%
-26.61%
-13.52%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Not recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
68
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sulfuric acid
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Rodine 31A
Amazing!:Liquid Fire
Mixed Chemical:
Amazing!:Liquid Fire
(Experimental Chemical 45)
Mixed Chemical:
Liquid Plumber: Hair Clog Eliminator
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium hypochlorite
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium hydroxide
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.83%
0.48%
-14.14%
-37.36%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Liquid Plumber: Hair Clog Eliminator
(Experimental Chemical 44)
Recommendatio
n
Weight Test Rating
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
No
Data
Use
Caution
No
Data
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
51.30%
12.63%
-18.99%
-90.91%
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
No
Data
Fair
(21-30%)
No
Data
Recommended
Use
Caution
Good
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
9.57%
-3.01%
3.18%
20.66%
Excellent
(<20%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Recommended
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Use
Caution
Recommendatio
n
2.12%
5.35%
-43.13%
-25.60%
Fair
(<60%)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Use
Caution
13.56%
54.75%
-45.78%
-25.55%
Fair
(<60%)
Use
Caution
Use
Caution
Recommended
Use
Caution
Fair
(<60%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
53.08%
24.54%
-64.32%
-94.32%
Poor
(<80%)
Not
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Use
Caution
16.77%
7.56%
-44.53%
-44.38%
Fair
(<60%)
Tensile Test Rating
Latex
Percent Change (%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not Recommended
(>80%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
254.15%
-42.51%
-60.91%
-68.70%
Poor
(<80%)
Tensile Test Rating
Latex
Percent Change (%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
6.10%
-1.42%
-4.22%
-0.02%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
9.94%
-5.17%
-19.04%
0.43%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
83.01%
1.73%
-89.90%
-44.04%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Good
(11-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
0.53%
-0.15%
-38.99%
-44.31%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.30%
-0.14%
-22.31%
-10.80%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.08%
-0.71%
-41.08%
-37.36%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Good
(11-20%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.29%
-1.92%
-6.96%
10.88%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
2.50%
-1.74%
-2.01%
12.95%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.87%
-2.85%
-8.98%
19.33%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
23.94%
6.72%
-26.38%
26.66%
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommendatio
n
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
Test
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
0.18%
-0.78%
-2.93%
20.98%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
Test
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum gases
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium hydroxide
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ethanol, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)
Mixed Chemical:
Easy Off: Oven Cleaner
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
1.28%
-1.94%
-16.27%
21.47%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Fair
(<60%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
3.58%
3.17%
-10.96%
2.55%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Use
Caution
Easy Off: Oven Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 43)
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Use
Caution
Excellent
(<20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(<20%)
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Diethylene glycol monopropyl ether
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
6.98%
-1.84%
-61.22%
-84.87%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
9.57%
3.88%
-0.85%
10.24%
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Diethylene glycol monobutyl ether
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Triethylene glycol monobutyl ether
Valvoline: DOT 3&4
Mixed Chemical:
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
2.48%
0.37%
-19.18%
-14.63%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Valvoline: DOT 3&4
(Experimental Chemical 42)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Good
(<40%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Methyl alcohol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Carbod dioxide
Use
Caution
Recommended
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Tensile Test Rating Weight Test Rating
Not Recommended
Not
(over 50%)
Recommended
Good
(11-20%)
Recommendatio
n
Recommended
9.25%
6.19%
-34.51%
1.89%
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Weight Test Rating
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
Test
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Xylene
Mixed Chemical:
Valvoline: Heavy Duty Brake Parts Cleaner
Valvoline: Heavy Duty Brake Parts Cleaner
(Experimental Chemical 41)
69
Not
Not Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
0.37%
3.16%
-13.62%
-20.85
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Not
Not Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Petroleum distillate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Isopropyl alcohol
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Ethylene glycol mono butyl ether
3-in-ONE: Motor Oil
(Experimental Chemical 50)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Paraffinic petroleum distillate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Naptha, petroleum
