Low Impact Markings Study

Transcription

1 OTD-11/0002 Low Impact Markings Study Prepared by: Gas Technology Institute Des Plaines, Illinois July 2011

2 FINAL REPORT GTI PROJECT NUMBER OTD PROJECT NUMBER 5.9.K Low Impact Markings Study Report Issued: 22 JUL 2011 Revision No.: FINAL Project Investors: Alagasco APGARF LA Consortium National Grid NW Natural SoCal GTI Project Manager: Kristine Wiley Senior Scientist GTI Technical Contact: Joseph Baffoe Engineer GTI Project Team: Karen Crippen, Joe Baffoe, Brian Miller, John Bubaris, Nick Daniels, Alicia Farag, Brian Spillar, Michael Mensinger Jr., Laura McCammack, Kristine Wiley Gas Technology Institute 1700 S. Mount Prospect Rd. Des Plaines, Illinois

3 Legal Notice This information was prepared by Gas Technology Institute ( GTI ) for Operations Technology Development ( OTD ). Neither GTI, the members of GTI, the Sponsor(s), nor any person acting on behalf of any of them: a. Makes any warranty or representation, express or implied with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe privatelyowned rights. Inasmuch as this project is experimental in nature, the technical information, results, or conclusions cannot be predicted. Conclusions and analysis of results by GTI represent GTI's opinion based on inferences from measurements and empirical relationships, which inferences and assumptions are not infallible, and with respect to which competent specialists may differ. b. Assumes any liability with respect to the use of, or for any and all damages resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report; any other use of, or reliance on, this report by any third party is at the third party's sole risk. c. The results within this report relate only to the items tested. Page i

4 Table of Contents Legal Notice... i Table of Contents... ii Table of Figures... iii List of Tables... vi Executive Summary... 1 Introduction... 7 Background... 7 Survey. 8 Paints Selected Experimental Test Methods Protocol Results and Discussions Water Immersion Accelerated Weathering Ceramic Tiles Traffic Wear Taber Abrasion Removal Methods Marking Alternatives Marking Tape Tests Conclusions References List of Acronyms Page ii

5 Table of Figures Page Figure 1. Rank Chart of Average Paint Impermanence from All Tests... 5 Figure 2. Cracking defect on Paint 3 Aervoe Fugitive Marker as cured before testing... 6 Figure 3. Paint 1: Aervoe All Purpose Marking Paint (1382 yellow, 2 month Reported Life) Figure 4. Paint 2: Aervoe Construction Marking Paint (258 high visibility yellow, 3 month Reported Life) Figure 5. Paint 3: Aervoe Fugitive Marker (1426 fluorescent yellow, 1 month Reported Life) Figure 6. Paint 4: Krylon Quik-Mark Water-Based Chalk (KWBC03502 APWA yellow, 14 day Reported Life) Figure 7. Paint 5: Krylon Quik-Mark Water-Based Paint (S03801 APWA utility yellow, Reported Life Not Available) Figure 8. Paint 6: Krylon Quik-Mark Solvent-Based Paint (S03823 APWA safety yellow, Not a temporary paint) Figure 9. Paint 7: Rust-Oleum Precision Line Water-Based Paint ( high visibility yellow, 1-3 month Reported Life) Figure 10. Paint 8: Rust-Oleum Professional Inverted Marking Paint (2545 caution yellow, Not a temporary paint) Figure 11. Paint 9: Seymour Stripe Inverted Tip Temporary Marker ( high visibility yellow, Reported Life Not Available) Figure 12. Paint 10: Fox Valley Systems Water-Based Athletic Paint (white, Reported Life Not Available) Figure 13. Paint 11: EZ-Paint Temporary Marker (1-3 month Reported Life) Figure 14. Schematic of 45/0 color geometry Figure 15. Hunter L-a-b color scale Figure 16. Lift Off Paint Remover by Motsenbocker. It is a water-based, biodegradable, and Green Cross Certified Graffiti Remover Figure 17. Generac Pressure Washer with 1400 psi and 1.5 gal/min of flow Figure 18. Pavement Load Tester at GTI to be used for Vehicular Testing Figure 19. Taber Industries Linear Abraser 5700 Unit at GTI Figure 20. Sample Paints 1 and 2, Before Water Immersion Test Figure 21. Paints 1 and 2, After Water Immersion Test Figure 22. L* values for Marking Paints during 18-day Water Immersion Test Figure 23. a* values for Marking Paints during 18-day Water Immersion Test Figure 24. b* values for Marking Paints during 18-day Water Immersion Test Figure 25. Change in E values for Marking Paints during 18-day Water Immersion Test Page iii

6 Figure 26. Rank Chart Summary of E after 18 days of Water Immersion Figure 27. Markers 7 and 8 applied to Asphalt Sealant after 3-day cure time, before UV exposure Figure 28. Markers 7 and 8 applied to Asphalt Sealant after 3-day cure time, after 30h UV exposure Figure 29. Ceramic tile coupons, coatings 1 to 4 after 818 hours of UV + condensation test Figure 30. L* of Paints on 3-day Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 31. a* of Paints on 3-day Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 32. b* of Paints on 3-day Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 33. E of Paints on 3-day Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 34. L* of Paints on 3-week Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 35. a* of Paints on 3-week Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 36. b* of Paints on 3-week Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 37. E of Paints on 3-week Cure Asphalt Sealant Figure 38. Cracking defect on Paint 3 Aervoe Fugitive Marker as cured before testing Figure 39. L* of Paints on Tile Substrates Figure 40. a* of Paints on Tile Substrates Figure 41. b* of Paints on Tile Substrates Figure 42. E of Paints on Tile Substrates Figure 43. Rank Chart of E values after 818 hours UV Exposure Figure 44. Traffic Wear Test at GTI Figure 45. Comparison of Car and Van Tests Figure 46. Weight Loss of Paints after Taber Abrasion Test Figure 47. Visual Inspection Ratings of Paints after Taber Abrasion Test Figure 48. Rank Chart of Visual Inspection Ratings after Taber Abrasion Test Figure 49 Sample Paint #10 before and after scrubbing with isopropyl alcohol Figure 50. Visual Inspection Ratings of Paints after Isopropyl Alcohol with Brush Figure 51. Visual Inspection Ratings of Paints after Power Washing Figure 52. Visual Inspection Ratings of Paints after Lift Off Remover Figure 53. Average Visual Inspection Rating from Removal Methods Testing Figure 54. Weight Loss of Paints after Taber Abrasion Test with Marking Tape Figure 55. Visual Inspection Ratings of Paints after Taber Abrasion Test with Marking Tape.. 49 Figure 56. UV Exposure with Marking Tape Figure 57. Marking Tape L*, a*, and b* values before and after UV Exposure Test Figure 58. Rank Chart of E values after 818 hours of UV Exposure with Marking Tape Page iv

7 Figure 59. Rank Chart of Average Paint Impermanence Page v

8 List of Tables Table 1. Marking Products Selected for Evaluation... 1 Table 2. Low Impact Markings Testing Summary... 2 Table 3. Legend for Test Codes in Summary Table... 3 Table 4. Average Paint Impermanence Rating in Rank Order... 4 Table 5. Survey Responses... 8 Table 6. Marking Products Selected for Evaluation Table 7. Test Methods Used Table 8. Visual Rating Key Table 9. Visual Rating Key Table 10. Visual Inspection Rating Key Table 11. Low Impact Markings Testing Summary Table 12. Legend for Test Codes in Summary Table Table 13. Average Paint Impermanence Rating in Rank Order Page vi