Mixed Chemical:
3-in-ONE: Motor Oil
Mixed Chemical:
Turtle Wax: Bug and Tar Remover
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
3.143
3.023
-8.18%
-12.83%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Turtle Wax: Bug and Tar Remover
(Experimental Chemical 49)
Use
Caution
Recommended
No
Data
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
No
Data
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Propane
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Isobutane
Good
(<40%)
Not
Not Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent
(0-10%)
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Heptane
White Lightning: Cleans Streaks
Mixed Chemical:
Recommended
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
13.37%
7.69%
-22.44%
-15.07%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
White Lightning: Cleans Streaks
(Experimental Chemical 48)
Mixed Chemical:
Resolve: Spray and Wash Laundry Stain Remover
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Hydrogen peroxide
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Alcohol ethoxyl
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
2.28%
0.74%
-6.56%
7.97%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Neoprene
Percent Change (%)
1.10%
0.44%
-0.62%
-16.12%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Resolve: Spray and Wash Laundry Stain Remover
(Experimental Chemical 47)
Mixed Chemical:
Clorox: Outdoor Bleach Concentrate
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium hypochlorite
Pure Chemical (Index Guide Rating):
Sodium hydroxide
Clorox: Outdoor Bleach Concentrate
(Experimental Chemical 46)
Recommended
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
3.85%
-0.15%
7.52%
5.15%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Not
Not
Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Not
Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
2.92%
-1.42%
-2.63%
35.02%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommended
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
0.96%
-0.86%
-5.68%
51.01%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
No
Data
Recommended
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Use
Caution
Recommended
Fair
(21-30%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Good
(<40%)
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
21.36%
-1.90%
-3.62%
82.92%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
2.02%
-1.86%
-8.83%
37.11%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Nitrile
Percent Change (%)
1.97%
-0.88%
-1.97%
48.28%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
2.70%
-0.27%
5.88%
0.34%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Not
Not
Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
51.05%
26.23%
-30.41%
-21.34%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
1.31%
-2.08%
-11.59%
0.76%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Recommended
Excellent
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Butyl
Percent Change (%)
1.10%
-0.79%
-14.55%
5.60%
Recommendatio
Tensile Test Rating
Weight Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
No
Data
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Use
Caution
Recommended
Fair to Poor
(21-50%)
Use
Caution
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
3.17%
-0.30%
-21.19%
210.84%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Good
Recommended
Excellent
(<40%)
(0-10%)
Not
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Fair to Good
(21-50%)
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.41%
0.09%
-53.60%
-70.91%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Fair
Excellent
Use
(<60%)
(0-10%)
Caution
Not
Not
Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
No
Data
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
50.41%
14.05%
-32.30%
0.57%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
4.96%
2.73%
-38.43%
-26.85%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Good
(0-10%)
(<40%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Vinyl
Percent Change (%)
2.45%
-0.77%
-64.99%
-61.19%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Use
Poor
Excellent
(0-10%)
Caution
(<80%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
No
Data
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Not
Recommended
Good
(<40%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
9.40%
0.40%
8.47%
4.34%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Excellent
Recommended
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Not
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Recommended
Not
Not
Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
31.11%
-3.10%
-56.28%
-57.81%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Fair
Poor
Use
(<60%)
Caution
(31-50%)
Not
Not
Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Not
Recommended
Recommended
(over 50%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Excellent to Good
(0-20%)
No
Data
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Not
Recommended
(over 50%)
Latex
Percent Change (%)
175.71%
-12.85%
-25.88%
16.61%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
-11.98%
4.31%
-5.84%
-7.19%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(<20%)
(0-10%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Fair to Poor
Use
(21-50%)
Caution
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
Latex
Percent Change (%)
3.51%
-1.23%
-0.84%
-6.98%
Recommendatio
Weight Test Rating
Tensile Test Rating
n
Excellent
Recommended
Excellent
(0-10%)
(<20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Excellent to Good Recommended
(0-20%)
Test
Weight
Thickness
Tensil
Elongation
REFERENCES
1. United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). Dermal Exposure.
https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/dermalexposure/ (accessed July 2014).
2. Reuscher, E. Chemical Contact. J Ind Hyg Toxicol. (2012), 46(1), 34-35.
3. American Society for Testing and Materials (ATSM): Standard Test
Method for Rubber Property – Effect of Liquids (D471). [Standard]
Philadelphia: ATSM, 2006.
4. American National Standards Institute, International Safety Equipment
Association (ANSI/ISEA): American National Standard for Hand Protection
Selection Criteria (105). [Standard] Virginia: ISEA, 2011.
5. Ansell Healthcare Limited. Chemical Resistance Guide: Permeation and
Degradation Data, 8th ed.
http://www.ansellpro.com/download/Ansell_8thEditionChemicalResistanceGui
de.pdf (accessed May 2014).
6. Forsberg, K.; Van Den Borre, A.; Henry III, N.; and Zeigler, J. P. Quick
Selection Guide to Chemical Protective Clothing, 6th ed. New Jersey: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2014
7. American Chemical Society, Chemical Abstracts Services (CAS): CAS
Registry. http://www.cas.org/content/chemical-substances (accessed May
2014).
70
8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH): Recommendations for Chemical
Protective Clothing: A Companion to the NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical
Hazards. http://www.cdc.gov.niosh/ncpc/pcpc.html (accessed Jun 2014).
9. Goa, P.; Tomasovic, B. Change in Tensile Properties of Neoprene and
Nitrile Gloves after Repeated Exposures to Acetone and Thermal
Decomposition. J Occup Environ Hyg 2005, 2, 543-552.
10. Hatada, K.; Fox, R. B.; Kahovec, J.; Maréchal, E.; Mita, I.; and Shibaev, V.
Definitions of Terms Relating to Degradation, Aging, and Related Chemical
Transformations of Polymers. Pure & Appl. Chem 1996, 68(11), 2313-2323.
11. Anna, D. H. Chemical Protective Clothing, 2nd ed.; American Industrial
Hygiene Association: Fairfax, VA, 2003.
12. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Hazard
Communication Safety Data Sheet Quick Card.
https://www.osha.gov.Publications/Hazcomm_QuickCard_SafetyData.html
(accessed June 2014).
13. International Labor Organization. The Chemical Safety Data Sheet or the
Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). http://www.ilo.org/oshenc/part-ix/usingstoring-and-transporting-chemicals/item/1242-case-study-hazardcommunication-the-chemical-safety-data-sheet-or-the-material-safety-datasheet-msds (accessed May 2014).
71
14. United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). Occupational Chemical Database.
https://www.osha.gov/chemicaldata/ (accessed June 2014).
15. American Society for Testing and Materials (ATSM): Standard Test
Method for Permeation of Liquids and Gases through Protective Clothing
Materials under Conditions of Continuous Contact, (F 739). [Standard]
Philadelphia: ATSM, 2006.
16. US Department of Energy. Glove Selection Guide.
http://www.aps.anl.gov/Safety_and_Training/User_Safety/gloveselection.html
(accessed May 2014).
17. Phalen, R.; Wong, W. Tensile Properties and Integrity of Clean Room and
Low-Module Disposable Nitrile Gloves: A Comparison of Two Dissimilar
Glove Types. Ann Occup Hyg 2012, 56(3), 450-457.
18. Phalen, R.; Wong, W. Integrity of Disposable Nitrile Exam Gloves Exposed
to Simulated Movement. J Occup Environ Hyg 2011, 8(8), 289-299.
19. Dai, G.; Raheel, M. Chemical Resistance and Structural Integrity of
Protective Glove Materials. J Environ Sci Heal A 1997, A32(1), 567-566.
72